Fwd: Citrus oils set to disappear in cosmetics

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 04/09/2007 5:54:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

info writes:

 

 

Cropwatch Newsletter April 2007.

 

Citrus Perfumery Ingredients Now Set to Disappear.

Copyright © Tony Burfield April 2007.

§ 1. Executive Summary.

Banning citrus oils from perfumes would be a drastic move from which

perfumery would never recover. But according to a communication written on 4th

April

2007 by Sabine Lecrenier, Head of Unit for the Cosmetics Sector to Cropwatch

(attached to this newsletter), this unthinkable step is precisely the

outcome which the EU Cosmetics regulators have decided upon – by placing a

restriction on certain furanocoumarins (FCF’s) such that their content in

finished

cosmetics cannot collectively exceed more that 1 ppm, in line with the previous

recommendations of the 2001 SCCP Opinion & SCCP Opinion 0942/05. In our

view, this once more confirms the Brussels ‘anti-naturals’ fragrance

ingredients machinery is operating in over-drive, becoming a vendetta of

scandalous

proportions.

In spite of the fact that this is potentially the most serious situation

that the perfume trade has ever faced, any open resistance to this move is

likely to be weak. The (confessed trade independent) SCCP / DG Entr. personnel

do

not have an authoritative overview of the fragrance industry and do not fully

comprehend the implications of the regulations that they help impose on the

cosmetics trade. IFRA and EFFA are part of the problem too, becoming

alarmingly right-wing/authoritarian and threatening member companies with

severe

measures if they do not follow their Codes of Practice, which feed into the EU

Cosmetic Directives. A non-scientific Cropwatch survey of the attendance of

professional perfumery organization meetings (UK / US) shows a membership

increasingly dominated by regulatory affairs personnel rather than perfumers

– the

significance of these measures on the perfumery art will be totally lost on

these types of technical employees. And as we have previously proven, the

trade press is largely loyal to IFRA and panders to the interests of corporate

dinosaurs, and not to interests of cosmetics consumers. The trade essential oil

organisations have angered many essential oil producers by their obedient

submission of technical data to EU regulators, which has enabled progressive

forms of restrictive legislation to be passed against the very trade that they

are supposed to represent.

It may very well be the case that industry as a whole chooses to ignore this

legislation as being completely destabilising & unworkable, but Cropwatch

has to work on a worst possible scenario, and therefore we consider that it is

only the sophistication of the fragrance consumer lobby itself which offers

any real hope of true resistance & reform. Cropwatch is therefore launching

the ‘Campaign for Real Perfume’ any hoping for consumer support to

counteract

what we have to see as philistinic regulatory crimes against the perfumery

art.

§ 2. A Brief Historical Note on Citrus Oils in Fragrances.

Citrus oils are absolutely vital ingredients in perfumes. Citrus colognes

were originally constructed by immersing various plant materials in alcohol,

the alcohol concentrated by distillation, distilling the major part off (often

down to one third of the original bulk), and citrus and other oils were added

e.g. as in the popular fragrance type: Millefleurs. These early perfumes

were somewhat unstable and prone to oxidation due to the high monoterpene

hydrocarbons content (Simonis 1984), but the development of concentrated &

terpeneless citrus oils was said to overcome these problems.

