Authors : Dr. Venugopal Reddy Iragamreddy

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/ym3ehyd2

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/3xrp2fy8

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jan713

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The use of cosmetic and personal-care products in children has increased substantially over recent decades, beginning in the neonatal period and extending through adolescence. Pediatric skin differs significantly from adult skin in terms of structure, function, permeability, and metabolic capacity, making children particularly susceptible to irritation, allergic sensitisation, and systemic absorption of topically applied substances. Despite this vulnerability, most cosmetic products are developed and marketed with limited pediatric-specific safety data. This narrative review critically examines pediatric cosmetology practices across all developmental stages, from newborns to teenagers, focusing on skin physiology, commonly used products, ingredient safety, regulatory frameworks, available clinical evidence, and special population considerations. Recommendations from international organisations including the World Health Organization, American Academy of Pediatrics, and US Food and Drug Administration are discussed. The aim is to provide clinicians, researchers, and policymakers with a comprehensive, evidence-based understanding of pediatric cosmetology to support safe clinical counselling and rational product use.

Keywords : Pediatric Cosmetology, Child-Care Products, Infant Skin, Cosmetic Safety, Endocrine Disruptors, Pediatric Dermatology.

References :

1. Stamatas GN, Nikolovski J, Mack MC, Kollias N. Infant skin physiology and development during the first year of life: a review of recent findings. Pediatr Dermatol. 2011;28(1):17–21.
2. Cork MJ, Danby SG, Vasilopoulos Y, et al. Epidermal barrier dysfunction in atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol. 2009;161(1):3–13.
3. Kelleher M, Dunn-Galvin A, Gray C, et al. Skin barrier dysfunction measured by transepidermal water loss at birth predicts atopic dermatitis at 12 months. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015;135(4):930–935.
4. Hoare C, Li Wan Po A, Williams H. Systematic review of treatments for atopic eczema. BMJ. 2000;321(7273):1316–1320.
5. Lodén M. Role of topical emollients and moisturizers in the treatment of dry skin barrier disorders. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2003;4(11):771–788.
6. Stamatas GN, Tierney NK, McBurney EI, et al. Water loss and barrier properties of infant skin. J Dermatol Sci. 2010;57(2):128–134.
7. American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Environmental Health. Policy statement: chemical management policy—prioritizing children's health. Pediatrics. 2011;127(5):983–990.
8. World Health Organization. Children’s Environmental Health. Geneva: WHO; 2017.
9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Cosmetic products and ingredients safety. FDA Consumer Health Information. 2020.
10. European Commission. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on cosmetic products. Off J Eur Union. 2009.
11. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T, Johansen JD. The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population—prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57(5):287–299.
12. Schlumpf M, Kypke K, Wittassek M, et al. Exposure patterns of UV filters in cosmetics: influence on endocrine activity. Environ Health Perspect. 2010;118(3):437–444.
13. Darbre PD. Environmental oestrogens, cosmetics and breast cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;20(1):121–143.
14. Kim J, Kim J, Lee H, et al. Systemic absorption of sunscreen ingredients in children. J Pediatr. 2019;208:259–265.e1.
15. Sarkar R, Basu S, Agrawal RK, Gupta P. Skin care in the newborn. Indian J Dermatol. 2010;55(1):2–5.
16. Atherton DJ. A review of the pathophysiology, prevention and treatment of irritant diaper dermatitis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(5):645–649.
17. Fluhr JW, Darlenski R, Taieb A, et al. Functional skin adaptation in infancy—almost complete but not fully competent. Exp Dermatol. 2010;19(6):483–492.
18. Uter W, Geier J, Frosch PJ. Contact allergy to fragrances: current clinical and regulatory trends. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;69(1):1–11.
19. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Health effects of cosmetic talc exposure. NIOSH Current Intelligence Bulletin. 2011.
20. Braun JM, Just AC, Williams PL, et al. Personal care product use and urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations in children. Environ Health Perspect. 2014;122(10):1125–1131.
21. Liao C, Kannan K. Concentrations and profiles of parabens in human urine. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(7):3910–3918.
22. Danby SG, AlEnezi T, Sultan A, et al. Effect of olive and sunflower seed oil on the adult skin barrier. Acta Derm Venereol. 2013;93(2):155–159.
23. European Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety. Opinion on parabens in cosmetic products. SCCS/1514/13. Brussels; 2013.
24. Baillie L, Forsyth K, Woods J. Cosmetic misuse and skin damage in adolescents. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2019;44(2):e44–e50.
25. Heller MM, Wu JJ. Pediatric cosmetic dermatology: ethical and safety considerations. Pediatr Dermatol. 2014;31(1):1–6.