Code of Conduct
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 60 of 138
  1. #1

    Default IFRA Standards - Discussion thread (Temporary partial version)

    I’m always being asked what these are and how they apply to fragrances. Most people not in the industry seem to find the IFRA website a bit difficult to navigate too, so I thought I’d make up a summary list for quick reference. This isn’t a substitute for looking up the details, it does not include everything by a long shot and I don’t accept liability for any errors or omissions (!) but you might find it helpful as a way of avoiding some of the more common pitfalls.

    All of this material is repeated and kept up to date on my own blog as well as here.

    In each case I’m quoting the IFRA limit for Category 4 (which covers fine fragrance and anything in an alcohol base, sprayed on the skin for scent except products intended for freshly shaved skin where some of the limits are lower) or for ‘Leave-on’ products where applicable. All the percentages quoted are on a weight for weight basis and apply to the finished product.

    I’ve tried to summarise the main things you are likely to come across from all the Prohibited, Specification~ and Restricted (QRA and non-QRA) Standards.

    Acetyl isovaleryl (5-Methyl-2,3-hexanedione) Prohibited
    Alantroot oil (aka elecampane oil) Prohibited
    Allyl heptine carbonate Prohibited
    Allyl isothiocyanate Prohibited
    Amyl cinnamic aldehyde 10.7%
    Amylcyclopentenone Prohibited
    Anisylidene acetone (4-(p-methoxyphenyl)-3-butene-2-one) Prohibited
    cis-and trans-Asarone ((E)-and(Z)-2,4,5-Trimethoxypropen-1-yl benzene)~ * Prohibited
    Benzene Prohibited
    Benzaldehyde 0.27%
    Benzyl alcohol 2.7%
    Benzyl benzoate 26.7%
    Benzyl cinnamate 2.1%
    Benzyl salicylate 8.0%
    Boldo Oil Prohibited
    α-Butylcinnamaldehyde 0.45%
    Cade Oil (crude) and Birch Tar (crude) Prohibited
    Cade Oil (rectified)~ and Birch Tar (rectified)~ PAHs <1ppb
    Celeriax (3-Propylidenephthalide) 0.01%
    Chenopodium oil Prohibited
    Cinamic alcohol 0.4%
    Citral* 0.6%
    Citronellol* 13.3%
    Citrus oils (expressed) 6%
    Costus root oil, absolute and concrete Prohibited
    Coumarin 1.6%
    Cumin oil 0.4%
    Cyclamen alcohol (up to 1.5% permitted as an impurity in ~Cyclamen aldehyde) Prohibited
    Cyclamen propanal (p-tert-Butyldihydrocinnamaldehyde; Bourgeonal) 0.5%
    Dimethyl anthranilate (Methyl N-methylanthranilate) 0.1%
    Estragole* 0.2%
    Eugenol* 0.5%
    Farnesol* 1.2%
    Fig leaf absolute Prohibited
    Galbanum ketone (various trade names; 1-(5,5-Dimethyl-1-cyclohexen-1-yl)pent-4-en-1-one) 1.13%
    Geraniol* 5.3%
    Geranyl acetate 6%
    Grapefruit oil (expressed) 4%
    Helional 5.3%
    Hydratropic Aldehyde (2-Phenylpropionaldehyde) 0.17
    Hydroxycitronellal 1%
    Hyacinth absolute 0.3%
    Hyacinth butanal (3-Phenylbutanal, Trifernal) 2.7%
    Iso E Super 21.4%
    Isoeugenol 0.2%
    Ivy carbaldehyde (Dimethylcyclohex-3-ene-1-carbaldehyde (mixed isomers)) 2.7%
    Jasmine Absolute 0.7%
    Jasmine Sambac Absolute 4%
    Leaf aldehyde (trans-2-Hexenal) 0.002%
    Lemon (expressed) 2%
    Lime (expressed) 0.7%
    Linalool~ (Peroxide content less than 20 millimoles per litre)*
    Lilial (p-tert-Butyl-α-methylhydrocinnamic aldehyde; BMHCA) 1.9%
    Limonene (d, l and dl) (1-methyl-4-prop-1-en-2-ylcyclohexene) ~ (Peroxide content less than 20 millimoles per litre)*
    Lyral (3and4-(4-Hydroxy-4-methylpentyl)-3-cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde (HMPCC)) 0.2%
    Majantol (lily propanol; 2,2-Dimethyl-3-(3-tolyl)propan-1-ol) 4.5%
    Melissa officinalis 0.63%
    Methyl β-naphthyl ketone (Oranger Crystals) 0.2%
    Methyl eugenol* 0.02% (‘Fine Fragrance’) or 0.008% (‘Eau de Toilette’)
    Methyl heptadienone (6-Methyl-3,5-heptadien-2-one) 0.002 %
    Methyl heptine carbonate 0.01 % (but total 0.002% if used with MOC)
    Methyl Ionone (mixed isomers) 31.7%
    Methyl octine carbonate 0.002%
    3-Methyl-2-(pentyloxy)cyclopent-2-en-1-one 0.5%
    Moskene Prohibited
    Musk ambrette Prohibited
    Musk indane (5-Acetyl-1,1,2,3,3,6-hexamethyl indan; AHMI; phantolid, fixolide) 2%
    Musk Ketone 1-(4-tert-butyl-2,6-dimethyl-3,5-dinitrophenyl)ethanone ~ (Musk Xylene content less than 0.1% )
    Musk tibetene Prohibited
    Musk Xylene Prohibited
    Nitrobenzene Prohibited
    Oakmoss Absolute 0.1%
    1-Octen-3-yl acetate 0.3%
    Opoponax 0.4%
    Patchouli ethanone (1-(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 Octahydro-2,3,8,8-tetramethyl-2-naphthalenyl) ethanone; OTNE) 21.4%
    Peru balsam (crude) Prohibited
    Phenylacetaldehyde 0.3 %
    Quinoline Prohibited
    Rose Ketones 0.02%
    Santolina oil Prohibited
    Safranal (2,6,6-Trimethylcyclohexa-1,3-dienyl methanal) 0.005%
    Safrole, Isosafrole, Dihydrosafrole~ Prohibited (EOs containing these permitted if total below 0.01%)
    Savin oil from Juniperus sabina Prohibited
    Styrax (from Liquidambar styraciflua macrophyla or Liquidambar orientalis only) 0.6%
    Silvial / Suzaral / Rhodial (p-Isobutyl--methyl hydrocinnamaldehyde) 1.04%
    Styrax (all other species) Prohibited
    Tacrolimus (1-(2,4,4,5,5-Pentamethyl-1-cyclopenten-1-yl)ethan-1-one) 0.45%
    Tea Leaf Absolute 0.2%
    Tree Moss 0.1%
    Toluene Prohibited
    Trivertal (aka ivy carbaldehyde; Dimethylcyclohex-3-ene-1-carbaldehyde) 2.7%
    Ultravanil (vanilla cresol; 2-Ethoxy-4-methylphenol) 0.1%
    Versalide (Acetyl ethyl tetramethyl tetralin; Musk 36A) Prohibited
    Verbena absolute (verbena oil is Prohibited) 0.2%
    Vetiveryl acetate~ 1.04%
    Ylang ylang extracts 0.8%

