To the Editor.—
This letter is in response to the report by Dr Catalano, "Hexachlorophene—Not a Cry of Wolf," that appeared in the Archives (111:250-251,1975). In Catalano's communication, an obviously biased approach toward the toxicity of hexachlorophene was taken. We do not recommend the unlimited use of hexachlorophene-containing products, and the label of pHisoHex imposes limitations on its uses. We must object to some of Dr Catalano's statements.Initially, he notes that hexachlorophene is a dangerous substance. While in oral or intravenous administration, sufficient doses of hexachlorophene have produced untoward effects, amounts of hexachlorophene encountered in normal use of this product are not in the same range.In the second column of his article, Dr Catalano alludes to a study of monkeys bathed with pHisoHex. Monkey skin is quite different from human skin, in that it is thinner and more fragile. The infant monkeys weighed about 300 gm, approximately one
McCarl GW. In Support of Hexachlorophene. Arch Dermatol. 1976;112(7):1031–1032. doi:10.1001/archderm.1976.01630310077023
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: