The aromatherapy qualities in perfumes and their effects on us

I think that I can say without fear of contradiction that aromatherapy is every bit as effective as homeopathy.

Aromatherapy is a field that is still unexplored. It is fascinating in its effects. Even veterinarians recommend scents for dogs: peppermint for stressed-out dogs, and lavender for overall calming.

One of the more fascinating things about aromatherapy, (and I use that term loosely, because I really feel that it is a misnomer), is that it isn't necessarily the scent of an essential oil that makes it therapeutic, but the actual living molecules inherent within the oils (generally natural herbs distilled down to their most potent form), have powerful curative potential when applied and absorbed topically, inhaled through nose and mouth, or taken orally. Knowledge of this has been gleaned over thousands of years of trial and error and scientific analysis. This is the most over-looked and underused resource. I recommend Kurt Schnaubelts two books as an excellent start. ( http://www.amazon.com/Kurt-Schnaubel...6365650&sr=1-1 )

You can analyze anything to death, including the list of aromatherapy applications for every note listed in every perfume (most of which are synthetic, by the way). I'm sure that aromatherapy has some basis in real, universal reactions to scents, whether they be natural or synthetic, but it's also highly subjective, and most likely depends to some extent on a placebo effect.

Healing properties of herbs used topically or internally have been determined empirically, mostly by trial and error over the centuries, with quite a bit of validity. In fact, many traditional herbal remedies have been incorporated into modern medicines in natural or synthetic form. Aspirin is a well-known example. I think some of the properties you list in your earlier post refer to topical or internal use, not smelling the odor. There seems to be a lot of confusion in this regard.

Wow! Nymphaea said almost the same thing while I was composing this post!

I agree that many of the synthetics used today in modern perfumery could also be potentially useful to our overall health, but for the moment is mostly a moot point, as the perfume industry generally withholds the actual ingredients in their perfumes and reveals them instead with flowery and exotic commonly-known stand-ins for advertising purposes. Therefore, most scents, which by instinct we may be drawn to (and therefore be inclined to feel is also healthy for us), are still part of the occult in the world of therapeutics, for the most part.

But I still do feel that our noses are very good guides for discerning what is good or dangerous for us. ..."I smell, therefore I am?" ;-D

This is probably a good rule of thumb, although not the whole story. That's what our noses evolved for - as a first line of defense against things that are bad for us, and they are probably right 95% of the time. Thus, a synthetic floral scent made up of a subset of the same chemicals (artificially manufactured) that are in the real flower fragrance should not be bad for us even though our bodies did not evolve to deal with each chemical component individually, or a mixture in which the flower is reduced to its basic components - an olfactory cartoon of itself.

The flip side is that odor (or taste) is occasionally misleading, so people have been poisoning themselves with various things ever since the beginning of time. For example, lead acetate, which is toxic, tastes sweet. In Roman times it was sometimes used as a sugar substitute. Lead was also used in cosmetics in "ancient" times. However, there's a fundamental difference between using something out of ignorance and deliberate use of harmful substances - for example adulterating baby formula with melamine just because it's cheap.

If you read the threads in some of the other sections, you will see that perfume reformulation has occurred for a number of reasons. One reason is, as you suppose, cost. My guess is that this is the primary reason. Aromachemicals are significantly cheaper than essential oils and absolutes. They are easier to use in mass production, since they don't contain trace amounts of waxes or solid particles that have to be removed by filtration, or anything else that would interfere with rapid, automated production. Their solubility is known. Their composition is known, so a formula can be replicated precisely over and over again to make thousands or millions of identical bottles. Reformulations have ostensibly occurred because IFRA has declared that a number of natural materials are "dangerous", oakmoss being the usual absurd example. It was banned based on the fact that occasionally someone might develop a skin rash from using a perfume containing it. A whole host of other natural ingredients have also been banned for similar "allergy" reasons. No one seems to consider all of the synthetic chemicals (not just aromachemicals) that could cause allergies or other reactions, most of which are as serious or more serious (e.g., migraines) than anything caused by the natural perfumery ingredients that have been used for millenia without hurting anyone.