    * - the main sources of these chemicals is in natural materials and you need to work out how much is in all the oils that contain them and keep the total in your product below the levels quoted here. These are some of the most complex standards to ensure compliance with.

    ~ = there is a Specification Standard for this material - check details via the Good Scents link for that material or directly on the IFRA Standards site.

    NB The limits for Oakmoss and Tree Moss are cumulative (so the combination of both must be below 0.1%)

    Explanation of IFRA Categories: When reading the standards maximum concentrations are given for each of the following 11 categories, but finding what goes in what category on the IFRA site is a bit like a treasure hunt, only not so much fun.

    So for those who may be interested in something other than straightforward spray on fragrance, here is a full list of what goes where:

    1 Lip Products of all types; Toys;

    2 Deodorant and Antiperspirant Products of all types

    3 Hydroalcoholic Products Applied To Recently Shaved Skin; Eye Products of all types; Men’s Facial Creams, Balms; Tampons; Baby Creams, Lotions, Oils

    4 Hydroalcoholic Products Applied To Unshaved Skin (includes body mists (aqueous based, alcoholic based and hydroalcoholic)); Hair Styling Aids, Hair Sprays of all types (pumps, aerosol sprays, etc.); Body Creams, Oils, Lotions, Fragrancing Creams of all types (except baby creams and lotions); Ingredients of Perfume Kits; Fragrance Compounds for Cosmetic Kits; Scent Pads, Foil Packs; Scent Strips for Hydroalcoholic Products; Foot Care Products; Hair Deodorant.

    5 Women’s Facial Creams/Facial Make-up; Hand Cream; Facial Masks; Baby Powder and Talc; Hair Permanent and Other Hair Chemical Treatments (e.g. relaxers) but not hair dyes; Wipes or Refreshing Tissues for Face, Neck, Hands, Body; Hand Sanitizers.

    6 Mouthwash; toothpaste

    7 Intimate wipes; baby wipes; insect repellent (intended to be applied to the skin)

    8 Make-up Removers of all types (not including face cleansers); Hair Styling Aids Non-Spray of all types; Nail Care; All powders and talcs (except baby powders and talcs); Hair Dyes.

    9 Bar Soap (Toilet Soap); Bath Gels, Foams, Mousses, Salts, Oils and Other Products Added To Bathwater; Body Washes of all types (including baby washes) and Shower Gels of all types; Conditioner (Rinse-Off); Depilatory Face Cleansers of all types (washes, gels, scrubs, etc.); Facial Tissues; Feminine Hygiene – Pads
    Feminine Hygiene – Liners; Liquid Soap; Napkins; Paper Towels; Shampoos of all types (including baby shampoos); Shaving Creams of all types (stick, gels, foams, etc.); Toilet Paper; Other Aerosols (including air fresheners sprays but not including deodorant/antiperspirants, hair styling aids spray)

    10 Handwash Laundry Detergents of all types including Concentrates; Fabric Softeners of all types including fabric softener sheets; Other Household Cleaning Products (fabric cleaners, soft surface cleaners, carpet cleaners); Machine Wash Laundry Detergents (liquids, powders, tablets, etc.) including laundry bleaches and concentrates; Hand Dishwashing Detergent including concentrates; Hard Surface Cleaners of all types (bathroom and kitchen cleansers, furniture polish); Diapers; Shampoos for Pets; Dry Cleaning Kits; Toilet Seat Wipes

    11 All non-skin contact or incidental skin contact. Including: Air Fresheners and Fragrancing of all types (plug-ins, solid substrate, membrane delivery, electrical, pot pourri, powders, fragrancing sachets, incense, liquid refills, air freshening crystals); Animal Sprays; Candles; Cat litter; Deodorizers/Maskers Not Intended For Skin Contact (e.g. fabric drying machine deodorizers, carpet powders); Floor wax; Fragranced lamp ring; Fuels; Infused socks; Insecticides (e.g. mosquito coil, paper, electrical, for clothing); Joss Sticks or Incense Sticks; Machine Dishwash Detergent and Deodorizers; Machine Only Laundry Detergent (e.g. liquitabs)
    Odored Distilled Water (that can be added to steam irons); Paints; Plastic articles (excluding toys); Reed diffusers; Scratch and sniff; Scent pack; Scent delivery system (using dry air technology); Shoe Polishes; Toilet Blocks; Treated Textiles (e.g. starch sprays, fabric treated with fragrances after wash, deodorizers for textiles or fabrics, tights with moisturizers) Note: Due to the expected negligible skin exposure from such products the risk of induction of dermal sensitization through the normal formulation and use of such products is considered to be negligible. As such, the concentration of fragrance ingredient is not restricted in the finished product.
    Last edited by Chris Bartlett; 1st May 2013 at 04:39 PM. Reason: added limonene and musk ketone
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  2. #2

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks for taking the time to do this, Chris. At the risk of increasing your workload, a question. Given oakmoss is now rationed to 0.1% can you (or anyone else reading) give us an indication of what % it may have once been in 'the good old days' for any of the classics like Chanel Pour Monsieur et al? Many thanks.

  3. #3

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    No problem. I canít say how much was in Channel Pour Monsieur but I can say that when Iím making a masculine fragrance to a commission and donít need to worry about the standards I will typically want to use in the region of 1%. So ten times as much as is now permitted.