Unless specifically treated, many essential oils derived from species of the

Apiaceae & Rutaceae (including citrus oils, angelica & a few others) will

contain a furanocoumarin (FCF) content – apparently even those labeled “

FCF-freeâ€. Although FCF’s may be associated with beneficial properties in

specific

situations, there are concerns that some may be associated with photo-toxic

& , some suggest, possibly photo-carcinogenic reactions, although this

situation is hardly new. To our certain knowledge people have been putting

perfumes

containing FCF’s on their skins for more than 600 years – for example the

lemon peel & angelica containing (and therefore FCF containing) Carmelite Water

was formulated in 1379 at Abbaye St. Juste. Certainly by the mid 1500’s

citrus oils were widely produced & used for fragrancing such that individual

fragrances based on mixture of citrus oils were developed (e.g. Eau de

Carmes),

and by 1709 we have the example of major citrus oil perfume deployment in

Eau de Cologne (“4711â€) by Gian Paolo Feminis, the story of which needs no

introduction from us. Slightly later, the use of citrus oils is demonstrated in

Eau Impériale (Guerlain 1861) – created by Guerlain for Emperess Eugenie

(wife of Napoleon III). Nowadays many publications recount the early uses of

these materials in the perfumery art, such as that of Burfield (2002) &

Williams

(2004). Felix Buccellato wrote an excellent review of the importance of

citrus oils to the development of Western perfumery over the last eight of nine

decades which can be found at

_http://www.fmi.bz/citrus_oils_in_perfumery.htm_

(http://www.fmi.bz/citrus_oils_in_perfumery.htm) . Cropwatch attempted to

put together what we commonly know about the FCF content of fragrance

ingredients at _http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm_

(http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm) .

§ 3. The Regulators Plot Together.

According to IFRA's recent information letter (IL 722) of March 16th 2007,

DG Entr. will ask the SCCP for an updated Opinion on whether 1ppm of the

furanocoumarins psoralen, bergapten (5-methoxypsoralen or 5-MOP), xanthotoxin

(8-methoxypsoralen or 8-MOP) and angelicin, determined either individually or

in

combination, is safe in cosmetics.

 

 

 

New and separate data for isopimpinellin (5,8-dimethoxypsoralen) &

bergamottin, it is understood, is also being considered by the SCCP, but data

for

oxypeucedanin and epoxy-bergamottin is not being presented, apparently due to

lack of test material of the appropriate purity (read this as the industry

failing to

 

cough-up enough of the appropriate purified samples for studies).

§ 4. Sabine Lecrenier Reports to Cropwatch.

§ 4.1 Lecrenier for the EU Cosmetics section reports in her 4th April 2007

letter to Cropwatch (attached), that the intention to restrict bergapten

(5-MOP) and xanthotoxin (8-MOP), either individually or additively, to 1ppm in

finished fragrances, even where naturally present, has already been decided.

This is a breath-taking decision which will, for example, affect many suppliers

& end-users of expressed, distilled and supposedly FCF-free citrus oils.

§ 4.2 Lecrenier also reports that the same remarks also apply to psoralen

and angelicin, although:

“…for angelicin, we may consider it differently in view of the results of

the public consultation of the Committee on herbal medicinal products on this

substance. I enclose the hyperlink to this consultation

(http://_www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/hmpc/31791306en.pdf_

(http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/hmpc/31791306en.pdf) ) A new consultation of

the scientific committee may thus be

necessary.â€

[Cropwatch comments: This is surely ‘clutching at straws’ – the above

cited

report merely reflects on the lack of knowledge, understanding & studies in

the photo-carcinogenic area, and on the situation wrt taking (daily) oral

herbal preparation(s) containing FCF’s – which cannot be directly

comparable to

an occasional or a one-off dermal fragrance application containing FCF’s].

§ 4.3 Lecrenier also refers to new studies by ‘part of the industry’ on

isopimpinellin & bergamottin which are apparently being presented by April end

2007, although we are apparently not allowed to be party to them [the SCCNFP

previously gave an Opinion (SCCNFP 0743/03) on bergamottin, which concluded

there was insufficient data on photo-toxic potential to come to an opinion].

§ 4.4 We are also informed by Lecrenier that oxypeucedanin & oxy-bergamottin

are also to be banned unless Cropwatch or other organization can provide

data indicating safe use by April end (2007).

§ 5. Cropwatch’s Reaction to Limiting FCF’s in Cosmetics.

