Therapeutic grade essential oils (EO's)...nothing more than a marketing strategy developed for the USA market.

In the USA, there are no regulating bodies for EO's, & it's estimated that only 2% of EO's sold there are pure/uncut. To gain a foothold in the marketplace, ‘CPTG’ or ‘Certified Pure Therapeutic Grade’ was registered as a Trademark by doTERRA in 2009…fact.

They go so far as to claim that CPTG EO's are better than organic EO's. In my opinion, this is utter rubbish- the stringent requirements for organic certification provide the ultimate standard of purity. The chain of supply can be tracked back through to the grower worldwide. However, the strategy worked, & a solid market was gradually established worldwide.

Their EO’s are sold through agents, & an incentive scheme is employed to attract more users. As a customer stated on the weekend, “They are the Tupperware party plan business of the essential oil world”. Users seem to promote their use of their EO’s as ‘a badge of honour’…they buy only ******* or ***** ****** because they “are the best quality available!” in justification of their hefty dollar outlay for their basic kit. This gets sprouted to me regularly, as they waltz up to our stall & quickly cast their eyes over our range of organic essential oils. I really don’t know why anyone would do that…it defies logic to me. They are usually quite shocked, and somewhat defensive, when I state that their oils are not organic…but our EO’s are.

The large US EO multi-tiered brands do not own all of their farms, as they like to impress upon customers. They make the broad-based claim as they do in fact own an odd organic farm in the USA. The rest of their oils are sourced through suppliers/brokers, who negotiate the best prices they can for volume buys. They dangle the dollar carrot in front of producers to do so, with the promise of exclusive supply contracts for volume supply. I don't see anything 'ethical' in their tactics...they are the Coles & Woolworths of the EO world- manipulating suppliers for the benefit of their own profits.

Put very simply, they 'test' the EO’s of potential suppliers to ensure that they meet their required standards, & haven't been cut/diluted with other oils. It's estimated that 77% of EO's sold in the USA are synthetically derived- which offers no benefit in aromatherapy. They might use glorified reasoning in explanation of their testing for marketing, but no amount of 'testing' can transform those EO's into a better standard/quality than organic, as they claim.

Generally speaking, they can be offering nothing better than a Grade 3 EO, by Australian standards of classification. Organic EO’s are classified as Grade 1. Grade 3 EO's are 100% pure, but are from blended origin- they are from a specified botanical species, sourced from various origins of supply & blended to produce a more economical option. Fertilisers & chemicals have been used on the plant. Some of the EO’s obtained might be organic, as there is an anomaly whereby a third world country might produce a plant organically as such, but their pricing can be cheaper than EO's offered through normal commercial production elsewhere in the world.

Personally, I would not use a Grade 3 EO, & I certainly would not ingest a Grade 3 EO…as these companies promote. By the way, it is illegal in Australia for anyone to recommend ingesting an EO, unless they are a qualified medical practitioner- recommending a treatment plan under supervision. I would not apply these EO’s (undiluted as they recommend, or diluted) to the skin either- anything applied to the skin is absorbed directly into the bloodstream. An undiluted EO can potentially cause a severe reaction to the skin…if not on the first exposure, repeated exposure can indeed stimulate a reaction. Each reaction thereafter can potentially amplify in severity with each exposure.

EO’s should not be used on babies/children either. Their skin is not sufficiently developed until after the age of seven. A reaction to an EO by a child will potentially set them up for never being able to tolerate any exposure to the EO for life!

There are over 300 EO's available, but only about 150 are used in aromatherapy. Of those, only about 70 are classified as being organic in origin…Grade 1. Think about it- do you really believe that these US companies own farms all around the world, sized to produce sufficient volumes to service their worldwide turn-over? It takes 30kg of rose petals to produce 15mL of rose EO. Organic rose EO is expensive- costing around $640/15mL from a supplier. Plants require environment specific conditions for their successful production. It takes numerous years for a tree to grow to sufficient sizing to tap into their resinous sap. Organic Australian Sandalwood costs around $154/15mL from a supplier. Multiply the above supply costs to factor in a profit margin, and I doubt many would buy into the resultant dollar equation!

I checked the prices of EO’s offered by the two main USA companies a few years back. At the time, frankincense was available at reasonable pricing…but then it was promoted in the media as a treatment option for cancer, and its price quadrupled from one company. No- I don’t believe their tactics are ‘ethical’ at all!

Despite a recipe having existed for centuries, the same company registered it & the name for Copyright. Indeed, it was a clever marketing strategy…but ‘ethical’? I think not. The competing company got around potential lawsuits by substituting the citrus EO used with another citrus EO.

It was also suggested to me recently by a customer, who had been a faithful customer of one of the brands, that I should copy the blends offered by them. No- I find no challenge or interest in this outlook- and I very simply can’t…most of the EO’s used are not available as an organic product. Am I making my point?

If you consider the above information, it is easy to understand the marketing strategies that have arisen by EO companies based in the USA. Unfortunately, most people are exposed to EO’s for the first time through grouped promotions held by their agents, and a knowledge/belief system is instigated. Most people never question this information. If you use and enjoy their products, please continue to do so. The circumstances of the USA do not apply in Australia. We have regulating Government bodies and standards in place Australia-wide, that instil a level of confidence in products.

Also note that I only personally sell our organic EO blends at Northey Street Organic Market on Sundays...they are not listed on our website. The blends are unique, and need to be experienced for their benefits offered through aromatherapy. I cannot perceive how an aroma can be described or imagined by an individual.

Did you know that there are over 300 essential oils available from around the world? Only about 150 essential oils are used in aromatherapy.

Did you also know that only around 70 of those essential oils are available as 'organic' as a resource, worldwide?

Did you know that many plants used to produce essential oils are only grown in site specific needs of an environment/country?
We are often asked if we 'produce' our essential oils used. We currently use 32 different organic essential oils in our various blends. Our blends are indeed limited by the organic essential oils available worldwide. Some essential oils that we'd like to use in our blends are very simply not available as an organic supply.

Did you know that huge amounts of plants are required to produce the concentrated extracts of essential oils? 
It takes roughly 30 kg of rose petals to produce 15 mL of rose essential oil, & 70 kg of lavender flowers to produce 500 mL of lavender essential oil. Hence, why so many pure essential oils are expensive. Add on the added costs associated with an organically grown & extracted oil, & the expense is multiplied.

Did you know that in the US, essential oils are not regulated or certified for quality control?
It's estimated that 77% of essential oils available in the US are synthetic- produced from petrochemicals & are toxic. Synthetic oils offer no therapeutic value through aromatherapy or use. Another 21% of the available oils in the US are considered to be adulterated with fillers to cut the oil, or synthetic compounds to enhance their natural aromas. Only 2 % of the the essential oils sold in the US are considered to be pure.

Considering the above facts, do you still believe the marketing strategies used by the large US multi-tiered essential oil companies, without question?

The best grading of essential oil quality is that of 'organic', Grade 1- grown without pesticides or herbicides, & extracted using approved methods. There is a chain of supply that can be tracked worldwide.

There is no such thing as 'Therapeutic Grade' essential oils available from essential oil suppliers/brokers worldwide. 'Therapeutic Grade' is a registered trademark created & used by US multi-tiered essential oil companies as a marketing strategy to imply that their products are "better than organic". Their testing might guarantee the purity of their offered oils, but their oils are not necessarily organic in supply. Their supplied oils are generally inferior grades of oil that are tested to ensure the oils have not been adulterated or cut by a supplier. A Grade 3 100% pure essential oil is of a specified botanical species, but is blended from various supply sources for economy. Chemicals can be used during growing. The supply chain of the blended specified essential oil can not be traced.

If you want a quality 100% pure essential oil, 'organic' is the top graded- Grade 1- in supply. Read product ingredient labels always...they provide your best guide. Ingredients are required to be listed in descending percentage order of content in Australia. If the only organic ingredient falls at the end of a listing, it might only be 1% or less of the content- that doesn't negate 99% or more chemical exposure from the other ingredients...yet that 1% or less content allows 'organic' terms to be used in marketing! Become aware...it's your choice- an informed person makes informed decisions!

Our organic 'honi' soap...currently sold out.

It's become a popular soap because of the gentle, soothing qualities offered by the organic extra virgin olive oil…enhanced by the organic honey content. I've managed to use twice the honey content normally added into a soap recipe...that took knowledge & experience to resolve the inherent problems.

It's very interesting...the lazy person syndrome that I raised discussing ‘goat’s milk’ soap comes into play again. I looked at many soap-making sites/groups before I started including honey in our soap. Complaint after complaint by makers discussing the problems they'd encountered...but all kept on repeating the same mistakes and recipes discussed. I simply looked at the problems, & worked out a probable solution.

I originally intended to use Manuka honey in 'honi'...but then I did my thorough research, & discovered that there would be no benefit in doing so, over normal organic honey. Manuka honey is a very vulnerable product...but we're not being told that, in marketing material by promoters. Indeed, its merited benefits are amazing- but to receive those benefits through most commercially processed products would virtually be impossible.

The merited qualities of Manuka honey come from the active enzymes...normally contained within the beehive honey. The beehive is carefully temperature controlled by the bees- maintaining a fairly constant temperature of 34-35 C degrees. The enzymes are destroyed for various reasons, once the honey is removed from the hive...one being temperature exposure. At 37 C, nearly 200 of the beneficial components of Manuka honey are destroyed. At 40 C, invertase- an important active enzyme/glycoprotein, which controls the breakdown of sucrose- is destroyed. This clearly indicates that to obtain any benefits from Manuka honey, it must be used raw…not put through the temperature exposure used during pasteurisation, that is generally applied to commercial products.

Manuka honey enzymes are also destroyed by exposure to light. Hence, why the best quality, graded Manuka honey is packaged in dark glass containers.

In fact, even raw Manuka honey loses all of its enzyme activity 10-15 days after removal from the hive- even under fully controlled conditions.

