From Betty Bridges, RN, Fragranced Products Information Network:

http://www.ameliaww.com/fpin/fpin.htm

I want to update everyone about the happenings over the past couple of weeks related to fragrances. Feel free to pass this along to anyone interested. Betty

**********************

The fragrance industry concerned about the efforts in Halifax to educate and implement voluntary fragrance free policies has launched a public relations campaign. The Canadian Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association (CCTFA) and the Scented Products Education and Information Association of Canada (SPEIAC) is organizing a media campaign to explain their position and counteract the concerns raised by those that see fragrances as a health concern. The CCTFA and SPEIAC held a meeting on June 20 in Halifax, Nova Scotia to address industry concerns over "anti-scent" policies. Invited to this meeting were delegates from Health Canada, scientific community,

Halifax area public policy-makers, and individuals representing anti-scent movement. Several organizations in Canada were invited to send someone representing their groups. Albert Donnay of MCS Referral and Resources and Betty Bridges, RN of the Fragranced Products Information Network were invited by the Environmental Illness Society of Canada (EISC) and The Nova Scotia Allergy and Environmental Health Association (NSAWHA) as their representatives.

The presentations by CCTFA and SPEIAC focused on what they termed as "myths" about fragrances. There was a brief review of the "self-regulatory" process of the fragrance industry. It was also contended that there are no scientific data to support bans and health concerns related to fragranced products. Very little information was presented to dispell concerns and little to no scientific data was presented.

There was a question and answer period after the presentation. The industry was unable to provide adequate answers to the questions posed.

1. The industry recommends that no one should be able to detect your fragrance more than an arm length's away. They did acknowledge that there are fragrances that are very powerful that extend beyond this scent circle, but contents that trends are toward lighter perfumery. No insight was provided into how to deal with scents that extended beyond arm's length away. Nor would they address the background levels of fragrance that is always in the air.

2. The industry contends that testing is adequate and products are safe. Most industry testing results are within company files and not available to the public. This makes it impossible to review the the information and determine how well products and materials are evaluated. There is little to no review of the material outside of the companies doing the testing. The industry was unwilling to address specific concerns about the lack of testing via all routes of exposure. Aerosol testing is done by some companies, but none of the information is available publically.

3. It is contended that most materials used in the fragrance industry are not synthesized from petroleum products. This is in direct conflict to information available in chemical catalogs and industry literature.

All in all the meeting was set up by the industry as a public relations effort. Little of substance was addressed by the industry and the very same tactics that they complain about being used by proponents of fragrance bans were used. Comparisons were made that had absolutely no scientific basis.

History of use was a major argument to support the safety of fragrances, yet it was acknowledged that use and materials use are very different. This invalidates history of use being a basis for safety claims.

After the meeting a press conference was held to present views of those that contend there are health concerns related to fragrance use. The fragranceindustry was invited to attend this press conference. Information was presented to the press and they had an opportunity to ask questions.

A fragrance industry press conference was held after this.. The Environmental Illness Society of Canada (EISC) and The Nova Scotia Allergy and Environmental Health Association (NSAWHA) as well as their representatives were not allowed into the industry press conference. But having attended the earlier press conference, the media was able to ask many of the hard questions and the answers were often lacking.

The media coverage has been quite good and over all, balanced. Both view have been presented. In the balance those concerned about fragrance safety have presented a great deal of scientific data to support concerns and the industry has present little other than public relations materials.

This has greatly increased the visability of this issue which is important.

Betty Bridges, RN

Fragranced Products Information Network

http://www.ameliaww.com/fpin/fpin.htm