Aside from cost and reproducibility, the advantage of judiciously using aromachemicals is that they provide scents that simply cannot be extracted from flowers or fruits as essential oils or absolutes (e.g., gardenia or strawberry), and they also provide scents that do not exist in nature (e.g., marine/ozone accord, many musks). The availability of these scents adds to the perfumer's palette in the same way that synthetic fabrics and dyes add to the clothing designer's toolbox, synthetic pigments add to the artist's palette, or synthesized sounds add to the musician's repertoire of effects and timbres.

Adulteration is an issue even for natural perfumers, since the practice is rampant among suppliers of essential oils and absolutes, including those who supply oils for aromatherapy.

My 2 cents. Aromatherapy and homeopathy work mostly on the mind/placebo than that they really 'work' scientifically speaking. There is too much contradicting information available on the net on the therapeutic value of essential oils to rely on them. There is however a scientific movement in bio-chemistry physics that experiment with the power of scent. Some big perfume houses use that as a marketing strategy and call that aromachology, basically psychologically manipulating people through scent. There are real statistically significant results that it works. It doesn't seem to matter if the used scents are 'natural' or synthetic.

Something else essential oils are not necessarily more expensive than aromachemicals. Not from the perspective of the small artisan perfumer anyways. Some aromachemicals can be even more expensive. Just browse on sites of suppliers like theperfumerapprentice or vigon or johnwalsh. Also some essential oils are really rare or endangered species or (their extraction is) bad for the environment or bad for local agriculture. Or just highly sensitive to adulteration. For that reason I prefer to use synthetic sandalwood, rosewood and agarwood replacements than the botanical sources.

In the end it all comes to your personal goal and choices as an artisan perfumer.

Actually, the placebo effect is a "real", scientifically documented phenomenon - we just don't yet know the scientific (biological) basis for it.

Of course cost depends on which EOs or aromachemicals you're talking about. If you look on any of the bulk suppliers of either, price goes way down when you start talking about buying by the kilo or more, so big manufacturers have that advantage over small artisan perfumers no matter what they are buying.

The issue of overharvesting that Irina brings up is a very real and important concern. More and more natural materials are becoming rare or endangered due to indiscriminate harvesting without caring for the environment and allowing for renewal of plant resources. Like Irina, I use synthetic replacements for oils like sandalwood, rosewood, and agarwood in most applications, not only because they are cheaper, but because it is the responsible thing to do - much like using synthetic civet or musk because of the animal welfare issues involved.

The sad thing is that as humans overpopulate the planet and continue to consume natural resources faster than they can be replaced, the only alternative is to manufacture synthetic substitutes for everything. At least Soylent Green was made from recycled materials.

All of you make some very interesting points which I mostly agree with. I can’t forget however, that this is a SUBTLE ART!

I will agree with the idea that just inhaling either a perfume or essential oil, in itself, has mostly just psychological effect upon the body, thus my feeling that the over-simplified term ‘aroma’therapy is grossly misrepresenting.

Be that as it may, there is no question that many essential oils truly DO have noticeable and proven therapeutic effect on numerous ailments. Do keep in mind that essential oils are already almost ‘perfumes in themselves’, as they are not single-molecule liquids, but are concentrations of many large and small amounts of (possibly hundreds) of different molecules, having evolved together to become what they are by mother nature over eons…just the right amount of each element in perfect harmony. Just as in perfumery, even the smallest amount of some unknown constituent, can modify these complex blends either for the better or the worse. But nature has taken millennium to evolve these plant materials to be balanced in a way that is extremely difficult to do artificially; and many have proven to wield some amazingly powerful healing agents for humans and other animals. I know this to be true from using them first hand on myself.

Take for instance, clove oil. While this is a very common familiar spice and oil, whose scent is quite intoxicating and used extensively in both the culinary and perfume arts, it is almost indispensable for people who have chronic gum and dental abscess trouble. One direct application can actually cure an infection. How is THAT for a ‘miracle’? Doesn’t that beat out 10 days of doctor-prescribed antibiotics and $150 in fees and drugs? But will a dentist tell you that ten-cents of essential oil can replace his $150 ‘expertise’? And just smelling the clove oil isn’t going to have any other scientifically-proven effect except possibly emotionally, for whatever THAT is worth.


