{"id":2834,"date":"2026-11-07T23:41:12","date_gmt":"2026-11-07T15:41:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/?p=2834"},"modified":"2026-11-07T23:41:12","modified_gmt":"2026-11-07T15:41:12","slug":"nanoactive-4-terpineol-20","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/?p=2834","title":{"rendered":"NanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20%"},"content":{"rendered":"

NanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20%Terpinen-4-ol Nanoliposomes<\/h2>\n

Product overview<\/p>\n

NanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20% Terpinen-4-ol Nanoliposomes<\/h2>\n

Terpinen-4-ol science: skin, eyelid, scalp and oral care<\/p>\n

PuriPharm Co. Ltd.<\/p>\n

PURISOME\u00ae FlexVes™ Liposome Technology<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Product and value<\/p>\n

One defined active, four formulation-development areas<\/h2>\n

Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639. Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2. Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence for the active<\/b><\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol research covers inflammatory-mediator regulation, microbial inhibition and biofilm effects.<\/p>\n

A lipid-carrier formulation strategy<\/b><\/p>\n

PURISOME\u00ae FlexVes™ Liposome Technology provides a platform design for active encapsulation.<\/p>\n

Skin care<\/b><\/p>\n

Blemish-prone skin and skin comfort<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/b><\/p>\n

External cleansing and lash-root care<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/b><\/p>\n

Scalp cleansing and dandruff-related care<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/b><\/p>\n

Formulation development targeting biofilms<\/p>\n

Product and value<\/p>\n

Product information and commercial specification<\/h2>\n

PuriPharm Co. Ltd. PURISOME technology brand document, v1.0, July 17, 2026. PubChem CID 11230; NIST Chemistry WebBook, CAS 562-74-3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Product information<\/td>\nPuriPharm product<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Product name<\/td>\nNanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20% Terpinen-4-ol Nanoliposomes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Core active INCI<\/td>\n4-TERPINEOL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Molecular name in the literature<\/td>\nTerpinen-4-ol<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CAS number<\/td>\n562-74-3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Delivery platform<\/td>\nPURISOME\u00ae FlexVes™ Liposome Technology<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

20% is the designated commercial specification. The basis for measuring active content and the full ingredient INCI list must follow the official product specifications.<\/p>\n

Product and value<\/p>\n

A monoterpene alcohol with lipophilic properties<\/h2>\n

PubChem CID 11230; NIST Chemistry WebBook, CAS 562-74-3. Akbarzadeh et al. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013. DOI: 10.1186\/1556-276X-8-102.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

A defined molecular identity<\/b><\/p>\n

A cyclic carbon skeleton carries one hydroxyl group. Terpinen-4-ol differs from \u03b1-terpineol and other terpineol isomers.<\/p>\n

Relevance to formulation design<\/b><\/p>\n

The molecular structure provides a rationale for active\u2013lipid association strategies in phospholipid delivery systems.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Three categories of biological evidence support application development<\/h2>\n

Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639. Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2. Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

Inflammatory mediators<\/b><\/p>\n

Human monocyte and mouse macrophage studies connect terpinen-4-ol with inflammatory-mediator production and cellular signaling.<\/p>\n

Contact-dependent activity<\/b><\/p>\n

Bacterial, fungal and Demodex experiments show concentration and contact-time responses in specific models.<\/p>\n

Surface-associated biofilms<\/b><\/p>\n

Studies separately assess biofilm formation, mature biomass, metabolic activity and adhesion-related gene expression.<\/p>\n

The test material, model and endpoint determine how a result informs formulation development.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol reduces inflammatory-mediator production<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 3A, B and E. LPS-stimulated human monocytes, cultured for 40 h.<\/p>\n

Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: terpinen-4-ol; \u03b1-terpineol; 1,8-cineole; viability. Concentrations a\/b and LPS conditions are specified in the text.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol: a = 0.052%, b = 0.026% (v\/v). LPS = 500 ng\/mL. Three donors, triplicate wells. Mean + SEM; *P < 0.05.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Inflammatory-mediator responses depend on material and exposure time<\/h2>\n

Original Table 3. Pure terpinen-4-ol and water-soluble tea tree oil components.<\/p>\n

Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Adherent human peripheral blood monocytes, LPS-induced. \u2013 = no significant decrease; P<0.05 for all changes shown.<\/p>\n