The relevance of the above factors are then further impacted by the soap-making process. Any additives to soap are introduced to the mixture at the very end, before the soap is poured- be it fragrance or colouring compounds, herbs, clays etc. When a sugar- in this case honey- is added to the mixture, a molecular reaction occurs. Significant heat is naturally generated in the reaction…temperatures in excess of 50 C occur. The soap mixture, which is normally a cream colour, instantly changes to a deep, terracotta colour…it’s quite alarming to observe- and the temperature rapidly rises.

There is no way to prevent this response…only control it to a degree. Without the reaction occurring, the honey could not be successfully combined. I read of results of the honey/sugar essentially separating into ‘toffee’ like particles within the soap…or the soap mixture exploding like lava. The resultant temperatures would undoubtedly destroy any active enzymes contained in Manuka honey, given its temperature sensitivity.

Beyond the above facts to be considered, I can’t attest to the value of many available commercial products, without knowing the processes and temperatures used in production.

It would however logically appear that if you want to receive the benefits of Manuka honey, the best results would be achieved by using raw Manuka honey, packaged in a lightproof container, and freshly harvested.

Again, we see people quickly jumping on to Manuka honey to gain profit from current marketing…without doing their own research to support the claims. I saw a company promoting a Manuka honey soap online for $40/100g. The soap might have warranted the price based on the quality and expense of the Manuka honey used, but it would offer absolutely no claimed benefits…impossible!

So I don’t use Manuka honey in our organic ‘honi’ soap for the above reasons…a little bit of research offers value in the time spent. I do however use a quality organic honey, offering all the naturally soothing benefits of a chemical-free honey to the skin…doubled in volume content to any other honey-based soap on the market. I highly recommend its use on problematic, irritated skin.

A frequently asked question at the markets: “Do we sell ‘goat’s milk’ soap?”

Answer: “No.”…and the person hastily walks on without looking at our products, or waiting for any explanation. 

The reasons why we don’t make ‘goat’s milk’ soap are more complicated than a short answer, but here’s a quick summation:

1. Our soaps address the needs of all those with skin sensitivities- so our soaps are vegan safe.

2. The addition of an animal protein or fat requires the use of a preservative to prevent the growth of bacteria etc. Our products are chemical free.

3. Animal fats have an inherent odour that generally requires fragrance compounds to conceal. Our products are fragrance free.

4. There have been no clinical studies that I can find that prove the benefits of using ‘goat’s milk’ soap to treat skin problems. User claims over product benefits are insufficient evidence to satisfy the requirements of the TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration, Division of the Australian Department of Health). User reviews and testimonials are unfounded evidence, and a tool used to support a product without the required evidence…’hearsay’ claimed by ‘external’ sources.

Let’s begin with a long rant to explain my outlook. 

We only use selected organic plant oils in our soaps, to keep them vegan-safe and usable by all. We limit the oils used in each soap type to a bare minimum to limit potential allergens, and avoid any oils that are nut based particularly for this reason. Oils that we avoid are: (capitals indicate oils not to be consumed) almond, ANDIROBA, argan, brazil nut, hazelnut, JOJOBA, KUKUI, macadamia, marula, pine nut, pistachio, PRACAXI, shea, TAMANU, walnut. 

In consideration of the topic, I would never consider using ‘goat’s milk’ in our soaps, as both my daughter and I have dairy allergies. I appreciate that a dairy allergy does not necessarily apply to ‘goat’s milk’. I also have difficulty digesting animal fats…so I’m not about to rub my skin with a milk based soap…nor a tallow (animal fat) based soap. Not ever! 

Skin irritations are tagged with various names depending on the severity: eczema, psoriasis, dermatitis etc. The cause needs to be medically identified and treated. Any topical application will only manage the resultant symptoms. For more information on skin irritations, please refer back to an earlier BLOG titled “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe…” (https://iloorganics.com/blogs/news/15646424-eeny-meeny-miny-moe-or-how-to-spot-eczema) 

I am not a chemist- I have no medical training- but I do read a lot and process information. My logic says that it makes absolutely no sense to apply an animal protein or fat based product to a skin irritation of unidentified source. To do so is to further provide an environment in which associated bacteria will potentially happily multiply. I have yet to find any clinical studies that prove that ‘goat’s milk’ soap/creams provide any benefits or cures to skin problems. Yet ‘goat’s milk’ soap makers ‘claim’ many of the following: prevents oxidative stress of the skin; reduces wrinkles, fine lines and skin ageing; reduces dark spots; whitens the skin; cures acne; heals skin; repairs damaged skin…and so the ‘claims’ continue. 

What became very obvious upon searching various ‘goat’s milk’ soap websites was the repetition of ‘claims’ made…none of which were verified. When someone introduces a product that achieves financial success in the marketplace, others quickly jump on the dollar bandwagon to nab their own profit share. Products are copied... the problem with that is that most people are generally lazy. Instead of creating their own product, and doing their own research, and writing their own marketing material…they just copy. If the information provided by someone has already brought them success, it’s usually good enough for them to ride with too…right or wrong- and incorrect information spreads exponentially very quickly in today’s internet connected world. Lazy people don’t bother to validate the information they’re fed, and copy. 

I’ll digress to a story from my personal experience. I worked for a large architectural company as their senior interior designer many years ago during my career path. An experienced architect was assigned to document the service doors to a large hotel project. The required minimum height of doors by Australian Standards at the time was 2040mm minimum. However, he made a profound mistake and documented all doors to the service core of the building, cast in concrete, to a height of 1800mm. No-one along the line questioned/checked the dimension…it was a common knowledge requirement. That mistake cost the company a hefty penalty in damages! Again, people are lazy- the original drawing documents were never amended, and placed on file. In later years, a junior architect was assigned to document the service doors on a high-rise building. To save time, he referred to old drawings. You guessed it- out came those unamended drawings as a reference. He trusted the information as being correct and from more experienced/knowledgeable architects. He was also lazy. The mistake was repeated at a hefty penalty in damages to the company again. My take home message: never assume anything, and take responsibility for your own information sources! 

One of the ‘claims’ made by ‘goat’s milk’ soap manufacturers is that it ‘matches & maintains the pH value of the skin’. Automatically, my alarm bells rang. This would be an impossibility unless ‘goat’s milk’ itself had a highly acidic pH value…something in the order of pH 0-3 (pH0 = battery acid, pH3 = lemon juice, pH5 = human skin, pH7 = neutrality/water, pH14 = sodium hydroxide). It becomes a simple exercise in math and chemistry to do a quick evaluation. Soap is made by combining an oil/fat (slightly varying pH values) with a strong alkali (sodium hydroxide pH14) suspended in a liquid to create a solid soap salt…with a resultant pH 9-10. In ‘goat’s milk’ soap the water/liquid content pH7 is substituted with ‘goat’s milk’…which actually has a pH value of 7.4- NOT the same as human skin pH5 as claimed, and more alkali than water. Therefore, swapping the water content with ‘goat’s milk’ actually achieves a resultant pH more alkali & further away from skin pH5 (range pH4-5.5)…that’s just straight math that can’t be questioned. 

As a further example of the ‘goat’s milk’ soap pH claim being absolutely false, we make our ‘cofi’ soap using coffee for its benefits, but also because it naturally reduces the pH slightly. Coffee does indeed have the same pH value of human skin…both ph5. The only variable in the three examples is the liquid content essentially- water, ‘goat’s milk’, or brewed organic coffee. Our other organic soaps achieve a pH9…lower because of the unprocessed quality of the organic oils. Our cofi soap achieves pH8…so are you doing the math on the pH of ‘goat’s milk’ soap? It can only achieve a probable pH value of 10, without question…far removed from the claimed same pH5 as human skin! 

On the basis of this outcome, in reality, the ‘claims’ made that ‘goat’s milk’ soap help to resolve skin problems because of its lower pH value contradict their ‘claims’ that an acidic pH value provides a solution…it is indeed an alkaline environment being created. 

Now I’ll move on to the ingredients used, and why it is absolutely critical to read product ingredient labels. A check of two of Australia’s leading ‘goat’s milk’ soap manufacturers’ ingredient lists showed that both use a preservative in their soaps, because of the animal protein/fat content. This is to maintain shelf life, and prevent the growth of bacteria…back to my argument that I don’t believe applying a similar animal protein/fat can solve a problem on irritated skin! 

The preservative used by both- despite sprouting ‘natural, healthy ingredients’ is tetrasodium EDTA, or ETHYLENEDIAMINETETRAACETIC acid in full. Those words that can’t be pronounced automatically ring my alarm bells! Tetrasodium EDTA is made from formaldehyde and sodium cyanide. Resultantly, it then also contains dioxane as a by-product. All of the above are known or suspected carcinogens. Dioxane is also known to CAUSE eczema, and is a strongly rated eye irritant. No studies have been conducted to establish its long-term safety in use. 

My jaw hit the floor in shock…these products are being promoted for use on babies and children. Fast forward twenty years, and who will ever connect the dots back to developed cancer to the use of ‘goat’s milk’ soap for 20 years! Tetrasodium EDTA has been used extensively in the cosmetic industry as a preservative for many years, and continues to be used by manufacturers because it works effectively and is cost viable. There are natural alternatives that can be used, but at a significant increase in costs. Once again, a manufacturer’s profit margin takes precedence over our safety as a consumer. I’ve written endlessly about the unconscionable use of another preservative, METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE. Do not buy any products containing either preservative- send a very clear message to manufacturers! They are knowingly impacting on our health, whilst purely evaluating their profit margins- yet marketing products that we trust to be in our best interests…and safe. 

Also of interest to me is that both companies use cheap, low quality plant oils as their primary ingredients. Personally, I would not be paying the exorbitant charges being asked for such an inferior grade of product. Trust me when I say that their profit margins are high…most oils coming in at a small fraction of the cost of the organic oils we use- yet their soaps are priced 50% more than ours on weight ratio. 

My conclusion? I’m yet to be convinced that those claiming benefits from these soaps aren’t just experiencing the inherent benefits of using cold-processed soaps made with plant oils…instead of petrochemicals. Specialised skin products from the pharmacy are also made from petrochemicals. My daughter reacted to all, and many other handmade soaps; because of colouring and fragrance compounds used- both are known skin irritants. These ‘goat’s milk’ soap companies do offer colour and fragrance free options, but meet consumer demand for a pretty and smelly soap in the main part. 

