Perfume free equals scent free?

When you find products in your store claiming they are perfume free you should always look closer. The statement perfume free only tell the buyer it is not added perfume, but that is not the same as it is not added scent!

How come? Perfume should be read as perfume, like the one you buy on a bottle and spray on your nekk. Often many other scents are added to replace perfume. And that do not make the product fragrance free, or rather.. not scent free.

Read closer, maybe you will find it is added some etheric oils, flower or fruit extracts aso. All these are scents and should be labeled as fragrance or “perfume” if you like.

Just today I was at the pharmacy where I work. The ladies there are very helpful and know I am sensitive and got asthma. I asked for a scent free hand lotion, and the lady kindly helped med with some tips. She took a tube from the shelf and I could read it saying perfume free. I looked at the ingredients list and there were listed other smelly flower content. I smeared it on my skin and smelled it closely. After a 5 inhales I felt a irriation in my lungs, and coughed.

Perfume free is only telling you the product is not added perfume, like perfume on a bottle. It is not telling you it is scent free.

So when you buy a product either if you need it for yourself, or to be kind and helpful to others by not using scented products, please read through the ingreaditents list carefully for things that got a scent/fragrance. Also, stick your nose into it.

It should be scent free to be good enough.

AKrem Lotion – Whitelisted

As usual I test the products on myself, I am my own guinea pig.

Akrem is a lotion from Norway by the company Apotekproduksjon sold at pharmacys.

The cream is fragrance free, and nice to use, good for dry skin. Suitable for all family and and for use for the whole body.

AKrem Lotion – Whitelisted.

All rights reserved.

Note! Always check the ingredients list for what you may be allegic or sensitive to before use.

Thank you for following my blog. :)

Visit their site
www.apotekproduksjon.no

Cutrin Sensitivism Shampo – Whitelisted

As usual I test the products on myself. This schampo is granted by the Finnish Asthma and Allergy Association, so I was positive to test it myself.

I have used all the bottle without pause and I had no problem at all using it, not even a slight cought. So this one is granted asthma free. No fragrance, no parabens and no color added. The schampo is nice to use in the hair, gentle to the sculp and got no scent. Color of schampo: clear – color free.

Cutrin Sensitivism Shampo – Whitelisted.

All rights reserved.

Note! It worked fine for me, but you should always check ingredients for yourself carefully before you use any products.

Thank you for following my blog :)

Visit their site
http://www.cutrin.no/brands/582/cutrin/sensitive/
or www.cutrin.com

Will there be a bus driver strike?

Vil det bli bussførerstreik? I flere år har fagforbundene forhandlet for å få opp bussjåførenes lønninger til samme nivået som industriarbeidernes. I 2007 ble det avtalt at ved å ta utdanning i 4 trinn, sk. moduler, så ville alle som tok modulene få en lønnsøkning. Dette var trinn en i målet å få industriarbeiderlønn. Arbeidsgiversiden lovet å heve lønna til industriarbeiderlønnens nivå som trinn 2 i avtalen.

Nå er dagen komt for å få denne lønna med industriarbeider nivå og arbeidsgiverne nekter å fullfølge.

“- I iveren etter å vinne anbud har busselskapene sett bort fra det de har lovet gjennom flere protokoller hos riksmekleren, nemlig gjennomsnittlig industriarbeiderlønn. Arbeidsgiverne sier de ikke har lønnsevne, men mange av dem har vært gjennom anbud, uten å ta høyde for det de selv har lovet. Vi krever bl.a en reguleringsbestemmelse, hvor vi kan justeres i forhold til  industrien årlig, sier YTF.”

Det er litt rart. Om det blir kontraktsbrudd mellom to bedrifter da blir det sett på som avtalebrudd og blir tatt opp i domstol med krav om fullfølging og erstating. Ingen bedrift skulle godtake å bli snytt. Men å bryte en avtale til sine ansatte er visstnokk sett på som ok fra arbeidsgiversidene? Det er kjipt altså.

