34 INTIMATE CARE
and vulvar microbiome. Interestingly, we have found that there are significant differences in diversity when comparing the vulvar microbiome to the vaginal microbiome. Within the vagina, there is a higher
percentage of Lactobacillus reflecting a lower pH than the skin. Within the vulva, we see a significantly higher population of S. epidermidis, something we see more associated with the skin than the vaginal microbiome (Figure 2). Sequential also found that L. crispatus was
high in the vagina, but not found in the vulva at all. This could possibly be due to driving down pH in more protective parts such as the vaginal microbiome. Some similarities included L. acidophilus, which is prevalent in both (Figure 3). One of the biggest things we have noticed
is that the vulva mirrors more of the skin’s microbiome and its associated microbes. We see a higher diversity in the vulvar microbiome as compared to the vaginal microbiome. We can say this with some degree of confidence, having sampled and sequenced 100 samples.
Paving the path to a better industry standard Women’s intimate care should never be a gamble. Consumers wield immense power in demanding transparency and accountability despite lacking regulations. The more consumers are aware of the potential dangers of improperly tested products reaching their hands, the more brands will be held accountable for undergoing rigorous testing processes that support meaningful insights. The realm of women’s intimate care products stands at a crossroads between potential danger and genuine wellbeing. The lack of regulations governing this sector is a stark reminder that the beauty and personal care industry must prioritise quantitative research above all else. A harmonious vaginal microbiome is integral to women’s health, and products intended for intimate care should never disrupt this delicate balance.
The solution lies in a multifaceted approach:
education, consumer empowerment, and brands taking action. If the regulatory side of things is taking too long to kick in, it does not mean that intimate care products should not be upheld to a higher standard until they are. Legislation can take a while to be established,
but accountability is something consumers can impart on brands as well as brands stepping up and testing their products to sell their claims without doubt or fears of lawsuits. A delicate relationship has always existed
between brands and their consumers. As testing companies, our aim is to bridge the gap that is widening between the two due to loss of trust and insignificant data to back claims. By doing so, we can transform the intimate care industry into a realm of safety, efficacy, and genuine care – a realm that celebrates women’s health rather than exploiting it.
References 1. Acumen Research and Consulting. Feminine hygiene products market size worth around $38.5 billion by 2028. 2021
2. Future Market Insights. Women intimate care PERSONAL CARE January 2024
1.00
Species 0.75 0.50
(Leptotrichia)_amnionii Atopobium_vaginae Gardnerella_vaginalis Lactobacillus_acidophilus Lactobacillus_crispatus Lactobacillus_fermentum Lactobacillus_helveticus Other Straphylococcus_epidermidis Straphylococcus_agalactiae_BSU248 Streptococcus)_anginosus
0.25
Unknown_Anaerococcus Unknown_Bacteroidales_S24-7_group Unknown_Corynebacterium_1 Unknown_Finegoldia Unknown_Lactobacillus Unknown_Megasphaera Unknown_Prevotella Unknown_Shuttleworthia Unknown_Streptococcus Veillonellaceae_bacterium_DNF00751
0.00 Vagina Group Figure 3: Vaginal and vulvar microbiome histogram 4 3 2 b 1 0 Vagina Group Figure 4: Alpha Diversity (Shannon) for vagina and vulva
market: Global industry analysis 2013-2017 and opportunity assessment 2018-2028. 2019
https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/ reports/women-intimate-care-market
3. Berg G, Rybakova D, Fischer D et al. Microbiome definition re- visited: old concepts and new challenges.Microbiome. 2020; 8, 103. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s40168-020-00875-0
PC
4. Saraf VS, Sheikh SA, Ahmad A, Gillevet, PM, Bokhari H, Javed S. Vaginal microbiome: normalcy vs dysbiosis. Archives of Microbiology. 2021; 203(7), 3793–3802. doi:10.1007/s00203-021-02414-3
5. Freitas AC, Hill JE. Quantification, isolation and characterization of Bifidobacterium from
the vaginal microbiomes of reproductive aged women. Anaerobe. 2017; 47, 145–156. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2017.05.012
6. Ravel J, Gajer P, Abdo Z, Schneider GM, Koenig SSK, McCulle SL, Forney LJ. Vaginal microbiome of reproductive-age women. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2010; 108(Supplement_1), 4680–4687. doi:10.1073/pnas.1002611107
7. France MT, Ma B, Gajer P, Brown S, Humphrys MS, Holm JB, Waetjen LE, Brotman RM, Ravel J. VALENCIA: a nearest centroid classification method for vaginal microbial communities based on composition. Microbiome. 2020; Nov 23;8(1):166. doi: 10.1186/s40168-020-00934-6. PMID: 33228810; PMCID: PMC7684964
www.personalcaremagazine.com Vulva Anova, p=4.2e-05 Vulva
a
Shannon
Relative Abundance
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80
