Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

Get a Whiff of This: Perfumes (Fragrances) - the Invisible Chemical Poisons
Get a Whiff of This: Perfumes (Fragrances) - the Invisible Chemical Poisons
Get a Whiff of This: Perfumes (Fragrances) - the Invisible Chemical Poisons
Ebook183 pages2 hours

Get a Whiff of This: Perfumes (Fragrances) - the Invisible Chemical Poisons

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars

()

Read preview

About this ebook



Presently,
there is not a book quite like Get A Whiff
Of This
. Books have been written
about cosmetic ingredients, yet most people are not aware of the serious,
harmful health effects of fragrance chemicals due to false advertising, failure
to bear warning labels, and lack of media attention.style='mso-spacerun:yes'> Millions of people are disabled from repeated
exposures to these deleterious products.
Synthetic fragrances are ubiquitous in the style='font-size:11.0pt'>U.S.style='font-size:11.0pt'>, and avoidance is nearly impossible unless a person
remains housebound. Many people are
under the false impression that perfumes are derived from flowers and other
natural sources.



Get
A Whiff Of This

will educate people and, therefore, give readers the knowledge they need in
order to protect their health and the health of their loved ones.style='mso-spacerun:yes'> Incidents of Multiple Chemical Sensitivities
(MCS), which has become an alarmingly growing epidemic in the style='font-size:11.0pt'>U.S.style='font-size:11.0pt'>, asthma, and central nervous system and neurological class=GramE>disorders are on the rise.
Women are being diagnosed with breast cancer at younger ages.style='mso-spacerun:yes'> Read and learn what expert doctors have to say about breast cancer and the perfume
connection and much more...



LanguageEnglish
PublisherAuthorHouse
Release dateOct 3, 2003
ISBN9781414008448
Get a Whiff of This: Perfumes (Fragrances) - the Invisible Chemical Poisons
Author

Connie Pitts

Connie Pitts is a wife, mother of two grown daughters, and adores her two young granddaughters. She resides in Colorado, enjoying the majestic beauty of the mountains. As a young adult, she was diagnosed with Fibromyalgia, which eventually led to disability. Being a former perfume user, she is also plagued with a secondary disabling condition, Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS). Searching for answers to her perfume sensitivities, she learned shocking information. Connie is a first time author, compelled by a strong sense of commitment to share her newfound knowledge with other people, as she believes everyone has a right and a need to know the truth.  

Related to Get a Whiff of This

Related ebooks

Teaching Methods & Materials For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for Get a Whiff of This

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
0 ratings

0 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    Get a Whiff of This - Connie Pitts

    GET A WHIFF OF THIS

    Perfumes (fragrances)-the Invisible Chemical Poisons

    By

    Connie Pitts

    Edited By Stephanee Killen

    © 2003 by Connie Pitts. All rights reserved.

    No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the author.

    ISBN: 1-4140-0844-9 (e-book)

    ISBN: 978-1-4140-0844-8 (e-book)

    ISBN: 1-4140-0845-7 (Paperback)

    ISBN: 1-4140-0846-5 (Dust Jacket)

    Library of Congress Control Number: 2003096854

    IstBooks-rev. 10/01/03

    Contents

    FOREWORD

    PREFACE

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    INTRODUCTION

    AN OVERALL UNVEILING OF FRAGRANCE FACTS

    HOW PERFUMES HAVE AFFECTED MY LIFE (My Story)

    CHAPTER 1 PERFUMES AND THE CANCER CONNECTION

    Cosmetics Linked to the Causes of Breast Cancer and Fatal BreastCancer

    Cancer Prevention Coalition and Environmental Health Network

    CHAPTER 2 THE PETITION FILED AGAINST THE U.S. FDA

    The Environmental Health Network (EHN)