What about the soothing and curative effects of lavender on burns? What about chamomile for inflammation? These are definitive therapeutics, not just ‘feeling relaxed’ from smelling something pleasant. The ‘complete package’ of an oil or herb is found in the small details, just as a great perfume is. Leave out just one of the vital, subtle components, and it will not be as effective or as beautiful.

Using aromachemicals exclusively in perfumery is like trying to cook without spices...everything is bland and monochromatic...and of course, controlled by large pharmaceutical companies. We're being herded to their troughs more and more each day.

Doc Elly...I love your point about Soylent Green...I agree...we should start using our most abundant resource...humans. Maybe humans can be harvested fro their 'fragrant materials'!

I feel I need to play the role of the devil's advocate here Although I love and believe botanicals and have been working with them for 30 years the modern science on them is very slim. By science I mean controlled double bind studies that take into account the placebo effect on both sides (the patient AND the researcher). With the latest findings on quantum physics where the mere thought of the researcher influences the way energy molecules react, it's hard to say there is a direct correlation and most importantly direct causality from applied essential oil -----> 100% cure. There are too many other factors involved that have been insufficiently researched nor documented.
I also don't see why nature should suffer for the egoistic man's kind need of 'true' naturals if the same affect can be achieved with safe synthetics grown by man for man if the only effect is the placebo effect.

Something else: essential oils as very concentrated distilled substances only exist for a couple of hundred years. So imo it goes too far to say that their effect is evolutionary. Traditional herbalism as my granny taught it to me is more about using locally grown fresh or dried herbs in fresh tinctures, maceration, powders etc. and not using imported herbs and roots from other geographical ecosphere with another 'energy' and potential. That latest is something that bothers me from an ecological point of view. How much pollution is involved in the manpower, exploiting natural resource till they dry up and then the logistics of getting the stuff packed and air shipped (more pollution, more nature destroyed) for such a rare essence to reach one's greedy human hands?

The modern use of exotic essential oils and their therapeutic effects is too young to spoke of their results as being either universal and all healing. Maybe in their land of origin they have their oral healing tradition, but does that apply for someone using that a thousand miles away?

Also there is more research on the biodegradability of most synthetics than on that of naturals, simply cos the people that invent those molecules can in 1 go research their properties.

These are just some topics that keep me occupied, sorry if it sounds chaotic.
My point is that the big picture is much more complicated and whatever choices you make, I find it a blessing to keep well informed before making mine.

No one would dispute that odors have effects on behavior since they provide signals for behaviorally relevant stimuli (attraction to bakery smell, compulsion to clean or avoid anything with a rotten smell), and no one would dispute that odors can affect mood (smelling coffee in the morning induces a good mood, smelling leaking sewage induces a bad mood), but this is very different from claiming that smelling an odor can cure acne or diabetes or kidney stones. I think the problem is that no one ever really defines "aromatherapy" and people use it both in the sense of medical treatment and in the sense of psychotherapy. The assertion that aromatherapy "works" is based on the universal observation that people feel better when they have pleasant odors to smell. This effect is undoubtedly due to subtle changes in brain state and neurotransmitter levels, so it is a real phenomenon. Odor can act as a distraction so that attention is shifted away from a painful or unpleasant sensation. The feeling of well-being induced by pleasant odors can have physiological effects such as lowered blood pressure, deeper breathing, etc. These uses of odors are scientifically valid, and are not the same as claiming that odors can directly treat or cure diseases.

Don't get me started on "pet aromatherapy". First off, dogs, cats, birds, and other common household pets have a very different set of olfactory receptors than humans do, so one would assume that humans and their pets do not perceive odors in the same way. The ultimate anthropomorphism is assuming that because an odor is pleasant to humans, pets will also find it pleasant, relaxing, or whatever the goal is. In terms of behavioral manipulation, the ultimate "aromatherapy" is the use of odor-based repellants to keep pets off of furniture.

