Code of Conduct
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 61 to 73 of 73
  1. #61

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Thank you for that info. I think it is safe to assume that most perfumers would also prefer to go that extra mile too for the same reasons. It does however seem a shame to have such an impact on classic frags that have seriously stood the test of time and probably been test run on real skins for far longer and more often than the tests resulting in these sort of conclusions. It would be interesting to have a side by side comparison... but that will never happen.

    Once upon a time if you came up in a rash to a perfume or the like, you just stopped wearing it.. simple...you didn't sue anyone or worry whose fault it was. I can remember being horribly allergic to the original Revlon Charlie perfume for some reason. I just wore a different one instead.

    I'm not saying allergies should be ignored when there is real proof, but one would just desire any perfumer to retain some freedom and responsibility to take it into consideration. I don't think any perfumer would have a problem with having to label something hyper accurately like the 'made-in-a-factory-that-may-have-a-nut-in-the-furthest-corner-brought-in-by-a-wild-mouse' food labels. It's the external ruling that one mustn't use the ingredients, or quantity of them, that irks slightly, when all the classic and successful perfumes had these things in them.

    For a learner perfumer, it feels like approaching a cookery exam without half the ingredients and still expecting to cook a dish as well as before. It may well be possible and that has it's own challenge. It may be that the individual perfumer decides not to use these ingredients anyway, but to any perfumers chagrin, it's the robbing of informed choice. Imagine the fuss that would ensue if peanuts or sesame seeds had a global ban imposed upon them.

    I was reading up about the UK approved alcohol denaturants the other day and even the least smelly of those chemicals seem to have problems attached to their use with some health and safety aspects. Yet it is not easy to get approval to use organic and therefore non-denatured alcohol. In that particular case it appears UK perfumers cannot be trusted not to drink the stuff whilst wanting to use less chemicals in a blend either.

    It really is a confusing minefield when one is learning. It is so nice when everyone pitches in with helpful suggestions and links. Mixing a nice perfume seems to be the very least of the perfumers challenges to face. One can always choose to wear just l'eau!
    Last edited by mumsy; 3rd October 2012 at 01:54 PM.

  2. #62

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    I totally agree that labeling should in some cases be enough, banning is not always the solution. However I do understand that the regulating parties are under a huge amount of pressure especially from customers afraid of 'chemicals', blown out of proportion by (social) media and 'green' political movements that feed upon the feeling of customers that 'natural is better', which irks many cosmetic scientists. It's a minefield where each solution seems to come with a new set of problems. I don't envy my colleagues at RIFM.

    Quote Originally Posted by mumsy View Post
    For a learner perfumer, it feels like approaching a cookery exam without half the ingredients and still expecting to cook a dish as well as before. It may well be possible and that has it's own challenge. It may be that the individual perfumer decides not to use these ingredients anyway, but to any perfumers chagrin, it's the robbing of informed choice. Imagine the fuss that would ensue if peanuts or sesame seeds had a global ban imposed upon them.
    I don't agree with this. Fragrance chemistry is moving on too and each day new aromatics are born. New ways of extraction, biotechnology, new ways of purification of materials of those components that give problems. What was may never be again. It's just the way progress works, in any industry. It doesn't make sense to go analogue after going digital.
    For example a few years back small indie perfumes couldn't even have dreamed to use natural isolates. Now they are being sold at Mandy Aftel's shop. Just a few hundred years ago cinnamon and clove oil were much more exotic and expensive than rose otto. Or just 3 decades ago the price of East Indian Sandalwood was dirt cheap. The world evolves, science evolves, people evolve, the economy evolves, the way people's skin react to different substances change (for example sensitization is something that occurs due to repeated exposure). Okay, so not everyone might like or agree with the changes, but with every change new opportunities arise. That is were true creativity and innovation come in, not by looking back and holding on tight to the past or trying to reproduce vintage.