    Review the Chemical Analysis of Calvin Klein’s Eternity Eau De Parfum

    Responses to the Petition

    Responding to the Petition

    CHAPTER 3 PERFUMES POSE SERIOUS HEALTH RISKS

    Health Risks from Perfumes

    Making Sense of Scents

    Fragrance Chemicals as Toxic Substances

    Synthetic Musk Linked to Environmental Risks

    CHAPTER 4 ANDERSON LABORATORIES

    Acute Toxic Effects of Fragrance Products

    Toxic Effects of Air Freshener Emissions

    CHAPTER 5 ABSTRACT

    Abstract of Article on Dana Perfume Co

    CHAPTER 6 HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA OUTLAWS PERFUMES THE REAL FACTS

    Note from Nova Scotia: Perfume Stinks

    The REAL Facts the Fragrance Industry Doesn’t Want You to Know

    CHAPTER 7 SCENTED CANDLES – THE REAL DIRT

    Dangers of Fragranced Candles

    Candles, Toxic Emissions, and Property Damage

    CHAPTER 8 THE EFFECTS OF CHEMICALS ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN MONEY RULES

    Chemicals Pose a Higher Risk for Females

    Environmental Research Foundation MONEY RULES

    CHAPTER 9 C.T.F.A.

    Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association

    CHAPTER 10 GOVERNMENT KNOWLEDGE

    Safe Notification Information for Fragrances [SNIFF]

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Governor Bush’s Proclamation

    To Report Adverse Health Effects of Fragrances

    What the U.S. Government [FDA] Is Doing About It

    CHAPTER 11 WEBSITES SAFER PRODUCTS

    Informative Websites

    Safer Products

    CONCLUSION

    ADDITIONAL BOOKS OF INTEREST

    APPENDIX

    RESOURCES

    I dedicate this book to the millions of people who suffer from chemically induced illnesses and to the countless people who have worked diligently towards change.

    To my family.

    FOREWORD

    Brother, here we go again . . .

    This is actually the refrain from an old song, which became a slogan in my family when challenging times came back in a sort of recirculating pattern. Not much more than a memory fragment, but it is sufficient. It could be the subtitle for this book, get a whiff of this. Connie Pitts is giving us the story of perfume—or more comprehensively, of fragrance. She provides the human poisoning story and the backup data, which gives credibility to an unlikely tale (unless you have been there, along with a growing number of Americans). This data shows us just how much is already known on the subject of poisons in fragrances. The surprise is that with so much already in the public arena, the possibility of perfume poisoning is completely unknown to so many.

    Although fragrances are the center of this contentious issue, we have heard the story hundreds of times on our phone about many different products. It could be the story of carpets, air fresheners, fabric softeners, pesticides, felt tip markers, or formaldehyde. Asbestos, lead, tobacco, mercury and PCB, and dioxin and hormone disruptors belong in the same category. The list is as long as you want to make it. Love Canal is not a proud memory. As a society, we have been through this fight over and over and when we read a book such as get a whiff of this, we learn, to our sorrow, how heavily the mechanisms for change are stacked against the small guy.

    Scores of individuals have failed to win when the issue was asbestos exposure or lead poisoning, each of which is now considered a no-brainer. There was enough information in the 1930s to indicate the future of lead in gasoline. After untold damage, steps were taken to get it out. We knew sufficient information when I was in school to institute precautionary steps concerning the mass production of asbestos-containing products and the same is true of tobacco. Not until late in the century were these issues prominent enough to cause formal action. Most of the other chemical issues have yet to be seriously examined and resolved. Until the situation is in our neighborhood, we tend to expect that a government safety net combined with human decency are enough to protect us. Let us look.

    Friends, Family, and Others

    Brother, here we go again. The story is always the same. An individual suffers from health problems following exposure to some product or chemical, which as consumers we assume is suitable for human use. The health complaints seem to be unusual, or even bizarre, and are therefore suspect in the eyes of friends, relations, and coworkers. Often, the same message from a third party expert is needed to make the obvious real to the closest associates.

