Fresh air does not smell of fragrance

Frisk luft lukter ikke av parfyme.


Leave a comment

No more laundry detergent or smell

Research for better environment

“Tenants in Malmö Sweden now becomes the first in the world to test a technology that cleans clothes in cold water and no detergent. Laundry room installed in two high-rise residential Nydala in Malmo used by 70 tenants and has according to owner minimal environmental impact.
– No more buying laundry detergent and fabric softener and additionally wash machines with cold water. This is something that we are the first in the world to offer. It is clean and odor-free, says Magnus novel that is project manager at MKB. In the installed laundry room is a facility in a cabinet that filter the water and de-ionize it. When the deionized water come in contact with the fabrics in the washing machine breaking the ionic bond between the fibers and dirt.

MKB Fasighets AB has high hopes for the technology. Totally are washed six million washes in the property company laundries every year and to wash with cold water would give a very large energy savings. Detergent and fabric softener is no cost for the property, but also here the company sees many benefits as it would save the environment by creating less pollution, less packaging waste and less risk of allergies.
– We want to contribute to ecologically sustainable Malmö, says Magnus Röman. By testing this solution we hope to find one of the ways that can help us achieve our ambitious goals.

In the project, electricity consumption, water consumption and customer satisfaction will be measured during the six months that the company will then decide how to proceed.” aktuellhallbarhet.se

Read more here; (Swedish article):

http://www.aktuellhallbarhet.se/ar-tvatt-i-kallvatten-utan-tvattmedel-framtiden/

I wish this works out, it would be dandy!


Leave a comment

Why #airfreshener and #scentedcandles can wreck your health

Putting a wiff of danger in the air

Fresh air what is that? some like us to believe that it is a chemical blend of hundreds of chemicals in mixes to make a scent to lure our nose and brain that there is something pleasant going on, while the truth is that fresh air is mother natures own blend created to make us live a healthy life, and it does not contain any fragrance at all. It is color free and scent free.

Faximilie Daily Mail 3 September 2015 “Chemical sprays, plug-ins and gels for home perfuming are hugely popular but investigators warn that they can include an array of hazardous substances which may cause lung damage and tumours, interfere with our hormones and cause such lifelong problems as asthma. Last month, a study involving Public Health England’s Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, warned that plug-in air fresheners produce ‘considerable’ levels of formaldehyde: described by the US government’s National Toxicology Program as a known ‘human carcinogen’. It is most closely linked with cancers of the nose and throat and at the very least, it can also cause sore throats, coughs, scratchy eyes and nosebleeds. It is not the only chemical to fear in air fresheners. Other basic ingredients include petroleum products and such chemicals as p-dichlorobenzene, which hardly bring to mind summer meadows, vanilla pods and sultry spices.” Daily Mail

If you want fresh air you should open a window.

It is also found that air fragranceing can harm your baby even before it is born so that the child get lung problems and expericnce breathing problems.

“In 2013, after a study of more than 2,000 pregnant women, the International Journal of Public Health reported that women who used air fresheners in their homes were significantly more likely to have babies that suffered from wheezing and lung infections.” Daily Mail

The use of air fragrance can also cause other health issues like nausea, headaches, migraine, depression and many more.

“A 2007 study also found that using air fresheners as little as once a week can raise the risk of asthma in adults. The same report found that the risk of developing asthma was up to 50 per cent higher in people who had been exposed to air-freshener sprays.

Many air fresheners also contain substances called volatile organic compounds (VOCs), characterised by their low boiling points which mean they form vapour or gas at room temperature. Experts warn that these can increase the risk of asthma.

Another common ingredient is naphthalene, which has been shown to cause tissue damage and cancer in the lungs of rats and mice in laboratory studies.

Not all of the ingredients used in the actual perfumes are fully listed and critics claim that these can each be made up of several hundred different chemicals.

In March, a team of experts tested six scented candles, with such aromas as clean cotton, strawberry and kiwi fruit.

Behind their delicious labels, however, lay a host of potentially dangerous industrial chemicals, including formaldehyde at levels which, with long-term exposure, are known to raise the risk of respiratory problems and cancer.

The candles also gave off significant levels of VOCs. Furthermore, the study warned that you don’t even need to light such candles because simple evaporation will enable them to pollute your home. Most scented candles are made with paraffin, which brings other problems. The oil by-product gives off ultra-fine soot particles containing acetone, benzene and toluene, usually seen in diesel emissions, and known carcinogens.” Daily Mail

And if you think insence is any safer…

“Burning incense releases tiny chemical particles which can become trapped in our lungs, causing potentially dangerous inflammatory reactions. The research also found that incense particles from commonly used ingredients agarwood and sandalwood are more toxic to our cells’ DNA than tobacco smoke.” Daily Mail

Perhaps it is time to stop this habit of using air scenting and fragrancing in all?

“Air is the Earth’s atmosphere. Air around us is a mixture of  78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. There is an average of about 1% water vapour. It is the clear gas in which living things live and breathe. It has an indefinite shape and volume. It has no color or smell. It has mass and weight. It is a matter as it has mass and weight. Air creates atmosphere pressure. There is no air in the vacuum and cosmos.” Wikipedia

We need air tor breathe and live, not fragrance chemicals.

Read the whole article at Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3220306/Why-air-fresheners-scented-candles-wreck-health-cause-cancerous-DNA-mutations-asthma.html

And at Wikipedia
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air


Leave a comment

Oxidizing #fragrance is #allergenic

Allergenic oxidizing fragrance contents

“The oxidizing fragrances in everything from toothpaste to shampoos and deodorants. These fragrances contents may not all be allergenic themselves but can quickly become so when they oxidize. When they are broken down by oxygen in the air to form hydroperoxides that are highly allergenic substances. Nobody knows today how many people in the population who are allergic to the oxidized fragrances because they are not included in the allergy tests done.

Researchers have now discovered that the allergenic substances may have formed already when the oils and fragrances from the supplier. When they are broken down by oxygen in the air to form hydroperoxides that are highly allergenic substances. International studies of eczema patients have shown that five to seven percent of the patients are allergic to the oxidized fragrances.

At the Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology at Gothenburg University, have developed a new analytical method that makes it actually possible to investigate hydroperoxides in various consumer products.

– Using mass spectrometry strikes disrupting substances so that they are small fragments and it is the first time that there is a method to find these individual-specific hydroperoxides in small quantities and in complex mixtures, explains Johanna Rudbäck, a doctoral student at the University of Gothenburg.

dr. Johanna Rudbäck has defended her thesis “Allergenic Oxidation Products from Fragrance Terpenes. Chemical Analysis and Determination of Sensitizing Potency “.

This is really important. Now, manufacturers can not sit back and say that the problem does not exist. So far, the perfume industry used a 1800-century approach when examining this type of oxidation products and then find they can not find these little difficult certain substances. Now the industry must deal with the problem in an entirely different way.

Ann-Therese Karlberg explains that it only takes small amounts of hydroperoxides to trigger allergy and eczema in a person who has become allergic to them.

Previously, scientists believed that it would take a long time before fragrances change of air. But when the research team used the new method to analyze the essential oils of lavender and orange peel, they discovered that it went faster than expected.

– We saw that it formed hydroperoxides already when we got the oils from the supplier. This was surprising to us, says Johanna Rudbäck.”

from article in SVT 26 september 2013

Source: http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/allergiframkallande-amnen-i-skonhetsprodukter-kan-sparas

“Spa personnel who works with essential oils in high consentrations is a rather new profession found hurt by handeling the oils. During some years back the skin clinic at Sahlgrenska hospitals have received several patients in the profession of masseuses from several parts of Gothenburg, Skövde and Varberg.

– The read thread here is that they have worked with essential oils smelling of for example lavender, roses or citrus, says Lina Hagwall who is researcher and expert on these substances. When the occupational dermatologic clinic tested the essential oils on several of the patients they could confirm that is was the oxidizing fragrance in the oils they were allergic to.

How can you, in your marketing say that your aromatherapy oil is healing and protective to the skin when you know that there are masseuses who have suffered from allergy and eczema of your oil?”
Source: http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/foretaget-bakom-oljorna-vi-har-utbildat

“Sanna Gunnesson, Mia Senor and Nina Sellman that all three worked at Hagabadet Spa in Gothenburg, where they massaged customers with organic oils from Kerstin Florian Aromatherapy series, and then got allergic reactions, says that it felt immoral to sell oil to customers. I can not do it. I can not stand and lie to a customer that way. It feels wrong to sell a product when you have a rash on the hands, says Sanna Gunnesson.”
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/foretaget-bakom-oljorna-vi-har-utbildat

“Oxidized fragrances of aromatherapy oils of the brand Kerstin Florian has given several masseurs and spa personnel contact allergy. Masseuses Mia Senor, Nina Sellman and Sanna Gunnesson got so severe discomfort that they had to change profession. Mia Senor showing us pictures of how her hands and arms might look when she came home from work. It almost looks like a burn. The skin on her hands became all swollen, and her fingers were like glued ogether. It stung and did hurt so evil, she says, and explains that her hands were so sore and infected that it even went impossible to work with gloves. Sanna Gunnessons trouble also started with eczema on the hands. Since she had no other jobs she stayed at Hagabadet even though it hurt to massage. Eventually, she was itching all over the body.
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/de-skadades-av-massageoljor

Imagine what it does to your skin, and then imagine what it does to your soft tissues in your airways and lungs. So next time you are thinking of putting some fragrance or oil on – Don’t!


Leave a comment

Science say use less smoke and fragrance

Dagens Medisin on indoor clima

In a article by Dagens Medisin (Medincine Today)  scientist talk about indoor clima.

“Researchers recommend minimal use of perfumes, candles, wood heating and heating of the car to improve the indoor air.”

“Researchers at the Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) has looked into the indoor environment specifically in the Arctic. This has not been done previously. Now it is just a pilot study published. Indoor air quality in both private homes and workplaces were tested for volatile organic compounds.

– The climatic conditions in the north imposes people a different lifestyle than other places that may lead to increased pollution indoors. In many places, the house can be wrapped in snow six months a year. Pollution caused by the use of wood-burning stove, for example, higher where winter lasts from October through May, compared with places that have winter for three months, says researcher Athanasios Katsogiannis the Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) and first author of the study.

People spend over 90 percent of their time in a “protected” indoor environment (Bruinen DeBruine, 2008) when cold clima. In addition, it is well known that concentrations of chemical contamination is higher indoors compared with outdoor.

– Indoor air is not currently regulated. Before politicians can set limits, they must get information from as many places as possible about how the condition is, said Katsogiannis.

The study collected air samples from various rooms in private homes and various rooms at workplaces in Tromsø in October and November of 2013. In some cases we found that the concentration of particulate matter was higher than the proposed maximum limits. We saw that using the wood stove and candles, leading to increased exposure to certain types of particles. We assume that dust and particles from the use of black sand on the snow and the use of studded tires on asphalt, also influence indoor climate. This may have various adverse effects on human health, such as asthma.

Will investigate more

Katsogiannis believe this study can be used as a starting point for further studies.

– You should now look at several chemicals found in indoor air in households. Chemical monitoring studies should be done together with epidemiological and toxicological studies where we examine the state of health, disease prevalence, and find out how chemicals affect. It’s the only way we can understand how air quality affects health and a method that can quantify this, says Katsogiannis. He points out that eachand everyone is responsible for its indoor environment. It is therefore our responsibility to protect it. The smoking ban was an excellent start. People should also use less spray, perfume, candles, incense and wood burning. We must remember that when we brush up, it also affects the indoor environment to a greater or lesser degree. Ventilation is generally the most important to reduce toxic substances in indoor air.

Discourages Arctic habit

He discourages especially a habit that many may have where the climate is cold. A habit many of Tromsø and the Arctic have is that you start and run your car engine and let the car warm up in the garage or outside the window. This leads to immediate high exposure to various hazardous chemicals.

For us to be able to say anything definite about the indoor climate in the Arctic, this study should be followed up. Public places such as malls, fitness centers and so on were not monitored in this study.”