Pure terpinen-4-ol<\/b><\/p>\n

At 0.052% v\/v, TNF-\u03b1, IL-1\u03b2, IL-8 and PGE\u2082 all decreased.<\/p>\n

IL-10 is an anti-inflammatory cytokine, so its reduction has a different biological meaning.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Reduced IL-6 and TNF-\u03b1 transcription in macrophages<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1. RAW264.7 cell viability and LPS-induced cytokine gene expression.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: cell viability; relative mRNA expression; control; T-4-O = terpinen-4-ol.<\/p>\n

IL-6 and TNF-\u03b1 vary with tested concentration<\/b><\/p>\n

This gene-expression study adds evidence from another cell model to the human-monocyte inflammatory-mediator findings.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Immunoblots show changes in mTOR and NF-\u03baB signaling<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 7A, shown in two parts with the same lane order.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/p>\n

Lane order: control, T-4-O, LPS, LPS + T-4-O.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Lower phosphorylation ratios versus LPS alone<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 7B. RAW264.7 cells pretreated with terpinen-4-ol 100 \u00b5mol\/L before LPS stimulation.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"<\/p>\n

mTOR, NF-\u03baB and I\u03baB phosphorylation ratios were lower than in the LPS group. The corresponding AMPK comparison was not significant.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Lower ECAR\/OCR ratio after terpinen-4-ol treatment<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. Terpinen-4-ol 100 \u00b5mol\/L for 2 h, followed by LPS 1 \u00b5g\/mL for 6 h.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: ECAR; OCR; time (min); ns. Original individual measurements and ratios retained.<\/p>\n

An altered energy-metabolism ratio<\/b><\/p>\n

The ECAR\/OCR ratio decreased versus LPS alone. The corresponding comparisons for ECAR and OCR individually were not significant in the original figure.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Selective responses of glutamine-metabolism genes<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 6. Four metabolism-related genes in RAW264.7 macrophages.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Gene responses differ<\/b><\/p>\n

Versus LPS, GLS and GDH expression increased; ASNS and GAD showed no significant change in the same comparison.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

A proposed mechanism linking metabolism and inflammation<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 8. A mechanistic model proposed by the authors from cell experiments.<\/p>\n

Liu et al. Foods. 2024. DOI: 10.3390\/foods13121842.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: extracellular\/cytoplasm; glutamine\/glutamate; TCA cycle; OXPHOS; inflammatory cytokines.<\/p>\n

Integrating cell-level mechanisms<\/b><\/p>\n

Glutamine metabolism, mTOR and NF-\u03baB are linked to inflammatory signaling. The figure presents the authors\u2019 mechanistic interpretation of their results.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Concentration-dependent bactericidal activity<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) ATCC 43300; viable plate counts.<\/p>\n

Cheng et al. BMC Microbiol. 2021. DOI: 10.1186\/s12866-021-02348-2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: control; MIC; time (h); log10(CFU\/mL).<\/p>\n

Inhibitory and bactericidal concentrations differ<\/b><\/p>\n

MIC: 0.16% v\/v<\/p>\n

MBC: 0.32% v\/v<\/p>\n

The authors report no recoverable viable bacteria within 2 h at 0.32%.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Different responses in biofilm formation and mature biomass<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. Crystal violet assay, MRSA ATCC 43300.<\/p>\n

Cheng et al. BMC Microbiol. 2021. DOI: 10.1186\/s12866-021-02348-2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: time (h); clearance of biofilm; OD590 crystal-violet absorbance.<\/p>\n

Formation inhibition and biomass removal are different endpoints<\/b><\/p>\n

At 0.16% v\/v: 24 h biofilm-formation inhibition was 48.09 \u00b1 0.97%; mature-biofilm biomass removal was 93.90 \u00b1 3.33%.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Confocal imaging shows altered biofilm viability<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 3. Preformed MRSA biofilm; LIVE\/DEAD staining.<\/p>\n

Cheng et al. BMC Microbiol. 2021. DOI: 10.1186\/s12866-021-02348-2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Images show a concentration response<\/b><\/p>\n

A: untreated<\/p>\n

B: 0.04% v\/v<\/p>\n

C: 0.08% v\/v<\/p>\n

D: 0.16% v\/v<\/p>\n

Green: viable cells<\/p>\n

Red: membrane-compromised cells<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Reduced extracellular DNA in treated biofilms<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 9. eDNA normalized to relative biofilm biomass.<\/p>\n

Cheng et al. BMC Microbiol. 2021. DOI: 10.1186\/s12866-021-02348-2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: ng eDNA\/relative biomass; control; concentration of terpinen-4-ol.<\/p>\n