Obviously, the power of marketing gets results for them…promote a product to mass media, and rely on people not questioning information- just blindly accepting and following. It’s a proven technique, and highlights a failure of human nature- place trust in the ‘experts’…we haven’t got time, or can’t be bothered checking information being handed to us. 

If you use ‘goat’s milk’ soap, and benefit from it, please continue to…but look for a healthier available option. Please take the time to read product ingredient labels. My very simple rule whilst shopping for products: if you can’t pronounce an ingredient name, there’s a clue to simply put it back on the shelf!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

It’s taken me awhile to associate this nursery rhyme to my soap ramblings…it should have been an obvious choice. I’ve explained a lot of issues and facts around soap to date, but not the most obvious factor…how soap actually manages to work as a cleansing agent.

I’ve explained in the past how soap is made- refer Blogs: http://iloorganics.com/blogs/news/14658801-soap-making-methods and http://iloorganics.com/blogs/news/15089821-soap-its-all-in-the-making. Unfortunately, I’ve just discovered that our website host does not support archiving of our Blogs, and only displays a limited number of recent posts…so they can only be accessed via the above links. I’m looking into a way to get around this limitation.

So another chemistry lesson that I’ll simplify as best I can to explain the advantages of using soap for cleansing. Funny- I was at my doctor’s the other day and he pulled up an information link he’d posted on his Facebook page, and slung off at the complexity of the language used…like what did it mean? I’d read a couple of sentences and put it in the ‘too hard’ basket! I read once that if you can’t explain something clearly to your grandmother, then you’ve failed…and I fall into that age category, so I’ll see how it works in reverse.

Some simple facts: a salt mixes with and dissolves in water- an oil doesn’t mix with water. That’s the reason an alkali (a strong soluble salt of an alkali metal- NaOH/caustic soda) solution is used in the soap making process to begin with- it allows the oil to be combined with the lye (NaOH/water) solution to turn it into a solid soap salt…which then will in fact dissolve in water.

If we tried to wash oil off our skin or clothes with just water, the water wouldn’t penetrate the oil- there would be a natural molecular resistance by the water. Therefore, we need something that alters the surface tension of the water…a ‘surfactant’.

Water molecules tend to like each other and stay together. If you dropped some water on a flat surface, the molecules would tend to hold their form naturally and not spread out- they’d form more of a flattened, round drop as they huddled together. This characteristic structure of water molecules is called ‘micelles’.

If you watch rain falling on a window, the droplets tend to merge together and run down the glass in little runs aided by gravity- instead of wetting the glass uniformly. When we add a surfactant, it improves the ability of the water to wet things by changing the surface tension. If we’d applied a window cleaner/detergent to the glass prior to the rain hitting it, the rain would wet the window evenly instead of forming runs of droplets.

Soap molecules have a different characteristic structure. They have a head that likes water molecules- ‘hydrophilic’, and a tail that hates it- ‘hydrophobic’. When soap is added to water, the hydrophilic heads mix with the water, but the hydrophobic tails connect up with the oil molecules and push away from the water molecules. The oil molecules end up surrounded by water molecules in a circle and trapped- like a bit of an ‘encircle and capture the enemy’ scenario. This resultant molecular structure is then termed ‘micellas’- an emulsion of oil encapsulated in water that is then easily carried away with more clean water.

In summary, soap acts as a ‘surfactant’ and an ‘emulsifier’ to loosen oils and dirt from our skin. Similarly, it causes bacteria to loosen their grip on our skin- become trapped and be rinsed away. As much as people profess that soap is not required to cleanse the skin, it would take a lot of vigorous rubbing to effectively break the surface tension without soap…causing skin irritation. It’s recommended that hand washing with soap be done for 30 seconds, but the average person does it for less than 15 seconds.

Psychologically, we tend to associate the effectiveness of soap by the amount of bubbles/lather it produces. This is not the case at all. Even a low lathering soap like our ‘oli’ organic soap, made with organic extra virgin olive oil, is just as effective as our very popular dense lathering ‘coci’ organic soap, made with organic extra virgin coconut oil. The success of the process/chemistry isn’t increased by more lather. We’ve again been convinced of this being the case through commercial marketing- the more bubbles, the more cleaning power…wrong!

Do your hands and your body a favour and use our organic soaps to reduce the chemical burden on your skin…’oli’ being extremely mild for the constant exposure of hand washing.

Back to the nursery rhyme:
“Rub-a-dub-dub,
 Three men in a tub,
 And who do you think they were?
 The butcher, the baker,
 The candlestick-maker.
 They all sailed out to sea.
 ‘Twas enough to make a man stare.”

What on earth does this rhyme refer to? You’ve got to wonder about the various rhymes as statements of periods through history! Put into my world as part of a market community with the butcher…the baker…the candlestick-maker…I’m shuddering at the prospect! My soap shall have no part in the play!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE PURE, ORGANIC SOAP

Do you remember the song “My Favorite Things” (written by Rodgers & Hammerstein) featured in the movie “The Sound of Music”? I hate to think how many times I must have seen the movie over the years…the words to the song indelibly imprinted in my brain.

Every week for a few years now, I’ve been posting lifestyle tips on our Facebook page for those wanting to pursue a more chemical free existence. The suggested tips were largely absorbed through observation of methods used by my mother in the days before our lives became saturated with commercial products. Simpler times…when people used resources on hand and common sense to resolve cleaning issues etc.

I don’t buy many commercial products…preferring to stick with the methods taught to me and later modified by me to suit my current lifestyle. I don’t have a cupboard full of cleaning products. The products that I stock for cleaning are: bicarb, cream of tartar, salt, white vinegar, tea tree and eucalyptus oils, WD-40…and of course, ilo ORGANICS soap! There are not many cleaning issues that can’t be resolved with these goodies- either singularly or in combination.

Here are some of my favourite tips that I use regularly:

1. Clean pots and pans in a flash by rubbing over baked on oil with a stainless steel scourer, soap and a splash of tea tree oil for gleaming pots with minimal effort.

2. To clean a microwave oven in a snap, place 1 cup of white vinegar in a bowl & run on high for 5 minutes, or until condensation appears on the surfaces. Carefully remove bowl, and wipe surfaces over…too easy.

3. Clean scale build-up from a kettle by covering it with a sufficient depth of white vinegar- boil and stand for 15 minutes. Empty and rinse well.

4. Use bicarb on a dampened cloth to clean the fridge, dishwasher and washing machine. It’ll remove any odours in the process. It’s also a great cleaner for the rubber seal on front- loaders.

5. To remove rust spots from stainless steel appliances, rub over with a damp cloth dipped in cream of tartar with the direction of the grain. Wipe over and apply a stainless steel protective oil finish.

6. Make a lot of scratches and marks on timber furniture disappear by rubbing them with a fresh walnut.

7. A squirt of WD-40 will shift dried paint and glue off hands easily.

8. Apply a dab of clear nail-polish to the centre of button stitches on a new shirt to prevent them from unravelling.

9. Keep these ethylene producing fruit separated from others & vegetables to extend the life of both: apple, apricot, avocado, banana, custard apple, grapefruit, kiwi, mango, melons, nectarine, pawpaw, passionfruit, peach, pear, pineapple, plum, tomato. Also note that ethylene gas can build to 40 times the normal level when fruit is stored in the confinement of a fridge- reducing the storage life by as much as 50%.

10. Keep celery crisp for up to 2 weeks in the fridge, cut the stems in half and wrap/seal them in aluminium foil.

11. For chemical free, easy weed removal, spray those pesky little weeds with white vinegar. They’ll shrivel up within a few days after application.

12. Heading off to the park for a barbeque? Wipe over the table with white vinegar to naturally disinfect the surface and repel flies.

Back to the song. I remember when I first heard this version of it - off the album “Tenderness” by Al Jarreau: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWMT-fpDQm0

It captured my brain for days and became a haunting obsession.

“…Brown paper packages tied up with strings

     These are a few of my favourite things…”

Indeed…’ilo’ packaging stands in testament of the fact!

Do you know the song? I must have heard the Louis Armstrong version a thousand times growing up…and a million times in my head since. It soothes and uplifts me. In case you are unfamiliar with the song, here’s a link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uReGn1l4ir8

Words of wisdom…we find them in unexpected places. I stumbled across this article today whilst sorting bits of paper…I seem to collect a lot. It was sent to me some years ago by my elderly uncle. I hung on to it…no surprises there.

The article was written by Regina Brett at the age of 90 from Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

“ To celebrate growing older, I once wrote the 45 lessons life taught me. It is the most requested column I’ve ever written.
My odometer rolled over to 90 in August, so here is the column once more:

1. Life isn’t fair, but it’s still good.

2. When in doubt, just take the next small step.

3. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.

4. Your job won’t take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and parents will. Stay in touch.

5. Pay off your credit cards every month.

6. You don’t have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.

7. Cry with someone. It’s more healing than crying alone.

8. It’s OK to get angry with God. He can take it.

9. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.

10. When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.

11. Make peace with your past so it won’t screw up the present.

12. It’s OK to let your children see you cry.

13. Don’t compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.

14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn’t be in it.

15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye. But don’t worry; God never blinks.

16. Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.

17. Get rid of anything that isn’t useful, beautiful or joyful.

18. Whatever doesn’t kill you really does make you stronger.

19. It’s never too late to have a happy childhood. But the second one is up to you and no one else.

20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don’t take no for an answer.

21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie. Don’t save it for a special occasion. Today is special.

22. Over prepare, then go with the flow.

23. Be eccentric now. Don’t wait for old age to wear purple.

24. The most important sex organ is the brain.

25. No one is in charge of you happiness but you.

26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words ‘In five years, will this matter?’

27. Always choose life.

28. Forgive everyone everything.

29. What other people think of you is none of your business.

30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.

31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.

32. Don’t take yourself so seriously. No one else does.

33. Believe in miracles.

34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn’t do.

35. Don’t audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.

36. Growing old beats the alternative- dying young.

37. Your children get only one childhood.

38. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.

