|
|
|
|
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:56:51 PM | Prettypicky
If a person is truly hypersensitive, even the odour of shampoo can be irritating and even life-threatening. Fortunately, these people are rare and because of their sensitivity are forced to identify their problem. Unfortunately, its becoming more and more common as people become more neurotic.
I have seen people who were so hypersensitive that the presence of a paper cup in the wastepaper basket invoked a migraine headache.
Quite often there is an underlying medical condition and it is accompanied by a neurosis (remember - even if its all in their head, they STILL FEEL IT). Please please - don't make a mistake here. A neuorosis may be all in their head but it feels real to them and must be taken seriously.
However, I don't think enough is being done to properly diagnose underlying medical conditions. Researchers have always known that some people have tiny holes between the ventricles of the heart. This is fairly common. Everyone is born with this hole, but its supposed to seal over when an infant is born. In a certain percentage of the population, the hole doesn't seal over properly. This normally causes no problems however, some people may experience strokes and heart disease. Surgeons discovered a really neat way of sealing the hole (I won't describe the medical procedures). Its a very new technique.
A very surprising result of having this procedure done is that it was found that sealing the hole in the heart almost completely cured migraine headaches. People who thought that they were "allergic" to perfume, in fact, had migraines caused by this problem.
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:19:10 PM | Chinua
You are proving my point about the ineffectiveness of bans. If the smokers had an indoor place to gather, they wouldn't be outside bothering YOU.
A more sensible solution would have been to designate an indoor place, increase the ventilation so that the smoke vents directly outside and not into the building and allow smokers the same dignity and comfort you demand for yourself!
Now a second problem has been created that requires yet more banning as a solution. And somehow you think this is all good! That if you simply enforce your desires on other people without ever respecting their needs - somehow it will all work out?
Have you actually ever stepped into a properly built designated smoking room with separate ventilation? No? I am so glad because if militant non-smokers ever actually experienced air that was cleaner that outside air, they would kick the smokers out and take over the room for themselves.
Even for the most toxic chemicals known to mankind, like dioxins and furans, lead, mercury, pcb's, snake venom - there is a concentration below which effects on humans are not discernable. A "safe" level of exposure, even for the most hypersensitive of individuals.
For some reason, militant anti-smokers blast the message that there is "no safe level" of exposure. This is so blatently untrue that it is laughable but some members of the public buys into what is essentially a slogan and a lie. It would make smoke from the burning of organic material like wood the most toxic substance of the face of the planet. How real is that belief in the history of the world where people heated their homes by directly burning wood and coal. Tobacco is a plant that is the same as wood and produces most of the very same contaminants.
Ventilation is a means of decreasing concentration to the point where exposure is safe for 99.99 % of people. Had everyone been allowed to install ventilation to control the concentration of cigarette smoke to such a level, then everyone would have benefited from cleaner air, everyone would have been included in a solution that treats everyone's needs with dignity and respect.
At this time, smoking bans simply disrespect and isolate a portion of the population. As soon as smoke disappeared as a visible contaminate, building owners reduced ventilation to save costs. Now everyone is dealing with air contaminated with perfumes, volatile organics that are discharged from textiles, building materials, cooking fumes, moulds and fungus.
You don't want smokers inside - you don't want smokers outside - the only consideration you want is for everyone to kowtow to your desires and needs. Well Chinua - your right to breathe "clean air" ends where someone else's doorway begins! And you certainly have no right to "own" the outside air.
Restrictions are reasonable (on perfume on smoking on doing anything that may harm another) but bans are NOT reasonable.
The first thing that has to happen is smokers, perfume wearers and any other group you can think of have to be consulted to develop workable compromises that respects the dignities and customs and desires of the greatest number of people while still supporting a civil society.
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:31:23 PM | | The thing is where will it stop..... will this just be perfumes or aftershave or deoderant or handlotion and shampoo? Then it will be a ban on smelly people and regulations on body odour. Come on people, if someone over indulges at work, tell them it bothers you or put a request through HR. If it is on a bus, just move.... if there is a wide berth of empty seats around them they will get the hint if just one person says pssst it is your perfume. I vote for a law that people must cover their mouth when they sneeze ....... hellooooooo common sense and a health risk but do we pass a law or educate. | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 79 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:34:44 PM | As a smoker, I will support the ban on EVERYTHING....I won't be allowed
to smoke in my own home if I have kids even with ventilation. I can't smoke
outside my office or in the office on the patio....we can't even smoke in
a bar and can't open a "smokers only bar" - we can't smoke in rental
cars. So screw it........we need to stop the perfume...it is causing toxic
shock to people and allergic reaction. What's more important; wearing your
toxin or somebody's health? Second hand perfuming needs to be shut down!!
