• About
  • Login to comment
    • Bluesky
    • RSS
    • Twitter

Now Smell This

a blog about perfume

Menu ▼
  • Perfume Reviews
  • New Perfumes
  • Archives

Career interests of composite toxicologists

Posted by Robin on 21 July 2009 9 Comments

The perfume industry certainly needs a safety organisation to protect its interests – but maybe not this one, which is guilty of over-regulating the industry, and confuses the career interests of its composite toxicologists over and above its function to be a balanced safety policy-making unit for the trade.

— Tony Burfield of Cropwatch, writing about the IFRA standards for melissa oil in Robertet Reveals its Evidence on Melissa Oil to Cropwatch at The Aromaconnection Blog. You can also read more at The melissa oil scandal & IFRA at 1000 Fragrances.

Filed Under: perfume in the news
Tagged With: ifra

Advertisement


9 Comments

Leave a comment, or read more about commenting at Now Smell This. Here's our privacy policy, and a handy emoticon chart.

  1. Janice says:
    21 July 2009 at 3:02 pm

    I admit I’m coming late to the discussion of IFRA standards and its recent restrictions, but does anyone know how the testing and regulation of perfume ingredients compares to that for other cosmetic products?

    From what I understand of the FDA’s regulation of cosmetic products in the U.S., they investigate when “clusters” of problems are reported and really aren’t concerned with individual allergic reactions. (And of course they’re only investigating after the fact, not preapproving anything before it’s sold.) Does the cosmetics industry in the EU have an organization similar to the IRFA that can restrict or prohibit ingredients before they’re marketed?

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      21 July 2009 at 3:13 pm

      I am not at all knowledgeable on this subject at all, but can tell you that IFRA, unlike the FDA, is not a governmental body — they rely on essentially voluntary adherence to their standards. For reasons that remain entirely mysterious to me, they seem to be bent on regulating materials that have not been at all problematic for consumers in terms of actual allergic reactions, and that aren’t even widely used…such as the melissa oil in question here.

      If it helps, there is a long statement here from the Director of Communications for IFRA:

      https://nstperfume.com/2009/04/04/rip/

      Scroll down to the commenter called “Sweller”.

      Log in to Reply
      • Janice says:
        21 July 2009 at 3:47 pm

        Thanks, Robin! I remember reading your original post but hadn’t seen all of the comments on it.

        Log in to Reply
  2. Rappleyea says:
    21 July 2009 at 3:54 pm

    This is beyond ridiculous, to say nothing of the fact that it is almost impossible to find “pure” or “real” melissa. It is almost all adulterated so God only knows what they were really testing.

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      21 July 2009 at 4:43 pm

      For the millionth time, I truly don’t understand why the fragrance industry is supporting this nonsense.

      Log in to Reply
  3. Rappleyea says:
    21 July 2009 at 6:43 pm

    Robin, I’m old and cynical, and I’d say that it is a matter of $$$. The big companies are in league with the chemical companies and it behooves everybody to outlaw the bad ole naturals and use the cheaper, but patented, synthetics.

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      21 July 2009 at 7:38 pm

      Well, that’s what lots of people assume, but at this point I find it hard to swallow. It cannot save the industry money to have to reformulate everything on the books, and then to do it again in 2 years when they come out with new restrictions.

      Log in to Reply
      • norjunma1 says:
        22 July 2009 at 9:34 am

        I have to agree with Robin. As tasty as a big conspiracy theory might be, I have a hard time believing that large fragrance and chemical companies need legal injunctions to give them an excuse to stop using higher-priced ingredients. Just look at Guerlain (sob). $$$ does factor into it, but I think it’s just plain ol’ pragmatism: what multinational wants to take its chances when people are litigation-happy on both sides of the pond?

        What I still don’t understand is why there is an insistence on banning/restriction when it seems a simple list of ingredients would go just as far to indemnify fragrance producers and placate nervy consumers.

        Log in to Reply
        • Robin says:
          22 July 2009 at 9:52 am

          It’s a good question: why not just print warnings on the box? People don’t read warnings on boxes anyway.

          Log in to Reply

Leave a reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement

Search

Recent reviews

Atelier Cologne Love Osmanthus
Moschino Toy Boy
Arquiste Misfit
Diptyque Eau Capitale
Zoologist Bee
Parfum d’Empire Immortelle Corse
Comme des Garcons Series 10 Clash
Frédéric Malle Rose & Cuir
L’Artisan Parfumeur Le Chant de Camargue
Yves Saint Laurent Grain de Poudre
Régime des Fleurs Chloë Sevigny Little Flower
Chanel 1957
Gallivant Los Angeles
Amouage Portrayal Woman

Blogroll

Bois de Jasmin
Grain de Musc
Perfume Posse
The Non-Blonde
More blogs...

Perfumista lists

100 fragrances every perfumista should try
And 25 more fragrances every perfumista should smell
50 masculine fragrances every perfumista should try
26 vintage fragrances every perfumista should try
25 rose fragrances every perfumista should try
11 Cheap Perfumes Beauty Outsiders Love

Favorite posts

The Great Perfume Reduction Plan
Why I Love Old School Chypres
New to perfume and want to learn more?
How to make fragrance last through the day
Fragrance concentrations: sorting it all out
On reformulations, or why your favorite perfume doesn’t smell like it used to
How to get fragrance samples
Perfume for Life: How Long Will Your Fragrance Collection Last?

Upcoming

List of upcoming Friday projects

3 July ~ damage poll
12 July ~ summer reading poll

Back to Top

Home
Archives
About Now Smell This :: Privacy Policy
Perfume Reviews
New Perfumes
General Perfume Articles
The Monday Mail

Glossary of Perfume Terms
Perfume FAQ
Perfume Books

Noses ~ Perfumers A-E :: F-K :: L-S :: T-Z

Perfume Houses A-B :: C :: D-E :: F-G
H-J :: K-L :: M :: N-O :: P :: Q-R :: S
T :: U-Z

Copyright © 2005-2025 Now Smell This. All rights reserved.