39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.

40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else’s, we’d grab ours back.

41. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.

42. The best is yet to come…

43. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.

44. Yield.

45. Life isn’t tied with a bow, but it’s still a gift.”

No matter what your religious beliefs are or are not, we can all take something away from her thoughts. Embrace the moment and the people around you always…believe, and forgive.

The words of the song:

"When You Wish Upon A Star" was written by Ned Washington, Leigh Harline.

"When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
Will come to you

If your heart is in your dreams
No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star
As dreamers do

Fate is kind
She brings to those who love
A sweet fullfillment of their secret longing
Like a boat out of the blue
Fate steps in and sees you through

Moma when you wished upon a star
Your dreams come true

Fate is kind
She brings to those who love
The sweet fullfillment of their secret longing
Like a boat out of the blue
Fate steps in and see's you through

Baby when you wish upon a star
Your dreams come true
When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Your dreams come true"

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

Off goes the brain searching through the memory again- this time landing on The Doors song “The End”. That’s an interesting outcome after contemplating the outcome of soap in the current marketplace…it feels a bit like that!

If you are like the majority of consumers these days, you probably haven’t noticed that the supermarket shelves now largely stock hand and body washes, where once they carried numerous commercial brands of soap. Most of the iconic soap brands have disappeared from the shelves…indeed, production has been ceased in many cases. Do you remember the brands…Dettol, Cashmere Bouquet, Camay, Imperial Leather, Lifebuoy, Lux, Rexona, Pears, Solvol and Sunlight Personal, to name the most common. Most brand names have now disappeared- it has become a memory exercise.

The main soap manufacturing companies- Colgate Palmolive, Johnson & Johnson, Pears, Procter & Gamble, PZ Cussons and Unilever- have progressively ceased soap production in favour of the more economical production of body washes/liquid soaps. The market infiltration of these products increased after the Colgate Company acquired the rights to ‘soft soap’ in 1987 from the Minnetonka Corporation- who had been manufacturing it since 1980 in the US. Minnetonka had achieved $25 million in sales in its first six months of operation. 

The marketing campaigns hit the media with vengeance- convincing consumers that body washes were a far more desirable option than soap. Here’s a video depicting the strategies of the “Say No To Soap” campaign used by Colgate-Palmolive to market their ‘Palmolive Naturals’ body wash: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDHoivL4Xm4

It would be hard not to feel manipulated after watching the campaign direction. Colgate-Palmolive was the global leader in body washes by 1993.

Body washes now hold the majority of sales in the marketplace- with soap sales continuing to decrease by roughly 5% per year. Many of the soap factories have been closed around the world- Unilever’s Sunlight UK (begun 1885) was closed in 2009; Unilever’s Rexona (begun 1908) was closed in 1989; Standard Soap Factory in UK closed in 2012; Lever Brothers, Baltimore in USA closed this year. Production of ‘Cashmere Bouquet’ was ceased in 2005, after being manufactured since 1872. Cussons in Australia closed its Dandenong factory in 2012. Unilever in New Zealand closed its Petone factory in 2013. Unilever has also expressed that it no longer intends to carry its now owned Pears soap in to the future. Procter & Gamble is currently negotiating to sell off its USA Ivorydale plant, where the iconic ‘Ivory” soap has been made since 1879.

Many of the iconic soap trade name licenses have been sold to manufacturers in Pakistan and India in recent years. Soap is definitely being shed by the big production companies in favour of body washes. The production time and costs of manufacturing body washes is far more commercially viable. The consumer has embraced the marketing campaigns- sales figures are proof. Sales figures for body washes represented $2.7 billion in the US last year- whilst soap sales were $1.5 billion.

If you’ve been following our blogs, you’d appreciate that body washes are primarily made from petrochemicals. They are a cheap buffered detergent suitably coloured and fragranced, and marketed as a product for ease of use. Yet these products have impacted considerably on the environment through plastic packaging and production methods. They are profitable for the manufacturer- yet they present a huge budget concern to the consumer, as superfluous product liberally gets washed down the drain.

Back to The Doors song:
“This is the end, beautiful friend
  This is the end, my only friend.
  The end of our elaborate plans
  The end of everything that stands, the end.”

How the battle will play out with time is yet to be seen. Commercially, a limited range of soaps remains in production to satisfy continuing consumer demand, but for how much longer is questionable.

The astute consumer is turning to handmade soaps as a solution for a better option in products. They are embracing the benefits that can be derived from a cold processed handmade soap, as our lives become more saturated with chemicals. Soap is fast becoming the domain of the artisan- continuing to use traditional soap making methods to create a superior product that is free of chemicals that irritate the skin.

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

“If you drink much from a bottle marked ‘poison’ it is certain to disagree with you sooner or later.”- Lewis Carroll, “Alice in Wonderland”…my favourite book from childhood- a book of riddles that actually makes wonderful sense.

We carry so much with us from our experiences. Nursery rhymes- will we ever forget any of them? TV ads and jingles- I’m sure they’ll stay embedded too. Can anyone over 40 forget the “Louie the Fly” ad for Mortein that played for years, with updated variations? For those unfamiliar, here’s the link to the original ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcO2UlIMkpo -a quirky fly character who was “bad and mean, and mighty unclean”, that we could remove from our lives by using Mortein insect spray in every room in our home with confidence…”Spray safe…spray only Mortein.” I still know the words to the jingle off by heart.

Then there was Mr Sheen in the 70s- a spray on furniture polish that promised to transform the toil of cleaning. Another quirky character, and another jingle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnlPZT5y24k convincing us that “Everything around you comes up bright and clean.” Too bad its harsh chemical formula destroyed many a cherished antique piece of timber furniture. Whoops- nothing was mentioned about that… just “Put Mr Sheen, in there to fight for you.” “Fight for you”?

TV became an effective place to market cleaning products that promised us an easy way to create a clean environment. Somewhere in the last twenty years, the focus moved more intensely to combating ‘germs’, and antibacterial products flooded the market. The surface cleaning sprays suddenly needed to be more effective than before- we needed more than Dettol to just kill the germs that could affect us from the odd scrape or cut…we needed to sanitise our household surfaces as well, and eradicate every trace of bacteria from our environment.

Manufacturers introduced products laden with the new wonder chemical ‘triclosan’. Triclosan was initially registered for use as a pesticide in 1969. Then it became a chemical largely reserved for hospital shelves, where it was used as a synthetic broad-spectrum antimicrobial agent. Now it’s included in about 75% of antibacterial personal care products, and represents an industry that’s worth an estimated $1 billion. It’s included in body washes, soaps, hand sanitisers, toothpastes, antiperspirants/deodorants, body wipes and antiseptics…along with household cleaning products, plastics, fabrics and numerous other common use products.

Triclosan can pass through the skin into the bloodstream, and it accumulates in fatty tissues. It is a suspected endocrine disruptor and carcinogen, immunotoxin, common irritant and allergen. It has been detected in 75% of human tissue samples…including breast milk. It has led to bacterial resistance, which can interfere with the effectiveness of antibiotics. Its prolific use has also led to the contamination of our waterways and the destruction of related ecosystems.

Like most other chemicals being used in commercial products, triclosan was never fully tested and evaluated for safety in long term and recurrent use. Studies of the use of triclosan began in 1972…the conclusions only finalised in 2005. It took 33 years to conclude that there was no effective benefit derived by the inclusion of triclosan in personal care products in their ability to obliterate bacteria, than there was over that achieved from using plain soap and water.

Triclosan does have efficacy against bacteria, but has not proven effective against viruses- and it is viruses that spread our most common illnesses…colds and flu. The conclusions of the studies were that most people who use antibacterial products are no healthier than those who don’t. The other finding was that chronically sick people who use antibacterial products actually become sicker and more prone to bacterial infections.

So how can you avoid exposure to Triclosan? BAM…read those product labels- I can’t emphasise enough how increasingly important this is to do in selecting products. Triclosan must be identified by law as an ingredient- so if a product includes it, bypass it. It’s any easy choice- it’s toxic to your body. Use soap and water, and learn to wash your hands effectively. I absolutely cringe seeing all the TV commercials currently running for antibacterial hand washes with kids lining up for their liquid dose, as the mother confidently and lovingly looks on at her ‘germ-free’ kids! I cringe seeing hand sanitisers with carabineer clips for ready attachment and use in our active lifestyles. The subliminal message being sent is that we need portable sanitation methods on hand when we step out of our sterilised homes...nasty 'germs' be gone!

Our skin is naturally covered in billions of bacteria- a healthy skin and body can deal with them. We are not meant to live in a sterile environment- nor our bodies to be sterilised. Chemicals interfere with our body’s ability to effectively function as it should. Reduce the chemical burden on your body whenever/wherever you can. Make informed decisions, and reject chemical-laden commercial products. If you can’t pronounce a product ingredient, there’s a clue to the decision you should make…leave it where it is!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

 “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe,
   Catch a tiger by the toe.
   If he hollers, let him go,
   Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.”

Hmm…the current politically correct version of the counting rhyme game played in childhood, to select the “it” person for exclusion somehow has lost the flow it had in my youth. I find it somewhat confronting that even children’s books are being edited to remove any of the unacceptable stigmas associated with our chequered history as a developing society…to arrive at destination point Z, but remove the travel diary seems somewhat of a pointless account of the journey. Perhaps the reference to a tiger and its stripes holds more relevance to the topic of eczema though.

I caught the passing conversation of two young women at the markets on Sunday: “I can’t use pump body washes anymore…they’ve given me eczema.” The conversation was obviously stimulated by our soap stall…yet they continued walking by, much to my frustration.

I’ve touched on the cheap, chemical cocktails that represent the ingredients of most commercial body washes many times on our Facebook page over the years. Body washes flooded the market in recent years as a cheaper option to manufacturers- accompanied by marketing campaigns to convince the consumer that they were a better option than soap. They are however just a more profitable production option for manufacturers, and the consumer the gullible target.