Note: there is now evidence that scented perfume may actually be the
cause of cancer...breast cancer. You guys ought to quit, and yes, I know
it's tough but better than being a nice smelling carcus below ground anyday. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:55:02 PM | I am one of the people who has an overly sensitive nose, and I do find most perfumes offensive. Many of them make it hard to read people, and girls don't even realize the messages they are sending with them!
A lot of them mimic the natural smell girls give off when they ovulate or menstruate, and it makes it hard for me to read them. I LIKE being able to tell what state a girl is in, it is a natural, healthy thing and is an indicator of overall health. Now ANYONE can smell like that, though when perfume-induced they usually also have an artificial twinge on them. It takes a bit longer to process the artificial quality than it does to get the primal image of fertility in my brain, and so sometimes I feel misled.
Do I think they should ban perfumes because of this? No. If it is really bothering me that much I can just go somewhere else out of the way.
There is a condition, I can't remember the name of it, where exposure to such scents can cause sickness, but that is an extreme and rare scenario. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:56:51 PM | Chinua's profile made me think of something else ..... if someone where you worked had a serious allergic reaction to cat hair and some from your cat lingered on your clothes when you went to work and it affected them, should you be expected to get rid of your cat? Chinua's profile is pretty adamant that her cat comes before someone elses allergy and if they don't like it they can stay away. There are so many allergies that at some point we just need to use common sense and help out others (ie. you would use a lint brush before going into work right!)...... can't we all just get compromise and get along.
 | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 9:22:35 PM | Why employers readily agreed to ban smoking for the workplace:
* Cost of specialized ventilation and exhaust air treatment (separate systems)
* Cost of lost employee days (smokers take more sick-days than nonsmokers, especially younger smokers) and had more chronic health related issues than nonsmokers.
* Cost of health insurance rises with the number of employee smokers on an employers health plan.
Heavy personal fragrance use is unnecessary in the workplace. Employee training should improve awareness of multiple chemical sensitivity in the general populace (estimated to be as high as 35%). Personal fragrance should be lightly applied OUTSIDE of the workplace (not indoors) and shouldn't be detectable more than a few feet from the wearer.
A national public ban on its use is unwise. To encourage intolerance is to suggest that MCT and related autocrine syndromes are acceptable - that the illness (like fibromyalgia) cannot be effectively managed to avoid public place conflicts between those who choose to use personal fragrance and those who have physical tolerance issues with fragrances.
The problem resides within the general populace - MCS is NOT a genetic disorder - its a functional disorder of the autocrine system brought about by multiple causes including genetic predisposition. The syndrome co-occurs with other related autocrine diseases, is complex and of long duration in developing in most patients, and feasures neurological, toxicological and immune system components to the symptoms and causes. Its most common in the chronically stressed who have CO-EXPOSURE to one or more sensitizing agents often during periods of chronic stress, punctuated with acute stress episodes.
I have mild chemical sensitivities to the most heavily smelling perfumes BUT I have found that I can reduce my sensitivity by practical lifestyle changes coupled with dietary supplements that influence neurological and immune health and raise trigger/response thresholds (improve tolerance).
Many of these same patients also have problems like migraine and GI symptoms - these are correlated to subcellular abnormalities common with MCT symptoms. This is a clue to the chemical imbalances underlying these chemical sensitivites and suggest that symptom severity can be modulated an in some cases, reversed and even curtailed with longterm practices that improve immune and neurological health. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 9:52:28 PM | Sombient says "Why employers readily agreed to ban smoking for the workplace:...."
If employers "readily agreed" to ban smoking then why were regulations put in place, complete with enforcement officers and a snitch line?
Perhaps "readily agreed" is not quite the right terminology?
And if employers really wanted to cut down on sick time - perhaps they should ban employees with chemical sensitivities?????
Michelle | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 84 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 10:01:26 PM | I work for a huge firm that everybody knows and I won't mention, but
I can say we have coffee/smoke breaks x's 2 every day - pick your vice.
