Is some of you might know, before Lysol was sold as a general household disinfectant solution, it was marketed as a vaginal douche.
Is the Lysol sold today as a disinfectant cleanser the same chemical compound, or more-or-less similar, as the Lysol douche of the 1950s?
Bump?
OK, bumping this.
I have no use whatsoever for a vaginal douche, yet this intrigues me oddly.
I don’t know if the formula for Lysol has changed since 1926. The makers to not disclose what is in it now. I do know that it was the main Lysol disinfectant product, not a specialized one that was recommended. Directions were generally to dilute it by half for douching.
FWIW, an old buddy of mine (who is a psychiatrist) about 20 years ago told me about a patient he saw who worked at a no-tell motel. The woman was so grossed out by her work, that she began to wash herself with stronger and stronger cleaning products. She was bathing in bleach (diluted) and douching with Lysol (full strength) and wound up with severe female problems.
So, at least in its full strength form, I do not think Lysol should be used as a feminine cleanser.
Googling on lysol douche brings up a series of hits featuring Lysol ads from the 20s on for Lysol as a feminine hygiene product.
Start with this site, which has several ads.
Dunno about the douching part but it looks like they do print the ingredients on the labels of at least some of their products, here’s a photo:
Cool, their website does not list the active ingredient in the FAQ. Now we need to look at a bottle from yesteryear to see if it changed.
The consensus of women that I have spoke to about using this as a douche, was that it burned the first few times, but once you got toughened up, it wasn’t so bad. So I would quite agree, using it on lady bits is not recommended.
That advert talks about using a very dilute solution (not that I think it’s a good idea, even then).
Here’s another one: Blogsome
I read a book about a 1950’s OB/GYN who worked in a hospital emergency room. After seeing the aftermath of too many self done abortions, he started doing them illegally. One of the things he saw was women who douched with full strenth Lysol to cause an abortion. The uterus would be black from third degree burns.
…BLACK?
:eek: :eek: :eek:
/crosses legs
I’ve heard that before but I think it’s BS. Unless the word “douche” means something other than what we now call “douching.”
I’m not a doctor but I have had a cervical biopsy, and I’m pretty sure there is no way anyone is getting a catheter up their own cervix, which they’d have to do in order to be able to get any liquid into the uterus. But perhaps a doctor can clarify this for us.
I can’t say much about the proprietary formulas of yore, but from what I have read here one of the possible ingredients is p-chloro-o-benzylphenol. Phenol has the unique ability of eating away your skin while numbing it too (Think about that next time you use your soar throat spray.) I think we can pretty much agree that the first time a woman shoves today’s Lysol up her c&%t is the last time anybody does it. My guess then is that the original formula was a dilute solution of p-chloro-o-benzylphenol or maybe it was just phenol.
I booted up my computer just to come in and make it clear, before any snarky comments ensue, that yes I am aware of how women get pregnant. I know it’s possible for “something” to get up the cervix. But those things are moving under their own power. I am not sure if it’s possible to get a quantity of liquid to swoosh up through the cervix and into the uterus.
It seems pretty difficult to me, too, and yet that’s how all “home-made” abortions were done back in the day. And today too, of course. Personally, I can’t imagine being able to do it.
Resolved: Nike should never make a douche.
Is your post here supposed to be relevant to answering the question in the OP?
-FrL-
The ad linked by Exapno Mapcase does clarify that a very dilute solution was recommended, which I think is relevant here.
Yes, but it’s also one of the very ads linked in the OP.
O I C