    Actually itís the Eugenol and Geraniol standards that is the most problematic though:

    Here is the IFRA list of oils containing Eugenol:
    Clove bud/leaf/stem oil < 90
    Cinnamon leaf oil < 85
    Pimento berry or leaf oil < 85
    Bay oil < 56
    Carnation absolute < 15
    Basil oil (Linalool type) <15
    Cinnamon bark oil < 6
    Hyacinth absolute < 2
    Laurel leaf (Laurus nobilis) oil (sweet bay oil) < 2
    Rose oils (Bulgaria, Morocco, China, Turkey) < 1.5
    Mace oil < 1.1
    Citronella oil (Java, China, Vietnam) < 1
    Rose absolutes (VP *) < 1
    Tuberose absolute < 1
    Cananga oil < 0.7
    Nutmeg oil < 0.6
    Basil oil (Estragole type) < 0.5
    Cassia oil < 0.5
    Ylang-ylang extra < 0.5
    Ylang-ylang extra super < 0.5
    Ylang-ylang type I, II and III < 0.5
    Cascarilla oil < 0.3
    Lemongrass oils < 0.3
    Origanum oil (Spanish) < 0.3
    Tolu balsam absolute (VP *) < 0.3
    Estragon oil (Tarragon oil, Artemisia dracunculus L.) < 0.2
    Tagete patula oil/ absolute. ND dans T. minuta < 0.2
    Davana oil < 0.1
    Myrtle oil < 0.1
    Spike Lavender oil < 0.1
    Citronella oil (Ceylon) Traces < 0.1

    And the same list for Geraniol:
    Palmarosa oil < 85
    Citronella oil (Java, China, Vietnam) < 25
    Citronella oil (Ceylon) < 23
    Rose oil (Morocco) < 23
    Rose oil (Bulgaria) < 22
    Geranium oil (Bourbon) < 20
    Geranium oil (North Africa) < 20
    Rose oil (Turkey) < 20
    Rose oil (China) < 18.3
    Geranium oil (China) < 12
    Lemongrass oil < 8
    Orange flower absolute (VP *) < 8
    Melissa oil (genuine) < 5
    Rose absolutes (VP *) < 5
    Petitgrain oil (Paraguay) < 4.5
    Petitgrain bergamot oil < 4
    Petitgrain bitter orange oil < 4
    Neroli oil < 3.5
    Petitgrain lemon oil < 3.5
    Coriander fruit oil < 3
    Ylang-ylang extra < 3
    Ylang-ylang type I < 2.6
    Rosewood oil < 2.5
    Ylang-ylang type II < 2.4
    Clary sage (Salvia sclarea) oil < 2.2
    Carrot (seed) oil < 2
    Mentha citrata oil (s) < 2
    Cananga oil < 1.5
    Litsea cubeba oil < 1.5
    Cardamom oil < 1.2
    Cistus (Rockrose) oil < 1.2
    Coriander leaf oil < 1
    Lavandin absolute (VP *) < 1
    Lavender absolute (VP *) < 1
    Lavender oil (s) < 1
    Snakeroot oil (Asarum canadense) < 1
    Myrtle oil < 0.8
    Ylang-ylang type III < 0.8
    Ylang-ylang extra super < 0.7
    Lavandin oil (s) < 0.6
    Red Thyme oil (Spanish) < 0.5
    Cajuput oil < 0.4
    Ho oil (s) < 0.4
    Lime oil (distilled) < 0.4
    Lime oil (expressed) < 0.4
    Nutmeg oil < 0.4
    Laurel leaf (Laurus nobilis) oil < 0.3
    Marjoram sweet oil (Origanum majorana) < 0.3
    Basil oil (Linalool type) < 0.2
    Hop oil < 0.2
    Lemon oil (s) < 0.2
    Spike Lavender oil < 0.2
    Last edited by Chris Bartlett; 15th January 2012 at 03:33 PM. Reason: minor corrections
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  4. #4

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    great! i think this should be made sticky until the next big change.

  5. #5

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    An amazing list, Chris. What's the primary point of limiting these things? In other words, what is the IFRA's main reason for limiting these ingredients? Is it ONLY because they are known allergens, or is it something more (something more sinister that could cause real health problems)?

    And what puts an ingredient on the list? If one person reports that they believe a certain ingredient caused them to sneeze, could THAT alone put the ingredient on the list? How many "problematic" reports have to occur before it's on the dreaded list?

    I think back to the recently discontinued 1948 Creed Vetiver. That fragrance was around for SIXTY-TWO (62) years! People loved it and it was a classic fragrance for Creed. The story I got from a Creed representative was that it was one of the one's Olivier Creed decided to discontinue due to IFRA interference. He is reportedly being pressured to change formulas and he is choosing to discontinue some fragrances rather than bow to the IFRA.

    So I'm just wondering what your opinion of the IFRA is. Are they going overboard with this stuff, or do you feel all their rules and regulations are necessary and that they are providing a truly needed service? I can't help but think so much of this is much ado about nothing. Simply stepping outside causes many people to tear up and sneeze. That's just the way things are. If someone has a problem with a certain fragrance, they shouldn't wear it. That doesn't mean the NO ONE should wear it, does it?
    Last edited by RedRaider430; 15th January 2012 at 08:32 PM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    This may be idle curiosity, but - I wonder if the current rules will result in less-common floral absolutes being used more, simply for the fact that they haven't been regulated yet? ( I'm thinking lotus, narcissus, etc. )

    Also, does ''musk ambrette'' being banned mean natural ambrette extracts are banned?

    I always wanted to smell costus. I guess I won't now.

  7. #7

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Very interesting... I actually found in a couple recent reformulations the cloves note more 'sticking out' than what I was used to. I didn't know about limits on eugenol levels, so now I wonder if staying under the cumulative 0.5% required changes in a number of contributing oils, and this is what throws the new versions off-balance. Unless there is a cloves substitution trick, which smells alike but still doesn't work perfectly in blends.

  8. #8

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I know what you mean, Fjord; I'm wondering if there is a clove-alike out there, too. Some reformulations have lead to more prominent clove rather than less, which is a touch baffling given the heavy restrictions on eugenol. I'm thinking of Caron's Poivre, which went from clove-y rose to rosy clove.

  9. #9

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Sugandaraja View Post
    This may be idle curiosity, but - I wonder if the current rules will result in less-common floral absolutes being used more, simply for the fact that they haven't been regulated yet? ( I'm thinking lotus, narcissus, etc. )

    Also, does ''musk ambrette'' being banned mean natural ambrette extracts are banned?