    The symptoms are denied by the employer (if job related). We have heard of some noteworthy exceptions, but the impulse to hide from a potentially costly challenge is strong. Workers compensation is expensive.

    Industry

    Here we go again. About industry, we have sometimes heard that the manufacturer responded that this was the very first and only complaint ever received. Being in the middle of the battle at the time, we knew that was not the case. Manufacturers are often very hard to contact. The phone number on the box is not always in service. The address may be incorrect. The help line and the hold line are sometimes interchangeable.

    The manufacturer of most products is at liberty to share information concerning a product or not. A material safety data sheet (MSDS) may be available or not. The desired information may be on the MSDS or not. The health test data may exist or not.

    Manufacturers of many consumer items are in a strange position. If they test a product for possible health effects and find some bad news, it is reportable. If they fail to test the product, there is nothing to report, and that is just fine with the regulatory agencies. Self-regulation under these circumstances is a non-starter. Needless to say, careful testing is unusual. The positive step would be to put the burden of proof on industry with reports to a non-government watchdog pack.

    Medicine

    The reports of a new syndrome are frequently rejected by the medical profession. The physicians of this country have very good memories, but our experience is that they are unwilling to consider ideas, which did not originate in their school days. They are almost universally ignorant concerning poisoning by chemicals and chemical mixtures. A positive step would be to add environmental toxic exposures to the curriculum.

    Local Health Department

    Somehow, in this abstract scenario, the exposure remains outside the jurisdiction of the local health department. Often, this is because there are no established limits for acceptable air contamination. Or else, as in the case of fragrances, the levels are established for single chemical exposure and do not apply to the multi-chemical mix of real life. The budget is always limited, and we have a tendency to shoot the messenger. This does not make for good communication.

    There are also informal agency barriers in the form of tradition and attitude, which prevent general recognition of the validity of these unwelcome (sometimes budget busting) complaints.

    This attitude barrier was mind blowing when Anderson Laboratories conducted an indoor air health study of a school building. We toured the school looking at the details of how it was built, cleaned, maintained, and furnished. We interviewed faculty and staff members and heard multiple reports about health problems associated with their hours working in the building. We made the usual measurements, and as a final precaution to test our impression that the building was indeed very sick, we took several large air samples back to our laboratory. Using a standardized test method, we found that the animals breathing air collected outside the building showed no change in their excellent health status. The animals breathing air from the kindergarten room were immediately showing signs of toxic chemical exposure, and one animal died within fifteen minutes—a very unusual and severe indication of trouble.

    In a follow-up meeting of parents, staff, and students, we explained our findings, followed by a state health officer who agreed that the building needed immediate attention. After the meeting, he came up to me and said, I study this school every year. It is a very bad building, but they never do anything. He showed me his stack of reports, each one a copy of the previous year suggesting that some remedial action might be beneficial. Then he added, But you should never have mentioned that mouse. When asked why, he replied, People might get upset. Indeed, the parents did get upset, primarily because the data had been minimized for years by an official who felt that his job was to protect his agency from controversy rather than to protect the youngest children from a preventable toxic exposure. (They also got angry much to the benefit of the school.)

    Federal Agencies

    Here we go again. When health problems associated with commercial products are presented to federal agencies, they frequently use the excuse that they are unable to find published literature concerning the health effects of the product. They have actually said, No published data, no problem. Right? The validity of this logic is right up there with tobacco junk science and should never be tolerated.

    It is true that for product toxicity issues, scientific data is generally not available. This is to be expected: there is no published research in these areas because there has been no federal money to fund the research—and no requirement for industry to do it either.

    We see from the Eternity Petition that even when there is data, and when the petitioners follow the rules to the letter and a thousand people endorse the complaint, the federal agency chooses not to comply with its own procedures. This situation is stupid but real.

    Thousands of new chemicals hit the market every year with no safety

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1