Source and Read more: http://www.dagensmedisin.no/nyheter/har-undersokt-arktisk-inneklima/

Finally I feel like being heard! How wonderful that scientists say the same as I do, and so many others with me, that fragrance product pollutes the indoor air and is unhealthy. Thank you so much, you can not imagine how important this article is to me and how happy I am to read it.

Please, continue the good word and please also look into the use of fragrance washing and cleaning products, air fragrance like air freshener, scented candles, designer scent like fragrance marketing and so on. It is a violation of the need for fresh air for a continued good health.

/ Annelie

 


Leave a comment

Genes and smoking – Research

New research: Specific gene makes you a heavy smoker

“Danish researchers from the University of Copenhagen and Herlev Hospital has for the first time demonstrated that there is a direct link between smoking and a significantly increased mortality.

The researchers followed 55,568 people. These include 38,823 smokers who were followed for 10 years. The scientific study also documents that genes play a crucial role in whether one who smokes ends up as a heavy smoker. Smoking gene has no bearing on whether you start smoking, or even if one stops again. But if you smoke, one gene make you smoke more. Those with the gene variant inherited from both parents smoke 20 percent more than those without the gene variant specific. Evidence suggests that it may be genetically predisposed to heavy smoking. Smokers who carry a particular genetic mutation that is at a higher tobacco consumption and are more affected by smoking, for example, by having a higher content of nicotine in the blood. Continue reading


Leave a comment

#Racism #Discrimination

Race and Racism?

I agree with Mellody Hobson we should not be color blind but color brave, see the video:

Only the human is one species. Is there really scientifically several races when it comes to humans? A species and a race is a genetic thing. Humans living today have no several races according to genetics as I have learned. There are different colors of skin, eyes, hair and so on but no different races I have learned, we all look the same inside. Maybe someone could start with changing this word flaw? There are humans, period. The word discrimination is more appropriate, it does not make the different peoples living around the world stand out. We are actually all humans.

What does the word racism come from?


“There are several theories about the origin of the word “race”. One is that it is related to the Latin “ratio” which means sense, secondly, that it comes from the Arabic “ra ‘s” meaning “head”, a word that in both Arabic and Ottoman Turkish is used both figuratively as metaphorical, the last in the sense of  “origins”, “the principal ” or “typical” possibly “the norm” . This way the use of “head” is also our expression “substantially” and “mainly” . The first instances in a European language is in Spanish “raza” or “Razza” and is recorded from the 1200s on, ie during the Andalusian Caliphate. It then means roughly “people group”. It is said that the word in the first centuries  primarily used for people who are descended from a common origin.
Use of the word in a meaning related to the emerging science occurs only in the late 1700s. Michael Biddiss points out that the word ” race” was used in a variety of meanings, from “the race of birds” “The British Race” . ” The British Race” , was used in all seriousness with important political and cultural overtones. Continue reading


Leave a comment

Research: Smoke reduces HDAC2 in the body decreasing effect from medicines.

Smoke damage the effect of Asthma medicine

It is known that passive smoking worsens asthma symptoms and reduce the effectiveness of inhaled steroid treatment, but how this occurs has not been elucidated.

Now researchers at Imperial College in London found that a person with severe asthma who is constantly exposed to smoke, have lower levels of the enzyme HDAC2 compared to those who is not subjected to smoke. It is precisely HDAC2 necessary to steroids in asthma medicine should be able to have an anti-inflammatory effect.

Researchers at Imperial College in London found that children with severe asthma with a parent who smoke at home have lower levels of the enzyme compared with those whose parents do not smoke. HDAC2 is required to steroids in asthma medicine to be able to have an anti-inflammatory effect.

So if you smoke, or if you have asthma, and are around a smoker or a person having asthma, know that it will damage the effect of the asthma medicine.

Don’t smoke. And stay away from smokers!

Source:
http://barnastma.se/index.php/14-medicinska-artiklar/36-passiv-roekning-foersaemrar-barns-foermaga-att-svara-pa-astmabehandling


Leave a comment

Ranking of shops – @FIVH @Tollefzen #environment #air

(Scroll Down for English)

Siden Framtiden i våre henders Kommunikasjonsjef Sindre S Tollefsen @Tollefzen følger meg på Twitter vil jeg her gi en liten tilbakemelding på undersøkelsen om butikker og miljø dere i Framtiden i våre hender har gjort.

Luften er miljø

Her har dere bommet litt. Hva med produkter som forurenser miljøet? Her burde COOP komme først, de har da et eget merke som er uten unødvendige tilsatser av både parfyme og farge og andre skadelige kjemikalier som er miljømerket og er merket med flere av astma og allergiforbundene i Skandinavia. Dette burde blitt tatt med i testet. Kiwi er en skikkelig versting på dette punktet. De har stort sett kun produkter som forurenser luften  og som ikke er egnet for allergikere og astmatikere i hyllene for personlig pleie, i tillegg er dem lite kundevennlige på dette punktet. Ber du om at de tar inn f.eks. Neutral sine produkter som er merket med astma og allergiforbundet sin logo da nekter dem for det. Kiwi suger og bør ikke få så høg ranking. Continue reading


Leave a comment

Chemical exposure before birth

“The established Western medicine and the FDA is true (Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration also is about drugs, vert.) Warn regularly presumed dangers of alternative medicines and dietary supplements, but they never talk about the widely used and perfectly legal chemical toxins that invade our bodies through the environment. And there’s more, the American nature there is little to do for many of these chemicals that threaten the health, to ward off common consumer products. Now, two new studies have shown that many children breathing problems could have caused by this common chemical threats.

A good example is that by researchers at the Columbia Center for Children’s Environmental Health (the CCCEH), working at the Mailman School of Public Health and Columbia University Medical Center, has shown that children who have been exposed before birth to the widely used pesticide ingredient piperonlybutoxide (PBO) have a greater chance that they have chronic cough at the age of five and six years. Their research, which was recently published in the online edition of the journal Environment International, provides evidence that the lungs of children are susceptible to damage by toxins while children are still in the womb. The problems are not the result of an infection, but chronic cough in children, the normal daily activities of the children quite upset and they also disrupt the sleep of both the children and their parents. But what exactly PBO? It is a chemical that enhances the effects of pyrethroids, substances used in pesticides that are most used by both professional pest control operators as well as consumers, according to a survey by researchers at the Mailman School from 2011. Previous research had shown that exposure to any of the pyrethroids, in particular a variant of the fabric permethrin, was in particular related to the occurrence of cough at the age of five years. The new research shows that children who are pregnant have come up with PBO contacted had an increased risk of cough that were not related to colds or flu. A chemical cause of asthma in children? Another new study by the CCCEH shows an even see much more serious problem, that the ability of children to get free breath can hamper. It appears that children who are exposed to diethyl phthalate (DEP) and benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), substances belong to chemical group phthalates, which are widely used in personal care products and plastic objects, have an increased risk of infections airways that are related to asthma. research team examined 244 children aged between five and nine years old and found that phthalates in urine were detectable in all children. The children with the highest concentration in their urine of both phthalates had a higher concentration of nitric oxide in their exhaled air, which is a biomarker for airway inflammation. The link between exposure to GDP and airway inflammation was especially strong among children who had recently had shown, wheezing a common symptom of asthma. “Although there are many factors that contribute to the development of asthma, our research shows that phthalates a play an important role, “says Allan Just, PhD, first author of the new study recently published online in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. It’s hard to protect your children from phthalates because the manufacturers allowed them use, including plastic, vinyl flooring and body care products. countless consumer products We get phthalates in with our food and inhalation. They can also be absorbed through the skin. Except that they are likely to cause in children, asthma is of different phthalates known that they may cause, the neurological and behavioral problems may impair fertility and may cause eczema in the Author: The work of author Sherry Baker is in many publications, including Newsweek, Health, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Yoga Journal, Optometry, Atlanta, Arthritis Today, Natural Healing Newsletter, OMNI, UCLA’s “Healthy Years” newsletter , Mount Sinai School of Medicine’s “Focus on Health Aging” newsletter, the Cleveland Clinic’s “Men’s Health Advisor” newsletter and many others.”  14 March 2014 Source: Natural News Translate: Google Translate

My Source:

http://www.earth-matters.nl/5/9111/gezondheid/nieuwe-studies-bevestigen-dat-kinderen-gevaar-lopen-door-blootstelling-aan-veelgebruikte-chemicalien

 


Leave a comment

What is in your fragrance? The content of perfume and aftershave

What is in that smell?

“From Halle Berry’s signature scent, Armani to JLo’s Glow, the sleek perfume bottles promise love, joy, and celebrity appeal. But what they won’t tell you is what’s on the inside: complex mixtures of undisclosed chemicals linked to asthma, allergies, hormone disruption, and other health effects.

According to the Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep database, an estimated 80% of products – everything from colognes and body sprays, to shampoos, deodorants, and even make-up – contain fragrance.

A research study  “Not So Sexy: The Health Risks of Secret Chemicals in Fragranceshow Fourteen chemicals not listed on labels due to he loophole in federal law that allows companies to claim fragrances as trade secrets. American Eagle Seventy Seven contained 24 hidden chemicals, the highest number of any product in the study.

Ten sensitizing chemicals associated with allergic reactions such as asthma, wheezing, headaches and contact dermatitis. Giorgio Armani Acqua Di Gio contained 19 different sensitizing chemicals, more than any other product in the study.

Four hormone-disrupting chemicals linked to a range of health effects including     sperm damage, thyroid disruption and cancer. Halle by Halle Berry, Quicksilver,  and Glow by JLo each     contained seven different chemicals with the potential to disrupt the hormone system.

The study further revealed the widespread use of chemicals that have not been assessed for safety by any publicly accountable agency, or by the cosmetics industry’s self-policing review panels. Of the 91 ingredients identified in the fragrances, only 19 have been reviewed by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR), and only 27 have been assessed by the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) and the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM), which develop voluntary standards for chemicals used in fragrance.

The existing data and lack of comprehensive studies are cause for concern, because one thing we do know is that fragrance chemicals are inhaled or absorbed through the skin and many of them are ending up inside people’s bodies, including pregnant women and newborn infants.

A recent EWG study found synthetic musk chemicals Galaxolide and Tonalide in the umbilical cord blood of newborn infants. These musk chemicals were found in nearly every fragrance analyzed for the “Not So Sexy” study.

Twelve of the 17 products in the study also contained diethyl phthalate (DEP), a chemical linked to sperm damage and behavioral problems that has been found in the bodies of nearly all Americans tested.

According to the analysis, Fierce contains eight sensitizing chemicals that can trigger allergic reactions such as headaches, wheezing, asthma, and contact dermatitis – the types of effects commonly reported by people exposed to fragrances.

According to a peer-reviewed paper published in the March 2009 Journal of Environmental Health, more than 30% of the general population and up to 37% of people with asthma report these types of negative reactions from fragrance products.”

Source and read more:

http://www.psr.org/environment-and-health/environmental-health-policy-institute/responses/whats-that-smell.html


Leave a comment

Incense toxic and harmful to health and indoor air

#incense The study followed 61,320 men and women between the ages of 45 and 74 for 12 years. When burned, incense releases carcinogens such as polyaromatic hyodrcarbons (PAHs), a class of toxins that includes formaldehyde and that has been linked to lung cancer in smokers. An earlier study found PAH content in temples that burn incense up to 45 times higher than in homes where people smoke. Incense typically contains other carcinogens such as carbonyls and benzene, which can trigger DNA mutations in human cells. Although the components of incense typically include benign plant and flower matter along with essential oils, most formulations also incorporate not-so-benign artificial fragrances and binders. The smoke produced as incense burns releases particulate matter, and because it slowly smolders, it releases even higher concentrations.” Sudy made by Study director Dr. Jeppe Friborg, of Statens Serum Institute in Copenhagen

As Dr. Len Horvitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, said, “Anything that affects air quality negatively is not a good thing. Burning in general and the release of smoke, these things are certainly to be avoided. At the very least, chemical irritants will set off asthma, and that’s reversible. Cancer is not reversible.”