No one would dispute that odors have effects on behavior since they provide signals for behaviorally relevant stimuli (attraction to bakery smell, compulsion to clean or avoid anything with a rotten smell), and no one would dispute that odors can affect mood (smelling coffee in the morning induces a good mood, smelling leaking sewage induces a bad mood), but this is very different from claiming that smelling an odor can cure acne or diabetes or kidney stones. I think the problem is that no one ever really defines "aromatherapy" and people use it both in the sense of medical treatment and in the sense of psychotherapy. The assertion that aromatherapy "works" is based on the universal observation that people feel better when they have pleasant odors to smell. This effect is undoubtedly due to subtle changes in brain state and neurotransmitter levels, so it is a real phenomenon. Odor can act as a distraction so that attention is shifted away from a painful or unpleasant sensation. The feeling of well-being induced by pleasant odors can have physiological effects such as lowered blood pressure, deeper breathing, etc. These uses of odors are scientifically valid, and are not the same as claiming that odors can directly treat or cure diseases.

Don't get me started on "pet aromatherapy". First off, dogs, cats, birds, and other common household pets have a very different set of olfactory receptors than humans do, so one would assume that humans and their pets do not perceive odors in the same way. The ultimate anthropomorphism is assuming that because an odor is pleasant to humans, pets will also find it pleasant, relaxing, or whatever the goal is. In terms of behavioral manipulation, the ultimate "aromatherapy" is the use of odor-based repellants to keep pets off of furniture.

Second DocElly. There are also numerous studies that EO's can be deadly to for example cats. So far the studies on odor seem to say that it's the 'pleasant odor' that is a mood enhancer in humans and the origin of that odor (natural or synthetic) doesn't matter.
On to medical claims on EO's, please take into account that any medical claims made for your cosmetics makes your cosmetics 'drugs'/medication. The regulations on selling drugs/pharmaceuticals are really different from cosmetics and you can get sued for misleading a customer that doesn't get 'healed' or cured by your perfume.

The key word here is "massage". A kind or loving human touch can promote well-being even more effectively than pleasant odors. Promoting a feeling of well-being is "healing" in a general sense, even though it doesn't directly address the actual cause of the problem unless it's stress.

Humans have a nasty tendency to always want concise explanations for every phenomenon, compartmentalize and categorize and document EVERYTHING. But everything can not be explained in terms that humans are able to grasp so easily. There truly ARE mysteries out there to be speculated about, but ones that Lawyers can not control and thus will always thwart our progress.

As Aristotle said, “The whole is more than the sum of its parts”, and that is evident with every perfume that we all adore. These in themselves should be proof that beauty, health and well-being are intimately connected in ways that can not be completely analyzed. Not to wax too mystical here, (because I am anything but that), but there is no denying, as hard as you’d like to here, that chemical agents, swallowed or inhaled internally OR applied to the skin, have some effect upon the body and mind. Rub a piece of garlic on your foot…you will soon taste it. Apply ‘Aspercreme’ on an ache…it will soon feel relieved, etc…etc…etc.

These are holistic ideas, and ones that should not be waved off because of buzz-word bias. I just think there is so much that can be explored with the food/perfume/medicine relationship. This is not some 'touchy-feely', pseudo-mystical mumbo-jumbo...there is real correlation and it will take some subtle understanding to appreciate and use it.

Nymphaea, I think that if you read carefully we're saying exactly the same thing in different ways.

Now you got me wanting an oil lavender perfume with all this discussion!

Doc Elly--- I like your blog.

Again second this. We seem to agree

Everything in the universe is vibrational. Turin's theory will be understood and accepted in time.

Healing is virtually all mind over matter.

Essential oils are helpful. Anything is if it helps you to feel better, get out of the way, and allow the trillions of cells inside of you to summon the energy to heal you.

Here are good books and two excellent sites for aromatherapy:

Snow Lotus: Aromatherapy, Education, and Inspiration - http://snowlotus.org/

Young Living Essential Oils - Wellness - http://www.youngliving.com/en_US/wellness/

The Fragrant Mind: Aromatherapy for Personality, Mind, Mood, and Emotion by Valerie Worwood

The Complete Book of Essential Oils & Aromatherapy by Valerie Worwood

edit double post