Please click here to be taken to my Glass Magazine reviews of Diptyque’s Volutes, Lalique’s 2011 masculine, Hommage À L’Homme and Mugler’s new A*Men Pure Leather. If you’ve got a moment to spare, you might also enjoy a read of Grazia’s mention of my book. And for some very worrying news, check out this Reuters article on the Chicago Tribune website. Yes, we’ve heard it all before, but it does seem to be getting worse.
Have a great weekend,
Persolaise.
Discover more from
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
This means the end of perfumery as we know it. No oakmoss, no treemoss: end of Mitsouko!
No tangerine/lemon – yet they can still be sold as foodstuff!
On the basis of a very limited contact allergy which can be readily dealt with by labelling. Any allergy is likely to affect a tiny, insignficant area of skin and be cured by discontinuing use – as with any cosmetic, laundry detergent or household product.
The statement that citizens are entitled to remain safe beggars belief: they can be: if they have reaction don't use the perfume – so simple. That's why labelling was introduced. But the rights of the vast majority of people that use products with no harm should not be trumped by concern for a very small minority when there are ways to prevent that harm to them.
What about hair dye – that can produce far more dangerous allergic reactions in some individuals and that continues to be sold with a warning and recommendation for patch test.
If tangerine and lemon oil are so dangerous why can they still be sold as foodstuffs.
As a lawyer, I have seen EU Commission and Court decisions that seem to inhabit an different reality from my industry, so do not hope that common sense prevails here. Even industry lobbying may not help.
Persolaise, can we set up an e petition on the Downing Street website?
Anon, thanks very much for writing.
The whole situation is very complex. I'm no scientist, but even I can see that if some new research suggests that, say, Substance X might have carcinogenic properties, then the scientific establishment couldn't stand by and allow the substance to continue to be used in perfumery. Unfortunately, the ill effects of certain materials can take a very long time (sometimes several decades) to make themselves felt, so I can see why the scientists prefer to err on the side of caution.
Then again, I don't wish to sound like I'm defending the legislators. I'm not convinced that everyone involved in this matter is being entirely straight with consumers. And I still fail to understand several extremely harmful and/or potentially lethal products (cigarettes, peanuts etc) may continue to be sold, as long as they're correctly labelled.
As an aside, the UK market for so-called 'legal highs' was able to flourish precisely because the manufacturers pasted the words "Not for human consumption" on their packaging. Maybe perfumes should bear the words, "Not to be worn on skin"?
Love the Glass Magazine reviews – dying to try both now!
Nic
Thanks, Nic. The Diptyque seems to have won many fans. And the Lalique garnered a ridiculous number of compliments when I wore it, although that's probably because it isn't too overpowering.