“This is not unlike the type of risk that one experiences from secondhand tobacco smoke,” said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society.

“Burning incense produces particulates greater than 45 mg/g burned as compared to only 10 mg/g burned for cigarettes–more than four times the load. So if you’re sitting right on top of burning incense and breathing it in, you’re getting a heavier whack of particulates than you would from smoking.”

“Incense has been implicated before in numerous studies (along with its cousin, scented candles). One such study found that exposure to burning incense at least once a week during pregnancy increases the risk that the child will develop leukemia by 2.7 times. ”

“Another measured air quality in several Dutch churches that burned candles and incense and found the particulate levels 20 times higher than they were next to a typical busy road. Other studies have determined links between incense allergic contact dermatitis, various respiratory conditions including asthma, and cancers of the nervous system.”

Source and read more:

https://jonbarron.org/article/toxic-incense#.Uvy_lHmYaSQ

http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/mcs/candles.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/021598_incense_air_quality.html

http://drbenkim.com/burning-incense-cancer.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1100-incense-burning-releases-cancercausing-chemicals.html#.UvzLNHmYZzU

http://www.mst.dk/NR/rdonlyres/1DBB5B30-34F9-4F9D-BD0E-D8EA4A88118D/0/39.pdf


Leave a comment

Cells converted to functional lung cells – europeanlung.org

Cells converted to functional lung cells

“This break-through, published in the journal, Nature Biotechnology, could significantly advance the modelling of lung disease, drug testing, studying lung development, and generating lung tissue for transplantation.

Study leader Hans-Willem Snoeck said, “Now, we are finally able to make lung and airway cells. This is important because lung transplants have a particularly poor prognosis. Although any clinical application is still many years away, we can begin thinking about making autologous lung transplants—that is, transplants that use a patient’s own skin cells to generate functional lung tissue.””

http://www.europeanlung.org/en/news-and-events/news/human-stem-cells-converted-to-functional-lung-cells

http://www.sciencenewsline.com/articles/2013120123560001.html#footer

“Lung diseases are one of the world’s biggest health concerns, causing about one sixth of all deaths worldwide.

The impact of lung diseases remains as large today as it was at the turn of the century and is likely to remain so for several decades.

Lung diseases cause disability and premature death. They have a huge cost related to primary care, hospital care and treatments, as well as the loss of productivity of those who cannot work and people who die early because of their condition.”

Link to different lung diseases
http://www.europeanlung.org/en/lung-disease-and-information/lung-diseases/


Leave a comment

We should throw cleaning spray bottle

(Scroll Down for English)

Vi bør kaste rengjøringssprayflasken

jifbaderom

Kaste alle sprayflasker og rengjør med såpe, klut og vann.

I dag leste jeg noe på nett i NRK Telemark at forskere og legestanden har komt fram til at man ikke bør bruke rengjøringsmedler på sprayflaske. Dette er noe jeg har advart mot i 6 år. Men det er jo meget godt at de endelig har komt fram til den samme konklusjonen som jeg gjorde etter å ha blitt astmatisk som yrkesskade i 2007. I jobben brukte jeg hyppig forskjellige medler på sprayflaske og annen aerosol form.

I artikkelen kan vi lese:

“Vaskemidler på spray gir astma hos renholdere. Nå skal det undersøkes om også vaskingen hjemme kan gi astma og lungeskader.

Mens proffe renholdere bevisst unngår spray, er bruken økende hjemme hos folk.

– Vi tynner vel sjeldent ut. Vi bruker det vi kan få kjøpt og vi sprayer mer og mer. Dermed puster vi inn mer av disse midlene, sier prosjektleder Anne Kristin M. Fell ved Sykehuset Telemark.

– Vi bør kaste den sprayflasken og heller bruke en klut, sier hun.

Astma vil bli den tredje største dødsårsaken om få år. Nå vil sykehuset finne ut hvor utsatt folk er hjemme.”

De holder på med en stor undersøkelse i Telemark for å finne ut av hva som årsaker astma hos folk, og de har nå funnit ut at sprayflasken er farlig.

Og igjen, jeg er helt enig, akkurat som jeg har ment i 6 år nå. Kutt ut sprayflasken og gå parfymefri folkens!

(NB! Dette er ikke knyttet til et spesielt rengjøringsmerke, men gjelder alle rengjøringsmedler på sprayflaske. )

Kilde: Nrk Telemark

In English

We should throw cleaning spray bottle

jifbaderom

Throw away all spray bottles and clean using a cloth, soap and water.

Today I read something online in Norwegian NRK Telemark that scientists and the medical profession made ​​concessions to the conclusion that one should not use cleaning agents on a the spray bottle. This is something I have warned about for 6 years now! But it’s very good that they have finally come up to the same conclusion I did after becoming asthmatic as occupational injuries in 2007. In my job, I frequently used different Cleaners on spray bottle and other aerosol form.

In the article we read:

“Washing the spray and asthma in cleaners. Should now be examined whether also washing at home can cause asthma and lung damage.

While pro cleaners deliberately avoids spray, its use increasing in people.

– We thinner rarely out. We use what we can buy and we spray more and more. Thus we breathe in more of these funds, says project manager Anne Kristin M. Fell at Telemark Hospital.

– We should throw the spray bottle and either use a cloth, she said.

Asthma will be the third leading cause of death in a few years. Now the hospital will determine how vulnerable people are at home. “

They’re on a major study in Telemark to find out what causes asthma in people, and they have now found out the spray bottle is dangerous.

And again, I completely agree. As I have for 6 years. Cut out the spray bottle and go fragrance free guys!

(Note! This is not Attached to any specific brand, but all cleaning using a spray bottle.)

Source: Nrk Telemark


Leave a comment

Fastfood increases risk for asthma, rhinitis and eczema

(Scroll down for English)

Astma Allergi Danmark 08.05.2013. Nytt om Astma Forskning 

Hurtigmat øker risikoen for alvorlig astma, rhinitis og eksem

Det kommer ikke som noen noen nyhet for de fleste at hurtigmat er usunt, men at det kan øke risikoen for astma, rhinitis og eksem er kanskje en nyhet for de fleste?

En stor internasjonal studie fra The University of Auckland (The to ledende forfattere, Professor Innes Asher og Philippa Ellwood) viser at det er en økt risiko for alvorlige astma, eksem og høysnue symptomer (rhinitis) hos barn og ungdom som spiser hurtigmat tre eller flere ganger i uken. Spiser du derimot frukt tre eller flere ganger i uka kan beskytte mot alvorlig astma.

Studien konkluderer med at dersom den observerte korrelasjonen er funnet å være pålitelig, slik at resultatene har stor betydning for folkehelsen på grunn av et økende forbruk av hurtigmat (fastfood) globalt.

Der blev innsamlet data på mere end 319.000 tenåringer (13-14 årsalderen) fra 107 sentere i 51 land, og mere enn 181.000 barn (6-7 år) fra 64 sentre i 31 land. Undersøkelsen spurte om deltakernes inntak av kjøtt, fisk, frukt og grønnsaker, belgfrukter, korn, brød og pasta, ris, smør, margarin, nøtter, poteter, melk, egg og gatekjøkkenmat / burgere.

“Etter å ha tatt hensyn til forhold som skulle påvirke resultatene, viste analysen at hurtigmat var den eneste av  mat som gjorde utslag og påviste de samme resultatene på tvers av begge aldersgruppene, slo forfatterne fast at “slike konsistente resultater legger noen vekt på mulig årsakssammenheng av forholdet “.”

Tre eller flere ukentlige hurtigmatmåltider var blant annet knyttet til en 39 prosent økning i risikoen for alvorlig astma blant tenåringer og en 27 prosent økning i risiko blant barn. Forfatterne viser i rapporten at forklaringen kan være at hurtigmat inneholder høye nivåer av mettede fettsyrer og transfettsyrer, mens frukten er rik på antioksidanter.

Nyheter fra forskningen er hentet fra Astma Allergi Danmark

Les artikkelen på  The University of Auckland: Fast food linked to asthma and eczema

Dette er godt nytt for alle som vil ha en bedre helse. Dette leste jeg om på en engelsk side for en måned siden. Det er mange år siden jeg sluttet å spise hamburgere og slik mat. Jeg besluttet meg for på 1990 tallet å ikke spise så masse hurtigmat, hamburgere og slik. Nå blir det kanskje en eller to slike måltider i året. Ofte synes jeg ikke hamburgere er så veldig delikate heller. Det er få kiosker som er gode til å lage gode hamburgere. McDonalds og slike kjeder for eksempel lager uattraktiv mat og jeg har ikke spist på McDonalds på veldig mange år. Jeg går heller på en kafe eller restaurant og tar meg et ordentlig måltid.

 In English

Asthma Allergy Denmark 05.08.2013. News about Asthma Research

Fastfood increases the risk for severe asthma, rhinitis and eczema

It it does not come as any news to most people that fastfood is unhealthy, but that it can increase the risk of asthma, rhinitis and eczema may be news for most people?

A large international study from The University of Auckland (The two principal authors, Professor Innes Asher and Philippa Ellwood) shows that there is an increased risk of severe asthma, eczema and hay fever symptoms (rhinitis) in children and adolescents who eat fast food three or more times a week. Do you eat fruit, however three or more times a week may protect against severe asthma.

The study concludes that if the observed correlation is found to be reliable, so the results are of great importance to public health due to the increasing consumption of fast food globally.

There was collected data on more end 319,000 teenagers (13-14 years old) from 107 centers in 51 countries and more than 181,000 children (6-7 years) from 64 centers in 31 countries. The survey asked about participants’ intake of meat, fish, fruit and vegetables, legumes, cereals, bread and pasta, rice, butter, margarine, nuts, potatoes, milk, eggs and junk food / burgers.

Three or more weekly fast food meals was partly due to a 39 percent increase in the risk of severe asthma among teens and a 27 percent increase in risk among children.

“After taking account of factors likely to influence results, the analysis showed that fast food was the only food type to show the same associations across both age groups, prompting the authors to suggest that “such consistency adds some weight to the possible causality of the relationship”.”

The authors of the report shows that the explanation could be that fast food contains high levels of saturated fatty acids and trans fatty acids, while the fruit is rich in antioxidants.

News from research provided by Asthma Allergy Denmark

Read the story at  The University of Auckland: Fast food linked to asthma and eczema

This is good news for all who want a better health. This I read about on an English page about a month ago. It is many years since I stopped eating hamburgers and such food. I decided on that in the 1990s not to eat so lots of fast food, hamburgers and such. Now it’s maybe one or two such meals a year. Often I do not think hamburgers are so very delicate food either. There are few fast Food stores that are good at making good tasty hamburgers. McDonalds and such chains make unattractive food and I have not eaten at McDonalds for very many years. I rather go to a cafe or restaurant and have a proper meal.

PhD A C Steinemann on Chemicals, Essential oils and Scents

Leave a comment

Please, listen to PhD Anne C Steinemann interviu

She is a professor in the content of common household products such as cleaning products, scented candles, airfresheners, personal care products a.s.

You will be amazed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhIP2zpVpoA

Also posted at:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fresh-air-for-all-Environmental-Inhibition-An-indoor-environment-case/137389693097385


Leave a comment

Research Methylparaben, bisphenol A (BPA) and breast cancer

(Scroll down for English)

Parabener påvirker effekten av kreftmedisiner, gir dårligere sedkvalitet og påvirker celler i kroppen

(SFGate Tuesday, September 13, 2011) Forsker Dr. William Goodson III er hovedforfatter av en studie fra California Pacific Medical Center i San Francisco som viser to kjemikalier som er vanlige i forbrukerprodukter – bisfenol-A og metylparaben – forårsaker friske celler til å vokse og overleve som kreftceller og kan forstyrre effektiviteten av anti-kreft medikamenter. Det er en økende mengde bevis ser på de negative helseeffekter av BPA, en plast herding kjemikalie som finnes i mat containere, bokser m.fl. produkter av plast og selv salg kvitteringer, samt Methylparaben, en mindre kjent konserveringsmiddel som finnes i kosmetikk og hygieneprodukter. Vitenskapelige studier har knyttet kjemikalier til hormonelle problemer og reproduktive helsespørsmål, blant andre problemer. Forskerne tok friske ikke kreftsyke celler fra bryster fra pasienter med høy risiko for kreft, odlet dem i et laboratorium og fant ut at når cellene ble utsatt for bisfenol A og Methylparaben, begynte de å oppføre seg som kreftceller.