An effect related to the biofilm matrix<\/b><\/p>\n

At 0.16% v\/v, eDNA decreased by 61.88 \u00b1 0.58% versus control, informing research on microbial growth and biofilm structure.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

An animal infection model provides antifungal evidence<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1. Candida albicans SA-40; experimental vaginal candidiasis.<\/p>\n

Mondello et al. BMC Infect Dis. 2006. DOI: 10.1186\/1471-2334-6-158.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Original treatment groups<\/b><\/p>\n

\u25b2 Terpinen-4-ol 1% v\/v<\/p>\n

\u25a0 Vehicle control<\/p>\n

\u25cf Fluconazole 100 \u00b5g<\/p>\n

\u25a1 Tea tree oil 5% v\/v<\/p>\n

\u25cb Tea tree oil 1% v\/v<\/p>\n

\u25b3 Tea tree oil 2.5% v\/v<\/p>\n

Five rats per group. Intravaginal dosing at 1, 24 and 48 h after infection, 0.1 mL per dose. Mean \u00b1 SE.<\/p>\n

Biological evidence<\/p>\n

Antifungal activity also observed against an azole-resistant strain<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. C. albicans AIDS-68; experimental vaginal candidiasis in rats.<\/p>\n

Mondello et al. BMC Infect Dis. 2006. DOI: 10.1186\/1471-2334-6-158.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Original treatment groups<\/b><\/p>\n

\u25b2 Terpinen-4-ol 1% v\/v<\/p>\n

\u25a0 Vehicle control<\/p>\n

\u25cf Fluconazole 100 \u00b5g<\/p>\n

\u25a1 Tea tree oil 5% v\/v<\/p>\n

\u25cb Tea tree oil 1% v\/v<\/p>\n

Five rats per group. Terpinen-4-ol 1% v\/v. Administration was vaginal in this animal model.<\/p>\n

Delivery design<\/p>\n

PURISOME\u00ae provides a phospholipid delivery structure<\/h2>\n

PuriPharm Co. Ltd. PURISOME technology brand document, v1.0, July 17, 2026. Akbarzadeh et al. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013. DOI: 10.1186\/1556-276X-8-102.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Phospholipid bilayer<\/b><\/p>\n

Polar heads face the internal and external aqueous phases; hydrophobic tails form the bilayer interior.<\/p>\n

Active\u2013lipid association<\/b><\/p>\n

Lipid-associated actives can disperse into formulations with the vesicular system. Their distribution depends on carrier composition.<\/p>\n

Structural schematic, not a measurement of particle size or active localization in this product.<\/p>\n

Delivery design<\/p>\n

Encapsulation links formulation dispersion to local contact<\/h2>\n

Akbarzadeh et al. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013. DOI: 10.1186\/1556-276X-8-102. PuriPharm Co. Ltd. PURISOME technology brand document, v1.0, July 17, 2026.<\/p>\n

Dispersion<\/b><\/p>\n

Dispersed carriers organize the lipophilic active, providing a design route for incorporation into aqueous formulations.<\/p>\n

Local contact<\/b><\/p>\n

The base, carrier and use method jointly determine contact at the target surface and the available fraction of active.<\/p>\n

User experience<\/b><\/p>\n

Odor, appearance, spreading and residue, alongside active retention, are measurable development variables.<\/p>\n

Design goal: consistent surface delivery and appropriate finished-product experience.<\/p>\n

Skin care<\/p>\n

Clarifying care draws on microbial and inflammatory-mediator evidence<\/h2>\n

Lee et al. J Food Drug Anal. 2013. DOI: 10.1016\/j.jfda.2013.05.007. Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639.<\/p>\n

Blemish-prone skin<\/b><\/p>\n

Microbial evidence<\/b><\/p>\n

Growth-inhibition results support evaluation of clarifying formulations under actual contact conditions.<\/p>\n

Inflammatory-mediator evidence<\/b><\/p>\n

Human-monocyte findings support further assessment of skin comfort and visible redness in finished products.<\/p>\n

Development focus: surface cleansing, skin appearance and perceived comfort.<\/p>\n

Skin care<\/p>\n

In vitro inhibition of bacteria associated with blemish-prone skin<\/h2>\n

The experiment distinguished individual components, whole tea tree oil and reconstituted mixtures.<\/p>\n

Lee et al. J Food Drug Anal. 2013. DOI: 10.1016\/j.jfda.2013.05.007.<\/p>\n

Cutibacterium acnes<\/b><\/p>\n

Cutibacterium acnes; the paper uses the former name Propionibacterium acnes.<\/p>\n