Nå ligger fagbevegelsen og arbeidsgiverne og deres organisasjoner i forhandlinger. Hvis de bryter avtalen da blir det streik fra 21 mai. I første omgang blir 1000 bussførere tatt ut i streik, og deretter kanskje flere..

Yrkestrafikkforbundet om saken
http://www.ytf.no/tariff/tariffoppgjoret-2012

In English

Will there be a bus driver strike? For years, unions negotiated to get the bus driver’s wages to the same level as industrial workers. In 2007 it was agreed that by taking education in 4 steps, sk. modules, so would all who took the modules get a raise. This was a step in the goal to manufacturing workers wages level. The employer promised to raise the wages to the level of manufacturing workers as step 2 of the Agreement.

Now is the day to get this level of wages of industrial workers and the employers refuse to complete follow.

“- In the eagerness to win offers have bus companies, apart from what they have promised for several protocols at the national mediator, namely, the average manufacturing workers wages level. Employers say they have no ability to pay, but many of them have been through tenders, without taking into account what they have promised. We require including a regulatory provision, where we can be adjusted according to the industry annually, says the union YTF. “

It’s a little strange. If there is contract breach between two companies when it will be seen as breach of contract and will be taken up in court, claiming damages. No company would consent to being cheated. But breaking a deal to their employees is certainly enough seen as ok from all the employers side? It is poorly done.

Now the trade unions and employers are in negotiations. If they break the contract then there will be a strike from 21 May. In the first 1000 bus drivers will go on strike. Then others follow.

Rotten modified fruit?

(Scroll down for English)

Råtten modifisert frukt?

Grunnet opplevelser med frukt så gjør man seg sine tanker om det. For 15 år siden da man kjøpte frukt da kunne man kjøpe mye og ha frukt på et fat i flere dager. Nå om man går på butikken kan man kun kjøpe mindre av det og det ligger kun 2-3 dager før det begynner å råtne.

Jeg kjøper fortsatt den samme frukten, og fra de samme leverandørene (er ikke så mye annet å velge på).

Så man kan lure på hvorfor det råtner så fort nå?

Er det en måte å få folk å kjøpe mere og oftere for å tjene mere penger for leverandørene? Frukt som råtner erstattes med ny.

Dette er jo bare vill spekulasjon, og egentlig tror jeg ikke den er modifisert å bli dårlig, men du må være enig i at det er litt rart at frukten har fått så mye dårligere kvalitet siste årene?

Jeg har ikke endret mine fruktvaner, men fruktens kvalitet er forandret.

Det er både trist og respektløst overfor kunden å selge frukt som råtner så fort. Den gjorde ikke det før, så hvorfor gjør den det nå? Det er også en skam at så mye frukt må kastes fordi den blir dårlig.

Behandler de frukten dårligere fra det de plukker den til de selger den? Og bryr seg butikkene så lite om kundene sine at de velger å selge gammel, råten og muggen frukt?

Jeg kan ikke lenger kjøpe mye frukt, men må bare kjøpe det jeg spiser på to dager. Hyggen å kunne ha et fat med frukt på bordet er ikke lenger, frukten råtner for fort.

Hvorfor er det blitt slik? Og hvorfor skal vi måtte tåle det?

In English

Rotten modified fruit?

Due to experiences with fruit as is done in their thoughts about it. 15 years ago when people bought fruit you could buy a lot and put on a plate for several days. Now if you go to the store you can only buy less of it and it is only 2-3 days before it begins to rot.

I still buy the same fruit, and from the same suppliers.

So you may wonder why it rots so quickly now?

Is there a way to get people to buy more and more to earn more money for the suppliers? Fruit rotting must be replaced with new.

This is just wild speculation, and really I do not think it is modified to be bad, but you must agree that it is little wonder that the fruit has been so much poorer quality in recent years?

I have not changed my habits about fruit, but fruit quality is changed.

It is both sad and disrespectful to the customer to sell the fruit that rots so quickly. It did not do it before, so why do it now? It’s also a shame that so much fruit should be discarded because it is bad.