    I always wanted to smell costus. I guess I won't now.
    To an extent I think it probably will, though price will prevent either of those two appearing in anything mainstream (as a complete aside I’m a huge fan of narcissus absolute - fab stuff). The flip-side though is that the regulation of the component-chemicals affects novel florals as much as the traditional ones. There may be no standard for narcissus as such, but it contains:

    benzyl alcohol <6.00 %
    benzyl benzoate <5.00 %
    cinnamyl alcohol <3.50 %
    coumarin <0.50 %

    all of which are restricted. This is the difficulty with natural ingredients - the very same complexity that makes them so desirable in a scent also makes them difficult to use because they contain so many potentially ‘dangerous’ things . . .

    And no, musk ambrette is a reference to an aroma-chemical of that name not the the natural extract of ambrette seeds.

    As to costus root oil - it is still available - it just won’t be used in mainstream perfumery any longer - it is still a permitted flavouring agent. So you could buy some to smell easily enough if you wanted to.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  10. #10

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks for the additional info.
    Last edited by mr. reasonable; 16th January 2012 at 08:53 AM.

  11. #11

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thank you, Chris for this awesome thread!!!

    As for IFRA it is more complicated than it seems @mr reasonable.

    In another topic I wrote this

    Here are a few highlights:

    There I also quote this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Nukapai View Post
    IFRA was started as a response to government regulators knee-jerk-reacting to allergens found in essential oils. The industry reacted by trying to form a body that would be substantial enough to prevent the ban of too many materials outright.
    Those allergens were actually pointed out by 'greenies': people afraid of 'chemicals' in perfume like EWG and other fear-mongering green movements.

    What has happened is that the industry did very thorough testing on too many skins and genetically variant people.

    What occurred, is that naturals got pushed out in favor of defined synthetics or nature identical products, that could be controlled from beginning to end.
    Thus, if test proved the product safe, if became freely available..... further more, the naturals got clobbered because they contained some topical issues.

    So the greenies, wanting to 'kill' the synthetics, actually killed the naturals and promoted the increase use of synthetics, or defined ingredient (YES CHEMICALS), that could be made and reproduced in a consistent manner.

  12. #12

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    . . .
    Last edited by mr. reasonable; 16th January 2012 at 08:53 AM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    My purpose in this thread was to provide something useful and helpful to people seeking to comply with the IFRA Standards rather than to get into yet another discussion on the politics of IFRA which has been, and will continue to be, explored extensively elsewhere on Basenotes and properly belongs in the ‘Industry and General’ forum rather than here in DIY.

    I’m happy to engage in that discussion: I just don’t think it belongs here where we are concerned with the practicalities of making fragrance.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  14. #14

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    It has occured to me that my attempt to summarise may have courted controversy by giving the impression that nearly all the IFRA standards are concerned with natural materials - that isn’t the case - I’ve included all the natural materials for which there are standards on my list (well I think I have anyway, if I’ve missed anything it was unintentional). There are however a lot of standards that I missed off, that are concerned with aroma-chemicals that don’t occur in nature - I’ve now added a couple of the more common ones that I had missed since I posted the first list.

    My reasoning was that as natural materials are so much easier to buy, DIY perfumers are more likely to be using them than some of the chemicals . . . that might have been a bad idea . . . I may go back and add more of the chemicals to restore balance to the list, but on the other hand I don’t want it to end up being just as complex as IFRAs own website - I’ll take votes!

    On the other hand there is no doubt that the restrictions on those chemicals common to a lot of essential oils really do impact a lot of natural materials.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  15. #15

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks for your answers Chris! You really are quite an asset to the Basenotes community.

    Something that came to mind reading this is: is it a lot easier to formulate scents at eau de toilette concentrations versus, say, parfum extrait? It seems to me one would have more options at lower levels.

    As much as I disapprove of some of the changes in the Caron urn scents, given that most of them were parfum-strength scents heavy on clove, carnation, rose, and jasmine, it must have been quite a headache for Mr. Fraysse making them IFRA compliant.

  16. #16

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Sugandaraja View Post
    Thanks for your answers Chris! You really are quite an asset to the Basenotes community.

    Something that came to mind reading this is: is it a lot easier to formulate scents at eau de toilette concentrations versus, say, parfum extrait? It seems to me one would have more options at lower levels.

    As much as I disapprove of some of the changes in the Caron urn scents, given that most of them were parfum-strength scents heavy on clove, carnation, rose, and jasmine, it must have been quite a headache for Mr. Fraysse making them IFRA compliant.
    Oh yes, very much easier at lower concentrations because all the limits apply to the final product, a fragrance that is compliant at 10% aromatics can easily be non-compliant at 15% and extrait (so called ‘pure parfum’) is often more like 20% - imagine trying to put together a good Lily of the Valley fragrance: even if you use all three of the main aroma-chemicals (hydroxycitronellal, lilial and lyral) at their maximum levels (1%, 1.9% and 0.2% respectively) you still have a very weak fragrance unless you pad it out with a lot of something else. So the tendency will be to use as much as you can of each of those, leaving you no scope for a more concentrated version of the final fragrance.

    Jasmine isn’t as bad as it first appears, because the odour yield is so high - a little goes a long way - plus you can boost it easily with various of synthetics or with jasmine sambac. With clove, another high odour yield item, most people use clove bud, which is much lower in eugenol than clove leaf and there are also some anisic aroma chemicals to boost that with too. The same is true of rose - plenty of options - but most of them are nothing like as good of course.

    The bottom line though is that reformulating something is like trying to imitate a fragrance for which the formula is unknown - ten times harder than making one from scratch - no wonder many fragrances are just discontinued instead. Something I frequently have to explain to potential customers who imagine I’m going to be able to make them a version of Shalimar at a fraction of the price . . .
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  17. #17

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bartlett View Post
    My reasoning was that as natural materials are so much easier to buy, DIY perfumers are more likely to be using them than some of the chemicals . . . that might have been a bad idea . . . I may go back and add more of the chemicals to restore balance to the list, but on the other hand I don’t want it to end up being just as complex as IFRAs own website - I’ll take votes!
    by all means, please make it as complete as you can. i find the ifra site a horror to deal with, i ended up frustrated because i did not find the data that i was looking for several times. just a nice list like this would be great! especially if it's complete.