Forskningen publisert online i det medisinske tidsskriftet Carcinogenesis.

Les forskningesrelultaten: Goodson WH et al (2011)  : ACTIVATION OF THE mTOR PATHWAY BY LOW LEVELS OF XENOESTROGENS IN BREAST EPITHELIAL CELLS FROM HIGH-RISK WOMEN

Mer om emnet
Andre forskere har funnet:

(PubMed.gov År 2008) Rapport om sikkerhetsvurdering av Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Isopropylparaben, Butylparaben, Isobutylparaben, og Benzylparaben som brukes i kosmetiske produkter.

Parabener er navnet gitt til en gruppe av p-hydroksybenzosyre (PHBA) estere som brukes i over mange titusentall kosmetiske produkter som konserveringsmidler ved konsentrasjoner opp til 0,8% (blandinger av parabener) eller opp til 0,4% (enkelt paraben). Gruppen omfatter Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Isopropylparaben, Butylparaben, Isobutylparaben, og Benzylparaben. Industri anslag over den daglige bruken av kosmetiske produkter som kan inneholde parabener var 17,76 g for voksne og 378 mg for spedbarn.

Paraben lagres ikke i kroppen, når du slutter å bruke det synker mengden langsomt fra kroppen. Parabener i kosmetiske formuleringer påføres huden penetrerer stratum corneum. Carboxylesterases hydrolyserer parabener i huden. Parabener akkumuleres ikke i kroppen. Serumkonsentrasjonen av parabener, selv etter intravenøs administrering, avtar raskt og holder seg lav.

  • Parabener er ikke funnet giftige.
  • Propylparaben, og Butylparaben påvirker antall spermier på alle nivåer fra 0,01% til 1,0% og redusert spermeantall og bevegelige aktivitet i avkom.
  • Ethylparaben og Methylparaben medførde økt kromosomavvik.
  • Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, og Butylparaben i kosten produserte celleproliferasjon i formagen.

Int J Toxicol. 2008;27 Suppl 4:1-82. doi: 10.1080/10915810802548359

In English

Parabens affect the efficacy of cancer drugs, leed to poorer semen quality and affects cells in the body

(SFGate Year 2011) Scientist Dr. William Goodson III is the lead author of a study by  from California  Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco that shows two chemicals common in consumer  products – bisphenol-A and methyl paraben – cause healthy cells to grow and  survive like cancer cells and can interfere with the effectiveness of  anti-cancer drugs. There is a growing body of evidence looking at the negative health effects of BPA, a  plastic hardening chemical found in food containers, cans and even sales  receipts, as well as methylparaben, a lesser-known preservative found in  cosmetics and personal care products. Scientific studies have linked the chemicals to hormonal problems and  reproductive health issues, among other problems. Researchers took noncancerous breast cells from high-risk patients, grew them in  a laboratory and found that once the cells were exposed to bisphenol A and  methylparaben, they started behaving like cancer cells.

Research is published online in the medical  journal Carcinogenesis.

Read research: Goodson WH et al (2011)  : ACTIVATION OF THE mTOR PATHWAY BY LOW LEVELS OF XENOESTROGENS IN BREAST EPITHELIAL CELLS FROM HIGH-RISK WOMEN

Read more: sfgate.com

More on the subject
Other researchers found:

(PubMed.org year 2008) Report on the safety assessment of Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Isopropylparaben, Butylparaben, Isobutylparaben, and Benzylparaben as used in cosmetic products.

Parabens is the name given to a group of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (PHBA) esters used in over many thousand cosmetics as preservatives at concentrations up to 0.8% (mixtures of parabens) or up to 0.4% (single paraben). The group includes Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Isopropylparaben, Butylparaben, Isobutylparaben, and Benzylparaben. Industry estimates of the daily use of cosmetic products that may contain parabens were 17.76 g for adults and 378 mg for infants.

Paraben do not store in the body, when you stop using it fades away from your body. Parabens in cosmetic formulations applied to skin penetrate the stratum corneum. Carboxylesterases hydrolyze parabens in the skin. Parabens do not accumulate in the body. Serum concentrations of parabens, even after intravenous administration, quickly decline and remain low.

  • Parabens are not found toxic.
  • Propylparaben, Butylparaben did affect sperm counts at all levels from 0.01% to 1.0% and decreased sperm number and motile activity in offspring.
  • Ethylparaben and Methylparaben did increase chromosomal aberrations.
  • Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, and Butylparaben in the diet produced cell proliferation in the forestomach.

Int J Toxicol. 2008;27 Suppl 4:1-82. doi: 10.1080/10915810802548359


Leave a comment

E-Cigarettes Electrical Cigarettes is harmful to the lungs

Electronic cigarettes, also known as vaporizer cigarettes and e-cigarettes, are devices  that release doses of water vapor that may or may not include nicotine. E-cigarettes are powered by a small battery.

Electrical cigarettes or e-cigarettes are by many regarded as healthy alternative to tobacco smoking, but they do cause damage to the lungs, scientists from the University of Athens, Greece, explained at the European Respiratory Society’s Annual Congress 2012, Vienna, on Sunday. Electronic cigarettes, also called e-cigarettes have also been marketed as effective smoking cessation devices.

People were let smoking e-cigarettes for ten minutes, and then they messured the lung capasity breating in and out fast. This is the same kind of test they do when checking asthma and other lung diseases.

“A spirometry test, as well as some others diagnostic procedures were used to measure their airway resistance. Airway resistance is used in respiratory physiology to measure the resistance of the respiratory tract to airflow coming in during inspiration (inhalation) and going out during expiration (exhalation).”

They found that using an e-cigarette caused an instant increase in airway resistance (that is a decrease in breathing ability) that lasted for 10 minutes in the majority of the participants. Actually meaning increased problems with breathing. Below are some of their findings:

Qoute

  • Non-smokers – even among lifetimes non-smokers, using an e-cigarette for ten minutes raised their airway resistance to 206% from 182% (mean average); the researchers described this as a “significant increase”.
  • Current regular smokers – among existing regular smokers, the spirometry tests revealed a significant rise in airway resistance to 220%, from 176% after using one e-cigarette for ten minutes.
  • COPD and Asthma patients experienced no significant increase in airway resistance from using one e-cigarette for ten minutes.

End Qoute

The test result for those with asthma and COPD I wonder about? Lungs are lungs and it is rather strange that the smokers got the worst results. Is it that those with COPD and Asthma are protected by their medicines that they did not react as much as the others? I find that likely. Then again for some people with asthma pure water vapor can be helpful, while in ohters it is harmful. If the vapor was not added any additive then maybe that is the answer.

The researchers also found

“The devices were found to cause an immediate rise in airway resistance in the lungs – meaning less oxygen is absorbed by the blood.”

“For all of persons involved in the test the e-cigarette caused an immediate rise in airway resistance, lasting for ten minutes.”

“This research helps us to understand how these products could be potentially harmful.”

“We found an immediate rise in airway resistance in our group of participants, which suggests e-cigarettes can cause immediate harm after smoking the device.”

“Ministers are concerned that some brands of E-cigarettes may contain very high levels of nicotine – the addictive substance in cigarettes has also been linked to cancer.”

Regardless what anyone says fresh air is best for the whole body, that is what we are designed to inhale.

Annelie

Read more:
www.dailymail.co.uk
www.medicalnewstoday.com

e-cigaretter e-sigaretter elektriska


Leave a comment

Every 10th asthma is work related

(Scroll down for English)

Hver tiende astma er arbeidsrelatert

En ny studie bekrefter hva som har vært kjent lenge. Hver tiende astma er arbeidsrelatert.

Studien er laget av Akademiske sjukehuset i Sverige og man har forsket i flere land. 13000 voksne kvinner og menn har deltatt i forskningen i Danmark, Estland, Finland, Island, Norge og Sverige. Sudien er blitt publisert i Annals of Occupational Medicine. Ingen av deltakerne hadde astma da studien startet. Studien pågikk over mange år og da den ble avsluttet hadde 429 av deltakerne utviklet astma.

Studien viste også at det var større risiko for å utvikle asthma i arbeidet om du blir utsatt for luftveiene irriterende og sensibiliserende kjemikalier. “Risikoemner” for yrkesmessig astma inkluderer såkalte isocyanater, epoksy akrylater og vaskemidler. Også peroner som arbeider med noen naturlige allergener og respiratoriske irritanter plantestoffer – for eksempel gartnere – hadde en økt risiko for å utvikle astma. Astma knyttet til faktorer i arbeid i voksen alder ser ut til å stor grad påvirke folk som ikke har vist tegn til noen allergier. Ifølge forskernes beregninger, arbeidsfaktorer ligger til grunn omtrent hvert syv nye tilfeller av astma blant menn og ca hver fjortende nye tilfeller av astma blant kvinner.

Renholdspersonale, spray malere, frisører og rørleggere er noen grupper av de grupper som er særlig sårbare for slike yrkesastma.

Kilde: unt.se 

In English

Every tenth asthma is work related

A new study confirms what has long been known. Every tenth asthma is work related.

The study is made of the Academic Hospital in Sweden and it has been investigated in several countries. 13,000 adult women and men participated in the research in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Sudie’s been published in the Annals of Occupational Medicine. None of the participants had asthma when the study began. The study took place over many years and when it was completed 429 participants had developed asthma.

The study also showed that there was a greater risk of developing asthma in the work if you are exposed to respiratory irritant and sensitizing chemicals. “Risk Subjects” for occupational asthma include so-called isocyanates, epoxy acrylates and detergents. Also persons in the working with some natural allergens and respiratory irritants plant substances – such as gardeners – had an increased risk of developing asthma. Asthma linked to factors at work in adulthood appears to greatly affect even people who have shown no signs of any allergies. According to the researchers’ calculations, work factors underlie approximately every seven new cases of asthma among men and approximately fortnightly new cases of asthma among women.

Cleaning Staff, spray painters, hairdressers and plumbers are some groups of the groups that are particularly vulnerable to such occupational asthma.

Source: unt.se


Leave a comment

Long-term exposure to air pollution – reduced lung function in children

Scientific Knowledge on the Subject

Long-term exposure to ambient air pollution has been associated with reduced lung function in children. However, the role of timing of exposure remains unclear as well as possible effect modification by allergic status and other factors.

What This Study Adds to the Field

In this prospective birth cohort study we found association between traffic-related air pollution exposure during infancy and decreased lung function in children up to 8 years of age. Our results suggest stronger effects in children sensitized to common allergens. Early life exposure to traffic-related air pollution seems to have long-term respiratory consequences in susceptible groups such as atopic children.

Read the whole story
http://www.thoracic.org/media/press-releases/resources/Schultz.pdf


Leave a comment

Invisible – smoke chemicals unseen

(Scroll down for English)

Sitat artikkel fra Helsedirektoratet (2012):

“Anslagsvis 100.000 barn utsettes for passiv røyking hjemme hver dag. Også hos besteforeldre, slektninger og venner blir man utsatt for passiv røyking. Det viser en ny undersøkelse Helsedirektoratet har fått utført i forbindelse med kampanjen «Det du ikke ser» om barn og passiv røyking.

Passive smoking give lung issues sneaking up from behind. Often in need of medical treatment.

Passive smoking give lung issues sneaking up from behind. Often in need of medical treatment.

Til sammen 27 prosent av de spurte sier de tillater røyking inne hos seg selv. 11 prosent tillater det generelt, mens ytterligere 16 prosent tillater det unntaksvis. 7 prosent av foreldrene i undersøkelsen sier at barna utsettes for røyk månedlig eller oftere hjemme, 11 prosent hos besteforeldre/slektninger. 9 prosent av foreldrene sier at barna blir eksponert for røyk hos venner.