Our firm does not just pay lip service about smoking....it's not gonna ban
it because people will simply smoke anyway, so instead it adopted a
policy: Full gym membership reimbursement and also reimbursement
to quit smoking and full reimbursement to buy exercise equipment including
bicycles. I can buy a bike every year or have my gym membership paid
for life.
It's not enough to simply say: NO SMOKING....that's what the cheap dictators
say....pretty simplistic and ineffective. You lose good talent to the
competitor in the process. | |
|
*Jay
|
Joined: 1/26/2007
Msg: 85 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 10:23:24 PM | so what's your problem OP?
I f'n HATE the smell of perfume and cologne....why should I be subject to its smell when I am at work or in school or anything else important? its only fair for everyone...ban away!
a couple weeks ago, some damn person at work got their perfume and cologne on a door handle and I touched it...it took a good 2 trips to the washroom to wash that shit off my hand and it still smelled! ARGGGGG!...why do people wear this crap anyways...attention whores...
now I'm a proponent of doing what you want as long as it doesn't hurt others...but perfume wearing affects others, and mostly in a negative way...get rid of it if you have the least bit of common decency | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 86 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 10:32:34 PM | I put the remark about my cat on there; not just for guys who are extremely allergic(to me , thats better than expecting him to put up with it)but guys who aren't animal lovers--that I won't be interested in them- so they won't waste their time!!!-- anybody who would expect me to put my cat in a shelter for them- is not worth my time.
My cat doesn't shed a lot(he's not a lap cat); I wash my clothes regularly- I use a dryer sheet(unscented:) that is good at taking off cat hair that doesn't come off in the washing machine. So far; nobody at work has complained.
Since when is smoking a 'need'? Food is a need, water is a need- smoking isn't. Its a habit. Most smokers I know; want to quit, smelling others smoke makes it harder for them- so its not just non smokers that have a hard time around second hand smoke. I think some ex smokers are a lot pushier about this; they say that since they quit- their sense of smell is more sensitive. As for owning the air do you think we should bring back all the coal burners??? get rid of catalytic converters?? How about all the heavy duty hair spray from the 80's???and all the other pollutants- people have a say abouttheir environment. I don't care if someone smokes in their home, yard , car..............then you can keep it to yourself. When I eat a chocolate bar I don't expect everyone around me to eat it too........... | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/27/2007 10:45:32 PM | OK, perhaps the appropriate phrase should have been ''voluntarily complied in advance of state regulations, having already adjusted their policy on smoking in anticipation of legislation banning smoking in the workplace" (and in some locations, in public gathering and eating establishments as well).
Most MCT suffers don't take sick days off unless there is a triggering event - like say, someone smoking in your immediate vicinity. Some employers accommodate MCT office workers by allowing them to work at home for part of workweek, as long as productivity doesn't suffer. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 5:46:20 AM | chinua
Since when did owning a cat become a "need". You own a cat for pleasure! What if your neighbour in the apartment next to yours complained that cat dander was seeping under the walls and through the ventilation system and irritate his allergies?
Ban cat ownership in multi-unit dwellings!
You see chinua - you still don't get it with this ban everything craze. Sooner or later, it will come back to haunt you. If you don't start wrapping your head around the fact that smokers smoke for pleasure and still need to be treated with dignity and respect - the sooner you can start ensuring that your little pleasures of life do not come under threat and your right to dignity and respect is not compromised.
What is good for the gander is good for the goose. Smokers, tolerent non-smokers and the public is starting to become very upset with dictatorial bans and are starting to recognise the dangers.
Militant people like yourself are the people who are actually in the minority.
People who own buildings where the public works and plays could have gone non-smoking, no-scents at any time that they wanted to. If the market demand was really there - they would have done it without bans in the first place.
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 6:16:38 AM | This is STUPID!!!!!!...I think some of those people who whine about hyper sensitivity are seeking self attention...not all but a small percent.....
Personally I think people need to start living life and stop worrying....
I rather smell clean and of a nice frangence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have asthmsa and I rather smell a prettyy scent...then smell stinky people..it makes me physically gag.
So Then the men and women who do not ever use soap...Why don't they force people who reek of bad body ouder to go home and bath...plus people who never get thier jackets washed etc....you go on public transportation and have to smell people who cook with yucky spices and never clean thier bodies....That is not right either...so then we should be able to kick off a person who reeks of garlic toooo and negleted to actually bathe
 | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 7:30:12 AM | Nicotine is a drug. It is addictive - highly addictive. Smokers are addicts. They are a subset of drug addict. Smoking drains the body of important compounds that must be used to bind and excrete the many toxins in cigarette smoke. Nicotine over stimulates the CNS and smoker almost always develop liver and muscle deterioration and scarring. It affects the brain - the brains of smokers look different - and act differently than non-smokers - and they are deteriorated as well.