The SCCP seems to apply different objectivity criteria in executing its’

various Opinions, presumably for undisclosed political reasons. The SCCP (2001)

Opinion on FCF’s was widely dismissed, amongst other things, for failing to

distinguish the different properties of linear FCF’s (xanthotoxin, psoralen

etc.) from angular FCF’s (e.g. angelicin). The further SCCP Opinion 0942/05

is

a substandard & disappointing rag-bag of previous assumptions & presumptions,

not universally endorsed by all workers in this area. (e.g. bergapten is ‘

probably carcinogenic’ (IARC 1987), an assumption not based on any robust

evidence). One of the main features of the 0942/05 document is a listing of FCF

occurrence in some (mainly citrus) products, but the data is not comprehensive

over the total range of FCF-containing (citrus) ingredients available to

perfumers i.e. does not cover the various mechanically prepared single

expressed

oils (pellatrice, sfumatrice, scorzella, machine process or whatever), the

various concentrated (deterpenated) oils, terpeneless oils, sesquiterpeneless

oils, solvent extracted oils, distilled oils etc. etc. Most importantly the

Opinion is embarrassingly short of any actual proof whatsoever of in vivo

human FCF photo-carcinogenicity. Further, its conclusions are at variance with

those of other workers Chouroulinkov et al. (1989), Dubertret et al. (1990),

EMEA (1990) etc. as pointed out previously by Cropwatch. No single case study

of photo-carcinogenicity from the application of FCF containing oils e.g.

expressed bergamot oil, has yet been identified (as many observers have pointed

out in mails to Cropwatch). This SCCP Opinion therefore is rejected by

Cropwatch as being not of a standard of evidence sufficient to support the

restriction of FCF’s to 1ppm in cosmetics.

Bear in mind also that a watershed for the precautionary principle approach

has been reached over a previous SCCP Opinion on Tea Tree Oil (SCCP Opinion

08438/04) which predicted tea tree oil was not safe in cosmetics – now proven

completely incorrect by an extensive analysis of end-user data. Having proven

that this predictive methodology doesn’t work, Ian White (Chairman of the`

SCCP, and in Cropwatch’s opinion, well overdue for replacement) has to halt

these flawed SCCP Opinions right now, and a better, more reliable evaluation

system for the toxicological assessment of fragrance ingredients has to be

devised.

It is quite clear, too, that our supporters believe these measures are

totally ‘over the top’. Bergamot oil for example has an almost ubiquitous

use in

fragrances (see below) so where are all the predicted adverse fragrance end

user reactions? We haven’t actually got a citrus oil derived photo-chemical

cancer epidemic on our hands - quite the opposite - we have a near zero

reporting of adverse reactions from modern citrus/FCF-containing perfumes.

Others

supporters point out that a simple measure such as a labeling requirement would

have sufficed instead of an unworkable 1ppm limit – after all it works for

thousands of clients receive aromatherapy body massages annually, where up to

2.5% of citrus oils in carrier oils are used. Clients are merely instructed

to strictly avoid actinic light for the next 12-24 hours. There seems,

therefore, no need to further undermine the natural aromatics sector in such a

heavy-handed manner by banning crucial ingredients.

In conclusion, and although this may sound a little melodramatic, it is hard

not to put these unsound regulatory decisions on furanocoumarins & their

effects on the fragrance trade in the very strongest of condemnatory terms. On

balance, we have to consider these decisions as to tantamount to regulatory

philistinism, and we cannot dismiss them as anything less than a crime against

the perfumery art.

§ 6. Cropwatch’s Position & Further Action on FCF’s.

You will remember that Cropwatch had previously established (see

_http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm_ (http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm)

) that

many, if not most, perfumers are unaware of the FCF contents of their

ingredients, and they are not helped by the ingredient (citrus oil) producers,

who

often do not know either. We also established that leading perfume chemists

even

argued about whether FCF’s were steam distillable.

§ 6.1 Cropwatch had previously pointed out to the Cosmetics Head of Unit in

Brussels that removal of FCF’s in citrus oils was not affordable technology

for many small essential oil producers, and Cropwatch received the following

concrete assurance on this matter from Sabine Lecrenier (written on 11th Dec

2007 for the EU Cosmetics Commission):

“… Lastly regarding furocoumarins, no decision has been taken at this stage

regarding the implementation of the SCCP opinion 0942/05. My services are

still considering the matter taking into account your remarks and we will keep

you informed regarding developments. Furthermore, if a restrictive measure

would be envisaged, a public consultation, via our website, on economic impact

would need to be carried out. that because of this threat of financial

discrimination, the measure to limit FCF’s would not go through.â€

We are unaware, or perhaps may have missed the notification of any public

consultation on this issue (?), but the sequence of events since Lecrenier's

mail had not particularly convinced us that this assurance on the grounds of

financial discrimination was going to hold up. Furthermore, there is no mention

of this public consultation eventuality in Lecrenier’s letter to Cropwatch

of 4th April 2007.