  18. #18

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    In my opinion this thread should be made sticky, and stay in this forum. It's a valuable amount of information.
    Thanks Chris
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  19. #19

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Yes mr. Bartlett, please, make it as complete as you can. You are fantastic!

  20. #20

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks for the kind remarks - I’ve added a few more items and will continue to work on making the list complete over time (assuming my ability to edit the list does not expire - I notice from the recently re-released rules that it’s only meant to last an hour . . .).

    One of the things I’ve just added is the strikingly heavily restricted leaf aldehyde - one of the IFRA rules that is harder than most to understand given the huge range of natural materials, particularly fruits and vegetables, that contain the substance. You’ll get far more exposure to leaf aldehyde by taking a trip to your local supermarket and handling a few of those healthy looking tomatoes than in any amount of perfume.

    From a practical perfume formulation point of view it’s straightforward to simply use the closely related, similar smelling (though weaker) and completely unrestricted leaf alcohol (cis-3-hexenol) - also widely found in nature.

    As a matter of interest, here is the list of things in which the aldehyde occurs naturally:
    apple
    apricot
    avocado
    banana
    bergamot oil turkey @ 0.01%
    blood orange oil italy @ 0.40%
    blueberry
    cananga leaf oil @ 2.0%
    champaca concrete @ trace%
    clary sage oil france @ trace%
    cucumber
    currant
    eschweilera coriacea (a. p. dc.) mori flower oil brazil @ 1.40%
    eucalyptus globulus oil rwanda @ 0.13%
    feverfew flower oil @ trace%
    geranium leaf oil india @ 0.05%
    geranium stem oil india @ 0.05%
    grape concord grape
    grapefruit oil california @ 0.03%
    guava fruit headspace reunion @ 7.40%
    guava fruit oil reunion @ 0.10%
    herniaria incana lam. oil greece @ 2.20%
    laurel leaf oil turkey @ <0.10%
    lemon verbena oil turkey @ 0.17%
    melon
    mentha longifolia (l.) huds. oil jordan @ 0.20%
    peach
    pennyroyal oil @ trace%
    petitgrain grapefruit oil @ 0.30%
    petitgrain lime oil @ trace%
    raspberry
    rice cooked rice
    satureja viminea l. oil costa rica @ trace%
    star fruit oil cuba @ trace%
    strawberry
    tagete oil turkey @ 0.06%
    tea black tea
    tobacco
    tomato

    So go carefully in the fruit and veg aisles!
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  21. #21

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Very strange, but then I'm a little surprised with your mention up-thread that costus is too deadly for trace amounts in perfume, yet it's considered alright to ingest it!

  22. #22

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Actually I can understand that more easily - quite a few things will irritate your skin but are safe to eat - anyone who has ever cut up chilli peppers will know how dangerous it can be to spread the juice about: I rubbed my eyes once, half an hour after I’d finished cutting them up and washed my hands, I thought, thoroughly: not a mistake you make a second time! The tearing continued throughout the whole evening and I looked like I’d been in a fight.

    What is bizarre though is that I can put as much chilli oil into a perfume as I like - and in fact I have used some (in a very low dose) in a fragrance for a commission. Everyone except the chap who had it made sneezes every time he sprays any in public! It does smell lovely on the skin a few minutes later though.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  23. #23

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Yes, chillis can be a nightmare in the wrong... places.

    The allergen status confuses me, too. If you test enough people, isn't it inevitable that there's someone out there allergic to amost everything testable?

    Given people's allergies to shellfish and peanuts ( which seem fairly common and sometimes horrific ), I'm surprised there aren't more bans of those.

  24. #24

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    There is no logic to that - different regulatory bodies take quite different views - the way the QRA system works is that they take a view of what the available evidence says causes sensitisation (and what has been tested depends of course on what has been tested, not on what should be tested) and then they conclude that ten times less than that will be safe. Then they permit ten times less than that in the perfume (roughly).

    To massively oversimplify, this is based on the idea that whatever sensitisation level is, this will be based on patch tests on the skin or arms or back, and perfumes and other products may be applied in more absorptive / reactive areas, plus there may be a cumulative effect of an ingredient being present in multiple products and an accumulation increasing the likelihood of a problematic reaction. Further they also try to take account of the general population including some individuals who may be more than usually sensitive to a particular product for racial or other genetic reasons and so the results from small samples may not be reliable for all members of the population. They describe this as taking a conservative approach.

    If you want to examine the full scientific rationale it is available in this RIFM document. There are worked examples from page 51 onwards. I must warn you that for the non-specialist (like me) it is tough going.

    As a final thought - there are many products - tobacco and rhubarb amongst them - that have a long history of consumer use and consumption. Yet if they were discovered today, they would never pass modern standards of acceptable safety. You can argue a convincing case either way as to whether that fact represents progress or not, according to your perspective.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  25. #25

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I’ve added Ivy carbaldehyde, Benzaldehyde, benzyl benzoate, benzyl cinnamate, benzyl salicylate and α-Butylcinnamaldehyde to the list this morning. More as I get time . . .
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  26. #26
    Dependent
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    3,637

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks for this, Chris!

  27. #27

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    No problem. I’ve added Amyl cinnamic aldehyde, Methyl heptadienone, Methyl heptine carbonate , 3-Methyl-2-(pentyloxy)cyclopent-2-en-1-one as well now.

    Of these Methyl heptadienone is in a few naturals including some lavender and lavandin products, lemon balm and grape as well as various foodstuffs. Amyl cinnamic aldehyde is in soya beans and black tea.

    The other two are not found in nature.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  28. #28

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thank you, Chris, this already an awesome starting point!

    I do have an important side note: I assume you are aware of the upcoming EC regulation for EU (2013) 1223/2009 regarding toxicity? Those standards override the IFRA percentages (and most of the times are a lot lower) due to toxicological exposure %.
    http://www.cosmeticsandtoiletries.co...132196008.html

    If one would make a perfume and sell it within the EU to the public with regards for the OP %, it does not necessarily mean that the particular perfume would be considered safe to be sold to the public. Therefore you would need an experienced toxicologist to calculate the individual MoS (Margin of Safety) for each substance that goes into the end product and advise the perfumer accordingly.