Do they handle the fruit less good from picking to sale now? And do the customers think so little of their customers that they sell old, rotten and moldy fruit?

I can no longer buy as much fruit, but only buy what I eat for two days. The nice and comfy to be able to have a plate of fruit on the table is no longer, the fruit rots too fast.

Why has it become so? And why should we have to endure it?

Confidentiality vs. Freedom of speach

Many firms have a confidentiality clause hindering their employee to speak their mind. Some enforce such a strong confidentiality clause that they forbid their staff to tell anything outside the firm that “can make the firm look bad to others” “to others than employees”, that in reality hinder the employed staff to negatively express themselves about their employer even with their family. In fact this means that if you are disappointed about the firm, and if you get to know something that is on the bad side with the firm, you are not allowed to tell anyone. If you do you risk loosing your job or getting accused in court, or both.

An employee that have noticed something about a business and have tried to take it up internal, and that do not help, is then forbidden to tell anyone outside the firm about the bad conditions. In reality this means they are hindering employees from whistle blowing, or telling the authorities what is going on in this business.  To narrow it further they are not allowed to speak at all other than praise for the firm. Does not matter if it is really so nice or bad as hell.

Such Confidentiality clauses is as I see it a hindering of Freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is a human right.

“Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one’s opinions and ideas via speech. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that “[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference” and “everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice”.”

If a firm got all sorted and everything by the book, treating the staff nicely they would not have to have such clauses, because then there would not be anything to complaint or talk badly about.

Firms who do this I think should look inside themselves before gag their staff. It is a problem when a business acts like a dictator first treating them badly, and then silence and gag them, and threaten them with loosing their job to make them silence. That is ladies and gentlemen abuse, and psychological abuse on one of its worst. Degrading treatment and punishment.

Employes tend to use much time, pride and effort in their work, and they are also in a situation that they are subordinate and therefore in a dependence of work and salary to live, and a firm that mistreat their staff are doing abuse. When they on top of it silence and gag the employees they increase the abuse to a maximum.

As I see it they are breaking the law about Freedom of speech and Freedom of expression.

And see UN talking about Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 5.

• No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 12.

• No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family,  home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 18.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

And even other laws depending on what the matter is all about.

I have a special firm in mind, but this may not be limited to them. Surely many others do the same.

Source: The Human rights law: United Nations (UN)

Perfume anno 2012

This article is blogged from the site Inneklima.com and published in whole in English. If you want to read the article in Norwegian, please click here. The article is published here as a forwarding providing of information. Article is written by Professor Kjell Aas, Norway. Links in this article leads to Norwegian pages. Please use a translator to read links.

Perfume anno 2012. Part 1 Chemicals and health aspects

Many suffer from perfume smell. A Danish study featured in Berlingske Tidende showed that 4 out of 10 Danes suffer from perfume smell. It is particularly a pest and a nuisance for many people with asthma with hyperresponsiveness and in-risk persons the chemical environment intolerance.

Also, many without known hypersensitivity otherwise the bad of perfume. Caress and Steinemann (2004, 2005) found that 17.8% and 20.5% (respectively the first and second examination) reported headaches, breathing problems and other ailments of “airfresheners” and deodorants, and 10.9% reported complaints of the smell of detergents and fabric softeners. Among asthmatics, this occurred in respectively 29.7% and 37.2% with breathing difficulties, headaches and other ailments. If you had asked a sample of people with chemical environmental intolerance / scent intolerance / MCS numbers would probably have been near 100 percent.

This has been the subject of two detailed dissertations, respectively, in Denmark (Elberling, 2005) and Sweden (Sten-Eaters Hasseus, 2005).

Aftenposten had at the beginning of May 2012 an article about this, but called it allergy. Fragrances are a major cause of contact allergy with eczema, but in asthma, it’s not about allergic reactions to perfume. Worsen of asthma not due to allergies, but the hyperreactivity of the airways, while the chemical environment intolerance is all about sensory hypersensitivity of the airways and / or the eyes mucosal øyeslimhinnen (conjunctiva). When the perfume evokes allergy, there is talk of allergic contact eczema in those who use perfume. All perfumes contain allergenic substances. Those who have contact allergic dermatitis to the perfume is also developing light sensitivity in other organs by the smell of perfume.

