Overview
This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.
Key numbers
The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:
- is only 5% of the sunlight reaching the earth and is and titanium dioxide are non‑irritant/allergenic and do not
- 90% UV‑A and 10% UV‑B, whereas ≈44% of sunlight is
- Clouds block only ≈20% of UVR. Window glass in
- less intense than sunlight, it may worsen melasma by was 0.8% in a Canadian report from 2014, while the North
- 0.9% of positive reactions were from sunscreen chemicals,
- photoallergic reactions happened in 2.3%, and 65% of
- them were from sunscreen agents, while 68% of the other
- in sunscreens or cosmetics. Journe et al.(31) observed 15.4%
- test reactions in 6.3% were from sunscreen chemicals.(32)
- photo‑investigation, 6.4% had photoallergy. Sunscreen Parsol‑1789).(40,41) Octylmethylcinnamate (ethylhexyl‑p‑
- chemicals/cosmetics caused sensitivity in 5.7% of them, and methoxycinnamate/Parsol MCX), the most used cinnamate,
- rubber products, clothing and the fabric industry, and post to UV‑A2 range. It has been associated with the rising
- with photodermatoses a high prevalence of 65% of women
- sunscreens or their excipients. Table 1 lists common
- concentration of 5% in Europe and 10% in the USA.(22,38) are rare causes of ACD and PACD when used in combination
- are often used in combination with benzophenones. commonest allergen in up to 0.6% of positive reactions,
- They infrequently cause ACD but are the third most and benzophenone‑3 was a relevant allergen in 70%
- Table 1: Chemical sunscreens
- incidence of PACD, accounting for 12‒21% of positive not bereft of contact or photoallergy. Contact sensitivity
- However, at 1‒6% concentration, it was not a significant
- has elicited positive reactions in 2.3% of 1693 patients structurally similar chemicals are not uncommon and
- from cinnamic aldehyde, a perfume, was 2.3% and 3.6% include a poor therapeutic response or worsening of
- screening and with a sunscreen series (Tables 2 and 3)
- Table 2: Indian sunscreen series*
- p‑tert‑butyl‑4‑methoxy‑dibenzoyl‑methane 10% pet testing.(81) A positive reaction from allergens on both sets
- Homosalate 5% pet reflects contact allergy with and without photo‑aggravation,
- PABA 10% pet whereas photoallergy is confirmed when only the irradiated
- Benzophenone‑3 10% pet the UV‑A dose alone (masked patch test).(20) For patients
- 2‑ethyl hexyl‑4‑methoxycinnamate 10% pet exhibiting negative/doubtful patch test results despite a strong
- 2‑hydroxy‑4‑methoxy‑4‑methyl‑benzophenone 10% pet suspicion of sunscreen sensitivity, a “usage test” or repeated
- Phenyl benzimidazole sulfonic acid 10% pet open application test (ROAT) are useful diagnostic tools; the
- Octyl triazone 10% pet latter must be performed for 2‒3 weeks for weak allergens.
- Octocrylene 10% pet Treatment
- Octyl salicylate 5% pet
- Bis‑ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine 10% pet of the culprit allergen(s) remain the first‑line treatments
- Methylene bis‑benzotriazolyl tetramethyl butyl phenol 10% pet for sunscreen ACD/PACD. Apprising patients of putative
- 2‑(4‑Diethylamino‑2 hydroxybenzoyl) benzoic acid 10% pet allergens, their synonyms, similar antigens, and available
- Diethyl hexyl butamido triazone 10% pet must be made aware of sunscreen chemicals such as
- Table 3: International sunscreen series (updated in January 2014)*
- Homosalate 5.0% pet
- Benzophenone‑3 (Eusolex 4360, Escalol 567, Oxybenzone) 10.0% pet
- Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate (Parsol MCX, Escalol 55) 10.0% pet
Methods (brief)
- octocrylene in a sunscreen. Photodermatol Photoimmunol 65. Waas RLV, Hill G. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by
- octocrylene: A review. Contact Dermatitis 2014;70:193‑204. 66. Le Coz CJ, Lefebvre C, Ludmann F, Grosshans E.
Implications
This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.
Wiki pages this source may touch
- Fish — marine, non-predatory (sardines, anchovies, salmon, cod)
- Baby Sunscreen, Mineral (ZnO + TiO2)
- Aluminum
Verification notes
- Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing
wiki/sources/pages before creation. - Full-PDF read:
pdftotext -layoutwas run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written. - Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
- Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
- HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.
Update history
The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.