    An example for lavender essential oil the MoS in a lotion would be 0.5%
    http://www.efchemicalconsulting.co.uk/lavender-mos.pdf

    while according to IFRA a perfumer could use up to 1.6% in an edp (fragrance concentrate 10%)

    (p.s. the above calculation should be adjusted by a few % as a lotion falls into a different IFRA category and exposure than a perfume)

    For hobby purposes or non-EU standards the OP is great. However if you intend to make perfume professionally you would need to take these new regulatory developments into consideration (and yes, I agree that it's huge headache!).

    Maybe you could add this to the OP, Chris, just to make sure people are aware?

    eta spelling
    Last edited by Irina; 25th January 2012 at 02:23 PM.

  29. #29

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks Irina, you saved me the bother as I was just about to post that. It was where I was getting very confused between the two sets of figures. It's a complete minefield isn't it?

  30. #30
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks so much for all the great information. I spent hours on the IFRA site yesterday and came away with a bigger headache than the time I sniffed too much eucalyptus oil.

    My next challenge is in figuring out how to actually calculate the amounts of Eugenol and Geraniol. I'm thinking it must be more complicated than just weighing drops of Bergamot Oil vs. Alcohol. The IFRA site mentions "PPM" (parts per million, I'm assuming), but I can't find any reference to the actual PPM for these ingredients on my supplier's web site... I've checked the MSDS and C of A sheets.

    Any advice or guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks you!

  31. #31

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Irina View Post
    Thank you, Chris, this already an awesome starting point!

    I do have an important side note: I assume you are aware of the upcoming EC regulation for EU (2013) 1223/2009 regarding toxicity? Those standards override the IFRA percentages (and most of the times are a lot lower) due to toxicological exposure %.
    http://www.cosmeticsandtoiletries.co...132196008.html

    If one would make a perfume and sell it within the EU to the public with regards for the OP %, it does not necessarily mean that the particular perfume would be considered safe to be sold to the public. Therefore you would need an experienced toxicologist to calculate the individual MoS (Margin of Safety) for each substance that goes into the end product and advise the perfumer accordingly.

    An example for lavender essential oil the MoS in a lotion would be 0.5%
    http://www.efchemicalconsulting.co.uk/lavender-mos.pdf

    while according to IFRA a perfumer could use up to 1.6% in an edp (fragrance concentrate 10%)

    (p.s. the above calculation should be adjusted by a few % as a lotion falls into a different IFRA category and exposure than a perfume)

    For hobby purposes or non-EU standards the OP is great. However if you intend to make perfume professionally you would need to take these new regulatory developments into consideration (and yes, I agree that it's huge headache!).

    Maybe you could add this to the OP, Chris, just to make sure people are aware?

    eta spelling
    There is definitely an issue here - and I’m happy to explore it - at this point my interpretation and yours look rather different, so I’m seeking a more expert opinion before I say anything that might not be accurate.

    Also I think we will probably need a separate thread on it, to avoid getting tangled in different numbers: once I’ve got what I believe to be a definitive view I’ll see if I can put something together, but that may take a while.

    One thing is very clear - it’s going to give all of us a headache!
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  32. #32

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Chris, thank you, for me, you don't need to put more time into it, as I'm fully aware of the implications

    Just thought it was worth mentioning. Of course (anyone) feel free to begin another thread on it, my time is rather limited thus I can't do so atm (also not sure if this forum is targeted to the pro perfumer for that matter), but I would happily pitch in if the moment arises

    Thanks again for all the effort and time you put into keeping this DIY section alive, interesting and informative! *thumbs up*

  33. #33

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by BoisLeLe View Post
    Thanks so much for all the great information. I spent hours on the IFRA site yesterday and came away with a bigger headache than the time I sniffed too much eucalyptus oil.

    My next challenge is in figuring out how to actually calculate the amounts of Eugenol and Geraniol. I'm thinking it must be more complicated than just weighing drops of Bergamot Oil vs. Alcohol. The IFRA site mentions "PPM" (parts per million, I'm assuming), but I can't find any reference to the actual PPM for these ingredients on my supplier's web site... I've checked the MSDS and C of A sheets.

    Any advice or guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks you!
    You have two options: you either need a specific GC/MS analysis of the oils you are using - you may be able to get that from your supplier if you ask - or you need to use the defined ‘typical maximum’ contents listed by IFRA in Annex 1 to the Code of Practice.

    In either case you then need to add up the amounts present in all the oils you are using in each product. A spreadsheet is a practical way to do this. Don’t forget that it isn’t just Eugenol and Geraniol - methyl eugenol is another particularly difficult one. I plan to add to this thread as an when I get time with more of the key practical areas to consider.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  34. #34
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Thanks, Chris. You rock!

  35. #35

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I’ve added another batch of aroma chemicals to the OP tonight: celeriax, Hydratropic Aldehyde, Hyacinth butanal, Phenylacetaldehyde, Patchouli ethanone, 1-Octen-3-yl acetate and Tacrolimus.

    That completes all the items from the Restricted Standards (QRA) - so if you spot something I’ve missed please say so - all the Prohibited Standards are also in now, so I’ve just to add some of the Specification and non-QRA ones.

    Of the new set, the one you are probably most likely to encounter is Phenyl acetaldehyde (it’s more usually written with a space, but IFRA have it without so that’s what’s in the list). Anyway it smells like hyacinth, is usually diluted in Phenyl Ethyl Alcohol (PEA - an aromatic ingredient in it’s own right) and the restriction is quite low. It occurs in a range of natural products including lots of fruit and veg, coriander oil and narcissus absolute among others and the actual scent of hyacinths.

    Finally I realised that some of these chems are given such bewildering names (to those not trained in organic chemistry) and have such a wide range of different ways of writing the name, plus in many cases pithier brand names that it can be very hard to know just what you are talking about.

    Throughout the list I’ve tried to start with the most commonly used name with other common ones and the name IFRA uses in brackets. With all the new additions I’ve also added a link to the Good Scents page on that material where you can see a list of synonyms, a list of some of the natural occurrences if any and get a link direct to the standard. Eventually I plan to put those in for everything and I wish I’d thought of it to start with . . .
    Last edited by Chris Bartlett; 7th June 2012 at 06:50 PM. Reason: minor corrections
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  36. #36

    Default

    Thanks again Chris. You made a good choice writing phenylacetaldehyde that way, since that comes from the IUPAC name which requires the words to be joint.
    For those who encounter problems with this names it's good to remember that each material has its own CAS number, you can find it easily via google and use it as a key for your searches (it's useful because it's written always the same of course).

