Talk:Baby oil
Appearance
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This joke is dumb and bad.
[edit]And you should feel bad if you edit this article to say that baby oil comes from babies. Please apply more effort in the future if you wish to make joke edits, that way at least the person who removes it gets to laugh. Grrusernames (talk) 10:42, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
- we have come full circle Nir Koren (talk) 23:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- time is a flat circle; now people are making diddy jokes User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 14:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- but it's Diddy tho 165.140.215.230 (talk) 13:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Spelling
[edit]"principle use" should be "principal use". 180.150.113.6 (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. Commander Keane (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Paragraph contradicts itself
[edit]The section on mineral-oil baby-oil says
- Nevertheless, the use of mineral oil in cosmetics is being criticized. Natural-cosmetic companies claim that mineral oil causes skin occlusion. Conventional cosmetic manufacturers and dermatologists and cosmetic chemists argue against that, and studies have shown no statistical difference between paraffin oil and vegetable oils in skin penetration and skin occlusion. On the contrary, petrolatum-based preparations have been shown to be effective to the skin barrier function, even in premature infants.
Skin-occlusion is a moisture barrier at the skin. How can the effectiveness of petroleum baby-oil in "the skin barrier function" be "contrary" to the claim that such oil "causes skin occlusion"?
It's unlikely that I'll promptly notice replies to this comment; but maybe someone who cares more about baby oil will fix the contradiction.