I cannot repeat enough the importance of learning to read ingredient labels to grasp the product on offer…beyond the enticing marketing words. That commercial product brandishing words of ‘natural’ etc need only contain one drop of that ‘natural’ ingredient to allow them to trade off those claims. Product ingredients in Australia are required to be listed in descending order of content percentages- so if you read the ingredients list and find that natural ingredient towards the end, it will offer very little benefit to the product or you.

Know what you are buying, and don’t be mislead by marketing. Those body washes are largely just petrochemical detergents with synthetic fragrance and appealing colouring agents added. No wonder people are experiencing eczema.

‘Eczema’ is a term applied to a large list of largely unqualified skin irritations…from the mild to the extreme- when the term changes to ‘dermatitis’. It is usually identified by collective symptoms of redness, bumps, swelling, itching, dryness, crusting, flaking, blistering, cracking, oozing or bleeding of the skin. That’s a broad range of symptoms to acquire the applied label.

There are generally no cures…just management strategies offered. The skin irritations are commonly termed as being either ‘atopic eczema’ or ‘allergic eczema’, and the causes can range from food allergies through to product exposure and material contact exposure. Most sources remain undiagnosed.

It is now common amongst our youth, with 1 in 5 children under the age of 2 experiencing ‘eczema’- the term usually applied to those having a weakened skin barrier of unknown reasons…making them more prone to the effects of chemical exposure. I’ve touched on our basic skin structure in the past- refer blog “Where’s my suit of armour?”, 09/07/14.

I think it’s very easy to explain away a problem by labelling someone’s weakened skin barrier as the cause, and then offering various ‘barrier creams’ to prevent further irritation, rather than stating that there are so many untested chemicals in products that there is no way to even begin testing for reactions to them. Hmm…there’s obviously something wrong with your skin or immune system, rather than there’s something obviously wrong with our chemically saturated world!

Perhaps those chemicals are stripping our children’s immune systems from developing properly these days. My daughter reacted to every commercial personal care product. She was tested for common food allergens- one of which was yellow colouring…which is used in just about every commercial product on the market to improve visual appeal- from shampoo to butter. In desperation, I began making our organic soap products to ensure as pure a product as possible for her safe use. Use of school soap or public toilet hand washes brought on instant red, itching and painful irritation to her hands that took up to a week to settle down again. My daughter, now 21, continues to have these responses to commercial products. As a mother, it has always been equally distressing for me to watch her suffer…she has the whitest, finest skin- exaggerating her skin reactions to the visually alarming!

However, she has never reacted to any of our organic soaps. My recommendation to anyone suffering ‘eczema’ would be to have a competent doctor specialising in bio and environmental medicine investigate the possible cause. Any treatment offered will only manage the condition until the cause is identified and removed from the equation. Medical intervention is required, but I believe the use of chemical free personal care products, without fragrance and colouring, will help to support the skin by not stripping the skin of its natural barrier.

The mildest soap that can be produced is an olive oil soap. It’s a good starting point to provide gentle care for the skin. I unfortunately purchased a handmade olive oil soap for my daughter many years ago- assuming I was buying a chemical free product…but she reacted badly. The makers failed to list the colouring agents added to the ingredients. It took my own experiences of making organic olive oil soap to identify that factor. After using oils with various depths of colour, it became obvious that every soap resulted in an ever so slight variation of off-white or cream as an outcome. There were definitely no shades of green ever evident…like the colour exuded by the handmade soap I’d purchased. Even using the dark green organic hemp oil that goes into our ‘hemi’ soap results only in the slightest hint of green to that general cream colour outcome. To not list colouring agents is in fact in breach of consumer labelling laws. Ignorant people put others health at risk, and should be reported. I have had some customers whose lives have been put on the line by labelling oversights of products.

Identifying the cause of eczema- it’s a bit like playing the rhyme game for identification…allergic contact, atopic, discoid, irritant contact, nummular, seborrhoeic, stasis, venous or xerotic- eczema, dermatitis, psoriasis or rosacea- it’s all a game of ingredient elimination at the end of the day…even for doctors. “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe…”

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

There goes my brain again searching for relevant facts in the memory bank. Up popped the old nursery rhyme chanted endlessly during childhood play:

“Ring-a-ring o’ roses,
 A pocket full of posies,
 A-tishoo! A-tishoo!
 We all fall down.”

It wasn’t until adult years that I read that the rhyme is referenced to the Bubonic Plague in England during the 17thC…who would have ever thought! The “Ring-a-ring o’ roses” refers to the rosy red, round rash symptomatic of the plague, and the “posies” refers to the belief that filling one’s pockets and pouches with fragrant herbs would prevent the spread of the disease…believed to be transmitted by bad smells. So began our pre-occupation with fragrances thereafter.

Fragrance compounds are generally added to products to conceal the unpleasant odours of the ingredients, or to tantalise our olfactory senses to encourage sales. Regulations do not require fragrance compounds to be identified in detail- but rather appear as a generalised listing as an ingredient, such as fragrance, fragrances, parfum or parfumes in Australia. Requirements vary with the country of origin for imported products.

Approximately 4,000 fragrance chemicals are commonly used in perfumed commercial items- from cosmetics through to household cleaning products. Only about 800 of those chemicals have actually been tested for toxicity- either alone, or in combination with others. They can be derived from natural sources or chemical synthesis. However, 95% of chemicals used in fragrances are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum. ‘Fragrance’ has become a catch-all term applied to an assortment of ingredients that can be added by manufacturers without redress- under the banner of protected ‘secret ingredients/formulas’.

Some fragrance chemicals alter the skin’s surface tension- then impacting on the permeability of other chemicals into the skin. None of these associated interactions have been studied to any extent. Fragrances contain large amounts of phthalates, which are a group of toxic chemicals known to be hormone disruptors. Phthalates are used to suitably blend and fix other ingredients. They have been linked to allergic responses (both skin and respiratory responses), damaging DNA structure, infertility, birth defects, cancer and thyroid disorders. Of the people tested for the presence of phthalates in their urine, all tested positive.

As fragrance compounds can be absorbed, ingested or inhaled during exposure, their effect on the body is difficult to quantify…possibly affecting any part of the body. Here is a list of the most commonly used fragrance compounds that have been proven to be problematic in physical responses, and are required to be identified in ingredients listings: Acetone, Benzaldehyde, Benzyl Acetate, Benzyl Alcohol, Camphor, 1,8-Cineole, b-Citronellol, Cocoamide DEA, Ethanol, Ethyl Acetate, Eugenol, Geraniol, Hexyl Cinnamal, Limonene, Linalool, Methyllene Chloride, b-Myrcene, Nerol, Ocimene, a-Pinene, b-Phenethyl Alcohol, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, g-Terpinene, a-Terpineol. Whew…only another 4,000 odd to go to make the list!

A skin contact fragrance allergy will usually manifest itself in the form of red bumps, blisters, itchiness and blotchiness of the skin. Continued exposure to the allergen can lead to chronic dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis is now quite common amongst children. Eczema has increased as a skin condition worldwide in the last decade. Allergic and non-allergic asthma, and reactive airway dysfunction syndrome have increased dramatically, and attacks are often induced by exposure to fragrances…72% of asthmatics citing fragrance as a trigger to an attack. Asthma is now the leading serious chronic illness amongst our youth.

Unfortunately, fragrance compounds are rarely investigated as the cause of a skin irritation…because it is too vast an area to open the lid on. The simplest way to identify fragrance compounds as a cause of irritation is to eliminate it from products being used, by buying fragrance free products. We have a voice as consumers to send a loud and clear message to manufacturers by boycotting synthetically fragranced products. If we don’t, the practice will continue, and continue to grow at an alarming rate of untested use- with approximately 1,000 new chemicals being introduced into industry every year.

We consciously chose not to add fragrance compounds to our organic soaps. We endeavour to produce as irritant free a skin care product as possible- to be used with confidence by those suffering various skin sensitivities.

We do not know enough about the effect of fragrance chemicals on our bodies…yet their use is sanctioned in products by regulatory bodies/Government. We assume that commercially available products are deemed safe for our use…yet this is not so. Let’s look at some of those statistics again- only 800 fragrance chemicals out of 4,000 currently being used in products have actually been tested.

Back to the significance of the nursery rhyme. Through ignorance at the time, it was assumed that enamouring oneself with fragrant herbs would act as a defence mechanism against the Bubonic Plague. Unpleasant smells became unacceptable, and later, the trend to fragrance oneself became fashionable. Some versions of the rhyme substitute “A-tishoo! A-tishoo!” with “Ashes! Ashes!” This variation is believed to refer to the mass cremations of the dead body toll of the Bubonic Plague.

Hmm…can I dare to compare the carnage from the Bubonic Plague to the growing impact of our commercially fragrance saturated lives…an unnecessary epidemic from progressive chemical exposure? Might we just “…all fall down.” before some control is manifested over the fragrance industry? Reduce the chemical burden on your body from personal care products…say “No!” to fragrance whenever possible.

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

If you’ve been following our blogs, by now you’d be becoming aware of the importance of reading ingredient labels on personal care products. You’d be conscious of the fact that most of those commercial products contain petrochemicals.

Making choices is easy, right? In response to this thought, my brain has automatically called up the classic diner scene from the movie “Five Easy Pieces” from the 70s, starring Jack Nicholson- link attached for those unfamiliar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wtfNE4z6a8

One of the main ingredients that personal care products and cosmetics are built around is mineral oil. In fact, roughly 98% of commercial personal care products contain mineral oil…leaving very little room for selective choice to the consumer.

Mineral oil is essentially a waste product of the petrochemical industry. It is a cheap, readily accessible resource from industry- being produced as a by-product of the distillation of gasoline from crude oil. Untreated or mildly treated mineral oils are classified by the World Health Organisation as being Group 1 carcinogenic to humans. Highly refined mineral oils, as in those contained in personal care products, are classified as being not suspected to be carcinogenic…but available information is not sufficient to classify them as harmless.

Hmm…that builds confidence over its use in commercial personal care products doesn’t it? Would you still feel confident slathering that baby oil on your precious newborn child if you read the label and realised that it was nothing more than fragranced mineral oil? That’s the problem- we don’t tend to read the labels, and assume that what is sold to us must be safe…think again! Research into chemicals used and their long term effects is a slow, laborious process, and restrictive actions then taken even slower- think asbestos, tobacco, BPA, DDT, Thalidomide…even leaded gasoline!