Staphylococcus aureus<\/b><\/p>\n

Staphylococcus aureus<\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol inhibited both microorganisms.<\/p>\n

Active-component selection matters<\/b><\/p>\n

In reconstituted tea tree oil mixtures, the terpinen-4-ol proportion correlated positively with activity against C. acnes.<\/p>\n

A defined active identity helps focus formulation development for blemish-prone skin.<\/p>\n

Skin care<\/p>\n

A tea tree oil gel trial provides human skin-care context<\/h2>\n

5% tea tree oil gel versus placebo; 60 participants; 45 days.<\/p>\n

Enshaieh et al. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2007. DOI: 10.4103\/0378-6323.30646.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Study element<\/td>\nReported information<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Design<\/td>\nRandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Groups<\/td>\nTea tree oil gel: n = 30; placebo: n = 30<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Assessments<\/td>\nTotal lesion count and acne severity index, assessed every 15 days<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Endpoints<\/td>\nBoth improved significantly versus placebo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

This human evidence applies to a gel containing whole tea tree oil.<\/p>\n

Skin care<\/p>\n

Skin-care concepts: translating evidence into formulation roles<\/h2>\n

Lee et al. J Food Drug Anal. 2013. DOI: 10.1016\/j.jfda.2013.05.007. Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639.<\/p>\n

Clarifying serum or gel<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: localized care for blemish-prone skin. Role: incorporate a defined active and evaluate dispersion and sensory properties.<\/p>\n

Comfort-care lotion<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: comfortable daily care. Role: combine with an appropriate moisturizing base and measure perceived comfort.<\/p>\n

Facial cleanser<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: daily surface cleansing. Role: assess active availability after surfactant mixing and under actual rinsing conditions.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

External eyelid, lash-root and periocular care involve different sites<\/h2>\n

Fromstein et al. Clin Optom. 2018. DOI: 10.2147\/OPTO.S142708. Wang et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.13.11.22.<\/p>\n

External care-area schematic and published in vivo confocal images of eyelash follicles.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Periocular skin<\/b><\/p>\n

Cosmetic care of the skin around the eyes<\/p>\n

External eyelid and lash roots<\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Original Figure 6<\/p>\n

Demodex within follicles<\/b><\/p>\n

Demodex can inhabit eyelash follicles. Numbers in the original image mark mite positions within the same follicle.<\/p>\n

Development focus: external surface cleansing and controlled contact at lash roots.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol leads in a tea tree oil component comparison<\/h2>\n

Upper half of original Table 2. Adult Demodex mites; mineral-oil dilution; observation for up to 150 min.<\/p>\n

Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Survival time: mean \u00b1 SD, min; potency order as in the source. N=6 unless stated. *TTO values from Gao et al. (2005). ND and original blank areas are retained; blanks are not converted to 0 or ND.<\/p>\n

Mean \u00b1 SD; n = 6 unless otherwise indicated. * Tea tree oil data are from Gao et al. (2005).<\/p>\n

ND: not determined; reasons follow in the next section.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Other tea tree oil constituents show different activity<\/h2>\n

Lower half of original Table 2, with column headers repeated for readability.<\/p>\n

Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Survival time: mean \u00b1 SD, min; N=6 unless stated. ND means not determined; reasons and solubility limits are explained in the original and this section. Blank and spanning blank areas retain their source positions without inferred results.<\/p>\n

ND: not determined. Reasons include survival beyond 150 min, unavailability of \u03b4-cadinene\/globulol, or insolubility of sabinene\/viridiflorol at the relevant concentration. n = 6 unless otherwise indicated.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

An external-cleansing case documents changes in the lid margin and mites<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1. One patient aged 61; eyelid cleansing twice daily for 8 weeks.<\/p>\n

Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Lash-root appearance and mite counts<\/b><\/p>\n

A\u2013B: baseline<\/p>\n

C\u2013D: after 8 weeks<\/p>\n

Mites on 8 sampled eyelashes decreased from 22 to 0. This was an uncontrolled single-case observation.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Combined eyelid care sustained the reduction in mite counts<\/h2>\n

Wang et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.13.11.22.<\/p>\n

Randomized, open-label trial, n = 40. Month 3 was one month after intervention stopped.<\/p>\n

Original Figure 2 and selected data from original Table 2.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: total Demodex; baseline; months 1\/2\/3; T4O wipes; DC+T4O deep cleaning plus wipes.<\/p>\n

Two care regimens<\/b><\/p>\n

Both groups used terpinen-4-ol cleansing wipes twice daily for 2 months.<\/p>\n

The combination group also received deep cleaning with 0.01% hypochlorous acid at baseline and months 1 and 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Mite-count change, mean \u00b1 SD<\/td>\nMonth 2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wipes<\/td>\n\u22125.65 \u00b1 6.03<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wipes + deep cleaning<\/td>\n\u22127.75 \u00b1 6.91<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P<\/td>\n0.312<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Mite-count change, mean \u00b1 SD<\/td>\nMonth 3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wipes<\/td>\n\u22124.15 \u00b1 6.91<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wipes + deep cleaning<\/td>\n\u22128.70 \u00b1 6.81<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P<\/td>\n0.043<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Mite-count changes vary across follow-up visits<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 3. Within-group comparisons; month 3 was one month after intervention stopped.<\/p>\n

Wang et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.13.11.22.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: T4O; DC+T4O; baseline; month; ns.<\/p>\n

Persistence during follow-up<\/b><\/p>\n

Counts decreased significantly at month 2 in the wipes group and at months 2 and 3 in the combination group. Comparisons are against each group\u2019s own baseline.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Between-group symptom-score differences were not significant<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 4. Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI).<\/p>\n

Wang et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.13.11.22.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: Ocular Surface Disease Index; baseline; month; T4O and DC+T4O regimens.<\/p>\n

Additional patient-reported symptom evidence<\/b><\/p>\n

OSDI trended downward in both groups. The combination group improved significantly from baseline at months 2 and 3, but between-group differences were not statistically significant.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Another wipes trial reported greater symptom improvement<\/h2>\n

Terpinen-4-ol + hyaluronate wipes versus diluted baby shampoo; 24 participants per group.<\/p>\n

Arici et al. Eye. 2022. DOI: 10.1038\/s41433-021-01642-7.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: lid wipes; baby shampoo; baseline; weeks 4\/8\/12; OSDI.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: BLISS; lid wipes; baby shampoo; original follow-up times.<\/p>\n

Week-8 OSDI change: \u22129.2 \u00b1 9.8 with wipes versus \u22120.8 \u00b1 9.9 with shampoo (P = 0.024).<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

Both care methods reduced measured mite counts<\/h2>\n

Selected and rearranged data from original Table 3. Mites per sampled eyelash; mean \u00b1 SD.<\/p>\n

Arici et al. Eye. 2022. DOI: 10.1038\/s41433-021-01642-7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Group \/ comparison<\/td>\nT4O + hyaluronate wipes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Baseline<\/td>\n1.52 \u00b1 1.54<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 4<\/td>\n0.07 \u00b1 0.16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 8<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 12<\/td>\n0.01 \u00b1 0.05<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Group \/ comparison<\/td>\nDiluted baby shampoo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Baseline<\/td>\n1.21 \u00b1 0.95<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 4<\/td>\n0.17 \u00b1 0.32<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 8<\/td>\n0.01 \u00b1 0.05<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 12<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Group \/ comparison<\/td>\nBetween-group P<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Baseline<\/td>\n0.868<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 4<\/td>\n0.415<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 8<\/td>\n0.317<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Week 12<\/td>\n0.317<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Both groups declined from baseline. Between-group patterns differed for symptom improvement and mite counts.<\/p>\n

Eyelid and periocular care<\/p>\n

External eyelid products require controlled contact conditions<\/h2>\n

Tighe et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2013. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.2.7.2. Wang et al. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024. DOI: 10.1167\/tvst.13.11.22.<\/p>\n

Cleansing wipes<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: controlled lash-root cleansing. Role: define delivered amount, wetness, contact method and residue.<\/p>\n

Cleansing foam<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: convenient external eyelid cleansing. Role: evaluate foam performance, rinsing and migration toward the eye.<\/p>\n

Periocular skin-care formulation<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: comfortable care around the eyes. Role: select an appropriate base and validate repeated-use tolerance at the intended site.<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/p>\n

Whole tea tree oil inhibits multiple Malassezia species<\/h2>\n

Whole tea tree oil; 54 isolates from 5 species. Agar dilution; incubation at 32\u00b0C for 7 days.<\/p>\n

Hammer et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000. DOI: 10.1128\/AAC.44.2.467-469.2000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Malassezia species<\/td>\nIsolates, n<\/td>\nTea tree oil MIC range, % v\/v<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
M. furfur<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n0.12\u20130.25<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
M. sympodialis<\/td>\n32<\/td>\n0.016\u20130.25<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
M. slooffiae<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n0.12\u20130.25<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
M. globosa<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n0.03\u20130.12<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
M. obtusa<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n0.12<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Species and culture conditions affect results. These data provide context for scalp-related activity testing in target formulations.<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol inhibits canine Malassezia isolates<\/h2>\n

Original Table 2. M. pachydermatis from canine clinical samples and a reference strain.<\/p>\n

\u010conkov\u00e1 et al. Vet Res Commun. 2024. DOI: 10.1007\/s11259-024-10446-5.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Isolates and reference strain CBS 1879 are shown separately. x\u0304 = mean; SD = standard deviation; MIC prevents visible growth; MIC\u2085\u2080\/MIC\u2089\u2080 inhibit 50%\/90% of isolates. The source footnote states that means with the same superscript letter differ significantly (p<0.05; one-way ANOVA and Tukey\u2019s test); its wording is retained without reinterpretation.<\/p>\n

Direct data on the single constituent<\/b><\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol MIC\u2085\u2080: 800 \u00b5g\/mL<\/p>\n

MIC\u2089\u2080: 3,130 \u00b5g\/mL<\/p>\n

The species and isolate source differ from those in human scalp Malassezia research.<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/p>\n

Phospholipase phenotypes change after exposure<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. M. pachydermatis isolates treated at each isolate\u2019s corresponding MIC.<\/p>\n

\u010conkov\u00e1 et al. Vet Res Commun. 2024. DOI: 10.1007\/s11259-024-10446-5.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure legend: negative, weak, poor, moderate and intensive phospholipase activity; no growth. Exposure times: 1, 3 and 6 h.<\/p>\n

Growth and enzyme activity require separate interpretation<\/b><\/p>\n

The original classification distinguishes phospholipase activity from no growth. \u201cTerpinen\u201d in the figure denotes terpinen-4-ol.<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/p>\n

A shampoo trial provides evidence for dandruff-related care<\/h2>\n

5% tea tree oil shampoo, daily for 4 weeks. Randomized, single-blind, parallel-group trial, n = 126.<\/p>\n

Satchell et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002. DOI: 10.1067\/mjd.2002.122734.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

41% versus 11%<\/b><\/p>\n

Improvement in the quadrant-area\u2013severity score<\/p>\n

P < 0.001<\/p>\n

This composite endpoint includes both affected area and severity.<\/p>\n

Redrawn from values in the original abstract. Percentages describe score improvement, not a reduction in dandruff particle counts.<\/p>\n

Scalp and hair care<\/p>\n

Scalp concepts balance cleansing, contact and comfort<\/h2>\n

Hammer et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000. DOI: 10.1128\/AAC.44.2.467-469.2000. Satchell et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002. DOI: 10.1067\/mjd.2002.122734. Hart et al. Inflamm Res. 2000. DOI: 10.1007\/s000110050639.<\/p>\n

Dandruff-care shampoo<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: scalp cleansing and visible-dandruff management. Role: test activity in the surfactant system at actual in-use dilution.<\/p>\n

Scalp cleanser<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: removal of surface buildup. Role: combine microbial endpoints with coverage, rinsing and scalp-experience assessments.<\/p>\n

Scalp serum<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: localized leave-on care. Role: study residence, residue and comfort, with dedicated tolerability testing.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Oral-cleansing research distinguishes three laboratory endpoints<\/h2>\n

Bordini et al. Biofouling. 2018. DOI: 10.1080\/08927014.2018.1504926. Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

01<\/p>\n

Planktonic inhibition<\/b><\/p>\n

Microbial growth in suspension<\/p>\n

02<\/p>\n

Surface-associated biofilms<\/b><\/p>\n

Metabolic activity on material surfaces<\/p>\n

03<\/p>\n

Adhesion-related responses<\/b><\/p>\n

Expression changes in specific genes<\/p>\n

Bordini et al. reported reduced gbpA and slpA expression after terpinen-4-ol treatment.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Candida reference strains respond to a concentration series<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1A\u2013B. C. albicans SC5314 and ATCC90028; XTT metabolic activity.<\/p>\n

Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: TTO; T-4-ol; nystatin; control; O.D.492 nm XTT absorbance.<\/p>\n

Test exposure: 24 h. Different letters indicate statistically significant differences between groups.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Clinical Candida isolates show differing responses<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 1C\u2013D. Clinical genotypes A and B; XTT metabolic activity.<\/p>\n

Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: genotypes A\/B; TTO; T-4-ol; nystatin.<\/p>\n

Strain differences indicate the need to assess a panel of relevant microorganisms in the target formulation.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Strain-dependent biofilm responses on denture resin<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. Biofilm grown on denture resin for 72 h, then treated for 60 s.<\/p>\n

Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: control; TTO; T-4-ol; Nys; original statistical letters and concentrations retained.<\/p>\n

8.86 mg\/mL<\/b><\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol treatment concentration<\/p>\n

Reference strains<\/b><\/p>\n

XTT signals decreased, with statistical letters differing from control.<\/p>\n

For clinical genotypes A and B, the terpinen-4-ol and control groups shared statistical letters.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Confocal imaging shows altered Candida biofilm structure<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 3. A: ATCC 90028; B: SC 5314. Denture-resin biofilms grown for 72 h and treated for 60 s.<\/p>\n

Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: control; nystatin; terpinen-4-ol; TTO. A\/B correspond to the strains specified in the text.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Mouthrinse performance depends on clinical study design<\/h2>\n

Randomized, double-blind, 4 \u00d7 4 crossover trial. Twenty participants; 5-day plaque-regrowth model.<\/p>\n

Rahman et al. Contemp Clin Dent. 2014. DOI: 10.4103\/0976-237X.142813.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Study element<\/td>\nResults and interpretation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Test formulation<\/td>\n1.5% tea tree oil mouthrinse, twice daily<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Comparators<\/td>\n0.12% chlorhexidine, 0.05% CPC and colored-water placebo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Plaque index<\/td>\nNo significant difference between tea tree oil and placebo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Gingival bleeding<\/td>\nNo significant difference among rinses after 5 days<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Mechanical oral hygiene stopped during each test period, with a 2-week washout between periods.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

An adjunctive mouthrinse trial assesses plaque and gingival indices<\/h2>\n

1% v\/v tea tree oil mouthrinse versus 0.12% chlorhexidine; 14 participants per group; 15 days.<\/p>\n

Menat et al. Front Oral Health. 2026. DOI: 10.3389\/froh.2026.1727735.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Endpoint<\/td>\nPlaque index<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tea tree oil: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n0.94 \u00b1 0.33 \u2192 0.45 \u00b1 0.13<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Chlorhexidine: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n0.69 \u00b1 0.37 \u2192 0.19 \u00b1 0.16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P for change<\/td>\n0.889<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Endpoint<\/td>\nGingival index<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tea tree oil: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n0.54 \u00b1 0.19 \u2192 0.19 \u00b1 0.07<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Chlorhexidine: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n0.49 \u00b1 0.13 \u2192 0.18 \u00b1 0.11<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P for change<\/td>\n0.560<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Both groups improved from baseline (P < 0.001). All participants also received scaling and oral-hygiene instruction.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Bacterial counts yield a different comparison<\/h2>\n

Selected data from original Table 1 and microbiology results; mean log(CFU\/mL) \u00b1 SD.<\/p>\n

Menat et al. Front Oral Health. 2026. DOI: 10.3389\/froh.2026.1727735.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Microbial category<\/td>\nStreptococcus spp.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tea tree oil: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n5.45 \u00b1 1.07 \u2192 4.71 \u00b1 1.16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Chlorhexidine: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n5.08 \u00b1 1.17 \u2192 3.45 \u00b1 1.50<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P<\/td>\n0.006<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Microbial category<\/td>\nTotal anaerobes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tea tree oil: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n5.90 \u00b1 0.83 \u2192 5.42 \u00b1 0.82<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Chlorhexidine: baseline \u2192 day 15<\/td>\n5.50 \u00b1 1.18 \u2192 4.39 \u00b1 1.22<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Between-group P<\/td>\n< 0.001<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Bacterial counts fell more with chlorhexidine. Clinical indices and microbiological endpoints answer different questions.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Participant-reported taste informs oral formulation design<\/h2>\n

Original Figure 2. Experiences reported after 15 days; n = 14 per group.<\/p>\n

Menat et al. Front Oral Health. 2026. DOI: 10.3389\/froh.2026.1727735.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Figure labels: none; relief; allergic reactions; increased salivation; altered taste perception; tingling; dry mouth; strong taste; bleeding; change in oral sensitivity; burning. Control and experimental groups retained.<\/p>\n