You are an addict. Tell me, why should addicts who drive up health care costs that we all must pay - why should we "tolerate' them, eh? Why do they deserve dignity and respect.
Do you lavish tolerance, dignity and respect on active alcoholics? Do you think alcoholics "tolerate" the rest of us who are mild drinkers or nondrinkers??
Yes, cat dander can be problem in a city. Even if you don't own a cat or dog, the pet animal density is now so high that most homes have sizable background level of pet dander even without direct pet ownership. Many homes have had animals residing within them in their past and the ambient outdoor load is high enough that this dander eventually accumulates in homes due to its small particle size. If you are allergic to pet dander, its very hard to avoid it. The effective solution is two part: reducing the load in air (through filtration) while avoiding direct contact and reducing the intensity of the immune reaction to pet dander.
Yes, we have a problem with cats and dogs, primarily risk through biting/attack of unsocialized animals, pet excrement in urban runoff that is contaminating waterways and coastal areas, and a potential very large problem in communicable disease. How unsettling, to find that both the cat and dog flea will not only incubate but pass on black plague, as well as Hanta and quite a few other danger pathogens. But thats another story.
You persist on using indefensible logic.
Smokers, tolerent non-smokers and the public is starting to become very upset with dictatorial bans and are starting to recognise the dangers.
If anything, the public needs a good swift kick to see the real inherent dangers in smoking. If you must have that cognitive boost to function, addict, why don't we just have you all wear patches and be done with the stinky and dangerous tars and thousand other chemical contaminants in cigarette smoke? You still have the problem with over excitation of the brain and CNS, inducing cellular aging, and overexcretion of the secretory system, and immune impairment. But at least you, your home and car won't stink and your family won't have their health endangered by your drug habit, addict. Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray.
Such a pleasant thought for a dating site. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 8:02:42 AM | Sombient
Please be careful in throwing that word "addict" around
The word addiction used to be clearly defined by about 5 characterists - 1. The drug was an intoxicant 2. The user required ever increasing dosages to satisfy craving 3. Withdrawal from the drug was life-threatening and a couple of other things I can't remember off-hand. By this standard definition, there were only 5 or so drugs that were defined as addictive. These included opiates, morphines, alcohol. If I recall correctly, cocaine didn't make the list because withdrawal in NOT life-threatening.
In 1985, C. Everett Koop changed the meaning of addiction so that it would include nicotene. Unfortunately, to accomplish this, the definition became so broad as to include anything that stimulated the pleasure centre's of the brain to create higher levels of pleasure chemicals (endomorphins)
By this new definition - everything that brings you pleasure is additive - that cheeseburger you love that leaves you feeling full and satisfied, physical exercise, PLAYING WITH A CAT, sex, chocolate yada yada yada
tens of millions of north americans have quit smoking simply because they chose to. The vast majority of them did it cold turkey with no life threatening side effects. Nicotene is no more addictive than caffeine or anything else that you enjoy.
By naming smokers as helpless addicts who can't control themselves - you encourage people to think that quitting smoking is "too hard" and encourage continued smoking, you disrespect our humanity and adult right to make choices for ourselves and you imply that we are in an altered state of mind such that anything we say must be discounted.
I am a 51 year old woman, well-educated, who has raised 3 children as a single parent for 30 years and is actively involved with the rearing of grandchildren, I have been financially independent since becoming an orphan at 15 years of age, who has managed to have not only one but two professional careers. I have extensively researched not only tobacco and smoking but many other topics related to public health for many many years.
But somehow - you believe in your heart of hearts that you (or someone like you) knows what is best for me?
I notice how defensive you become over cat ownership. I could say that cats give you pleasure. That this causes you to have elevated endomorphins to which you are addicted. That because of this altered mental state, you are unable to make reasonable decisions in regard to the harm you inflict on asthmatics and people allergic to cat dander. That you don't respect the right of others to "breathe clean air". That you are selfish and inconsiderate.