  37. #37

    Default

    Sorry double post

  38. #38

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I did think about putting CAS numbers into the list, but in the end I didn’t because they too are subject to some confusion. Take Lyral for example - the name that appears in the IFRA list is

    3and4-(4-Hydroxy-4-methylpentyl)-3-cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde (HMPCC)

    The ‘3and4’ part of which is recognising that there are actually two similar substances involved, with CAS numbers:
    31906-04-4
    51414-25-6
    These same two substances also have the EC numbers:
    250-863-4
    257-187-9

    If you put Lyral into a product you have to declare it on the label, as it is one of the 26 allergens regulated by the EU, but when you do that you have to use the INCI name, which is:
    Hydroxyisohexyl 3-Cyclohexene Carboxaldehyde
    and that has the CAS number:
    31906-04-4 (as though it was just the ‘3’ version)

    Now if you put 'Lyral IUPAC' into Google the top result is from ChemIndustry indicating it has another CAS number:
    68411-90-5

    While if you look it up on Wikipedea you find that chemical details are given, including the IUPAC name
    4-(4-hydroxy-4-methylpentyl)-1-cyclohex-3-enecarboxaldehyde (as though it was just the ‘4’ version)
    plus CAS number 31906-04-4 and EC number 250-863-4 (as though it was just the ‘3’ version)
    As well as a list of other names under which it is sold:
    Lyral, Kovanol, Mugonal, Landolal

    Which, strikingly to me, does not include the name used by my own supplier, and under which it is listed by The Good Scents Company which is Leeral

    If I were to attempt to reconcile all that stuff for every entry I’d have failed in my objective to produce a simplified reference summary, so in the end I decided that the best quality, most complete information for the widest range of materials seemed to be that included in The Good Scents Company pages: hence my decision that links there would be useful.

    How the ordinary consumer is expected to make any sense out of all this is a mystery!
    Last edited by Chris Bartlett; 4th February 2012 at 11:51 AM. Reason: added quotation marks to clarify the Google search
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  39. #39

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Some from my collection but it's on the fragrance concentrate. I think they are not on the list.

    bornylacetate 9% of concentrate
    terpineol alpha 30% of concentrate
    ethyl butyrate 8% of concentrate
    anisaldehyde 10% of concentrate
    galbex 183 6% of concentrate
    benzyl propionate 10% of concentrate
    styrallyl acetate 5% of concentrate

    Please check and adjust or let me know if editing is required.
    Last edited by princeOK; 4th February 2012 at 03:32 PM.

  40. #40

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Right, another update to the OP just completed - I’ve added Dimethyl anthranilate, Estragole, Methyl β-naphthyl ketone, Methyl eugenol, Musk indane and Safranal.

    This update completes all the non-QRA Restricted Standards. It also really shows that those who said I should make the list complete were right, because it includes two of the most important and difficult standards (in bold). I’m going to add lists of the natural materials containing these somewhere: I think it might be most useful to put them into the same post with the Eugenol list for ease of reference later.

    There are still most of the specification standards left - not quite sure how best to handle those as they are not so easily summarised - and there are also quite a few Prohibited Standards left to add (all the natural materials are in, but not all the synthetics).

    This has turned into rather an epic task!
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  41. #41

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Chris, my message was just to suggest users to use as well CAS numbers because they are useful, I wasn't suggesting you to put it in your list, as it would be actually too much work as you say!!
    As for the problems you reported about CAS, actually it is a precise and unambiguous method of classification if we consider the exact molecule. The problem arises from the fact that often chemicals are given common or commercial names which can be not precise and create confusion as you describe (the matter with lyral is that as you said two chemically different molecules, which have obviously two different CAS, are called both lyral, or leeral; the third CAS you cited is an error of that site because that number turns out to correspond to Hexanedinitrile).
    I suggest everyone to use Sigma-Aldrich site for their searches about chemicals, it's a precise source of information and there you are sure to find the correct CAS
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  42. #42

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    The Sigma Aldrich tip is useful, thanks. Yes I realise the CAS numbers are precise for their purpose: if you buy materials direct from the big manufacturers you always get CAS numbers quoted too.

    The whole thing is still very confusing to those of us without the organic chemistry background!
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  43. #43

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bartlett View Post
    The whole thing is still very confusing to those of us without the organic chemistry background!
    I know, I hope I didn't enhance the confusion, my tip had the opposite purpose: facilitate the identification of chemicals by using a mean which is different from the long annoying chemical names Anyhow, it's good to know there's this possibility, just in case!
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  44. #44

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    No, no - not at all - I appreciate the idea and link. Once I have the Good Scents links there the CAS number is another thing that can be picked up from them. I can’t be sure how reliable they are for those, not having checked a meaningful sized sample, but pretty much anything else on those pages that I’ve ever cross-checked has turned out to be accurate so it should be - and for Lyral they give full chemical details, including both correct CAS numbers, for both the variants that are present in the commercial product.

    I think we are slowly building up a really useful resource here.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  45. #45

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bartlett View Post
    I think we are slowly building up a really useful resource here.
    I agree
    About Lyral I was wondering: is the commercial product containing both the molecules or is it just the same name for two slightly different products each one with one molecule?
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  46. #46

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I’m not quite certain because I don’t know how the stuff is made, but from my reading of some of MSDS and the EU papers on the subject I believe all the commercial products contain both molecules, presumably either because the mix is desirable or because they are both made in the production process and there is no commercial incentive to separate them.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  47. #47

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    thank you,

    the original post is getting better and better.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bartlett View Post
    There are still most of the specification standards left - not quite sure how best to handle those as they are not so easily summarised - and there are also quite a few Prohibited Standards left to add (all the natural materials are in, but not all the synthetics).
    what is the problem with these specification standards, could you give an example? i would like to think it over if that could be of any help, and i am sure many others feel this way too.

    maybe in the meanwhile you could start with the prohibited synthetics?

    please do keep up the good work, it surely is appreciated. and thankfully the mods have taken note, and made this thing sticky. :)

  48. #48

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bartlett View Post
    This has turned into rather an epic task!
    don't bite off more than you can chew (in dutch we say something about stacking too much hay on ones fork, which evokes funny images to my mind).

