Synthetic Commercial Perfumes VS Natural Perfumes.

Before posting, please get your facts right. I think you mean IFRA not IFF (a fragrance house).

"Many say commercial perfumes gradually adds up toxins in your body, some contain horse pee especially those ridiculously cheap ones."

Who does? Horse pee? Sorry, more like BS.

And as for ending my post one way or another? No. An all Natural Fragrance ( and I wait for your definition) is usually boring; certain notes are unobtainable. An all Synthetic fragrance (again please define) is usually more interesting but not as good as a fragrance containing a mixture of both.

100 % natural ingredients won't give you a long lasting perfume, customers will start to complaint on regards to poor longevity e.g. Eau de Colognes.
Therefore a combination on raw materials ( natural and Chemical) is the best system in place at this point in time.

I'm casting a vote for a judicious mixture of naturals and synthetics. And I find the current IFRA restrictions absolutely maddening! I mean, a limit to the amount of natural rose/rose ketones? In a personal perfume? We've been wearing rose frags for years and nobody's toppled over dead yet. Well, not from the perfume, anyway.
I like natural frags, and my daughter wears only naturals, but we both agree there's a real problem with longevity here. So some synthetics are useful to add that factor and also to deepen and broaden the notes in each frag.
Nobody likes harsh synthetics, and some substances do give me contact dermatitis, so I always test carefully before buying. But a ban on scent components? How stupid. Especially at a time when the EU is dealing with serious financial problems, and the export of fine frags is one of France's best-known commercial interests.

I don't see any scientific evidence that the use of fragrances, synthetic or otherwise, is harmful so I just stick with the individual fragrances I enjoy regardless of their makeup.

They don't bother me in the least or alter my choice in scent.

There's nothing wrong with synthetics, if they are used for aesthetic purposes, rather than cost-cutting (which inevitably means lower quality, because naturals simply do certain things better)

IFRA regulations are excessive and I believe in too many cases they advance the interests of the aromachemical industry rather than genuinely protecting consumers.

Horse pee is natural, by the way.

What about honey?.......

Anyway I don't believe urine has ever been found in any fragrances other than fakes.

Natural!! It is not as long-lasting and hence needs reapplication - but the rest is chemical - factory produce.

You can also say that loads of natural oils and ingredients are toxic to humans.

Ghandi drank his own pee, won't do you any harm. Would fancy doing it myself. In history it was used to cleanse wounds.

Scare mongering doesn't work with perfume lovers.

I don't think the 3 articles linked to have any authority, they are just mindless copy churned out by journalistic hacks.
I don't think you will find many users on basenotes who would say "natural for me", as virtually all the perfume we discuss have some synthetic ingredients. People who are enthusiastic about all natural perfumes would likely be on a different website.

As a user of fragrance, I'm not bothered by the IFRA, but I'm also not allergic to anything. I would buying an artisan fragrance that exceeded the regulations on an allergen, but I appreciate the warnings.

If your vegetarian colleague was worried about h/she is putting into their body, just avoid all perfume. Most perfume ingredients don't come from edible sources, are highly concentrated and toxic if ingested. Horse pee, despite being a waste product, is definitely more natural and less toxic (if for some reason you decide to drink it), than any all-natural perfume.

Sorry, double post.

Hanz I apologise profusely if I came across as arrogant; that was not my intention. However, to me, you came across as ill informed and uneducated, which I'm sure was not your intention either. There still seems to be a huge misunderstanding over the pluses and minuses of "Natural" versus "Synthetic". An Essential oil steam distilled from a plant, with no other chemistry involved is made up of chemicals, that have been made by that plant. It is possible to make many of those chemicals synthetically, in a laboratory; there is no difference between the chemical found in the oil, and the chemical made in the lab. Many "natural" materials are very poisonous, and can kill you. Many chemicals found in Essential oils are nasty too. There are many examples I could give, I will give two. Limonene is a chemical found in many oils (there is 70.0% of it in Orange Oil). It is an allergen. It is a skin sensitiser. It is classed (by the EU) as the worst type of environemental pollutant; and yet it is entirely natural. para Cresyl Methyl Ether is a chemical found in Ylang Oil, it has recently been classed as a possible carcinogen. Now, there are also many chemicals used in Perfumery that are entirely synthetic and that do not occur in Nature. As all materials that are used in Perfumery have to be tested for safety, so these synthetics are tested. I really cannot see what the fuss is about.

As far as I am aware nothing non-vegetarian is used in most Perfumery. Indeed the only non plant derived materials that were used are the naturals, Civet, Castoreum, Beeswax, Ambergris and Musk.

"This is a friendly neutral thread. It's a no bashing zone. Just leave your thoughts in a polite manner and at the end of your thoughts have a goal to educate what you know or experienced or even studied. It's an Open-minded thread for most of us consumers. If you do want to correct someone, do say ''Agree or Disagree'' and explain. We all share the same interest here. So, please."

If you have read anything else that I have written on Basenotes you will realise that I always try to "have a goal to educate". However it is not possible to educate if the person has already made up his or her mind. It is not possible to educate if the person is blind.