§ 6.2 Further Action. Cropwatch has recently written to a number of leading

citrus oil producers and end-users and will be meeting with a number of these

over the coming weeks. It appears that the reported EFFA position (that

manufacturers will be able to produce FCF free oils to the required limits) is

an

option only open to the economically privileged producers, and can be safely

dismissed as not being a universally applicable solution. Cropwatch will be

supporting those producers who cannot afford the technology to produce

FCF-free oils to the standard demanded, and has written to the FAO and the WHO

to

ask if financial assistance for citrus producers will be available for those

producers who are potentially economically discriminated against by this

particular EU policy. We will be looking to see what further action is possible

against these unfair prospects.

§ 7. The Importance of Citrus Ingredients to Perfumery: Spelling It Out.

Frerot & Decorzant (2004) of Firmenich somehow predicted in advance that the

EU would limit FCF’s to 1ppm (how did they know this was going to happen?

–

we were sold a different story), and presented a published paper

quantifying FCF’s in citrus products using sophisticated analytical technology

that

many small citrus producers are unable to afford - HPLC coupled with UV,

fluorescence, and mass detection. Sure enough, the SCCP Opinion 0942/05 then

conveniently cites the Frerot & Decorzant (2004) paper as the way to assess

FCF’s in

essential oils. Cropwatch, with its’ watchdog’s hat on, is extremely worried

that this is yet another example of an emerging discriminatory technical

divide between the corporate dinosaurs and small producers, and the situation

might involve collusion between big business and EU lawyers to suit their

individual positions. This eventuality, of course, would be working against the

interests of free competition & trading within the EU.

Meanwhile here are some brief notes & indications on how absolutely vital

citrus ingredients are to perfumery (N.B. this is not an exhaustive FCF

containing ingredients list – see _http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm_

(http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm) for a more comprehensive account).

§ 7.1 Bergamot Oil. According to the SCCNFP 07403/05, ‘bergamot oil’ –

type

& origin not specified - contains 2.2% bergamottin, but is also notorious`

for its bergapten content (0.3% within a total FCF content of 3.0%: ref

Forlott, unpublished data). Bergamot oil also contains bergaptol.

Suppose for a moment that bergamot oil might be effectively banned as a

perfumery ingredient, as currently seems more than possible. Bergamot oil has

both a citrus & herbaceous character and mixes seamlessly with the palette of

citrus oils and many herbaceous notes especially lavender & basil, making it

particularly useful in masculine fragrances. It is also is useful in fresh top

note accords in floral fragrances. It also mixes well with mossy and ambery

notes, and because it has this herbal dimension to its character, it is the

cornerstone of the eau de cologne & chypre perfumes. Its place in perfumery is

unique. Its employment in male fragrances is virtually ubiquitous and

represents a lot of the fresh fragrance character - examples CK One (Calvin

Klein

1994), Cool Water (Davidoff 1988), Eau Savage (Dior 1966), and in female

fragrances it is also virtually ubiquitous as part of top note accords e.g.

Chanel

19 (Chanel 1970), Anais-anais (Cacharel 1979), Rive-Gauche (Y. Saint-Laurent

1971), Obsession (Calvin Klein 1985). Bergamot oil is also of course used to

flavour Earl Gray tea – but no doubt suitable reasons will appear to prevent

this flavoured beverage from being banned. However, in perfumery, bergamot

oil is not capable of being replaced.