The PETA people have already started a campaign to ban pet ownership. I could join with the PETA people and seek to usurp government powers of regulatation and restrict your right to own cats. Afterall - I would only be doing it for the "sake of the children"/
The arguments are the exact same arguements used to ban smoking and perfumes and use of pesticides and drive-thrus (the target ban list is actually quite extensive). Somehow, in your mind, smoking is "different".
Well surprise surprise - its NOT. Everytime you point the finger at adult human beings who have chosen to consume a legal product and diminish their humanity - there are three fingers pointing right back at you!
Democracy is the process of giving the people what they want - good and hard! Tread lightly Sombient - your turn is coming!
Those who would bargain away their freedom in exchange for security (or to resolve spin-doctored health concerns) will ultimately end up with neither!
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 8:29:46 AM | Diesel fuel chokes me up.....gas fumes are worse...ban cars! The Gov't creates these issues to keep our minds on things other than the real problems like global warming.....
Having said that...I went to "Phantom of the Opera" at "Her Majesties Theatre" in London, and almost died from the mixture of scents! Those English people must feel they have a scent to hide. | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 93 | |
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 8:59:38 AM | Ok; I don't live in an apartment; never have, never will. I don't live in a basement suite ; never have, never will. I live in a mobile home!(which I own)- and the neighbours all around me have cats- they play together. Who was it that checked my profile? It says Hope, BC, Canada. Why don't do you do your research more thoroughly......Hope is a small town of less than 7000 people; with 2 traffic lights. There are very few apartments.
As for pleasure; yes, thats part of it. Need? yes; that too, its nice to have someone to come home to. Right now; he's gone missing- I cry every night..........
Now tell me why you started smoking............was it need, or pleasure?
Anybody who loves animals would know that a cigarette; wouldn't compare to the love of a cat, dog, horse.......etc..........if you do........nothing more I can say. You won't attract anybody with animals now. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 9:38:05 AM | Chinua
Chinua,
I don't like animals. There is no way I can understand your need to own a pet. I don't need to understand it. What I need is to understand and need to acknowledge is your right to self-determination and your right to live your life your way without the petty, mean-spirited interferences in your life that most bans represent.
You don't need to understand why I smoke. You need to understand that I have the same right to self-determination and the same right to live my life my way that you do.
Now we are communicating. Now you seem to have backed down from your militant and intolerant stance. Now between people of good will and good faith - we can find solutions that will satisfy most of our needs without sacrificing the needs of others. A little give here, a little adjustment and compromise there and we all gain.
You can't arbitrarily decides whose needs are most important. Your need to own a cat vs my need to smoke. It is all the same need. Its the need to be accepted and at the very least respectfully tolerated in a civil society.
Despite the fact that I hate cats - my neighbours cat chooses my garden and patio to sun itself on. I mean every single day! It walks on my window sills, it pees in my garden and chews my plants. It leaves cat poop that I clean -up.
This has been going on for over 8 years.
I have never ever said the slightest word to my neighbour and I have never indicated in any way shape or form that I am discomforted. She needs her cat!
I watch her house when she goes away. I hang christmas lights for her and give out the holloween candy. As a family, we help her with necessary heavy work and do odd jobs for her. I do all the outdoor yard work for her and even sealed her driveway at the same time that I did mine at my own cost.
I am not lonely. Everyone in my neighbourhood talks to me and my crazy family. Kids run in an out of my house like an amusement park.
Now imagine what the result would be if my neighbour campaigned to ban smoking in my unit because it bothers her? Or if someone else mounts the same campaign and my neighbour fails to stand up for me!
Here is what would happen
1. all neighbourhood children would be banned from my house - no more free babysitting while others pop out to the store.
2. no more free work or any other kind of freebie
3. find another house sitter
4. control your animal - I am afraid of cats and it damages my garden
5. campaign to ban cat ownership - I am allergic to the dander
6. And I boil and cook with curry 24 hours a day, 7 days a week!!! Hey I like curry.
See how this all works!
I am a nice person who loves to get along with other people but Chinua - but a body would be very sadly mistaken to ever think of me as a doormat.
Because I am a smoker and children are constantly in my house - there are certain compromises that I voluntarily make, even in my private home. I installed a 300 cubic foot per minute exhaust fan. I never smoke in the upstairs floors. I refrain from smoking if people want to visit but have medical conditions that would make it uncomfortable for them. I run two portable air cleaners. I installed two active vents in my roof. I never smoke in the private home of those who don't want smoking in their house (I never visit either but that is another story). I obey all smoking restrictions.