The use of petrochemical derivatives/mineral oils became necessary during the restrictions placed on natural resources during WW2. Thereafter, it just made economic business sense to find a useful purpose for them, rather than deal with the costs of waste disposal. The other advantage in using mineral oil over natural oils in personal care products became quickly obvious to industry. Mineral oil is non-biodegradable- providing products with a stable shelf life…more economic sense.

Mineral oil is used in three different forms as a base in products: in a liquid state…mineral oil, in a jelly state…petrolatum, in a solid state…paraffin wax. It gets listed as an ingredient under various synonyms like: liquid paraffin, mineral oil, mineral oil mist, mineral syrup, white mineral oil, white oil, hydrocarbon oil, petroleum hydrocarbons, petroleum, paraffin oil, paraffinic, soft paraffin, and petroleum jelly. The composition of these oils varies depending on the crude oil source, the refining process and the additives present.

The actual problem with using mineral oil on our bodies is that it forms a film on the skin that blocks the pores and the natural processes of the skin. It actually traps dirt and bacteria instead of them being naturally dispersed. The chemically based oil film then prevents the effective absorption of all those added ingredients that are supposedly included to benefit the skin…like those natural oils and vitamins added in minute amounts for marketing purposes. So more chemicals are added…like those to enhance the permeability to the skin.

As a consumer, you have the ability to decrease the number of chemicals your skin comes into contact with. All you have to do is make the simple choice of reading labels and purchasing personal care products with all-natural, organic ingredients instead. Of far more benefit to the skin are natural plant oils- offering all the nutritive qualities assigned to a plant oil. The plant oils are absorbed readily by the skin- benefiting and nurturing it.

Our pure organic soaps offer chemical, colour and fragrance free gentle care to reduce the chemical burden on your skin.

Back to the diner scene from “Five Easy Pieces”…quote, ”No substitution!” There are better options/substitutes available to us. Read those product labels. Become conscious of ingredients…informed people, make informed decisions.

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

There’s my brain searching and sifting for relevant information again, and it’s fired back this children’s lullaby immediately…possibly as an appropriate parody- in that what you pay for, is not always what you get.

I raised the issue over dog shampoo effectively being a rip-off in my opinion, briefly last week. Product marketing has led us to believe that a dog’s skin is particularly ‘sensitive’. The pH of dog skin falls within the range of 6.2-8.62 (pH 7.3 average), depending on the breed of dog. A German Shepherd dog has a more alkaline skin than a Maltese Terrier dog for example- but for this purpose, we'll go with the average pH value.

The accepted neutrality point on a pH scale is water at 7- although be wary of bottled water brands, as tests have indicated readings as low as pH 4. Anything below pH 7 is acidic- anything above, is alkaline.

Human skin has a pH range of 4.5-6, depending on ethnicity, area on body and diet. Therefore, if you were to use a shampoo pH balanced for our use, the product would be too acidic for a dog’s skin and cause irritation. It’s not that a dog’s skin is ‘sensitive’ as such- as you’ve just seen, a dog’s skin is closer in range to being of neutral pH than human skin is.

This is why I believe that we’ve all been manipulated through commercial marketing. Commercial shampoos, soaps, body washes, dishwashing liquids, clothes washes etc are all based on petrochemical by-products. There’s not a hell of a lot of difference in the base product- it’s how they are then chemically manipulated for a desired purpose that achieves the end product. All of these products are synthetic detergent based.

What’s that…detergent based? Hmm…wonder what the pH of detergent/dishwashing liquid is? The pH values vary between brands, but the pH value of Palmolive dishwashing liquid happens to be 7.3. Isn’t that interesting…dishwashing liquid would be perfectly suitable for use on a dog’s skin (pH 7.3 average) as a shampoo! A commercial dog shampoo might have some other beneficial ingredients blended in, but you’re essentially buying dishwashing detergent at a dramatically increased price…the power of marketing and manipulation!

I’ve been manipulated by the marketing…spending a small fortune on dog products. I wouldn’t have considered paying the associated prices for our own shampoos…but for our dog, I did without hesitation because her ‘sensitive skin’ required 'specialised' care! Then one day, I was sold a neem oil based soap as the latest and greatest dog grooming product. It was expensive too- about three times the price for weight over our organic soaps…yet I handed over the cash on the premise of it being a specialised dog care product.

So I washed our dog Lucy with this neem oil soap. It was highly fragranced, didn’t lather very well, and did nothing to improve her irritated skin or coat condition.

By this time, I’d been making organic soap for a long time for our personal use. I took a step back and read the neem soap ingredients, and realised that I’d been manipulated into buying a cheap, commercial soap- no different to that sold for us at the supermarket- with a small amount of neem oil thrown into the mix. In fact, later I would realise- after making our own organic neem seed oil soap and becoming experienced with the strong odour of neem oil- that the percentage of added neem oil in the soap must have been very minimal, or an extreme amount of cheap fragrance compounds were added to mask the odour. Neem oil has a unique and strong odour...reminiscent of fried curry powder with onions!

It was at this point that I took a step back and actually researched the pH range of dog skin…and what an eye-opening exercise that was, as you’ve seen. A far superior product to wash our dog with would have been our organic soaps...any of them! Our neem seed oil soap has the maximum amount of neem seed oil added that is recommended in an oil blend for soap. Soap generally has a pH of 9- higher than that of dog skin…but that didn’t seem to be of any concern by the manufacturers of the commercial ‘neem’ dog soap that I’d purchased. There was nothing in the ingredients that would have altered the achieved pH of the soap. So they were hanging their claims on the benefits offered by the neem oil only in their marketing.

Given the above, I’d recommend using our ‘nimi’ organic soap as a dog wash for the natural properties that neem seed oil offers: antiviral, anti-fungal, anti-bacterial, antimicrobial, anti-septic, insecticidal and a skin soother through its various fatty acids. Following the bath and rinsing, I’d recommend applying a mix of 100 mL apple cider vinegar in 400 mL water in a nozzled sauce bottle, and working it through the coat evenly whilst the coat is still wet. This will reduce the final pH, and also act as a natural flea deterrent. The vinegar smell will dissipate when the coat is dry.

However, if you’d prefer to mix up a cheap dog shampoo, to 200 mL of water in an old squirter/shampoo bottle, add 1 tspn Palmolive dishwashing liquid and 1/2 tspn vegetable glycerine- shake well to mix. You could also add 1 tblspn of pure aloe vera gel as a skin soother. I don’t recommend this option though because the dishwashing liquid is a petrochemical…but your choice. Hmm…I’ve paid $20-30/200-250 mL for dog shampoos! Aren't you feeling incredibly manipulated through commercial marketing now?

Back to the lullaby, Hush Little Baby- I must have sung this lullaby to our children hundreds of times during their infancy…
”If that diamond ring turns brass,
Mama’s gonna buy you a looking glass.”
Indeed!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

Guess you’re wondering what the title has to do with soap. Nothing- it’s just how my brain associates things…sorting and sifting information- this time centred around numbers and pH values of personal care products…numbers being the associating factor.

The Thunderbirds TV series is a favourite from my husband’s childhood…that continues. A few years back, the series was being screened at 4.30 AM on Saturday mornings…so we’d go to bed with the TV tuned in. BAM...the minute the introduction countdown would begin, he’d be bolt upright and alert. This response was from a man who sleeps through our security system alarm blasting the neighbourhood…but to the sound of “5-4…”, he’d be wide awake in anticipation- imagining he’s Scott Tracy (TB1 pilot, modelled on Sean Connery). He sees me as Lady Penelope without question…a female puppet version of MacGyver in his eyes. I don't know whether I should take that as a compliment or not. I believe my husband’s dream job would have been as a set/model maker for this series.

We had a market customer on Sunday who bought our soaps for a neighbour’s son to try in the management of his eczema. “Eczema”…it’s a tag placed against a very broad range of largely unidentified skin rashes. Most skin irritations can be sourced back to metabolic issues- usually food allergies. Anything applied topically might assist in soothing skin irritations, but the problem will not be resolved until the source of irritation is identified through the skilled resources of a competent nutritional and environmental doctor.

Other factors leading to skin problems can indeed be irritations caused by personal care product ingredients. The customer above said that her neighbour was about to try ‘baby soap’ on her son. I mentioned in the last blog that I’d done an ingredient analysis of many commercial soaps- one of which is JOHNSON’S “Baby Soap”, as listed:
- Sodium Palmate- saponified palm oil
- Sodium Palm Kernelate- saponified palm kernel oil
- Mineral Oil- petrochemical
- Fragrance
- Titanium Dioxide- white pigment
- Water
- Tetrasodium EDTA- synthetic chelating agent- skin irritant, allergen & suspected carcinogen
- Etidronic Acid- bisphosphonate & chelating agent- skin irritant

Its main ingredients are cheap, harsh palm oils- in combination with the petrochemical irritant mineral oil- further enhanced by fragrance irritants of an unidentified source, to conceal the smell- with a potential carcinogen added, to combine the ingredients successfully. Hmm…does that really sound like something that you want to use on your baby now that you can identify what the ingredients actually are?

I don’t know if they still do it, but I remember being given a gift pack of baby products when leaving the hospital after having our children. I was told that these were the best and only products that I should use on my babies. Oh, to have the opportunity for an encore in life over that moment, knowing what I now know! We generally accept what we are told by those supposedly in authority of a subject. We accept, as they accept, nothing more than marketing blurb put forward by commercial companies- put forward by artful copywriters, to promote a product to the retail market. Oh dear- I started my career in Graphic Design/Advertising. One core subject of study was Copywriting- trust me, there’s nothing substantial to the process beyond the creative use of words…”secret ingredient XPY will…”

Marketing has led us to believe that baby’s skin is “delicate” requiring “gentle, mild” product ingredients. Shall we reflect on the ingredients in JOHNSON’S Baby Soap again? A very simple relevant fact is that baby’s skin actually has a pH 7…the same as water- the neutrality point on a pH scale. Adult skin has a pH range of 4.5-6 - depending on diet, ethnicity and the body area. So if marketing were to be true with reference to pH scales, a more appropriate statement to make with regards to personal care products would alternatively be “Harsh enough for use on adult skin”!