    Imho that is the spirit of any entrepreneurial perfumer that will truly succeed: by moving forward, finding solutions and being a part of the solution instead of the problem.
    Customized consultancy on perfume formulation, safety, training and marketing & olfactory research
    I also offer individual online personalised advice on perfume making to anyone eager to learn how to smell and design like a pro
    www.irinatudor.nl

    Social platform & research network on all things smelly, daily smelly science twitter feed @SomethingSmelly
    www.somethingsmelly.com


    The facts on IFRA restrictions & EU regulations

  3. #63

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    I agree with all of that completely which may seem strange coming from the camp of natural, and an avid collector of classic vintage frags. I'm not sure it is being averse to the new and advanced changes but more from an angle of what is old is old and what is new is new. Neither winning any kind of battle points except that the old camp has established and proven credentials for pure olfactory delight and the new camp is still in the running, and some rather well. The Hermes house in point.

    I am not the only one to mourn the passing of some of these greatest classic format perfume blends. It would be just nice to see the originals left as they were and to have moved on honestly and not covertly as if the perfume has not changed except in name alone. It is the reformulations of the great vintages that carry the same name with no distinguishing indicators of change that make it become objectionable. It would be no shame to have marked each reformulation so that the buyer is aware of which version they are getting, again leading to the purchasers own fully aware choice. Oakmoss vintage or the various substitute oakmoss and other versions.

    It may be only a coincidental fact that many of the greats were composed of many of the withdrawing and banned ingredients, so the new greats will have to be different because there is no longer the classic alternative. It always boils down to choice whichever way it is perceived. Do we have any choice but to move on? Maybe not.

  4. #64

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Quote Originally Posted by mumsy View Post
    I am not the only one to mourn the passing of some of these greatest classic format perfume blends. It would be just nice to see the originals left as they were and to have moved on honestly and not covertly as if the perfume has not changed except in name alone. It is the reformulations of the great vintages that carry the same name with no distinguishing indicators of change that make it become objectionable. It would be no shame to have marked each reformulation so that the buyer is aware of which version they are getting, again leading to the purchasers own fully aware choice. Oakmoss vintage or the various substitute oakmoss and other versions.
    Totally agree. I really don't see any good arguments for keeping that secret from consumers. It's the lack of transparency and secrecy that is the biggest thorn in my eye, even more now that I'm a member of the industry. It's a huge shame and I can only hope the new generation will get rid of that.
    Customized consultancy on perfume formulation, safety, training and marketing & olfactory research
    I also offer individual online personalised advice on perfume making to anyone eager to learn how to smell and design like a pro
    www.irinatudor.nl

    Social platform & research network on all things smelly, daily smelly science twitter feed @SomethingSmelly
    www.somethingsmelly.com


    The facts on IFRA restrictions & EU regulations

  5. #65

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    What is the situation with creating perfumes just for garments (clothes, gloves, scarves e.t.c.)? Does anything change in that case, are we completelly free of regulations? And if not, what makes detergents and chemicals (all the stuff used on textiles during and after the production of clothes) safer than a perfume that has a formula not IFRA compliant?
    (if you feel this needs a new thread please move it accordingly. this one is getting too long anyway)
    "I have the sun in my pocket"
    http://www.ionportraits.gr
    http://www.facebook.com/ion.portraits

  6. #66

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Quote Originally Posted by Irina View Post
    But I don't understand if you also think that even small companies should comply with the EU law on cosmetics?
    I think that everybody should comply to the laws that are applicable, BUT I also think the cosmetics legislation for smaller companies (or better smaller amounts sold) should be less restrictive. I think that would be safe enough, the small number of products sold decreases the risk.

    The main issue seems to be the perfumers ingredient constraints are nudging into the latter when foodstuffs such as peanuts are not subject to such constraints.
    When you sell a novelty food in huge amounts you don't need a safety assessment (there are however a lot of other rules for food!), so in a way the rules for cosmetics are stricter than for food, which has a certain absurdity in it.

