﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A dash of TNT with that, madam?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/</link>
	<description>essential information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 01:31:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Antwan Northrup</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-118</link>
		<dc:creator>Antwan Northrup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:46:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-118</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the great article!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the great article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Soham Topham</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-111</link>
		<dc:creator>Soham Topham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-111</guid>
		<description>Thank you for this interesting blog and all the information on your website. I found it through Elianes blog. Best wishes from Cologne, Germany. Soham</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for this interesting blog and all the information on your website. I found it through Elianes blog. Best wishes from Cologne, Germany. Soham</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Tisserand</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Tisserand</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:01:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-96</guid>
		<description>Of the 26 fragrance materials, I have only studied the 16 that are also essential oil constituents. Of these 16, the most allergenic are cinnamaldehyde, isoeugenol and farnesol. Oakmoss and treemoss absolutes are also problematic. Should these be listed on product labels?

Well, you would have to stipulate what level would trigger a labeling requirement. You would also have to be prepared for the inevitable consequence - an apparently simple labeling requirement in Europe has caused what could reasonably be described as mass panic, as many manufacturers re-formulated, so they would not have to declare any of the &quot;allergens&quot; on their products. Sounds good, but some of the synthetic alternatives now used are equally allergenic, but are not restricted! And, the labeling requirement, as I mentioned before, has become a de-facto safety regulation.

Another approach would be to require all fragrance ingredients to be listed. It raises some new problems, but it could be done.

There is no evidence that I am aware of that synthetic fragrances are, as a group, more skin-reactive than essential oils, though there is much anecdotal evidence that synthetics are more likely to cause respiratory symptoms in sensitive individuals. At present, this issue is not being addressed by any regulatory agency, though it may be fair to say that those who are sensitive know to avoid highly fragranced products.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of the 26 fragrance materials, I have only studied the 16 that are also essential oil constituents. Of these 16, the most allergenic are cinnamaldehyde, isoeugenol and farnesol. Oakmoss and treemoss absolutes are also problematic. Should these be listed on product labels?</p>
<p>Well, you would have to stipulate what level would trigger a labeling requirement. You would also have to be prepared for the inevitable consequence &#8211; an apparently simple labeling requirement in Europe has caused what could reasonably be described as mass panic, as many manufacturers re-formulated, so they would not have to declare any of the &#8220;allergens&#8221; on their products. Sounds good, but some of the synthetic alternatives now used are equally allergenic, but are not restricted! And, the labeling requirement, as I mentioned before, has become a de-facto safety regulation.</p>
<p>Another approach would be to require all fragrance ingredients to be listed. It raises some new problems, but it could be done.</p>
<p>There is no evidence that I am aware of that synthetic fragrances are, as a group, more skin-reactive than essential oils, though there is much anecdotal evidence that synthetics are more likely to cause respiratory symptoms in sensitive individuals. At present, this issue is not being addressed by any regulatory agency, though it may be fair to say that those who are sensitive know to avoid highly fragranced products.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan Apito</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-90</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan Apito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 03:47:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-90</guid>
		<description>Thank you for addressing these confusing issues.  You said &quot;remember that most potential cosmetic ingredients are already regulated in the USA too. Not prohibited, but controlled to specific maximum levels.&quot; 

The issue is education.  Ask 100 small, independent crafters making aromatherapy lotions what the specific maximum levels are for each of their ingredients...I guarantee you...few if any even know what you are talking about.

I personally don&#039;t think we need a lot of new laws for cosmetics, but it sure would be nice if the FDA actually followed up on the laws that are already there. 

Now a question, do you believe any of the 26 fragrance materials listed as an allergen in the European Union should be listed on product labels for consumer&#039;s benefit?  I ask, because I won&#039;t buy ANY product that lists just &quot;fragrance&quot; on the label.  If the product says fragrance, I assume it&#039;s synthetic fragrance and I avoid them for both health and environmental reasons.  If a product says something general like &quot;scented with only essential oils&quot;...I still won&#039;t buy the product unless the EOs are specifically listed, because I am extremely allergic to lemongrass.  

So I don&#039;t have a problem with regulations that are &quot;information&quot; based.  But listing a fragrance component on a label is different from making the use of that ingredient illegal, as the Colorado Bill would have done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for addressing these confusing issues.  You said &#8220;remember that most potential cosmetic ingredients are already regulated in the USA too. Not prohibited, but controlled to specific maximum levels.&#8221; </p>
<p>The issue is education.  Ask 100 small, independent crafters making aromatherapy lotions what the specific maximum levels are for each of their ingredients&#8230;I guarantee you&#8230;few if any even know what you are talking about.</p>
<p>I personally don&#8217;t think we need a lot of new laws for cosmetics, but it sure would be nice if the FDA actually followed up on the laws that are already there. </p>
<p>Now a question, do you believe any of the 26 fragrance materials listed as an allergen in the European Union should be listed on product labels for consumer&#8217;s benefit?  I ask, because I won&#8217;t buy ANY product that lists just &#8220;fragrance&#8221; on the label.  If the product says fragrance, I assume it&#8217;s synthetic fragrance and I avoid them for both health and environmental reasons.  If a product says something general like &#8220;scented with only essential oils&#8221;&#8230;I still won&#8217;t buy the product unless the EOs are specifically listed, because I am extremely allergic to lemongrass.  </p>
<p>So I don&#8217;t have a problem with regulations that are &#8220;information&#8221; based.  But listing a fragrance component on a label is different from making the use of that ingredient illegal, as the Colorado Bill would have done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catherine Roe</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-88</link>
		<dc:creator>Catherine Roe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-88</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s the kind of information we need to know on the EU continent!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s the kind of information we need to know on the EU continent!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eliane Zimmermann</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-84</link>
		<dc:creator>Eliane Zimmermann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 08:19:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-84</guid>
		<description>creative idea to show how silly the europaean regulation of cosmetic ingredients is, to compare it to petrolatum! fits well to my purchase done yesterday: i bought the organic lavender, mint and aloe refreshing gel from your company. thank your for this adress, i hadn&#039;t been aware of this website/blog. regards from europe/ireland eliane</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>creative idea to show how silly the europaean regulation of cosmetic ingredients is, to compare it to petrolatum! fits well to my purchase done yesterday: i bought the organic lavender, mint and aloe refreshing gel from your company. thank your for this adress, i hadn&#8217;t been aware of this website/blog. regards from europe/ireland eliane</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily Caswell</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily Caswell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-82</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve provided a rational and articulate response to those who would blindly follow the EU and their heavy-handed banning. People here in Maine have been holding up that &quot;thousands vs. ten banned&quot; comparison, the assumption being that Europeans have safer products. Throwing everything out — the good with the bad — doesn&#039;t mean that they are safer. It&#039;s a hard thing to communicate once people have made that assumption. Thank you for explaining this so well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve provided a rational and articulate response to those who would blindly follow the EU and their heavy-handed banning. People here in Maine have been holding up that &#8220;thousands vs. ten banned&#8221; comparison, the assumption being that Europeans have safer products. Throwing everything out — the good with the bad — doesn&#8217;t mean that they are safer. It&#8217;s a hard thing to communicate once people have made that assumption. Thank you for explaining this so well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cindy Jones</title>
		<link>http://roberttisserand.com/2010/03/a-dash-of-tnt-with-that-madam/comment-page-1/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Cindy Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 04:32:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://roberttisserand.com/?p=1179#comment-80</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s interesting Robert. There is also literature that finds linalool to be an anti-carcinogen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s interesting Robert. There is also literature that finds linalool to be an anti-carcinogen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