Taste is an important formulation variable<\/b><\/p>\n

Test: 1% tea tree oil mouthrinse.<\/p>\n

Control: 0.12% chlorhexidine.<\/p>\n

\u201cStrong taste\u201d was reported by 64.3% and 28.6%, respectively.<\/p>\n

Oral care<\/p>\n

Oral concepts focus on surface contact and biofilms<\/h2>\n

Bordini et al. Biofouling. 2018. DOI: 10.1080\/08927014.2018.1504926. Francisconi et al. Braz Oral Res. 2020. DOI: 10.1590\/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0050.<\/p>\n

Toothpaste<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: daily surface cleansing. Role: evaluate activity in abrasive\/surfactant bases, accounting for saliva dilution and brief contact.<\/p>\n

Mouthrinse<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: broader surface contact. Role: assess dispersion, taste, exposure time and residual biofilm activity in a rinsing model.<\/p>\n

Localized oral-care formulation<\/b><\/p>\n

Need: care of a target surface. Role: assess residence and material interactions alongside oral-mucosal tolerability.<\/p>\n

Formulation development<\/p>\n

Four application areas define formulation priorities<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Application<\/td>\nSkin care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Target need<\/td>\nClarifying and comfort care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Evidence focus<\/td>\nBacterial studies + monocyte-mediator research<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Formats<\/td>\nSerums, gels, lotions, cleansers<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Application<\/td>\nEyelid and periocular care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Target need<\/td>\nExternal cleansing<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Evidence focus<\/td>\nMite-contact experiments + clinical care regimens<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Formats<\/td>\nWipes, foams, skin-care formulations<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Application<\/td>\nScalp and hair care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Target need<\/td>\nScalp cleansing and dandruff-related concerns<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Evidence focus<\/td>\nMalassezia experiments + tea tree oil shampoo trial<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Formats<\/td>\nShampoos, cleansers, scalp serums<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Application<\/td>\nOral care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Target need<\/td>\nCleansing of surface biofilms<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Evidence focus<\/td>\nBiofilm metabolism + adhesion-related genes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Formats<\/td>\nToothpastes, rinses, localized oral care<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

These roles and formats are development concepts. Validation should account for each study\u2019s material and model.<\/p>\n

Formulation development<\/p>\n

An active-content calculation example<\/h2>\n

Conditional calculation: assume 4-TERPINEOL active content of 20% w\/w in the ingredient.<\/p>\n

Calculation basis: active content assumed at 20% w\/w, with ingredient addition also expressed as % w\/w.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Ingredient addition, % w\/w<\/td>\nCalculated finished-product 4-TERPINEOL, % w\/w<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
0.50%<\/td>\n0.10%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1.00%<\/td>\n0.20%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2.00%<\/td>\n0.40%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Finished-product active content (%) = ingredient addition (%) \u00d7 0.20<\/p>\n

The 20% mass-fraction basis requires confirmation in the specification. This table is arithmetic only, not a recommended use-level range.<\/p>\n

Formulation development<\/p>\n

Formulation testing should connect delivery design and use conditions<\/h2>\n

Akbarzadeh et al. Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013. DOI: 10.1186\/1556-276X-8-102.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Development question<\/td>\nFormulation assessment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Does the active remain uniformly dispersed?<\/td>\nAppearance, phase behavior and uniformity of active content after incorporation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Can the formulation maintain target performance?<\/td>\nActive content, physical stability and packaging compatibility over the intended shelf life<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Do contact conditions match use?<\/td>\nRinse dilution, contact time, wipe delivery or leave-on coverage<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Is the finished product appropriate for the intended site?<\/td>\nSkin, eyelid or oral tolerance, with endpoints matching the intended cosmetic claim<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Processing temperature, pH, shear and addition stage should follow the technical documentation for this product.<\/p>\n

PuriPharm Co. Ltd.<\/p>\n

Developing targeted care with a defined active<\/h2>\n

PuriPharm Co. Ltd. PURISOME technology brand document, v1.0, July 17, 2026.<\/p>\n

NanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20%<\/b><\/p>\n

Terpinen-4-ol Nanoliposomes<\/b><\/p>\n

Biological research on terpinen-4-ol<\/p>\n

PURISOME\u00ae phospholipid delivery design<\/p>\n

Skin, eyelid, scalp and oral-care development<\/p>\n

Develop care products<\/b><\/p>\n

with PuriPharm<\/b><\/p>\n

Discuss sample evaluation, formulation fit and efficacy-evidence plans for the intended application.<\/p>\n

Supported by PURISOME\u00ae Liposome Technology<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

NanoActive 4-TERPINEOL 20%Terpinen-4-ol Nanoliposomes P […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[25],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2834"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2834"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2834\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2877,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2834\/revisions\/2877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.puriactives.com\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}