Perfume and other fragrance substances used as cosmetics and in the air-fresheners and cleaners, etc. belong to the bad guys right on par with tobacco smoke for many people with asthma and all the chemical environment of intolerance.

The chemicals in perfumes

Perfumes are diverse complex chemical and petrochemical products with volatile solvents plays an important role. Almost all perfumes gases ethanol and similar volatile hydrocarbons (solvents) along with a host of other ingredients. Some have a twenty chemical ingredients, others may have several hundred. Much of this added to soaps, lotions, detergents, etc. (Bickers et al., 2003 Ford et al., 2000).

From 1997, a private site, the Fragranced Products Information Network FPIN conveyed information about “the dangers of our highly scented world.”

Through chemical analysis of perfumes, we know that different perfumes evaporate altogether over 2600 different VOCs (Ford et al., 2000). Many of the ingredients is amended in contact with such oxidizing substances in the air. Terpenes such as limonene and pinene reacts with ozone ozone and other oxidants in indoor air to form potentially harmful pollutants such as ultrafine particles, formaldehyde glykoletere and radicals such as hydroxyl (Destaillats et al, 2006 Singer et al 2006 Wainman 2000). In an indoor environment where walk many people who use different perfumes, so the air can contaminate thousands of products. Most common are ethanol, limonene, linalool,?-fenetyl alcohol?-myrcen, benzylacetat, benzyl alcohol, benzaldehyde,?-terpinolen,?-citronellol, and ?-pinene.

It is mostly of carbon-containing chemical compounds that occur in ephemeral form (gas) at room temperature. Perfume and perfumed products can make the majority of common human exposure to VOCs in the day. What it means for children who are the most vulnerable among us, we do not know. See Children and perfume (which comes later).

Evaporation occurs in concentrations too low to appear toxic, but the trigger disease in many over-sensitive. It is a common cause of exacerbations of asthma and chemical environmental intolerance / scent perfume odor intolerance which gives severe headache, dizziness, loss of power and causes shock-like conditions with fainting in some people. Although the concentration of these may be low, there is often a matter of almost continuous exposure where the accumulated dust bound chemistry can be important (Rudel et al 2003.

In the United States is full contents lists a large number of perfumes and other “fragrances” for women fragrance for women , men and children in the Government House hold products database. (Use search term “fragrance” in Household products The list of perfumes does not indicate anything about ingredients’ potential health problems. substances specified in the list of names and abbreviations can be confusing for most people. Whoever wants to know more, you can copy the name into the search field Toxnet .

There can one find out how the drug may work for most people, but not in people with allergy, hyperreactivity or chemical environmental intolerance. They want to ban perfume in public spaces.

Increasing knowledge of perfumes chemical diversity can contribute to skepticism about the use of them for others. Many perfumes contain chemicals that can enter the body through the skin and especially the respiratory tract. There are overviews of many perfumes information can seem daunting. Some may be able to console itself with the concentration of each of the many harmful substances are too low to cause toxic effects. However, it may be a poor consolation when one takes into consideration that many people are exposed to (exposure to) the substance is almost continuous.

Steinemann (2008) refers findings by chemical analysis of 6 perfumes and perfumed products. It was discovered under the 100 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 10 of them considered to be toxic or harmful. Among these, acetaldehyde, chloromethan, and 1,4-dioxan. Such potentially harmful content declared no perfume or scented products.