    personally, i would rather see the list complete than a summary of all the naturals that contain the restricted ingredients. don't get me wrong; such a list would be nothing less than great, but if you feel it's becoming too much i think you should leave that part out for now.

    and you surely should get something like a medal pinned to your user profile when you manage to accomplish all this. ;)

  49. #49

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    As I can deduce by the IFRA website the specification standars include few materials but they are a little bit more complex to understand, not being just a number but an explaination of particular cases.
    E.g. "Allyl esters should only be used when the level of free allylalcohol in the ester is less than 0.1%. This recommendation is based on the delayed irritant potential of allylalcohol"
    I don't know if this is what Chris meant to say but still it's one possibile issue.
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  50. #50

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Quote Originally Posted by otocione View Post
    As I can deduce by the IFRA website the specification standars include few materials but they are a little bit more complex to understand, not being just a number but an explaination of particular cases.
    E.g. "Allyl esters should only be used when the level of free allylalcohol in the ester is less than 0.1%. This recommendation is based on the delayed irritant potential of allylalcohol"
    I don't know if this is what Chris meant to say but still it's one possibile issue.
    Yes that is the sort of thing I meant - I’ve oversimplified the Cade and Birch Tar ones in order to essentially turn them back into a number, but some of the standards talk about production methods.

    Take this one on Vetiveryl acetate for example:

    Acetylated vetiver oil (Vetiveryl acetate) should only be used as a fragrance ingredient if produced by methods that lead to a reduction in allergenic materials, like the ones outlined below (acetylation methods using acetic anhydride):
    - without catalyst, at a temperature not exceeding 120įC
    - with ortho phosphoric acid at room temperature
    - with sodium acetate in toluene at reflux temperature
    The first two products can be used in their crude form after the usual procedures, but may be further purified. In the last case, distillation is necessary. Another method accepted is an enzymatic acetylation process.
    This recommendation is based on test results of RIFM with samples prepared according to different acetylation methods (private communication to IFRA).
    I can’t see any obvious way of summarising that without rendering it meaningless, yet Vetiveryl acetate is a very commonly used ingredient so I’m loath to miss it out.
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  51. #51

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Actually it's complicated but there's no way to make it simpler. I don't know maybe we could just put the direct link to the IFRA pdf of any specification so that it's easily accessible, then if anybody needs help, that's why we are here
    If someone has a better idea it would be definitely welcome!
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  52. #52

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    i think it would be the most simple to just list them with the others, with a short note of the matter *, plus either a link or a footnote.

    material, problem, reference.

    in that way, you keep the list readable, just one line per item. all in one place.

    the reference could then exist in the form of a more extensive listing with either full or simplified data below the main alphabetic summary list. this could possibly be divided under headers of certain case types (i do not know whether many are shared or not) alphabetic, or whatever makes the most sense (i do not know what these cases are).

    alternatively (less work) a link to the original data should do it as well, provided they keep the information on the same page over time. a bunch of broken links would be a terrible waste of valuable work.

    and while not everyone would understand everything, at least it's there and you can always find out more, one way or the other. ask the suppliers, ask here on the forum, google some terms, and so on. diy-ers tend to be resourceful. :)

    *) the vetiveryl acetate case, for instance, could be described without giving any detail. it's good enough to know that they demand a type with allergens reduced, for a start. provide a pointer to additional detailed information, and it's all great.

    i hope this helps.

  53. #53

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    @gido the links at IFRA site may change as they update the information on regular basis, so it would be necessary to check occasionally their validity
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  54. #54

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    OK thanks for the thoughts guys - I’ve just finished adding Versalide, several new links, colour coding and references to Specification Standards. I’ve gone for a combination of:

    the Good Scents link - so far they are reproducing the specification in their material data for everything I’ve linked that has a standard.

    A generic link to the list of Specification Standards on the IFRA site - hopefully that link should be stable even if the individual pdf links change.

    To make them stand out more I’ve also colour coded the *, ~ and ‘prohibited’ notes.

    To be continued . . .
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  55. #55

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    WONDERFUL
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  56. #56

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Another update - I’ve now added a detailed explanation of the IFRA Categories so that you can see exactly what is included in the Category 4 numbers given in the main table as well as what would fall into all the other categories if you want to look something up. It took me hours of searching to find this information on the IFRA site the first time I needed it, so I thought it useful to include.

    Also note that there are a range of products in Category 11 for which the majority of the standards simply state ‘Not Restricted'
    Last edited by Chris Bartlett; 8th June 2012 at 04:53 PM. Reason: minor corrections
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

  57. #57

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Wow Chris! Thank you for your diligence. This is a huge undertaking and I hope people realize the work you have had to put into this. I don't work with aromachem's, only naturals and this is really fantasic.

    Thanks, Tracy
    It isn't happiness that makes us grateful, but gratitude that makes us happy.

    Tracy
    www.aromaartisan.com
    www.myskinsoapstudio.com

  58. #58

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Fantastic guide! This thread gets better each time I look at it.

  59. #59

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    Given the restrictions around all these, I'm guessing we'll see a lot of creative work in Category 11 in these next few years.

  60. #60

    Default Re: IFRA Standards - a summary

    I strongly suspect that’s one of the reasons we’ve seen an explosion in sales of reed diffusers in the last year or two. Now, far from being the poor-relations of the home fragrance business you can get some really excellent ones.

    The relaxed restrictions are certainly one of the reasons I decided to launch my own range: sometimes making a skin-fragrance you feel as though you’re running with a sack of lead - so it’s nice to put it down and run free every now and then!
    ďA person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person
    ― Dave Barry

    Chris Bartlett
    Perfumes from the edge . . .

    www.perfumedesigner.co.uk
    Twitter: @PellWallPerfume

    If you are looking for a perfumery consultation Iím happy to quote: if you want free advice, thatís what these forums are for
    You can also join my blog if you wish to ask questions of me.

Similar Threads

  1. Phoenicia Perfumes: Discussion Thread
    By deadidol in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 27th May 2014, 03:37 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31st October 2013, 08:21 PM
  3. 9 Hermessences Sampling Groups Discussion Thread
    By 30 Roses in forum Female Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 168
    Last Post: 2nd December 2011, 02:55 AM
  4. Replies: 115
    Last Post: 29th May 2011, 04:22 AM
  5. 10 Creed Samples Group Discussion Thread
    By 30 Roses in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 17th April 2011, 08:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •