11/10/2020 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL): A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in t…

Home

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2001 | Volume : 67 | Issue : 6 | Page : 290-291

A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in the Indian market

Gulrez Tyebkhan
C/o Galderma India, 23 Steelmade Industrial estate, 2nd floor, Marol village, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 059, India

Correspondence Address:
Gulrez Tyebkhan
C/o Galderma India, 23 Steelmade Industrial estate, 2nd floor, Marol village, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 059
India

Abstract
Cleansers, commonly referred to as soaps (though all soaps are cleansers, all cleansers are not soaps), are an
important adjuvant in the treatment of any dermatological condition. In order to recommend a cleanser, many aspect
should be taken into consideration one important being its pH. pH of a cleanser tends to have an impact on the skin
in several ways viz. alteration of bacterial flora and pH, moisture content and irritation. A study was conducted to
evaluate the pH of various commonly available soaps/cleansers available in the Indian market. Most of the commonly
used soaps have an alkaline pH.

How to cite this article:

Tyebkhan G. A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in the Indian market.Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol
2001;67:290-291

How to cite this URL:

Tyebkhan G. A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in the Indian market. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol
[serial online] 2001 [cited 2020 Nov 10 ];67:290-291
Available from: https://www.ijdvl.com/text.asp?2001/67/6/290/11235

Full Text

Introduction

Considerable work has gone in the understanding of the relation of pH of the soaps and its effect on the skin. The
general rule is that soap-based cleansers exhibit a higher pH than products based on synthetic detergents.

The skin's surface is slightly acidic, giving rise to the concept of acid mantle. Intact skin exhibits an ability to recover
from pH changes, even when exposed to highly alkaline materials although prolonged exposure to materials applied
under occlusion may overwhelm the skin's buffering capacity.

While some argue that the contact time of the cleanser with the skin is too little to cause significant change in pH,
studies have proved other wise. Bechor et al[1] examined 41 marketed skin cleansing skin products and found that
on an average, the skin surface pH increased by about 0.6 units after 30 seconds of washing and returned to the
baseline within about 36 minutes. Even in the worst case, the surface pH was raised by 1.3 units and recovered
within 90 minutes. Sauermann et al[2] reported that the skin's surface pH recovered 2 hours after a 5minute face

https://www.ijdvl.com/printarticle.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2001;volume=67;issue=6;spage=290;epage=291;aulast=Tyebkhan 1/3
11/10/2020 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL): A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in t…

wash with soap.

Korting et al[3] reported that skin surface pH recovered within several hours after a 2-minute wash of the forearm
and forehead with soap. These authors also noted a small but persistent elevation in skin surface pH at both body
sites over a 4-week use period involving twice daily, 2-minute washing with soap.

The impact of the alteration in the skin pH is clearly seen with the help of the study conducted by Korting et al.[3]
The study demonstrated the effect of 2 cleansers, one at pH 5.5 and another at pH 8.5, on the resident bacterial flora
of the skin. Subjects were asked to wash the forearm and the forehead with the 2 synthetic detergents at different
pH levels. Neither of the cleansers affected the level of staphylococci on the forearm or the forehead. However, there
were more Propionibacterium aches on the skin of the forehead at the end of the first week in the group using the
alkaline synthetic cleanser.

The important conclusion drawn from this study was that preservation of the skin pH may be important to control the
bacterial count on the skin surface in patients of acne.

In some studies it has been shown that the irritation potential of the cleanser is not related to the pH.[5] According to
some, pH is an indicator of irritancy potential of a cleanser. They argue that, if the cleanser tends to change the pH of
the skin, the stress on the skin buffering may alone cause irritation.[6]

The pH of a cleanser has an effect even on the moisture content of the skin. Gehring et al reported that a multi-
component emulsion with a pH value of 7.5 had a greater drying effect on the skin than a similar emulsion with a pH
of 4.5.[7]

Materials and Methods

Soaps commonly available and used by the public were taken for assessment of pH. They included the following
categories of soaps-antibacterial, moisturizing, glycerin and sulphur containing, ayurvedic, baby soap, neem and lime
containing, soaps sold as beauty bars, anti-acne face wash, routine bathing bar, dove bar soap, aquaderm and the
new entrant into the ethical market cetapHil. Kindly note that all except, the anti-acne face wash, aquaderm and
cetapHil were bar soaps.

The pH was determined with the help of litmus paper-Indikrom papers from Qualigens fine chemicals. In case of bar
soaps, a few drops of tap water at room temperature, were poured onto the soap, rubbed to obtain lather and the
litmus paper dipped into it where as in case of the liquid soaps, a few drops were poured on to the litmus paper. The
colour change was then compared to the standard for determining the pH [Figure:1]

A change of color to green and deep green, correlating with a pH of 7-9 was seen with most of the commonly used
soaps. None of the soaps brought a color change to blue color relating with a pH of 9 and above by this method. Only
dove bar, aquaderm and cetapHil did not change color, indicating that their pH was around 6 by this method.

Discussion

The soaps commonly recommended and used by the population at large have a pH, which is neutral to alkaline in
most cases, ranging between 7 and 9. Only 3 cleansing agents (from amongst the ones tested) aquaderm, dove - an
OTC product and cetapHil had a pH in keeping with the normal skin. Even the glycerin and baby soaps, which are the
socalled mild soaps showed a neutral to alkaline pH.

From the evidence available, the pH of the skin changes depending on the pH of the cleanser used. This has a

https://www.ijdvl.com/printarticle.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2001;volume=67;issue=6;spage=290;epage=291;aulast=Tyebkhan 2/3
11/10/2020 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL): A study on the pH of commonly used soaps/cleansers available in t…

multifold impact on the skin in terms of the moisture content, the irritability and the bacterial flora.

Thus, before recommending a cleanser to a patient especially in case of dermatitic, sensitive and acne prone skin,
due consideration to the pH of the cleanser needs to be given.

References
1 Bechor R, Zlotogorski A, Dikstein S. Effect of soaps and detergents on the pH and casual lipid levels of the skin
surface. J Appl Cosmetol 1988; 6:123-128.
2 Sauermann G, Doerschner A, Hoppe U, et al. Comparative study of skin care efficacy and in-use properties of
soap and surfactant bars. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1986;37;309-327.
3 Korting HC, Megele M, Mehringer L, et al. Influence of skin cleansing preparation acidity on skin surface
properties. Int J Cosmet Sci 1991;13;91-102.
4 Rhein LD. Review of properties of surfactants that determine their interactions with stratum corneum. J Soc
Cosmet Chem 1997;48:253-274.
5 Mark Oestreicher. Detergents. bath preparations, and other skin cleansers. Clinics in Dermatology 1998;6:29-
36.
6 Gehring W, Gehse M, Zimmerman V, et al. Effect of pH changes in specific detergent multicomponent emulsion
on the water content of the stratum corneum. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1991; 42:327-333.

Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Site Map | Home | Contact Us | Feedback | Copyright and disclaimer

https://www.ijdvl.com/printarticle.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2001;volume=67;issue=6;spage=290;epage=291;aulast=Tyebkhan 3/3