title: The pH of water from various sources: an overview for recommendation for patients with atopic dermatitis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have increased susceptibility to irritants. Some patients have questions about types of water for bathing or skin cleansing.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  We studied the pH of water from various sources to give an overview for physicians to recommend patients with AD.
  
  
  METHODS
  Water from various sources was collected for measurement of the pH using a pH meter and pH-indicator strips.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Bottled drinking still water had pH between 6.9 and 7.5 while the sparkling type had pH between 4.9 and 5.5. Water derived from home water filters had an approximate pH of 7.5 as same as tap water. Swimming pool water had had pH between 7.2 and 7.5 while seawater had a pH of 8. Normal saline and distilled water had pH of 5.4 and 5.7, respectively. Facial mineral water had pH between 7.5 and 8, while facial makeup removing water had an acidic pH.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Normal saline, distilled water, bottled sparkling water and facial makeup removing water had similar pH to that of normal skin of normal people. However, other factors including benefits of mineral substances in the water in terms of bacteriostatic and anti-inflammation should be considered in the selection of cleansing water.
authors: Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.
authors: Kanokvalai
authors: K
authors: Kulthanan
authors: Piyavadee
authors: P
authors: Nuchkull
authors: Supenya
authors: S
authors: Varothai
keywords: Atopic dermatitis; pH of water
references: Dermatol Ther. 2003;16(2):132-40
references: 12919115
references: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2000 Sep;14(5):425-8
references: 11305394
references: Dermatol Ther. 2004;17 Suppl 1:26-34
references: 14728696
references: Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2005 Oct;132(10 Pt 2):6S16-6S18
references: 16340929
references: Contact Dermatitis. 1999 Dec;41(6):311-4
references: 10617210
references: Acta Derm Venereol. 1999 Sep;79(5):360-2
references: 10494711
references: Lancet. 1998 Aug 15;352(9127):527-31
references: 9716057
references: Gynecol Surg. 2009 Sep;6(3):255-259
references: 20234842
references: Arch Dermatol. 2010 May;146(5):541-3
references: 20479303
references: Hautarzt. 1986 Mar;37(3):126-9
references: 3700100
references: Acta Derm Venereol. 1995 Nov;75(6):429-33
references: 8651017
references: Cutis. 2006 May;77(5):317-24
references: 16776289
references: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2001 Sep;15 Suppl 1:12-5
references: 11720072
references: J Asthma. 2012 Oct;49(8):830-8
references: 22861198
references: Br J Dermatol. 1990 Aug;123(2):199-205
references: 2400722
references: Environ Monit Assess. 2012 Oct;184(10):6087-137
references: 22076103
references: J Environ Sci (China). 2008;20(4):441-8
references: 18575129
references: Clin Dermatol. 1996 Nov-Dec;14(6):659-64
references: 8960809
references: Environ Sci Technol. 2007 Jan 15;41(2):363-72
references: 17310693
references: Cutis. 2000 Oct;66(4):296-300
references: 11109156
references: Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2007 Sep;5(3):305-23
references: 21631794
references: Pediatrics. 2009 May;123(5):e808-14
references: 19403473
references: Int J Dermatol. 2005 Feb;44(2):151-7
references: 15689218
references: J Food Sci. 2011 Nov-Dec;76(9):R178-96
references: 22416719
references: Am J Clin Dermatol. 2009;10 Suppl 1:13-7
references: 19209949
references: Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010 Feb;64(2):115-23
references: 19724292
references: Oncol Rep. 2011 Sep;26(3):577-86
references: 21567108
references: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011 Feb;25 Suppl 1:6-11
references: 21175868
references: Environ Sci Technol. 2008 Jun 15;42(12):4261-7
references: 18605542
references: J Dermatol. 2003 Mar;30(3):196-202
references: 12692355