This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

R. P. Moody, PhD
Health and Welfare Canada Environmental Health Centre Ottawa

JAMA. 1989;262(1):28-29.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor. —

I am writing in reference to the letter to the editor by Davies et al and the reply by Tenenbein¹ in the April 15, 1988, issue of JAMA concerning the safety of N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET)—based insect repellents. The criticism expressed by Davies et al that a previous article by Tenenbein² was incorrect in extrapolating DEET toxicity data from ingestion studies to topical applications was questioned. Tenenbein¹ pointed out inconsistencies between the data of Davies et al and those of a study by Wu et al.³ We recently reported⁴ that DE ET is absorbed rapidly after topical applications in rats, monkeys, and man and that anatomic site—related differences were observed in the monkey, with 68% ± 9% being absorbed from the ventral forepaw. This observation should cause concern since the monkey ventral forepaw corresponds with the human palmar surface,⁴ . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?