– Det er mange barn som utsettes for passiv røyking, enten hjemme eller hos andre. Å gjøre hjemmet, og selvsagt bilen røykfri er den beste måten å beskytte barna mot tobakksrøyk på. Foreldre er også rollemodeller, og det aller beste både for barna og dem selv, er selvsagt å slutte, sier helsedirektør Bjørn-Inge Larsen.

Helseskader
Passiv røyk kan føre til luftveisinfeksjoner som astma og bronkiolitt, lungekreft og andre kreftformer. Ørebetennelse er også en effekt av passiv røyking som forekommer hyppig. Dette utsetter barna for store smerter, og øker sjansen for kirurgiske inngrep.

–  Luftveisinfeksjoner som bronkiolitt i tillegg til astma er begge hyppigere hos barn av røykende foreldre. Disse sykdommene er potensielt livstruende, selv om vi heldigvis har lav dødelighet av sykdommene. Men mange barn legges inn på sykehus med alvorlig sykdom, sier Karin C. Lødrup Carlsen, professor MD ved Kvinne- og barneklinikken ved Oslo Universitetssykehus.

Barn er spesielt sårbare for andres tobakksrøyk siden lungene og immunsystemet deres ikke er ferdig utviklet. Dessuten puster de fortere enn voksne og får dermed i seg mer røyk. Alle som blir utsatt for passiv røyking har økt risiko for de samme sykdommene som den som røyker selv.

Det finnes ikke noen sikker nedre grense for passiv røyking, og barn spesielt er sårbare for helseskader, sier Bjørn-Inge Larsen.

Røyking hjemme
Hovedsakelig er det de som røyker selv, eldre over 55 år, de som ikke har barn boende hjemme og de med lavere utdanning som tillater røyking hjemme. Blant dem som tillater røyking hjemme er det 13 prosent som tillater det i alle rom. Tre av fire tillater det kun i bestemte rom eller på bestemte steder som under kjøkkenvifta, ut av vinduet, inn i peisen og lignende. Helsedirektøren oppfordrer foreldre, og særlig besteforeldre som røyker til å ta hensyn til barn som er på besøk.

–  Minst 80 prosent av den helseskadelige tobakksrøyken er usynlig. Det hjelper ikke å røyke under kjøkkenvifta eller ut av vinduet, du må faktisk gå ut, påpeker Larsen.

Barns rettigheter
Så å si alle er enige i at barn har rett til et røykfritt miljø. Det er stor støtte for et forbud mot røyking i bil med barn. 85 prosent støtter et slikt forbud. Åtte av ti støtter også et forbud mot røyking i nærheten av barn innendørs. Også blant dem som røyker daglig støtter rundt 65 prosent et forbud mot røyking med barn inne eller i bil. 56 prosent er for økte avgifter på tobakk. Åtte av ti er enige i at virkemidler som informasjonskampanjer kan hjelpe for å begrense røyking.

 

Tall fra undersøkelsen

  • Det er forholdsvis høy kjennskap til at passiv røyking er skadelig for barn og voksne.
  • Mange vet at passiv røyking eller mors røyking i svangerskapet kan føre til helseskader som astma, luftveisinfeksjoner, lungekreft/andre kreftformer, lav fødselsvekt.
  •   Mindre kjennskap til at passiv røyking eller mors røyking i svangerskapet kan føre til ørebetennelser og krybbedød (nesten fire av ti svarer ‘vet ikke’).
  •   Få melder at barna deres blir utsatt for røyk daglig. Likevel er det 7 prosent som sier at barna utsettes for røyk månedlig eller oftere hjemme, og 11 prosent hos besteforeldre/slektninger
  • Sju av ti sier at de aldri tillater røyking hjemme hos seg – også fire av ti dagligrøykere sier det.
  •   27 prosent tillater røyking inne hos seg. Blant disse finner man hovedsakelig dem som røyker selv, eldre (55 år+), de som ikke har barn boende hjemme og de med lavere utdanning.
  • Alle er enige i at barn har rett til et røykfritt miljø.
  • 74  prosent er enige i at de plages av andres tobakksrøyk innendørs, 58 prosent plages utendørs.
  • Det er stor støtte (85 prosent) for forbud mot røyking i bil med barn, og i nærheten av barn innendørs.
  • Åtte av ti støtter bruk av virkemidler som informasjonskampanjer om helseskader som følge av røyking/passiv røyking.
  • Åtte av ti støtter forbud mot røyking innendørs på alle arbeidsplasser. Her er det naturlig nok stor forskjell på røykere og ikke-røykere.
  • De fleste som røyker sier at de ville prøve å slutte alene uten hjelp.”
     
    Sitat slutt

Jo, det er sant det at all røyk ikke er synlig. Når jeg er på besøk hos en venn (navn er ikke viktig) som er veldig hensynsfull når det gjelder røyking fordi jeg har astma (og jeg setter veldig stor pris på ham for det), da står han bak en rullegardin som er trukket ned med hodet ut av vinduet. Du ser ingen røyk som siver inn, men likevel får jeg pusteproblemer om jeg befinner meg i samme rom som ham. Så dette som Helsedirektoratet varsler om er å ta alvorlig. Vi som har astma har som jeg pleier å si “en innebygget røykvarsler” fordi vi kjenner før alle andre når lufta er forurenset ved å få hoste og/eller pustevansker. Vi får nemlig reaksjon på uheldige stoffer i lufta som er på 0,002 ppm. Jeg kan signere på at det Helsedirektoratet sier er sant.

Dere som røyker, for deres egen skyld og andres, forsøk å kutte det ut. Røyk ute, og røyk overhodet ikke der andre er, fordi det er til skade for de du er gla i. Da mener jeg det som en bønn til alle som røyker, og ikke utelukkende til mine venner spesielt.

Gjør du noe godt for andre,
da får du det tilbake i kjærlighet.
~Annelie Molin

Kilde: http://www.helsedirektoratet.no/Om/nyheter/Sider/barn-utsettes-for-passiv-royking-hos-besteforeldre.aspx

In English

The Norwegian Directorate of Health is an executive agency and competent authority subordinate to the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services. ​The political frameworks to which the Directorate is subject are the political platform of the government in office at any time and resolutions of the government and of Parliament.

Quote article from The Norwegian Directorate of Health (2012):

“An estimated 100,000 children are exposed to secondhand smoke at home every day. Again their grandparents, relatives and friends expose them to secondhand smoke. According to a new survey Health Directorate has conducted in conjunction with the campaign,” What you do not see ” – Children and passive smoking.

Passive smoking give lung issues sneaking up from behind. Often in need of medical treatment.

Passive smoking give lung issues sneaking up from behind. Often in need of medical treatment.

A total of 27 percent of respondents say they allow smoking in the house with themself. 11 percent allow the general, while another 16 per cent allows an exception. 7 percent of parents surveyed said that children exposed to smoking monthly or more often at home, 11 percent for grandparents / relatives. 9 percent of parents say that their children are being exposed to fumes from friends.

– There are many children who are exposed to passive smoking at home or in other places. Making your home and car smoke-free course is the best way to protect children from tobacco smoke. Parents are role models, and the very best for their children and themselves, is of course to stop, said health director Bjørn-Inge Larsen.

Harmful
Passive smoking can lead to respiratory infections such as bronchiolitis and asthma, lung cancer and other cancers. Ear infection is also an effect of passive smoking that occur frequently. This exposes children to severe pain, and increases the chance of surgical intervention.

– Respiratory infections such as bronchiolitis in addition to asthma are both more frequent in children of smoking parents. These diseases are potentially life threatening, although we fortunately have low mortality from diseases. But many children hospitalized with severe disease, says Karin C. Lødrup Carlsen, MD Professor of Women’s and Children’s Clinic at Oslo University.

Children are especially vulnerable to other people’s tobacco smoke to the lungs and their immune system is not fully developed. Moreover, they breathe faster than adults, and consequently inhale more smoke. Anyone who is exposed to secondhand smoke are at increased risk for the same diseases as the smoker himself can develope.

There is no safe lower limit for passive smoking, and children are especially vulnerable to human health, says Bjørn-Inge Larsen.

Smoking at home
Mainly there are those who smoke themselves, older than 55 years, those who do not have children living at home and those with less education that allow smoking at home. Among those who allow smoking in the home is 13 percent that allow it in any room. Three of the four permitted only in specific rooms or locations as the hood, out the window, into the fire and the like. Director of Public Health encourages parents and especially grandparents who smoke to pay attention to children who are visiting.

– At least 80 percent of the harmful tobacco smoke is invisible. It helps not to smoke under the kitchen fan or out of the window, you have to actually go out, says Larsen.

Children’s rights
Virtually everyone agrees that children have a right to a smoke-free environment. There is widespread support for a ban on smoking in cars with children. 85 percent support such a ban. Eight out of ten also support a ban on smoking near children indoors. Among those who smoke daily support around 65 percent a ban on smoking with children inside or in the car.

56 percent are for higher taxes on tobacco. Eight out of ten agree that measures such as information campaigns can help to limit smoking.

Data from the survey

  • There are relatively high awareness that secondhand smoke is harmful to children and adults.
  • Many people know that both passive smoking or maternal smoking during pregnancy can cause health problems such as asthma, respiratory infections, lung cancer / other cancers, low birth weight.
  • Less known is that both passive smoking or maternal smoking during pregnancy can lead to ear infections and sudden infant death syndrome (nearly four out of ten answer ‘do not know’).
  • People reported that their children are exposed to smoke daily. Yet it is 7 percent who say that children exposed to smoking monthly or more often at home, and 11 percent for grandparents / relatives.
  • Seven out of ten said that they never allow smoking in their home – also four in ten daily smokers say it.
  • 27 percent allow smoking in his room. Among these are mainly those who smoke themselves, the elderly (55 years +), those who do not have children living at home and those with less education.
  • All agree that children have a right to a smoke-free environment.
  • 74 percent agree that they are bothered by other people’s tobacco smoke indoors, 58 percent suffer outdoors.
  • There is strong support (85 percent) for a ban on smoking in cars with kids, and near children indoors.
  • Eight out of ten support the use of measures such as information campaigns on human health caused by smoking / passive smoking.
  • Eight out of ten support the ban on indoor smoking in all workplaces. It is natural enough big difference between smokers and non-smokers.
  • Most smokers say that they would try to quit alone without help. “End of quoteYes, it is true that the smoke is not visible. When I’m visiting a friend (name is not important) which is very considerate when it comes to smoking because I have asthma (and I really appreciate him for that), then he stands behind a blind being drawn down head out of the window. You see no smoke seeping in, but still I get breathing problems if I’m in the same room as him. So this The Norwegian Directorate of Health say is to take seriously. We who have asthma as I tend to say “have a built-in smoke detector” because we know before anyone else when the air is polluted by causing coughing and/or difficulty breathing. This is since we get a response to detrimental substances in the air is 0.002 ppm. So therefor I can sign this.You who smokes, for their own sake and that of others, try to cut it out. And do not smoke whatsoever where others are, because it is to the detriment of the people you are fond of. When I mean it as a prayer to all smokers, not only for my friends especially.

Doing something good for others,
then you get it back with love.
~ Annelie Molin

Source: http://www.helsedirektoratet.no/Om/nyheter/Sider/barn-utsettes-for-passiv-royking-hos-besteforeldre.aspx


1 Comment

Perfume allergy, the second most common allergy

(Scroll down for English)

Det er nest mest vanlig med parfymeallergi

 Av alle allergier er allergi mot parfyme rangert andre plass. Det viser en av de største studiene som har vært gjennomført i området. Parfymeallergi kan forårsake eksem, hudsykdommer og relaterte lidelser. For mange er det et problem som fører til langtidssykemeldelse.