There is also evidence that certain phthalates and synthetic fragrances (musk) has a negative effect in this context. The frequent use and increasing exposure may be some risk of endocrine disruption as well as the environment can be damaged by perfumes musk substances perfumes musk substances. Greenpeace warns: In 2003 and 2004 saw Greenpeace for analyzing a random sample of a total of 36 perfumes and perfumed products (eau de cologne) with respect to the content of chemical substances that can damage the ability to have children (reproduction and fertility). The reason is that a number of studies show an increasing tendency to poor sperm quality in men. Greenpeace believes that perfume use may be important causes. Greenpeace claims to have shown that many of the chemicals in perfumes pollute the environment and can impair fertility. And they have published a report on perfume in a subtitle Greenpeace writes: “L’eau de toxin. (The Toxic of water). ” It is a legitimate characteristic that many people with fragrance intolerance can confirm. The study focuses, however, only about nearly imperceptible long-term effects of some ingredients in the perfume and provides no explanation for the reported immediate effects in the over-sensitive. They is probably more the content of volatile hydrocarbons (solvents) (Platt 2009). The report contains an extensive bibliography (referring here to this).

The warning is especially true content of phthalates and synthetic fragrances (musk), but it must immediately be noted that the allegations in that report is rejected both by an expert committee in the European Union and the Food Safety Authority and Public Health in Norway, according to VG online. Phthalates are also present as plasticizers in a variety of plastic products. They have given cause for concern in the notification of the Environment for phthalates.

Phthalates in perfumes Diethyl (DEP) is used in a lot of cosmetics that contain alcohol, is added as a rule to make the alcohol undrinkable. The drug will rarely, if ever, be indicated on the ingredient list. DEP can be absorbed through the skin. In the body breaks the drug down to monoetylftalat (MEP). New American trials have shown high concentrations of MEP in the urine of American men. At the University of Harvard researchers have found correlation between the MEP in urine and damage to DNA in sperm from American men. MEP amounts found in several urine samples the researchers examined, proved to be enough to impair fertility. Also glykoletere (as mentioned earlier) are suspected to cause reproductive disorders (miscarriages, testicular damage) and birth defects in addition to listening to the hazardous substances.

Musk in Perfume Musk is a group of fragrance materials that originally came from the scent glands of musk deer (a threatened species in Asia). The original natural substance from the male’s scent glands have been used in perfumes for a long time, but is very expensive. It is replaced by aromatic substances from plants in some perfumes, but now used mostly synthetic musk that is relatively cheap to produce. They are used in perfumes and in many common skin care, personal care and household products.

It deals with different chemical variants. Typical is the musk xylene (5-tert butyl-2 ,4,6-trinitro-m-xylene) and musk ketone (1 – (4-tert-butyl-2 ,6-dimethyl-3 ,5-dinitrophenyl) ethanone). Such substances are found in human adipose tissue and in breast milk as clear evidence of exposure and deposition in the body. (Rimkus, Rimkus, Wolf 1994) Musk badly decomposed in nature so that they can be found in water where they are toxic to many organisms and is often found in fish and shellfish .. They are pollutants pollutants causing concern in the notification of the Environment Norway

See also Perfumery anno 2012 Part 2: Children and perfume .