And still, militant and rude people think that they have the right to disregard my humanity and seek to publically censure and embarrass me or punish me for my choices?
The hell you say?????????????????????????
Michelle | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 9:45:00 AM | I am anti smoking and anti perfume.
What you do in your own home is YOUR business. What you do where OTHER PEOPLE have to breathe the air is EVERYONE'S business. When the cigarette smoke from your apartment pollutes the hallways, it is no longer smoking in YOUR home.
I don't care if you don't like it. I don't care if you FEEL you have a right to smoke or stinck of perfume when you are outside of your home.
YOU ARE MAKING ME SICK
No one has the "right" to do that!
Someday smoking will be banned everywhere and it can't be too soon for me! If they could get away with banning of perfume I would be 100% behind that as well. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 9:52:15 AM | Perfumes in products do not have the same effects on all people. I have a condition called "vasomotor rhinnitis" when am around fragrences, most but not all. This is not a "true allergy" and there are no "allergy shots" to use to stop or help this. I must use fragrence-free products in order not to have my nose run constantly and cause a chronic hack. I am a medical professional and am not neurotic. Some other chemicals that have strong "odors" also cause this problem.
When you "smell" something--anything, it is free-floating molecules of that substance floating into your nasal cavity, hitting the receptors and then sending a message to your brain for interpretation.
Before my retirement, I spent my days in small examination rooms with the public, and many times patients have just bathed before they go to their physician's or nurse practitioner's clinic. They put on perfumed substances, or douse on fragrence. In a small room this caused me great difficulty. When you get into an elevator and some folks get in with heavy scents you can almost choke.
Many hospitals are asking their staff now to not wear scents, but with other products having scents in them, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Scents do not cover body odor, which is what they were originally designed for in groups that bathed infrequently. There is no NEED to have these in products. Fortunately, there are now scent free detergents, soaps, deoderants, shampoos, etc.
I refuse to shop in a store that has "scents" all over the place--not because the scent is unpleasant, but because of my nose's over reaction to it. Addiing scents to a product is not NECESSARY, and I see no reason to do so. But I am only one voice "crying in the wilderness" and expect that the addition of scents and the sale of perfumes will go on without my business. However, I do buy unscented products so am "voting" with my money which I think is the best way to "vote" and if more folks "vote" scent-free it will eventually help the situation. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 9:55:34 AM | Maybe people should resort to living in bubbles...this is dumb....public places are public..
Trust me there is much more than someone smoking and fragrance...maybe everyone should stop driving and go back to horses....but wait some people get sick from them toooo.....
lawn mowers..you name it....maybe we should not grow grass some people are sensitive to grass tooo I am one of them....I don't complain. I have asthma..its my problem..I don't blame it on others.
I think what happens it to many mixing of frangences..I have a hard time in perfumes shops..but I love perfume.....
What your talking about is something different and that does not affect majority of people.....
I have asthma and I won't support scent free......
I don't go where people smoke........if you really want to know what is a major problem its polution..now that I would support. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 10:14:39 AM | Look, Oxdrovers point is a good one: this chemical sensitivity isn't like an allergy. It can't be equated to pet dander (a particulate issue with antigen immune component). This condition Ox mentions is now quite common. When scent is used lightly and sparingly, its not a big issue. When its used in excess, its irritating, and to some, it causes a reflexive reaction similar to allergies -eyes and nose water. In the more susceptible patients, it can be worse, causing headache, nausea, fatigue, nasal drip and bronchial spasm.
And, there are gradations of chemical sensitivity symptoms in the general population. It can be marginal - simple rhinitis symptoms - to severe - to an acute asthma or debilitating chronic fatigue episode.
Reasonable control is really a matter of education and general public awareness to the problem of chemical triggers in personal product use. And, as she has mentioned, adding fragrance to many personal products is unnecessary chemical exposure that does nothing to improve personal care product effectiveness. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 11:22:34 AM | I'm just wondering if people realize how many toxic fumes are in the air of their own home but because they are odor less they aren't even aware of them. lol
Chinua for example, might want to google formaldehyde mobile homes.
I'm sensitive to many scents, but geez I don't go around expecting everyone to kowtow to me. | |
|
| Canada ban on Perfumes
Posted: 3/28/2007 1:16:35 PM | People are not idiots I don't know why when someone fights for a cause they assume it is thier God given right to expect others to obey thier whims....
I am sure maybe help the homeless and less fortunite might be a better cause | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