Other pH values to reflect on: human blood pH 7.4, dog skin pH range 6.2-8.62 depending on breed (pH 7.3 average), dishwashing liquid pH 7.3 (Palmolive), black coffee pH 5. Are you noticing something? Despite all the marketing claims used for baby and dog care products, dishwashing liquid would prove a good pH match to use on their skins. Hmm…guess that’s a bit alarming to promote- especially when two thriving, profitable industries have been built around specialist care products- promoting these skins as being sensitive and delicate.

However, we would not recommend using dishwashing detergent in either scenario, mainly because of its toxic petrochemical ingredients- but that is essentially what you are buying as the ingredients in these products. If I told you that instead of paying $20 for that 250mL bottle of dog shampoo, that you could make your own at a cost of lets say 10c a bottle maximum…you’d be feeling a little manipulated, cheated and angry- more on that next week!

Soap has a pH 9…alkaline in range. There are two outlooks with regards to the pH value of personal care products. Adult skin is in fact acidic. Most argue that any higher variation to this range creates a breeding ground for bacteria. Others argue that bacteria can’t breed within a more alkaline range. I’m a supporter of alkaline ranges for health generally.

Very simply, commercial products that have been “pH adjusted” have had other chemicals added to reduce the end pH value…further adding to the chemical cocktail. One chemical produces undesirable side effects, so another is added to buffer it. Those 'gentle' baby shampoos that don't sting 'sensitive' eyes have another chemical buffer added to do so. Somehow, I find it alarming that products are produced that intentionally negate the natural instinct to protect one's eyes from a chemical element by closing them. No matter what the pH range of a product is, the skin will regain its natural pH again within 2 hours of use.

Here’s an ingredient list of another commercial product, frequently recommended for use on irritated skin-

REDWIN “Sorbolene Body Wash”, as listed:
- Water
- Sodium Laureth Sulphate- synthetic foaming agent & surfactant- skin irritant
- Ammonium Lauryl Sulphate- synthetic foaming agent & surfactant- skin irritant
- Glycerin- synthetic petrochemical
- Cocamidopropyl Betaine- synthetic surfactant
- Sorbitol- sugar alcohol & humectant
- Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate- synthetic surfactant- skin irritant
- Cocamide DEA-synthetic surfactant
- Styrene/Acrylates Copolymer-polyester resin- skin irritant
- Sodium Chloride- salt
- PEG-7 glycerol Cocoate- synthetic binder- skin irritant
- Citric Acid- organic acid & chelating agent
- Triticum Vulgare (Wheat Germ) Oil- but at this end of the descending listing, it's an insignificant amount to achieve any benefit
- Tertasodium EDTApolyamino carboxylic acid & chelating agent- organic pollutant
- Methylchloroisothiazolinone- preservative- skin irritant
- Methylisothiazolinone- preservative- mutagenic neurotoxin that can change DNA structure- 100% skin absorption

After reading that list, do you really think there is benefit to be gained through its use on an irritated skin? Yet go into a pharmacy and ask for guidance- you’ll be offered this or a similar product. Sorbelene…that’s purported to be mild, right? That might have been the case many years ago in its initial formulation, but the ingredients drastically changed over the course of time. Once you start reading labels and understanding what the ingredients actually are, you’ll begin to think very differently about products, marketing and advice given at pharmacies.

Commercial soaps are fairly harsh- being made from cheap oils and/or petrochemicals. Our handmade soaps are mild, moisturising and offer the beneficial qualities of the organic plant oils used. All of our organic soaps are chemical, colouring and fragrance free...the primary irritants used in most personal care products. Because we superfat our soaps- whereby not all of the oils are converted into a solid soap salt- a layer of the suspended oils used is applied to the skin with use. Our soaps are rich in natural glycerine content, as a by-product of the cold process method of soap making used. Glycerine is the most regarded moisturising ingredient in the cosmetic industry- being a humectant, attracting moisture to the skin.

It is not the pH range of a product that is generally an irritant to the skin, but more so the ingredients used. Our bodies were very simply never intended to process petrochemicals. The use of petrochemicals has developed through economics…a cheap waste product of the petroleum industry being put to use.

By caring for your skin with the natural nutrients of the organic plant oils that we use in our soaps, instead of synthetic chemicals, your skin will become healthy, naturally balanced and moisturised through the one simple daily task of bathing.

The resounding message is that our organic soaps are “F.A.B.”...the Thunderbirds' affirmative radio code for 'fabulous'!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

It’s an incredibly eye-opening experience to start reading ingredient labels on personal care products. A few years ago, I assembled details of the ingredients in several commercially available soaps- for my interest and that of our customers.

Now I’m back hearing Shakespeare’s Macbeth again:
“Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder’s fork, and blind-worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg, and howlet’s wing,…”

It’s not surprising that those words should spring to mind when examining the ingredients of a popular “Beauty Cream Bar” with its 26 ingredients- repeat, 26! Its marketing dares to claim: “Soap is Harsh…Dove is Different”. I dare say it is different…at least to our organic soaps.

Let’s take a closer look at Dove's ingredients list, and see what all those 26 goodies are:
- Sodium Lauroyl Isenthionate- synthetic foaming agent, emulsifier & surfactant- skin irritant
- Stearic Acid- fatty acid from animal fats in this instance- common allergen
- Sodium Palmitate- saponified palm oil
- Aqua- water
- Lauric Acid- fatty acid in coconut oil
- Sodium Isethionate- synthetic amphoteric detergent
- Sodium Stearate- synthetic surfactant
- Cocamidopropyl Betaine- synthetic surfactant, allergen
- Sodium Palm Kernelate- saponified palm kernel oil
- Parfum- fragrance, endocrine disruptors
- Glycerin- synthetic glycerin from petrochemicals
- Sodium Chloride- salt
- Zinc Oxide- synthetic binder- insoluble in water, soluble only in acids- skin irritant
- Citric Acid- organic acid & preservative- skin irritant
- Tetrasodium EDTA- synthetic chelating agent- skin irritant, allergen & suspected carcinogen
- Tetrasodium Eldronate- water softener & chelating agent- aggravates eczema/skin problems
- Alumina- aluminium- amphoteric oxide & abrasive
- Alpha-isomethyl Ionone- binder- a restricted irritant & allergen- banned from use in perfume industry
- Benzyl Alcohol- organic peroxide compound
- Butylphenyl Methylpropional- sensitizing fragrance- restricted use in perfume industry
- Citronellol- acyalic monoterpenoid- sensitizing organic fragrance & allergen
- Coumarin- sensitizing chemical fragrance
- Hexyl Cinnamal- synthetic fragrance- Class B allergen
- Limonene- cyclicterpene synthetic fragrance
- Linalool- terpene alcohol synthetic fragrance
- CI 77891- titanium dioxide- white pigment

By law, ingredients must be listed in descending order of content. After looking at that list, I’m now wondering where the “1/4 moisturising cream” supposedly contained in each bar is. The only ingredients that could contribute to being moisturising are the Stearic (from animal fat waste = tallow, in this instance) and Lauric acids (from palm oil), and petroleum-based glycerin. All three are cheap and harsh ingredients…hidden from obvious disclosure of their source. If you were aware that you were buying a soap made from largely animal fat waste, and palm oil, would you consciously buy it on principle? Unilever- who manufacture Dove- buys 3% of the world’s palm oil…alarmingly contributing to the destruction of our environment. Are you feeling a little bit different about that “Beauty Cream Bar” yet…made from waste products and petrochemical derived synthetic detergents?

In comparison, our organic soaps generally contain four natural ingredients…we’ll never manage to compare to that grand list above, thankfully.

Our soaps are made with quality organic plant oils. They are expensive- without question. Our ‘vari’ soap- which also forms the base of our ‘cofi’, ‘hemi’, ‘nimi’ and ‘salti’ soaps- contains organic extra virgin coconut and olive oils, and organic castor oil. It therefore contains the following beneficial and moisturising fatty acids from those oils: Lauric, Linoleic, Myristic, Oleic, Palmitic, Ricinoleic and Stearic Acids.

‘vari’ also contains around 12% natural glycerine produced from those organic plant oils, as a by-product of the cold-process method of soap-making that we use. We also ‘superfat’ our soaps- meaning that our recipes are calculated to retain a proportion of the oils in free suspension within the soap to further increase the moisturising qualities.

Hmm…what was that marketing line again- “Soap is Harsh…Dove is Different”? Nothing more than a bit of deceptive, creative copywriting- the ingredients tell the true story.

Continuing Shakespeare’s Macbeth:
“…For a charm of powerful trouble, Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.”
Who knew all those years ago, that one day Shakespeare would finally find relevance in my life!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

Pew…that’s my strongest memory of packed tram trips whilst living in Melbourne! The smell was frequently utterly nauseating- the combination of carried supplies of ground coffee, strong cheeses, preserved sausages…and raised straining armpits!

I’m particularly sensitive to the smell of body odour. The funny thing about that is that I have never used an underarm deodorant in my life- I just don’t personally experience body odour. Nor do I have underarm hair. I thought I was a freak until reading recently that I’m not alone.

Apparently, a small percentage (2%) of people carry a rare genetic variant located in the ABCC11 gene…making it inactive. The production of body odour depends on this gene being active. An indicator of having this genetic variant is earwax- dry, flaky earwax means that you can probably toss the deodorant in the bin…yellow, sticky wax means that you’re probably a stinker!

Again, commercial marketing has most people believing that they need to wear a deodorant anyway. Sweat is actually nearly odourless- with variations produced through both diet and ethnicity. The smell is actually created by surface bacteria breaking down the sweat.

I’m betting that right now you’re reaching for a cotton bud to check on where you might stand in the stinker stakes!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE, PURE ORGANIC SOAP

We bang on a lot about chemicals in personal care products. If you’ve been following our blogs, you’ll be starting to understand the significance of this. What you apply to the skin, gets absorbed through the skin to varying degrees- refer “Where’s my suit of armour?” (09.07.14).

