4.7 Article

A new strategy for pressed powder eye shadow analysis: Allergenic metal ion content and particle size distribution

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 432, 期 -, 页码 173-179

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.092

关键词

Sedimentation field-flow fractionation; Atomic absorption spectroscopy; Allergenic transition metal ions; Pigments; Spectrofluorimetry

资金

  1. University of Ferrara (Fondo di Ateneo per la Ricerca Scientifica FAR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nine cheap eye shadow products were analyzed through graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GF-AAS) to quantify their Cr, Co and Ni contents, all known to be skin sensitizers. In many cases, the concentrations were higher than 1 or 5 ppm (mu g/g), i.e. the limits recommended in the scientific literature to minimize the risk of reaction in particularly sensitive subjects. In most cases, the concentration of Cr was higher than that of Ni and Co, up to a limit case of 150 mg/g. In this particular sample, the potential amount of Cr that could be released in ionic form was determined in sweat simulating solutions by GF-AAS and confirmed through a specific spectrofluorimetric method; the results indicated the presence of approximately 80-90 ppb (ng/g) of Cr3+. The water dispersible particles were isolated from the eye shadow powders through a simple solvent extraction procedure. The aqueous suspensions were then sorted through sedimentation field flow fractionation (SdFFF) and the particles sizes were calculated from experimental fractograms using theory. For the most part, the computed sizes were in the micron range, as confirmed by some SEM photographs taken on fractions collected during the separations. The SdFFF coupled off-line with the GFAAS enabled elemental characterization of pigment particles as a function of size. This finding reduces the concern that the ingredients of such makeup formulations may contain nanoparticles. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据