Dear EarthTalk: I’ve always suspected that perfumes and colognes must not be too healthy simply because of the way the smell of most of them bothers me. Am I correct? Is there information available on this issue?—Lucinda Barry, Minneapolis

Ahhh...the sweet smell of petrochemicals! The Environmental Working Group (EWG) reports that, while many popular perfumes, colognes and body sprays contain trace amounts of natural essences, they also typically contain a dozen or more potentially hazardous synthetic chemicals, some of which are derived from petroleum. To protect trade secrets, makers are allowed to withhold fragrance ingredients, so consumers can’t rely on labels to know what hazards may lurk inside that new bottle of perfume.

“A rose may be a rose,” reports EWG. “But that rose-like fragrance in your perfume may be something else entirely, concocted from any number of the fragrance industry’s 3,100 stock chemical ingredients, the blend of which is almost always kept hidden from the consumer.”

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, a coalition of over 100 groups seeking transparency about chemicals in cosmetics, commissioned independent laboratory tests that revealed 38 secret chemicals in 17 leading fragrances. The top offenders?: American Eagle Seventy Seven topped the list with 24, followed by Chanel Coco with 18 and Britney Spears Curious and Giorgio Armani Acqua Di Gio each with 17.

“The average fragrance product tested contained 14 secret chemicals not listed on the label,” reports EWG, which analyzed the Campaign’s data. “Among them are chemicals associated with hormone disruption and allergic reactions, and many substances that have not been assessed for safety in personal care products.” EWG adds that some of the undisclosed ingredients are chemicals “with troubling hazardous properties or with a propensity to accumulate in human tissues.” Examples include diethyl phthalate, a chemical found in 97 percent of Americans and linked to sperm damage in human epidemiological studies, and musk ketone, which concentrates in human fat tissue and breast milk.

EWG explains that ingredients not in a product’s “hidden fragrance mixture” must be listed on the label, so makers disclose some chemicals but “lump others together in the generic category of ‘fragrance’.”

EWG blames the U.S. government in part, pointing out that the Food and Drug Administration “has not assessed the safety of the vast majority” of secret chemicals used in spray-on products such as fragrances. “Fragrance secrecy is legal due to a giant loophole in the Federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act of 1973, which requires companies to list cosmetics ingredients on the product labels but explicitly exempts fragrance,” reports EWG. As such, the cosmetics industry has kept the public in the dark about fragrance ingredients, “even those that present potential health risks or build up in people’s bodies.”

For more information, check out EWG’s May 2010 “Not So Sexy” report, available on the group’s website. Also, EWG’s SkinDeep database serves as an evolving source of information on the ingredients (and their health risks) in thousands of cosmetics and related products widely available on store shelves.

CONTACTS: Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, www.safecosmetics.org; EWG’s “Not So Sexy,” www.ewg.org/notsosexy; Skin Deep, www.ewg.org/skindeep.

EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine ( www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe. Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

11 Comments

1. 1. IanSawyer in reply to maniac 12:02 PM 9/29/12

   I couldn't say if there are such things as anti-pheromones, but it's long been known that the smell of perfumes and many deodorants and antiperspirants masks our natural body pheromones. From an evolutionary perspective these pheromones are one of the major means that males and females have of assessing genetic compatibility, and although I've never seen any studies into this I have a strong suspicion that there's a causal link between disguising natural body odours, and hence interfering with the operation of these pheromones, and the rise in the rate of failure in relationships over the last few decades.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. vmfenimore 10:35 PM 9/29/12

   Fragrances used to be made from natural ingredients such as flower oils and civet. Over time it was decided that some natural ingredients were unnecessarily cruel or just in short supply and they were replaced with chemicals. In some cases such as animal musks, these replacements made good sense.
   
   However, then "someone" decided that more and more natural ingredients could be irritants and that we needed to be saved from possible dangerous allergic reactions. As most people know, it is possible for a person to be allergic to almost anything.
   
   So now this someone, IFF (International Flavors & Fragrances, Inc.), does everything they can to get natural ingredients banned because someone, somewhere might be allergic. And they conveniently come up with a chemical replacement that they have patented and manufacture. And in a "happy coincidence" they make a lot of money.
   
   But what's the catch? No one actually knows that the replacement chemicals are any safer than the natural ingredients they are replacing.
   
   Welcome to the IFF, the "mobsters" of the perfume industry.
   
   As usual, it's all about power, connections and money.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. luhng 04:13 AM 9/30/12

   Examples include diethyl phthalate, a chemical found in 97 percent of Americans and linked to sperm damage in human epidemiological studies, and musk ketone, which concentrates in human fat tissue and breast milk.
   Petroleum is a good product when used correctly. Yet the fragrance used to please God's nostrils had no petroleum.☺☻ I do understand that most companies work together for the good of the market place. Thus the reason I make my own products. Don't get me wrong as Qi Bow put it, "there has to be balance in all things". A + & -.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. ironjustice 11:19 AM 9/30/12

   Linalool has been recently shown to cause allergic reactions
   "Air-oxidized linalool-a frequent cause of fragrance contact allergy"

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. aldarwin 01:04 PM 9/30/12

   We are surrounded by chemicals some of which if not most of which can chemically combine with and alter DNA genetic material or the histones , methyl groups that control DNA expression. Mothers and Dads beware for your children. Everyday stuff like insecticides has been shown to cause white Agouti rats to bear brown offspring ... DNA expression for coat color was changed.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. smw0011 03:57 PM 10/1/12

   Nice work. I dont work in cosmetics but I work in Corrosion inhibitors and LOTS of chemicals NEED to be kept secret. This is the real world people; NO MORE SECRETS (exists in the movie sneakers though) doesnt and can exist in a free-trade society, it could in a communist/socialist world but companies are here to make money, and we cant give away knowledge and secrets because then there wouldnt be jobs. As Europe falls deeper into the pits of dispear because they have to disclose most things, we in the US should look at this and say NO to total disclosure it will KILL industrial advantages. I would love to disclose EVERYTHING in my products but you cant patent everything and trade secrets are needed for protection. The best we can offer is a REALISTIC MSDS and tested products.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. bumluck 10:58 PM 10/2/12

   Don't know what's in them, but to me perfume stinks! One whiff can usually give me an instant headache, sometimes accompanied by nausea.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. silentagony 12:11 AM 10/5/12

   *Sigh* expected more from this magazine than a cheap crappy mainstream womens fashion magazine. Caving into the fear mongering propaganda. Everything is made out of chemicals (well almost everything), water is a chemical even water can be toxic or fatal in high doses. The dose makes the poison. Not impressed at all. :((( CFSC is a lobbying organization run by LAWYERS not scientists!!! Major difference a magazine called SCIENTIFIC American should be able to realize when people are cherry picking biased studies.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. Ranler 11:28 AM 10/5/12

   This is a shamelessly one-sided article and I expect more from this publication. The EWG has a right to make their point but the authors should have presented a balance of information by consulting a reputable scientific source like Cosmeticsinfo.org.
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. illiana 12:47 PM 10/7/12

    Wow. Is the EWG what now passes for science at Scientific American? I'll be reconsidering giving subscriptions as Christmas gifts this year.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

11. 11. Snarkling 03:50 PM 10/8/12

    I am shocked and saddened that Scientific American would validate the EWG without at least giving an opposing viewpoint to an obviously concerned reader. This oversight flies in the face of every Scientific American should stand for. This article is nothing more than pandering to a small subset of the scientific community (if you can even call them that). This is a shame.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this