§ 7.2 Bitter Orange oils. Contain ‘large amounts’ of oxypeucedanin

(Naganuma et al. 1985). The main application for bitter orange oil is in eau de

colognes where it imparts a sharp freshness to the citrus cologne character,

and

generally in citrus accords, for the same sort of effect on the top-notes of

fragrances.

§ 7.3 Lemon oils. Cold-pressed lemon oils vary widely in their FCF content.

Naganuma et al. (1985) principally found begapten (range 4 to 87 ppm) &

oxypeucedanin (range 26 to 728ppm) to be responsible for the photo-toxicity,

indicating that the phototoxic potential of oxypeucedanin being a quarter of

that of bergapten. Whereas bergamot oil has a middle & top note presence, lemon

oil is a wonderful fresh top-note material used widely in men’s fragrances

e.g. Paco (Paco Robanne 1996), Kenzo pour Homme (Kenzo 1991), often in

combination with other citrus oils (such as bergamot, lime & mandarin). Lemon

oil is

also used in women’s fragrances; it is widely used for its supremely fresh

natural character in personal care & toiletry products, particularly in foam

baths, shower gels & shampoos.

§ 7.4 Lime oils. According to the SCCNFP ‘cold pressed lime oil’ – type

&

origin not specified - contains 2.5% bergamottin. However Naganuma et al.

(1985) indicate oxypeucedanin as the principle FCF. Minor FCF’s such as

oxypeucedaninyl acetals in Key Lime type A or oxypeucedanin methanolate are

still in

the process of being characterised in processed oils (Feger et al. 2006).

Lime oil expressed can be used in perfumery to add notes to eau de cologne,

straight citrus blends for foam baths etc., washing up liquid perfumes, men’s

fragrances, although washing up liquid and foam fragrances can often be

constructed with distilled lime oil. For example Tommy (T. Hilfinger 1995)

contains

bergamot, lemon, lime, mandarin & grapefruit, and Eau de Patou (J. Patou)

contains lemon & lime as well as bergamot & mandarin in its fresh citrus

complex. Lime oil blends well with other citrus oils particularly bergamot and

lemon, also with lavender and aromatic herbal notes such as armoise and as such

is

used frequently in men’s’ fragrances. Lime is usually used in its cheaper

forms (lime terpenes, lime oil washed q.v.) in toiletries and household

fragrances. Lime oil in not often used now in soap & detergent perfumery

because of

its’ poor stability and has been superceded by fragrance chemicals with lime

odour profiles such as dihydromyrcenol (Burfield 2007).

§ 7.5 Grapefruit oils. Cold pressed white grapefruit oils contain up to 1.5%

FCF’s (mainly) including bergamottin. Some varieties of ‘Sweetie’

grapefruit oils also contain FCF’s. White grapefruit oils have a number of

small

applications in perfumery, including uses in male fine fragrances for citrus

theme top notes and generally minor application in citrus cocktail perfumes,

although since it has been ten to fifteen times more expensive than orange oil

in

recent years, these uses have been restricted. The cheaper ‘Sweetie’

Grapefruit oils have been used by some perfumers as a substitute for white

grapefruit oils, but annual production volumes are limited (Burfield 2007).

§ 7.5 Mandarin oils. Cold-pressed mandarin oil contains 250 ppm bergapten:

IFRA. Mandarin oils are used in perfumery for top notes in fine female

& shy;fragrances, and in large amounts in male fragrances to produce fresh

notes,

particularly in combination with woody accords e.g., Dune for Men (Dior 1998),

Freedom for Men (Hilfiger 1999). Terpeneless mandarin & shy;oil was

especially prized in perfumery for its aldehydic notes, but nowadays & shy;is an

extremely expensive perfumery material (and probably virtually unusable because

of

the new restrictions on methyl-N-methyl anthranilate). In flavours it

has & shy; considerable usage, especially in liqueurs, chocolate and baked

products.

Italian mandarin oils are made from fruits of varying ripeness & shy; giving

rise to 3 basic oils: green, yellow, and red, but Argentinean mandarin oil

& shy;is only made from ripe fruit, and so is reddish-orange (Burfield 2007).