    Regarding Mumsy's A-Z story: yes, in case a fragrance is completely covered by an assessment (that can be made in a way that hundreds of fragrances are covered) it is all right for the law. For instance: when galaxolide is acceptable in amounts of 0-15% according to that assesment, then any perfume within that range is covered. In case 2-10% is safe, then it needs at least 2% Galaxolide! So, in case you are thinking of requesting such an assessment please note to make it possible for all ingredients not to be used!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ION View Post
    What is the situation with creating perfumes just for garments (clothes, gloves, scarves e.t.c.)? Does anything change in that case, are we completelly free of regulations? And if not, what makes detergents and chemicals (all the stuff used on textiles during and after the production of clothes) safer than a perfume that has a formula not IFRA compliant?
    (if you feel this needs a new thread please move it accordingly. this one is getting too long anyway)
    Again: only applicable in the EU!

    A room fragrance, linen spray or alike product is not a cosmetic (for it is not intended to be used on hair, skin or in the mouth), unless it is clear that you only name it different, but it is actualy intended as a personal fragrance. Therefor the cosmetics legislation is not applicable. What is usualy applicable is the legislation about dangerous goods, instead of the word 'oakmoss extract' you have to put danger signs on the label and text like 'May cause an allergic skin reaction', just like the ones that are on (legaly sold) essential oils and aromachemicals. I am aware that still a lot of essential oils are not properly marked, just like 62% of the Dutch cosmetics produces does not meet the demands of the law al lot of producers and traders in essential oils and alike products don't comply.

    For linen sprays the IFRA rules are applicable, again only when you are a member. For these products the rules can be different.

  7. #67

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Janmeut, you talk about this huge 62% which is not EU compliant in NL, but can you tell what would be the punishment estabilished by european law for non compliant companies? Is it just very unlikely to be caught or is it because the consequencies are very soft? And most important, does it depend on EU law only or on the local legislation of the host country?
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  8. #68

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Each country of the EU has to make sure the law is fulfilled, but this can be done very different. There can be a lot of checks, there may be little. The public servants may be mild or not.

    For the Netherlands: a few of the 62% companies that broke the law were punished ... they received a warning letter ...

    So nothing here to encourage to fulfill the law.

  9. #69

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    OK, so it looks like the Netherlands are quite a good place to start a perfumery business, now I understand why my compatriot Alessandro Gualtieri (aka Nasomatto) based his business in Amsterdam
    Sebastiano - Organic Chemist

  10. #70

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Well then, now this is all wonderfully clear, I'm off to make some glove frags, hankie smellies and room fresheners then...... I do not wish to deliberately flout anyones perfume rules. Now, where were we?.... where is my oakmoss?

  11. #71

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    I believe Janmeut has helped us all have a much clearer picture on the subject. If you ask me, I don't see why people should wear perfumes on their skin anyway. As if our modern living environments are short on enough chemicals, food of questionable origin, and antennas of all kinds anyway..
    Last edited by ION; 5th October 2012 at 08:09 AM.
    "I have the sun in my pocket"
    http://www.ionportraits.gr
    http://www.facebook.com/ion.portraits

  12. #72
    Basenotes Member mia von trost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Mannheim & Zurich
    Posts
    93

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Deleted so as to not cross-post. Apologies, I should have known better.
    Last edited by mia von trost; 10th April 2014 at 07:21 PM.
    Un parfum doit avant tout sent bon. - Guy Robert -

    On the EU's amendment to sharpen restrictions on fragrance allergens

  13. #73

    Default Re: Oakmoss restrictions as per 2013?

    Thank you very much, Mia, for the effort and lifeblood you and other perfumistas have put into this petition. Great job!

Similar Threads

  1. Oakmoss Versus Oakmoss Extract, on ingredient list?
    By lodz in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10th August 2011, 10:52 AM
  2. Oakmoss Versus Oakmoss Extract, on ingredient list?
    By lodz in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10th August 2011, 09:43 AM
  3. What to do about IFRA and its restrictions.
    By LiliB in forum Female Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28th May 2011, 01:28 AM
  4. New IFRA restrictions and ban
    By 30 Roses in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 17th August 2010, 01:24 PM
  5. Oakmoss, My kingdom for Oakmoss.
    By N_Tesla in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 9th December 2009, 01:32 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
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000