Studien ble gjennomført i Sverige, Tyskland, Nederland, Portugal og Italia. Ifølge overlege ved Hudavdelingen ved Skåne universitetssykehus, og en av de ansvarlige for studien, er det den mest omfattende i sitt slag.

Resultatene viser at nikkelallergi er mest vanlig. Parfymeallergier kom på andreplass.

Kilde: https://www.vardforbundet.se/vardfokus/webbnyheter/2012/augusti/nast-vanligast-att-vara-allergisk-mot-parfym/

In English

Of all allergies are perfume allergiy ranked as second of all allergies. It shows one of the largest studies that have been conducted in the area. Perfume allergies can cause eczema, skin diseases and related disorders. For many it is a problem that leads to long-term sick leave.

The study was conducted in Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal and Italy. According to chief physician at the Department of Dermatology at Skåne University Hospital, and one of those responsible for the study, it is the most comprehensive study of its kind.

The results show that nickel allergy is the most common. Perfume Allergies in second place after nickel allergy.

Source: https://www.vardforbundet.se/vardfokus/webbnyheter/2012/augusti/nast-vanligast-att-vara-allergisk-mot-parfym/


Leave a comment

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 .

With big knowledge on perfume and fragranced products.
http://drsteinemann.com/

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.


Leave a comment

Not so sexy – researched perfume

Again I have found an article where researchers have conducted tests on perfume. The test is called The Health Risks of Secret Chemicals in Fragrance by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics May 12th, 2010.

To qoute them researchers:

“A rose may be a rose. But that rose-like fragrance in your perfume may be something else entirely, concocted from any number of the fragrance industry’s 3,100 stock chemical ingredients, the blend of which is almost always kept hidden from the consumer.”

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics that is an independent lab tested 17 fragrance products, and their partner Environmental Working Group gathered information from the ingredients labels of the products.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and Environmental Working Group concluded with:

“Fragrance is now considered among the top five allergens in North America and European countries and is associated with a wide range of skin, eye and respiratory reactions. Repeated, cumulative exposure to chemical sensitizers like allergenic fragrance ingredients increases the chance that a person will develop allergic symptoms later in life. Our tests found an average of 10 chemical sensitizers in each fragrance product.”

The analyze gave the result that:

  • “Fourteen secret chemicals not listed on labels due to a loophole in federal law that allows companies to claim fragrances as trade secrets.”
  • “Ten sensitizing chemicals associated with allergic reactions such as asthma, wheezing, headaches and contact dermatitis.”
  • “Four hormone-disrupting chemicals linked to a range of health effects including sperm damage, thyroid disruption and cancer.”

The majority of the chemicals found in this report have never been tested and checked for for safety by any publicly approved agency, and also not by the perfume and cosmetics industry self-policing review panels.

And The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and their partner Environmental Working Group also announce the chocking effects and numbers of  damage on peoples health:

“When sprayed or applied on the skin, many chemicals from perfumes, cosmetics and personal care products are inhaled or absorbed through the skin. A recent EWG study found synthetic musk chemicals Galaxolide and Tonalide in the umbilical cord blood of newborn infants; these chemicals were found in all but one fragrance analyzed for this study. Diethyl phthalate (DEP), which appeared in 12 of the 17 products we tested, has been found in 97 percent of Americans tested by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

Source: The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics
http://www.safecosmetics.org/article.php?id=644

Click the link to read the entire article and research.

Think before you stink! When you stink you pollute the air we shall all inhale!


Leave a comment

Immune effects of respiratory exposure to fragrance

I found a research I want to share. Already in year 2007 they found that fragranced products can affect the immune system, respiration and give respiratory diseases and allergy. They found this out the same year I got my asthma, from secondhand smoking and fragranced washing agents used at work.

“Inhalation of the fragrance chemicals, isoeugenol and cinnamal (Isoeugenol (purity >99%) and cinnamal (purity >98%)), by mice resulted in immune reactions in the respiratory tract. This was observed in experiments performed by the RIVM (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) of which results indicate that inhalation of some fragrance chemicals could induce unwanted effects on the immune system.

Fragrance chemicals are common ingredients in such consumer products as cosmetics and scented products. Several fragrance chemicals are known to cause allergy after skin exposure, but it is unknown whether inhalation of these fragrance chemicals can cause allergic reactions or other unwanted immune reactions. Till recently, it was assumed that inhalation of fragrance chemicals was harmless for humans, because there was no exposure via inhalation. However, applying fragrance chemicals in scented products used indoors, has changed this.

RIVM investigated the effects of inhalation of isoeugenol and cinnamal, fragrance chemicals that can cause skin allergy. Mice were exposed to the fragrance chemicals via inhalation. Effects on the immune system were measured using a respiratory lymph node assay, which measures cell proliferation in lymph nodes of the respiratory tract. Inhalation of both isoeugenol and cinnamal resulted in stimulation of the immune system of the respiratory tract. The effects of isoeugenol were more pronounced than those of cinnamal. This is in contrast with results observed after skin exposure, after which both these fragrance chemicals were found equally potent in inducing skin allergy. This implies that effects of fragrance chemicals on the immune system depend on the route of exposure.

washing powders, and scented products to improve the smell in homes, offices, cars and stores. The last category contains many different products, for example bathroom sprays, incenses, fragrant candles, and room perfumes. Exposure to fragrance chemicals used in scented products is predominantly via inhalation. For some applications, such as room perfumes, this exposure is chronic, while for others, for instance bathroom sprays, exposure is now and then.

Skin exposure to certain fragrance chemicals can induce contact allergy. The EU Scientific Committee on Consumer and Non Food Products (SCCNFP) has compiled a list with 24 fragrance chemicals that are most frequently reported as contact allergens.

For safety evaluation of fragrance chemicals the major route of exposure is considered to be the dermal route. Currently, exposure via inhalation in safety evaluations this route is not included. However, consumers can also be exposed via inhalation.

2007 TNO (Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research) together with the RIVM has developed a mouse model to assess the respiratory sensitizing potential of chemicals. In this model mice were exposed via the respiratory route on three consecutive days.

The immune response was determined by measuring cell proliferation and cytokine responses in the lymph nodes draining the respiratory tract. In this model, the most pronounced effects were found in the mandibular lymph nodes, which drain the nasopharynx.

To expose mice to these fragrance chemicals two methods of distribution were used: vaporization with maximum vapour pressure or nebulization of aerosols in acetone. Isoeugenol and cinnamal are known human skin sensitizers.

Mice were exposed noseonly to either isoeugenol or cinnamal for 45, 90, 180 or 360 minutes per day on day 0, 1 and 2. Controls were exposed to the vehicle for 360 minutes per day on day 0, 1, and 2. Mice were exposed to the fragrances either via evaporized or via nebulized test material.

Exposure to aerosols of isoeugenol (300 ppm) resulted in toxic effects in the mice that were exposed for 360 min/day. After two days of exposure one mouse died and the other mice displayed several signs of distress. These mice were not exposed to isoeugenol on the third day. Effects of the two days exposure to isoeugenol were assessed on day 5. On the third day two mice died that were exposed for 180 minutes/day for 3 days. The other mice in this group appeared normal.

Toxic effects were also observed after nose-only exposure to aerosols of cinnamal (300 ppm). Two mice died after exposure to cinnamal for 360 minutes/day for 1 day. The other mice in this group displayed several signs of distress.

The fragrance chemicals, isoeugenol and cinnamal, two known skin sensitizers, have been tested in the respiratory lymph node assay to assess their effects on the immune system after respiratory exposure.

The substance is delivered as a mixture of vapour and liquid droplets that will at least lead to local high dose levels due to impaction of the pure substance on respiratory tract epithelium. The size of the droplets (~ 5 μm) prevents them to reach the lower airways and alveoli, though once deposited, the compound can continue to evaporate resulting in significantly higher concentrations in the alveolar air spaces.

Immune reactions caused by chemicals in the lung can also induce other pulmonary reactions. Some chemicals induce a Th1-type immune responses in the lungs, as has been shown in rodent models. Skin allergens such as DNCB (dinitro-chloro-benzene), DNFB (dinitrofluoro-benzene) and picryl chloride were able to induce allergic reactions in the lungs, e.g. laryngitis, pneumotis, and airway hyperreactivity to non-specific stimuli.”  – rivm.nl, RIVM 2007 ‘National Institute for Public Health and the Environment’.

In this pilot research project from 2007 of respiratory exposure of fragrance some of the mice died from inhaling the fragrance chemicals. Even though this research is not ended, and more research is needed to be done it is remarcable that what people spray on themselves, smear on themselves, wash their clothes with, and wash their homes with, fragranced candles, airfresheners and any product holding fragrance can kill mice when they inhale fragrance after only 2 – 3 days.

Something to think about.

Source: http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/340301001.pdf


Leave a comment

Strong scent inhibit many in the daily life

(Scroll down for English)

Fakta om parfyme- og duftoverfølsomhet

(NAAF.no : 17.06.2011)  “De fleste mennesker får umiddelbare assosiasjoner til noe velduftende eller positivt når de hører ordet ”parfyme”.  Denne reaksjonen er ikke allmenngyldig og noen vil både assosiere og reagere negativt på ”parfyme”. For denne gruppen mennesker kan en hel rekke dufter vi stilles overfor i hverdagen legge store begrensninger på det daglige liv. Disse menneskene har det vi kaller en miljøhemming.” (Norges Astma og Allergiforbund, NAAF.no)

Astma og andre lungsjukdommer er en av de grupper som hemmes av parfyme og andre sterke dufter. Den godlukten du tar på deg hver morgen er til besvær for litt over 370.000 – 1.2 millioner personer i Norge hver dag enten grunnet astma, KOLS eller annen sensitivitet. Da du tar trikken, bussen, toget eller går på butikken eller kjøpesentra er det veldig sannsynelig at du møter noen med astma. Ca 1 av 4 personer fra alder 0-100 har astma, og de fleste av disse –  om ikke alle –  blir syke av parfyme.

Parfyme er alt som er parfymert. De fleste tror at parfyme er det du har i parfymeflasken, men parfyme er i så mange produkter idag (år 2011)  at det ibland kan være en mare å unngå det. Parfyme er ikke noe man trenger for å holde seg ren. Parfyme er kun en dufttilsetning og gjør inget for å vaske deg, klærne dine, huset ditt, bilen din eller noe annet rent. Det du trenger for å holde deg og dine ting rene er kun såpen, og den kan du kjøpe parfymefri. Også deodorant finnes det parfymefri. Der er mange produkter på markedet som er frie for parfyme og da bidrar du også til å minke risikoen for at du selv blir allergisk og i tillegg gjør du hverdagen til alle astmatikere mye bedre.

Tenk deg f.eks. at bussjåføren din har astma. Ombord bussen går ca 400 parfymerte mennesker hver dag. Bussjåføren blir sjuk av parfyme, og med 400 parfymerte personer ombord bussen hver dag så er livet på jobb = å være sjuk. Bussjåføren får pustevansker og sliter med å puste, noe de fleste tar for gitt. Vi bare gjør det, puster, helt naturligt. For en astmatiker bør det også være naturlig å puste fritt uten problemer, men en hverdag sammen med parfymerte mennesker umuliggjør dette.

Hva er parfyme?

(NAAF) “Rent teknisk er parfyme et begrep som knyttes til en rekke kjemikalier, som enten kan fremstilles syntetisk eller utvinnes naturlig fra for eksempel planter i form av oljer eller vekstekstrakter. Kjemikaliene fordeler seg godt i luft, og våre neser oppfatter dem generelt som velduftende. Kjemikaliene tilsettes oftest til vanlige forbrukerprodukter for både å gi produktet en egenlukt eller en duftsignatur. I følge parfymebransjens eget organ IFRA har kosmetikkprodusentene i en frivillig tilbakemelding fra 2008 (transparency list) rapportert at det er ca 3200 stoffer som kan anvendes med formål å gi dufttilsatte produkter.” (Norges Astma og Allergiforbund, NAAF.no)

Menneskets sanser er laget for å beskytte oss mot det som er farlig for oss. Dårlig mat lukter vondt og vi vet at vi ikke bør spise det for å ikke bli syke. Høge lyder varsler at noe kan være farlig, vonde lukter varsler at noe kan være lite heldig for oss, eller sjukdom, og den sjette sans og erfaring sier oss gjerne når der er fare på ferde. Men hva når de farlige kjemikalier dufter godt, eller godlukt brukes for å skjule andre kjemikalier som ikke er gode for oss? Da lures sansene våres å tro at det er ufarlige stoffer vi har med å gjøre. De fleste av oss er gjerne også litt godtroende og tror det beste om produsenter fordi man kan jo ikke tro de vil oss noe vondt?

Allergi mot kjemikalier og parfyme

(NAAF.no) “Kosmetikkbransjen er lovpålagt (2011) å regulere bruken 26 parfymestoffer på grunn av sterke allergifremkallende egenskaper. Hyppig og uregulert bruk i kosmetikk har medført en større andel både av allergi og sensibilisering i befolkningen (dvs begynnende allergiutvikling). Reguleringen er ment å forebygge og til dels for å beskytte de sensibiliserte. EU har i kosmetikkdirektivet bestemt at 26 spesielt allergifremkallende parfymestoffer skal med på ingredienslisten til kosmetiske produkter og kroppspleiemidler som inneholder dem. Andre parfymestoffer får stå under samlebetegnelsen ”parfyme”. Alle de 26 allergifremkallende parfymestoffene har du dermed mulighet for å unngå. Mattilsynet i Norge gir deg en oversikt over de 26 stoffende og maksimale mengder som får inngå. Reguleringen av de 26 parfymestoffende gjelder utelukkende for kontaktallergi … I en studie fra 2007 (Dotterud & Smith-Sivertsen) rapporteres det at kontaktallergi mot denne gruppen av allergene parfymestoffer (fragrance mix) forekommer hos 1,8 % av befolkningen. Det blir presisert at dette tallet er noe høyere enn det man ser fra Danmark. Symptomer ved kontaktallergi kjennetegnes ved rødt, kløende utslett – tørr og flassete hud, med små blærer som kan gi væskende hudområder og skorpedannelser.”  (Norges Astma og Allergiforbund, NAAF.no)

(Naaf.no) “Kjemisk kontaktallergi kan også utvikles mot veldig mange andre kjemikalier enn parfyme (for eksempel hårfarger, såpe, konserveringsmidler, fargestoffer osv), og i motsetning til parfymekontaktallergi tilskrives kjemisk kontaktallergi hyppigst men ikke utelukkende fra yrkesskader der mennesker blir utsatt for større mengder kjemikalier enn man normal ville blitt i det daglige liv.”  (Norges Astma og Allergiforbund, NAAF.no)

Du har krav på å få vite hva der innholder i det du bruker. I mat er det pålagt å definere hva som er i et produkt helt ned til salt og andre vanlige innhold og innholdsfortegningen skal vise hva er mest av. Det som er mest av i et produkt skal stå først i innholdsfortegningen. Når gjelder parfymer er kun påkrevd at 26 stoffer (år 2011) må deklareres, og alt annet kan gå under parfyme. Det er ikke godt nokk. Også om et stoff i listene ikke ennå er gradert som allergiframkallende på huden så betyr det ikke nødvendigvis at der ikke er noen i verden som reagerer mot det. Produsenter er gjerne litt etterpå når det gjelder kunnskap om effekten av stoffene de tilsetter i produktene sine, og forskere på stoffene og kjemikaliene ligger gjerne i forkant, og da helst uavhengige forskere. Ofte er man gjerne etterpåklok og sier, “Det visste vi ikke da.” etter at flere er blitt sjuke. Og i noen tilfeller kan det også være at de unnlater å bry seg fordi det ville koste penger å finne en erstating eller forandring, eller i deres øyne vil endre effekten av produktet. Det er ikke godt nokk. Der er mange stoffer i produkter som ikke er gode for mennesket å bruke som har en effekt på produkter, jeg snakker da om ftalater og parabener f.eks, men ikke utelukkende disse. Der er masse å lese om dette på siter overalt i verdenen der uavhengige forskere advarer mot mange av stoffene i bl.a parfyme, parfymerte produkter og også andre stoffer og produkter. Det må også være lettere å leve etter føre vare prinsippet både hos forbrukere og produsenter. Jeg mener alt i et produkt skal deklareres. Da er det lettere for forskerstanden og folk flest å rope varsku, og å velge selv hva de ønsker å bruke. Det er langt fra kun kontaktallergi som lager problemer hos mennesker med allergi, astma og sensitiviteter. Produsenter skal ikke kunne gjemme seg bak et ord som ikke forteller noe annet enn at det dufter.

For astmatikere er det gjerne luftbåret det som utløser astmaattacker. Det betyr at alt som avdunster, sprayes eller på annen måte sprer seg i lufta kan være med på å gi astmaattacker. Det eneste som trenges er at den som har astma og blir utsatt for stoffet puster det inn for å få en astmaattack. Det beste for en astmatiker er ren naturlig luft og oksygen.

(Naaf.no) “I Danmark er det publisert en større vitenskapelig undersøkelse ”Forekomst av selvrapporterte symptomer og reaksjoner relatert til inhalasjon av luftbårne kjemikalier i en dansk befolkning”. Det ble plukket ut 6000 individer i alderen 18-69 år fra folkeregistret i en befolkning rundt stor-København til en spørreundersøkelse hvor de fikk tilsendt et spørreskjema om symptomer relatert til 11 alminnelig forekommende dufter og kjemiske stoffer samt om konsekvenser relatert til dem. Dufter og kjemiske stoffer inkluderte andre personers bruk av parfyme, rengjøringsmidler, oppløsningsmidler, friske trykksaker, nytt boliginventar, bløt plast eller gummi, nytt elektronisk apparatur, steke- og matos, utstøtning fra motorkjøretøy, tjæreprodukter samt røyk fra forbrenningsovner. Svarprosenten på denne undersøkelsen var på 71 % (4242 svar). 45 % av de som svarte oppgav de at de var sjenert/plaget av minst én av de alminnelig forekommende dufter og kjemiske stoffer som det ble spurt om. 27 % av  4242 personer var sjenert/plaget i en grad som var symptomutløsende. 17 %  av  4242 personer oppgav at reaksjonene fremkalt av dufter eller kjemiske stoffer hadde betydning for deres valg av personlige pleiemidler, andre for hvordan det ble gjort rent i deres hjem og for hvilke butikker de handlet i, sjenerte/plagede rapporterte at symptomer fremkaldt av dufter og kjemiske stoffer begrenset dem sosialt eller arbeidsmessig og flere oppgav, at symptomene hadde negativ innflytelse på begge disse forhold. Av de som svarte på undersøkelsen, oppgav respondentene at de hadde opplevd ubehag eller symptomer i relasjon til andres parfymebruk, at symptomene deres påvirket dem både sosialt og yrkesmessig, hvilket i en Dansk befolkning svarer til at ca. 17000 voksne danske mennesker.”  (Norges Astma og Allergiforbund, NAAF.no)

Ved en allergi reagerer kroppens immunforsvar når man utsettes for stoffer man har rukket å utvikle allergi for. Allergi spiller typisk en rolle ved f.eks. astma, pollenallergi (rhinitt) og eksem og kan bekreftes ved blodprøve eller en test på huden.

Risikanter

Miljøhemming er situasjonsbetinget. I miljøer som ikke inneholder noe av det som ikke tåles, er den berørte “frisk” i den meningen at den er symptomfri. Derfor kan i enkelte tilfeller betegnelsen ”risikant” brukes.

Er du rammet?

“Professor Emeritus Kjell Aas er readktør på NAAFs nettside www.Allergiviten.no og www.Inneklima.com. Han har laget en spørreundersøkelse for å kartlegge miljøhemming. Foreløpig er det flest med kjemisk miljøintoleranse som har sendt svar. Det dreier seg om at mennesker blir syke av luftforurensninger og inneklima som de aller fleste tåler godt. De får hodepine, tørre og irriterte slimhinner, kvalme, unormal tretthet, problemer med konsentrasjon, oppfattelse og hukommelse og andre subjektive følelse av dårlig helse. Ikke få føler seg helt utslått med symptomer som kan minne om en slags forgiftning. ”

Har du astma, allergi, mcs, eller annen sensitivitet og sliter med å vistes i miljø der stoffer , avgassinger, parfymering brukes, eller rett og slett ikke kan være der, da har du miljøhemming.

Hvis du ikke ennå er rammet, tenk da på at veldig mange andre sliter med ditt eventuelle bruk av parfymer / godlukt og kjemikalier i hverdagen. Velg et uparfymert og kjemikaliefritt produkt så er du på god vei med på å gjøre hverdagen til meg og tusener av andre mye bedre!

På forhånd takk
Annelie

In English

Facts about perfume and fragrance sensitivity

(NAAF.no: 06/17/2011) “Most people get immediate associations with any aromatic or positively when they hear the word” perfume “. This reaction is not universal and there are poeple both associate and react negatively to ” perfume “. For this group of people, a whole series of fragrances we face in everyday life put severe restrictions on daily life. These people have what we call an environmental inhibition. “ (Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association, NAAF.no)

Asthma and other lung diseases is one of the groups that are inhibited by perfumes and other strong scents. The scent you put on every morning either in form of perfume, cologne, after shave, deodorant, body spray or other perfumed products a little over 370,000 to 1,200,000 persons in Norway breathe in and get sick from every day either due to asthma, COPD, MCS or other sensitivities. When you take the tram, bus, train or go to the store or shopping centers, it is very likely that you meet someone with asthma/sensitivites. Approximately 1 in 4 people from age 0-100 have asthma, and most of these – if not all – are sick of perfume. In addition to them you have all those with other lung diseases and sensitivities.

Perfume is all that is perfumed (frangranced). Most people think that the perfume is what you have in the perfume bottle, but the perfume is in so many products today (year 2011) that at times it can be a nightmare to avoid it. Perfume is not something you need to keep themselves clean. Perfume is just a fragrance additive and do nothing for to wash yourself, your clothes, your house, your car or anything else. What you need to keep you and your stuff clean is just pure soap, and you can buy perfume free. There are many products on the market that are free of perfumes and then you are also helping to decrease the risk that you may become/get  allergic and also do the daily lives of all asthmatics much better.

Imagine for example… The bus driver have asthma. Aboard the bus is about 400 perfumed people every day. The bus driver is sick from perfume, and aboard the bus come 400 people scented every day, there is life on the job = being sick. Bus driver gets breathing difficulties and struggling to breathe, something most people take for granted. We just do it, breathe, naturally. For an asthmatic, it should also be natural to breathe freely without problems, but a day with perfumed people makes it impossible to do so. But fragranced people are everywhere in society so whatever one do or wherever one go, there it is.

What is the perfume?

(NAAF) “Technically perfume a term linked to a variety of chemicals, which can either be produced synthetically or obtained naturally from such plants in the form of oils or growth extracts. The chemicals are distributed well in air, and our noses perceive them in general as fragrant. The chemicals are added frequently for common consumer products for both to give the product a scent or a fragrance signature. According to the perfume industry’s own body IFRA has cosmetic manufacturers in a voluntary feedback from 2008 (Transparency list) reported that there are approximately 3200 substances that can be used for the purpose of give fragrance added products. “ (Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association, NAAF.no)

The human senses are designed to protect us against that which is dangerous to us. Poor food smells bad and we know we should not eat it for not being sick. High noise signals that something may be dangerous, bad smells warn that something may be unfortunate for us, or illness, and the sixth sense and experience tells us when there is danger ahead. But what if the hazardous chemical smells good, or scent is used to hide other chemicals that are not good for us? When our senses are tricked to believe that it is harmless substances we are dealing with. Most of us are like a little gullible and believe the best about the producers because they can not believe they will do us any harm?

Allergy to chemicals and perfumes

(NAAF.no) “Cosmetics Industry is required by law (year 2011) to regulate the use of 26 fragrances because of the strong allergenic properties. Frequent and unregulated use in cosmetics has resulted in a greater proportion of both allergy and sensitization in the population (ie the onset of allergy development). The regulation is intended to prevent and partly to protect the sensitized. The EU has in the cosmetics directive specified that 26 particularly allergenic perfume substances to be included on the list of ingredients for cosmetic products and body care products that contain them. Other fragrances will be under the collective term “fragrance.” All the 26 allergenic fragrance substances you are thus able to avoid. Food Safety Authority in Norway gives you an overview of the 26 drug immediately and maximum amounts that can be included. The regulation of the 26 perfume substances shall apply exclusively for contact allergies … In a study from 2007 (Dotterud & Smith-Sivertsen) reported that contact allergy to this group of allergenic perfume substances (fragrance mix) occurs in 1.8% of the population. It is clear that this figure is slightly higher than that seen from Denmark. Symptoms of contact allergy is characterized by red, itchy rash – dry and flaky skin, with small bladders that can cause skin and exuding skorpedannelser. “ (Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association, NAAF.no)

(Naaf.no) “Chemical contact allergy may also be developed against many chemicals other than perfumes (such as hair dyes, surfactants, preservatives, dyes, etc.), and unlike perfume contact allergy attributed to chemical contact allergy frequently but not exclusively from industrial accidents where people are exposed to larger quantities of chemicals than you normally would in everyday life. “ (Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association, NAAF.no)

You are and should be entitled to know what are in the products you use. The food is required to define what is in a product right down to salt and other common content. That which is most of  in the product will be first in the table of content too. When it comes to perfumes / fragrance is only required that 26 substances (year 2011) must be declared, and everything else can go under perfume. It is not good enough since one fragrance hold several hundreds of chemicals. Note that the 26 substances is only those that is against contact allergies, and even if a substance in the lists are not yet classified as allergenic to the skin so it does not necessarily mean that there is no one in the world that reacts with breathing difficulties and other ways to it. And what about those who breathe it in, and it goes to the blood stream through the lungs? Manufacturers are usually a little later when it comes to knowledge about the effects of the substances they add in their products, and researchers in the drugs and chemicals is often in advance, and preferably independent researchers. Often, one is often wise after the event and says, “We did not know.” after several gotten sick. And in some cases it may be that they fail to care because it would cost money, or in their eyes it  will change the effect of the product. It is not good enough. There are many substances in products that are not good for man to use that has an effect on the products, I’m talking about phthalates and parabens such as, but not limited to these. There is plenty to read about this on sites all over the world where independent researchers warn against many of the ingredients of including perfumes and perfumed products and other substances and products. It should also be easier to live after the principle care before accident and illness, both producers and consumers. I mean everything in a product to be declared. This makes it easier for the research profession and people shouting warning and to choose for themselves what they want to use. It is far from only cantact allergy that give people who got allergies, astma and sensitivites problems. Manufacturers should not be able to hide behind a word that does not tell anything other than it got a scent and smells.

For asthmatics, it is usually airborne what triggers asthma attacks. It means that everything that evaporate, sprayed or otherwise spread in the air can help to provide asthma attacks. The only thing required is that those who have asthma and are exposed to the substance and breathe it in to get an asthma attack. The best for a asthmatic is pure natural air and oxygen.

(Naaf.no) “In Denmark, published a major scientific study” Prevalence of self-reported symptoms and reactions related to the inhalation of airborne chemicals in a Danish population. “It was selected 6000 individuals aged 18-69 years from the National Registry in a population around large-Copenhagen to a questionnaire where they were sent a questionnaire about symptoms related to 11 common occurring scents and chemicals and the consequences related to them. Fragrances and chemical substances included other people’s use of perfumes, detergents, solvents, fresh print, new residential furniture, soft plastic or rubber, new electronic apparatus, frying and cooking fumes, exclusion from motor vehicles, tar products and smoke from incinerators. The response rate for this survey was 71% (out of 4,242 persons responses). 45% of respondents provided that they was shy / suffering at least one of the most commonly occurring fragrances and chemicals that were asked. 27% of 4242 people were shy / harassed to a degree that was symptom-triggering. 17% of 4,242 persons provided that the reactions induced by scents or chemical drugs had influenced their choice of personal care products, others for how it was done purely in their homes and the stores they shopped in, shy / sufferers reported symptoms until cold of fragrances and chemicals limited their social or work activities and tasks, that symptoms had a negative influence on both of these conditions. Of those who answered the survey gave respondents that they had experienced discomfort or symptoms in relation to others’ perfume use, that their symptoms affected them both socially and professionally, which in a Danish population corresponds to that around . 17,000 adult Danish people. “ (Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association, NAAF.no)

One should note that this is only 4242 persons out of over some millions people in a country. 47 % out of approximately 4.5 million people is… 2.115.000 persons.

In an allergic reaction the body’s immune system when exposed to substances they have managed to develop allergies to. Allergy plays a typical role for example. asthma, pollen allergy (rhinitis) or eczema and can be confirmed by blood test or a test on the skin.

In-risk-people

Environmental inhibition is situational. In environments that do not contain anything that is not tolerated, the person is concerned “healthy” in the sense that it is asymptomatic. Therefore, in some cases, the term “risikant” (in-risk-person) is used.

Are you affected?

“Professor Emeritus Kjell Aas with website http://www.Allergiviten.no and http://www.Inneklima.com. He has made a survey to determine the environmental inhibition. Currently, the majority of chemical environmental intolerance that have responded. It is about people become ill from air pollution and indoor air quality, which most other people can tolerate well. They get headaches, dry and irritated mucous membranes, nausea, unusual fatigue, difficulty with concentration, perception and memory and other subjective feelings of poor health. Do feel completely eliminated with symptoms which resembles a kind of intoxication. “

Do you have asthma, allergies, mcs, or sensitivity and are struggling to appeared in the environment where drugs, gave the singer, perfume ring is used, or simply can not be there, then you have the environmental inhibition.

If you have not yet been affected, think of that very many others are struggling with your potential use of perfumes / fragrances and chemicals in everyday life. Choose an unscented and chemical free product, you’re on your way to making life for me and thousands of other much better!

Thank you in advance
Annelie
a person with asthma


Leave a comment

515 chemicals

Beauty… Everyone wants to be beautiful and feel good. But did you know that many women put on 515 chemicals before breakfast? Do you use any products before you are ready for the rest of the day? Then you should read on…

Many women use about 13 products a day. A quick shower, and some lotion is all that is needed to have used very many chemicals on your body in a jiffy.

Showering in Shower cream, shampoo, conditioner, removing hair using a cream or barber foam, and after body lotion, hand lotion, face lotion, deodorant,  doing the hair with some gel, mousse and hairspray, putting on makeup, and then you add the last little thing perfume. Then time for clothes washed in wash agents and fabric softeners with perfume added to them because you want to smell nice. And now you are ready for breakfast. Do you see your self in this?

Before you have even had breakfast you have added more than 515 chemicals to your body and some are even harmful to you and your environment, and even to people around you.

Most products women use contain some kind of perfume, and this is in addition to the perfume you spray on yourself. Even your makeup most likely has perfume in it, along with your lotions, shower cream, shampoo, conditioner, hairspray, gel a.s.o. A perfume contain on an average a cocktail of 250 ingredients, the study found, with some containing as many as 400.

For example: Lipstick contains on average 33 ingredients, body lotion 32, mascara 29, and the purest product tested, hand moisturizer 11.

“The new ‘wonder treatment products’ contain more chemicals to be able to achieve better results, which means that women are more at risk.”

You like musk?

Synthetic musks (by Greenpeace) 
“Synthetic musks are man-made fragrance additives used in laundry detergents, air fresheners, hand creams, soaps and perfumes in place of more expensive natural musks from the behind glands of  the musk deer.  They are environmentally persistent chemicals that have become widely distributed through the environment.  Two nitro-musks (musk xylene and musk ketone, or MX and MK) and two polycyclic musks (Galaxolide and Tonalide, or HHCB and AHTN) make up 95% of the European market for synthetic musks.  Emerging evidence suggests that these commonly used musks or their metabolites may be capable of interfering with hormone communication systems in fish, amphibians and mammals and may enhance the effects of exposure to other toxic chemicals.  Although the estrogenic activity of HHCB and AHTN is relatively weak, anti-estrogenic effects have been observed for the same compounds at concentrations more than 100 times lower.”

And what more all those products containing all these chemicals evaporate fumes from them with scent and else, plus the skin sucks up the chemicals and transport it via your blood stream to your organs. Taking a blood test one can count the chemicals in your blood and determine if you have a high amount of chemicals in your blood. Chemicals in your beauty products / deodorant have in research been found in for example breast cancer. Also the perfume and scents in the products are spread around you and affects also those around you. The feel good from your beauty products may just as well be a plague for others. You think you smell nice and that others like you, but very many get ill from your fumes and therefore you become a problem.

Not only are you risking your own health using those products, you can get eczema, allergies, asthma, sensitivities, reproduction problems and even cancer. But you also make others that already got those sensitivity illnesses sick from your use.

Take a look in your cabinet, and throw all way and replace it with non-perfumed products, also see to that you choose a product that got no Paraben in it. Paraben is chemical used in most beauty products a.s as a preservative to prevent the product from getting damaged. But Parabens is one of the most dangerous ingredients and is found in cancer.

There may be reason for people to be concerned about the findings.

“Their detection in human breast tumours is of concern since parabens have been shown to be able to mimic the action of the female hormone oestrogen, Oestrogen can drive the growth of human breast tumours. It would therefore seem especially prudent to consider whether parabens should continue to be used in such a wide range of cosmetics applied to the breast area including deodorants.”

Greenpeace tested 36 brands of perfume and concluded with that they hold chemicals that is hazardous to the reproduction ability with men, Many perfumes also contain a lot of  Phthalates, and EU has concluded with that they are bad for the reproduction. According to Greenpeace a high concentration of the substances can change the DNA of the sperm. Phthalates are used in plastics, in perfumes and as denaturing agent in the rubbing alcohol used in cosmetics and grooming products.

Whale vommit, or Ambergris, is vommit from whales that is a common ingredient in perfume. Ambergris is also used for scenting cigarettes. It is a solid, waxy, flammable substance of a dull grey or blackish color produced in the digestive system of sperm whales. Natural Whale vommit is now mostly replaced with a chemical substitute, natural whale vommit is still used in some perfume brands.

Phthalate esters (by Greenpeace) – “used as softeners in flexible PVC products, including floors, wallpapers, furnishings, prints on clothing and toys, as well as ingredients in cosmetics and perfumes.  They are almost universal contaminants in both the indoor and outdoor environment.  Two commonly used phthalates, namely di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP) are listed as reproductive toxins in the EU.  Concerns for other phthalates in common use (including di-isononyl and di-isodecyl phthalate, or DINP and DIDP) centre on adverse impacts on the liver and kidneys.  Together, these concerns resulted in a recently proposed EU ban on the use of three phthalates (DEHP, DBP, BBP) in all products intended for children; the use of the three other phthalates (DINP, DIDP and DNOP) will only be prohibited in toys and childcare items for children under 3 years than can be put in the mouth.  However, they will still be allowed for use in all other products.”

EU is working with a law to reduce the use of harmful ingredients.

Alkylphenols (nonylphenol, octylphenol and their derivatives) (by Greenpeace) – “primarily used as non-ionic surfactants in industrial detergents, though also used in textile and leather finishing treatments, water based paints and as components of some personal care products.  Alkylphenols are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic to marine life.  Nonylphenol and other alkylphenols have the ability to mimic natural oestrogen hormones.  Recent research has also raised concerns that exposure to alklyphenol compounds could cause direct damage to DNA and to sperm structure and function in mammals.”

What do you got in your cabinet? If you let me, I suggest you replace it with something organic, and non-scented. Personally I am on the lookout for cleaner cosmetic products here where I live.

Source: Telegraph, Health-Report, DinSide, Greenpeace, Greenpeace.org nrk.no forskning.no about.com