§ 7.6 Tangerine oils. Cold-pressed tangerine oil contains 50ppm bergaptene

(IFRA). Perfumery uses are as for mandarin oil – in any case, many

unscrupulous traders pass one off as the other to non-discerning customers.

§ 7.7 Angelica oils. Academic studies of lab prepared root oils of Angelica

archangelica L. ssp. archangelica var. sativa (Miller) Rikli reveal the

presence of the angular furanocoumarins angelicin & archangelicin, as well as

lesser amounts of linear furanocoumarins. Solvent extracts (often passed off

as essential oils) contain angelicin, bergaptene, imperatorin, oxypeucedanin

hydrate, xanthotoxin and xanthotoxol. However, overall evidence for (any) FCF

content in commercial angelica root oil qualities from various species &

origins is conflicting (see _http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm_

(http://www.cropwatch.org/newslet3.htm) ). Angelica qualities (root or seed oils

of various

geographic origins & species, solvent or CO2 extracts, absolutes etc.) are

not widely used in perfumery, and their power is such that when they are

employed, they are generally present at relatively low levels e.g. 0.1%, rarely

more. However angelica oil has been used to good effect in chypres to enhance

spicy peppery accords; and it also finds some uses in masculine fougeres.

Angelica oil blends well with many aromatic raw materials woody including

patchouli, vetivert and clary sage, and many workers consider that this

property

is, in part, due to synergistic effects imparted by the macrocyclic lactones

(Burfield 2007).

§ 8. IFRA’s Position on FCF’s.

Reading between the lines, IFRA do not seem to appear to know quite what to

do about FCF containing perfumery ingredients, and they have warned their

members in Information Letter IL 772, that several (presumably, largely citrus)

materials may eventually disappear from cosmetics / perfumery usage. Many of

us aromaphiles have little sympathy for IFRA's position, especially after

the Prance Internet article which seemingly revealed IFRA’s true colours,

confirming IFRA’s support for synthetics over naturals, an article which was

subsequently rather hastily withdrawn (for references see Cropwatch Newsletter

March 2007). After being tarred with an anti-naturals reputation, IFRA now

appear

anxious not be seen as responsible for this current demise, and appears to

be engaging in a blame-shifting exercise – by suggesting a ‘pow-wow’

between

(citrus) producers and end-users as a way of deciding a strategy for the FCF

situation. But many of you will remember that it was the IFRA organisation

that got us into this situation in the first place, by introducing a Standard

imposing a 15ppm limit on FCF’s in finished perfumes on 1st Dec 1996 (which

few cosmetic/fragrance companies seem to either been aware of, or have

subsequently adhered to).

§ 9. ‘The Campaign for Real Perfume’ is launched.

In a world where the perfume industry is now run by regulatory affairs

managers and lawyers, feeding off the results of dermatologists &

toxicologists,

and the trade media dances to the tunes of the regulators, how can the perfume

consumers demand non-synthetic perfumes and avoid all the disappointing

regulatory-conformist remakes of established conventional perfumes (for example

Guerlain’s reformulation of Mitsouko, first minus the nitro-musks and now,

more devastatingly, minus the oakmoss).

We have to remember that some of us have been here before. In the UK, the

world’s most popular beverage (beer) was under threat from the big brewers

set

to maximize profits by producing a bland processed product designed to keep

for weeks in a pubs & clubs setting, stored in metal kegs, and dispensed under

pressure with carbon dioxide. The ‘Campaign for Real Ale’ was launched in

the 1970’s and proved successful in convincing the public that real

traditional cask-conditioned ale, kept in cool cellars, and dispensed by

beer-engines

mechanically hand-pumped by publicans was the superior form of beer.

It is not an inconceivable step to imagine that this same rationale could be

applied to perfumes, as a result of consumer back-lash, so that ‘perfume’

should be composed of wholly natural ingredients (natural perfumes), or a

mixture of naturals and synthetics (conventional perfumes). Natural ingredients

should not be discriminated against by legislators who are over-represented &

over-influenced by career toxicologists, dermatologists and regulatory

affairs managers, nor should we have a situation where legislators have the

continuity of their own careers uppermost in their minds when rubber-stamping

precautionary principle-based health & safety legislation which has neither

been

tested nor statistically proven at the user-end.

These steps would enable us to get back to producing & marketing crafted

real perfumes. Please help by contacting Cropwatch at _info_

(info)

References.

Burfield T. (2002) Natural Perfumery Module 1. AIA UK private publication.

Burfield T. (2007) Natural Aromatics – Odours & Origins edn 2. AIA private

publication. 2007.

Chouroulinkov I., Lasne C. & Nguyen-Ba (1989) “Study with 5-MOP, bergamot &

Bergasol in mouse skin carcinogenicity tests.†In Psoralens: Past, Present &

Future of Photochemoprotection & other biological activities. Eds: T.B.

Fitzpatrick, F. Forlot, M.A. Pathak & F. Urbach pp345-355. John Libby Eurotext.

Paris.

Dubertret L., Serraf-Tircazes D., Jeanmougin M., Morliere P., Averbeck D. &

Young A.R. (1990) “Phototoxic properties of perfumes containing bergamot oil

on human skin. Photoprotective effect of UVA and UVA substances.†J.

Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biology. 7, 251-259.

Feger W, Brandauer H, Gabris P, Ziegler H. (2006) " Nonvolatiles of

commercial lime and grapefruit oils separated by high-speed countercurrent

chromatography. " J Agric Food Chem. 22. 54(6), 2242-52.

Frerot E & Decorzant E. (2004) “Quantification of total furocoumarins in

citrus oils by HPLC coupled with UV, fluorescence, and mass detection.†J

Agric

Food Chem. 17, 52(23), 6879-86.

IARC (1987) Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. 5-

Methoxypsoralen and 8-Methoxypsoralen plus ultraviolet irradiation. Suppl 7,

242-245, 1987.

Naganuma M., Hirose S., Nakayama1 Y., Nakajima K. & Someya T. (1985) " A

study of the phototoxicity of lemon oil " Archives of Derm. Res. 278, 1, 31-36.

 

Simonis, Cynthia Clare (1984) “Eau de Cologne Past & Present†Dragoco

Report 4, p113- 121

Williams D.G. (2004) Perfumes of Yesterday Micelle Press, Weymouth 2004.

Other News: the 42nd IFRA Amendment (the 40th IFRA Amendment Revisited).

Details of the 42nd IFRA Amendment (- a continuation of the immensely

complex IFRA 40th Amendment) can be found at

_http://www.perfumerflavorist.com/news/6789072.html_

(http://www.perfumerflavorist.com/news/6789072.html) .

Although the Cropwatch petition against the 40th IFRA Amendment is, of course,

unacknowledged (but now appears with 872 signatories see

_http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ifra40/_

(http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ifra40/) ), it

appears that Cropwatch might have won a point for small businesses (SME’s).

This is

because there are some concessions announced on timings for implementation

of this exceedingly complex and unnecessary piece of technical hyperbureacracy

(the QRA system). Cropwatch doesn’t necessarily see this concession as

advantageous for all SME’s – since it basically draws attention to the fact

that SME's might be unable to presently achieve the industry norms (i.e.

adherence to the 40th Amendment) and this aspect of apparent uncompetitiveness

against larger organisations might well work against them. The only instance in

which it might be advantageous is for micro-companies, where (in the nicest

possible way) the fragrance customer base may not fully comprehend the issues

around the 40th IFRA Amendment.

Voluntary Regulation of Perfumery now Revealed as Obsolete.

As several national perfumery organizations in the last few weeks have asked

their individual constituent members to submit a Directors letter from their

companies pledging blind allegiance, sorry, to strictly abide, by IFRA /

EFFA Codes of Practice, or presumably face unstated consequences, it is clear

that any claim of voluntary adherence to perfume regulation is now just a sham.

So let’s have no more pretence on this issue, shall we?

Tony Burfield, April 2007.

Cropwatch – the Independent Watchdog for the Aroma Industry.

_www.cropwatch.org_ (http://www.cropwatch.org/)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.