What are the documented risks of using topical menthol/camphor products near the ear or nose?
Executive summary
Topical menthol/camphor products are designed for external skin use and are repeatedly warned against being applied inside the nose, ears, or eyes because they can irritate mucous membranes and, in some circumstances, cause more serious local or systemic harms [1] [2] [3]. While these products produce a cooling sensation that can relieve congestion or pain when used on the chest or external nose area, documented risks include local burns or chemical irritation, rare respiratory complications from excessive inhalation or intranasal use, and systemic toxicity—especially in children or after ingestion [2] [4] [5].
1. What the labels and poison-control experts say: a firm “don’t put it inside”
Manufacturers’ labels and poison-control guidance consistently instruct that camphor/menthol topical preparations are for skin use only and must not be applied to the insides of the eyes, nose, or mouth; users are told to wash hands after application to avoid accidental transfer to mucous membranes [1] [2] [3]. Poison Control explicitly warns against applying these products to the insides of the eyes, ears, or nose and cautions that inhaling large amounts or improper use (for example heating the product) increases risk of burns or tissue damage [2].
2. Local irritation, burning, and skin/mucosa injury: a predictable chemical effect
Menthol and camphor act as counterirritants—stimulating sensory nerves to cause cooling/warming sensations—so when these ingredients contact delicate mucosal tissue inside the nose or ear they can provoke pain, burning, or chemical irritation; product monographs and drug references list eye, nose, and mouth burning or irritation as an expected adverse effect and advise rinsing with water if contact occurs [4] [3] [6].
3. Respiratory risk: lipoid pneumonia and excessive inhalation
Although small external applications below the nostrils can create a subjective clearing of nasal passages, Poison Control and clinical summaries note that excessive use of petroleum‑based menthol/camphor products under the nose has been associated—rarely—with lipoid pneumonia, a lipid‑aspiration inflammatory condition, particularly when oils are inhaled in quantity [2]. DailyMed labels for nasal decongestant gels containing menthol and camphor show these agents are used for symptomatic relief but underline formulation and route matter [7].
4. Systemic toxicity and vulnerable populations: children, ingestion, pregnancy
Camphor can be systemically toxic if swallowed and has been linked to serious outcomes; Poison Control warns about ingestion and advises emergency help for swallowed product, and notes camphor has been implicated in miscarriage when consumed—prompting extra caution for pregnant or breastfeeding people and for infants exposed via chest application [2] [8]. Pediatric risk is emphasized in product literature and clinical reviews: young children are particularly vulnerable to systemic effects from ingestion or large‑area topical application, and combination rubs that include methyl salicylate carry added concerns about salicylate toxicity when used over large areas [5] [8].
5. Dose, formulation, and application: why context matters
Concentration ranges in common products (for example ~1% menthol and ~4.7% camphor in some gels) and recommended external application schedules are documented in prescribing or labeling sources, underlining that risk correlates with dose, frequency, surface area, and formulation [7] [9]. Dermal absorption studies are cited in ingredient overviews, indicating measurable systemic uptake under some conditions, which supports conservative label warnings against internal mucosal use [9].
6. Balance, gaps, and agendas: safety messaging vs. folklore use
Clinical and regulatory sources uniformly discourage intranasal or intraaural use, yet popular or folk remedies sometimes urge applying rubs “under the nose” for congestion relief; medical sources stress that perceived benefit from surface application does not justify internal use and that manufacturers and poison-control centers prioritize preventing predictable irritant and ingestion harms [2] [1]. Available reporting documents mechanisms and warnings but does not provide population‑level incidence rates for outcomes like mucosal burns or lipoid pneumonia, a limitation of the public summaries consulted [2] [5].