Literature

• Bickers DR, Calow P, Greim HA, Hanifin JM, Rogers AE, Saurat JH, Glenn Sipes I, Smith RL, Tagami H. (2003: The safety assessment of fragrance materials. Regula Toxicol Pharmacol. 37 :218-73.
• Caress SM, Steinemann AC (2005a): A national population study of the prevalence of multiple chemical sensitivity. Arch Environ Hhealth 2004 59: 300 – 5
• Caress SM, Steinemann AC (2005b: National prevalence of asthma and chemical hypersensitivity: an examination of potential overlap. J Occup Environ With 47:18-22.
• Dalton P. (2003): Upper airway irritation, odor perception and health risk due two airborne chemicals. Review. Toxicol Lett. 11140-141:239-48.
• Destaillats H, Lunden MM, Singer BC, Coleman BK, Hodgson AT, Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW. (2006): Indoor secondary pollutants from household product Emissions in the presence of ozone: A bench-scale chamber study. Environ Sci technol. 40: 4421 – 8
• Doty RL, Cometto-Muniz JE, Jalowayski AA, Dalton P, Kendal-Reed M, Hodgson M (2004): Assessment of upper respiratory tract and ocular irritative effects of volatile chemicals in humans. Crit Rev Toxicol34: 85-142. Elberling J (2005): Ocular and Respiratory Symptoms Elicited by Perfume and Fragrance products PHD Thesis http://www.mcsvidencenter.dk/Admin/Public/DWSDownload.aspx?File=Files% 2fFiler% 2fPhDpdf.pdf
• Elberling J, Linn Berg A, Dirksen A, Johansen JD, Frolunda L, Madsen F, Nielsen NH, Mosbech H (2005a). Mucosal Symptoms elicited by fragrance products in a population-based sample in relation two atopy and bronchial hyper-reactivity. Clin Exp Allergy 35:75 -81.
• Elberling J, Linn Berg A, Mosbech H, Dirksen A, Men T, Nielsen NH, Madsen F, Frolunda L, Johansen JD 2005b: Airborne chemicals cause respiratory Symptoms in Individuals with contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis52: 65 – 72
• Elberling J, Dirksen A, Johansen JD, Mosbech H (2006): The capsaicin cough reflex in eczema Patients with respiratory Symptoms elicited by perfume. Contact Dermatitis 54: 158 – 64
• Elberling J, Skov PS, Mosbech H, Holst H, Dirksen A, Johansen JD (2007): Increased release of histamine in Patients with respiratory Symptoms related to perfume. Clin Exp Allergy37: 1676 – 80 -
• Ford RA, Domeyer B, Easterday O, Maier K, Middleton J. (2000): Criteria for the development of a database for safety evaluation of fragrance materials. Regula Toxicol Pharmacol 31:166-81.
• Greenpeace (2005): Perfume. An investigation of chemicals in 36 eaux de toilette and eaux de parfum. Report. Web Version / http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/perfume-an-investigation-of.pdf
• Mill Qvist E, Bengtsson U, Lowhagen O. (1999): Provocations with perfume in the eyes induces airway Symptoms in Patients with sensory hyperreactivity. Allergy. May54 1999 (5) :495-9.
• Opiekun RE, Smeet M, Sulewski M, Rogers R, Prasad N, Vedula U, Dalton P (2003): Assessment of ocular and nasal irritation in asthmatics resulting from fragrance exposure. Clin Exp Allergy. 33:1256 -65.
• Pall ML (2009): Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: Toxicological Questions and Mechanisms in Ballantyne B, Marrs TC, Syversen T (Editors): The General a nd Applied Toxicology, 3rd Edition “(John Wiley & Sons,) ISBN: 978-0-470 -72,327 to 2.
• Rimkus, G., Rimkus, B. and Wolf M. (1994): Nitro musks inhuman adipose tissue and breast milk. Chemosphere 28: 421 – 433 Web Version: http://www.envirofacs.org/Pre-prints/Vol% 2039% 20No% 201/Papers/Lipnick% 20 -% 207/248.pdf
• Rudel, RA., Camann, DE, Spengler, JD, Korn, LR and Brody, JG (2003): phthalates, alkylphenols, pesticides, polybrominated diphenyl ethers and Other Endocrine-Disrupting Compounds in indoor air and dust. Environmental Science and Technology 37: 186-194
• Singer BC, Coleman BK, Destaillats H, Hodgson AT, Lunden MM, Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW (2006): Indoor secondary pollutants from cleaning product and air freshener use in the presence of ozone. Atmos Environ 40:6696-710.
• Steinemann AC (2008): Fragranced consumer products and undisclosed ingredients, Environ Impact Asses Rev, doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2008.05.002. Web Version Web Version
• Sten-Eaters Hasseus E (2005): Airway sensitivity two chemicals and Scents. Thesis. Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Wainman T, Zhang J, Weschler CJ, Lioy PJ. (2000): Ozone and limonene in indoor air: a source of submicron particle exposure, Environ Health Perspect.108: 1139 – 45

Prof. Kjell Aas ^(c) (Last updated 13. februar, 2012) Original article on www.inneklima.com

Many thanks to prof. Kjell Aas for good and easy understandable article for all.