Hairdressers could be forced by law to carry out allergy tests on clients dyeing their hair following an incident in which a girl’s head grew twice its normal size after a severe reaction.
The new rules are being discussed between the health department and the consumer watchdog and follow the recent case of a young woman who landed in hospital after her head swelled alarmingly, following a severe allergic reaction to hair dye.
The case was exposed by The Sunday Times in October.
The woman was admitted to hospital where she spent four days after the swelling spread to her face. She eventually made a full recovery. However, just a week later, a similar case reported in the UK ended in the death of a 17-year-old girl.
It remains unclear what caused the allergic reaction in both cases but past literature has shown that, in extremely rare cases, allergic reactions to a particular chemical in permanent hair dye – para-phenylenediamine (PPD) – can lead to death.
The consumer authority itself has not come up with an explanation after having investigated the case, met with the woman who suffered the allergy and analysed the product’s ingredients.
None of the ingredients is banned. However, the authority is now holding discussions with the health department to make allergy patch-tests mandatory.
UK campaigners are calling for the outright ban of the potentially deadly PPD that is allowed by EU law.
However, Hair and Beauty Federation President Corinne Farrugia said an allergy was an abnormal reaction to a substance which is usually harmless and information collected from dermatologists showed that allergies cannot be avoided, while regular patch testing could lead to clients becoming more sensitive to a particular chemical.
“Although text books and manufacturers advise in favour of patch tests every time a person dyes their hair – while hairdressers and reason dictate that this is impractical – the view held by dermatologists is that patch testing does not prevent allergies and might actually sensitise people more.”
The hair dye in the Maltese allergy did not list PPD as one of its ingredients but included a related compound (toluene-2.5-diamine).
A spokesman for the Malta Competition and Consumers Affairs Authority said the maximum concentration of the substance applied to hair must not exceed four per cent. He added that several warnings must also be printed on the label, including that hair colorants could cause “severe allergic reactions”, and that those under the age of 16 cannot use the product.
Labels should warn customers not to colour their hair if they have a rash on their face or a sensitive, irritated and damaged scalp, if they have experienced a reaction after colouring their hair in the past, or have experienced a reaction to a temporary “black henna” tattoo.
It should also indicate that the product contains phenylenediamines (toluenediamines).
Last month, Labour MP Anthony Agius Decelis also asked Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, in Parliament, what action was being taken about PPD.
Dr Gonzi said the MCCAA was investigating the case reported by this paper to make sure that only products which abide by regulations are allowed on the market.