Why should we be conscious of this fact when selecting personal care products? Aren’t these products safe for our use, if they’re available to the consumer? That’s a complicated answer to address, but the simplest one is a resounding “NO!” Many of the chemicals used in commercial products contain considered carcinogens, and “YES”- they are allowed/approved to be used…when used in isolation, or with minimal skin contact time.

The concerning factor with regards to chemicals and the body is that if a chemical is consumed orally, the liver can often break it down and render it harmless. However, when those same chemicals are applied to the skin, they are absorbed directly into the blood stream…bypassing the liver, and directly affecting your cells, tissues and organs.

During the course of a day, the consumer is applying hundreds of chemicals to the skin…without much thought to the ramifications to their health. The average woman applies over 500 chemicals to her face every day through cosmetic use. Not only are many of these chemicals considered carcinogens, further complications come from the accumulative impact of varying substances and products being applied- the chemical in one product then interacts with the chemical in another, that were never meant to be combined. These then become ‘hidden carcinogens’- created through the combination or breakdown of differing chemicals.

So we’ll start with a list of the obvious chemicals, contained in many personal care products (pcp’s), which we believe should be avoided. Refer also to “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” (02.07.14). We suggest that you scrutinise ingredient listings on all products, and consciously reject those containing the following ingredients.

'TRIPLE P’S' OF CHEMICALS

ALUMINIUM ZIRCONIUM & OTHER ALUMINIUM COMPOUNDS
Purpose: used to control sweat & odour
Present in: antiperspirant
Problem: linked to the development of Alzheimer’s Disease & breast cancer- probable neurotoxin, respiratory & developmental toxin

BENZYL ACETATE
Purpose: ester/solvent hidden within ‘fragrance’ compounds
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: linked to pancreatic cancer- possible neurotoxin

BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE & BENZETHONIUM CHLORIDE (ADBAC, BC50, BC80) 
Purpose: antimicrobial, deodorant, preservative, biocide
Present in: facial care products, sunscreens, pain relief
Problem: irritant- immune & organ toxicant- hormone disruptor- possible carcinogen

BRONOPOL (2-BRON-2-NITROPROPANE-1, 3-DIOL)
Purpose: preservative, antimicrobial
Present in: body washes & cleansers, moisturisers, makeup removers
Problem: irritant- immune, lung & skin toxicant- hormone disruptor

BUTYL ACETATE
Purpose: solvent used in nail polish products
Present in: nail polish & nail treatments
Problem: causes skin dryness- toxic vapours

BUTYLATED HYDROXYTOLUENE (BHT) & BUTYLATED HYDROXYANISOLE (BHA)
Purpose: antioxidant, preservative
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: allergen- immune-toxicant- hormone disruptor- probable carcinogen- neurotoxin

(ETHOXYLATED) CETEARETH-20/PEG COMPOUNDS
Purpose: alcohol, surfactant & emulsifier
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: irritant- alters skin structure- increases absorption rate- neurotoxin

COAL TAR
Purpose: breaks down rough , scaly skin, reduces itching
Present in: shampoos, hair dyes
Problem: known carcinogen, tissue toxicant

COCAMIDE DEA/LAURAMIDE DEA
Purpose: foaming agent, emulsifier
Present in: body washes, shampoos
Problem: irritant- allergen-immune & skin toxicant- induces carcinogenic compounds

DIETHANOLAMINE (DEA, DEOA)
Purpose: emulsifier, humectant, pH adjuster, solvent
Present in: foundations, moisturisers, sunscreens, hair dyes
Problem: immune & skin toxicant- hormone disruptor- neurotoxin- possible carcinogen

ETHYL ACETATE
Purpose: solvent
Present in: nail polish products, mascaras, perfumes, tooth whiteners
Problem: irritant- probable neurotoxin- possible carcinogen

FORMALDEHYDE
Purpose: preservative, disinfectant, fungicide, germicide
Present in: deodorants, nail polish, shampoos, shaving products
Problem: irritant- immune & skin toxicant- carcinogen- damages DNA structure

FORMALDEHYDE-RELEASING PRESERVATIVES (QUATERNIUM-15, DMDM HYDANTOIN, DIAZOLIDINYL UREA, IMIDAZOLIDINYL UREA)
Purpose: anti-microbial preservative
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: as per Formaldehyde

FRAGRANCE/PARFUM
Purpose: masking chemical odours, perfuming
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: irritant- immune-toxicant- possible neurotoxin

HYDROQUINONE (4-DIOL)
Purpose: antioxidant, fragrance ingredient, hair dye, skin bleach
Present in: skin lighteners, facial cleansers & moisturisers, anti-ageing products, sunscreen, hair dyes
Problem: immune-toxicant- hormone disruptor- probable neurotoxin- possible carcinogen

IODOPROPYNYL BUTYLCARBAMATE
Purpose: preservative, biocide
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: allergen- immune-toxicant

LEAD & LEAD COMPOUNDS
Purpose: colorant
Present in: hair dyes, lipsticks
Problem: probable carcinogen- toxicant

METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE (MI/MCI) & METHYCHLOROISOTHIAZOLINONE
Purpose: preservative
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: immune-toxicant- neurotoxin- mutagenic, changing DNA structure

OXYBENZONE (BENZOPENONE-3)
Purpose: UV absorber & filter
Present in: sunscreens & cosmetics
Problem: immune-toxicant- hormone disruptor-probable carcinogen

PARABENS (BUTYL, ETHYL, METHYL & PROPYL)
Purpose: anti-bacterial, preservative
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: hormone disruptors- skin toxicants- possible carcinogens- possible neurotoxins

PETROLATUM
Purpose: skin softener, emulsifier, skin barrier
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: irritant- possible carcinogen- can contain unknown contaminants

PHTHALATES (DIBUTYL PHTHALATES)
Purpose: ester/solvent, fragrance ingredient, plasticiser
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: immune-toxicant- hormone disruptor- possible carcinogen- probable neurotoxin

P-PHENYLENERIAMINE (PPD)
Purpose: dye
Present in: hair dyes, shampoos, hair sprays
Problem: immune-toxicant- possible neurotoxin

PROPYLENE GLYCOL (2-DIOL)
Purpose: solvent
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: alters skin structure- hormone disruptor- possible mutagenic

SODIUM LAURETH SULFATE/SODIUM LAURYL SULFATE (SLES)
Purpose: cleansing & foaming agent, surfactant, emulsifier
Present in: cosmetics & pcp’s
Problem: irritant- alters skin structure- hormone disruptor

TALC
Purpose: anti-caking agent, bulking agent
Present in: cosmetics, deodorants
Problem: possible carcinogen

TOLUENE
Purpose: antioxidant, solvent
Present in: nail polish, hair dyes
Problem: liver toxin- probable neurotoxin- possible carcinogen

TRICLOSAN
Purpose: anti-bacterial agent, deodorant, preservative, biocide
Present in: anti-bacterial pcp’s, toothpastes
Problem: irritant- hormone disruptor- probable carcinogen

TRIETHANALOMINE (TEA)
Purpose: emulsifier, pH adjustor, surfactant, fragrance ingredient
Present in: body lotions, body washes, shampoo
Problem: immune-toxicant- hormone disruptor- possible carcinogen

1.4 DIOXANE
Purpose: penetration enhancer
Present in: body lotions, sunless tanning products, anti-aging products
Problem: irritant- probable carcinogen

AMEN!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE PURE, ORGANIC SOAP

My memory wandered further writing the blog this week about ‘safety practices in soap making’. The explanation of how caustic soda is produced, with the comparison to a salt water chlorinator, took me on a journey through past experience…and how I learnt about the process.

We have a 60’s designed house with the first experimental free-form, natural look pool- which received many awards…many years ago. It also had a very antiquated, experimental salt chlorinator…that looked like you were at risk of electrocution if you touched it. I decided it was time for a bit of an upgrade for safety, and invested through a new local pool shop.

They came and installed the new cell unit- but we retained the antiquated power unit. The old salt cell used to have a plastic tube connected to the power unit. This tube, I was told, was not required with the new cell- so the technician cut the tube, bent the end upon itself and wrapped a rubber-band around it. I was told that sometimes the tube might lose pressure, and that the salt cell then wouldn’t operate. When that happened, I should undo the end, blow into the tube and reseal it quickly…and all would be fine.

Our natural looking pool was surrounded by some 57 large gum trees on our average suburban block, so it faced a daily deluge of oily gum leaves. If you have a pool, you’ll know that we fought an uphill battle in keeping the pool clear, as the copious amount of leaves placed a high demand on chlorine levels.

So every second day, the pool would start to turn green. I’d check on the salt cell- not engaging- so I’d blow in the tube as instructed. It became a daily task for a few months. If we went away for the weekend, the pool went green. So I complained, and was told to have silicon sealant at the ready- blow in the tube, and fill the end with the sealant quickly…and the problem would be resolved. The pool continued to turn green every other day.

Fed up, I pulled the power unit and salt cell down- jumped in the car, and headed off to the manufacturer…demanding a solution. The manager listened intently to my complaint, then asked who the pool business was…and picked up the phone.

Every expletive imaginable was YELLED as I listened to the conversation.

It turns out that the ‘redundant’ plastic tube that they’d cut off was a safety device, and not redundant at all. It was designed to detect the pressure within the salt cell chamber, and to cut off the power supply should the level of hydrogen gas build-up become too high. With a salt cell, hydrogen is generated at the cathode, and chlorine at the anode…which is fine, as long as the unit is pressurised with the required water flow.

I heard that what they’d created was an active hydrogen bomb in our backyard…one spark and the whole thing could have blown me, the pool shed and the attached brick building (now the soap workshop)…sky high! If the unit was turned on and for some reason the water hadn’t flowed to the salt cell unit (which happens frequently here), the electrical charge passing between the plates would have provided the spark to the hydrogen filled chamber.

KABOOM…made all the more frightening because I usually blew away into the tube with a cigarette in one hand- whilst constantly turning the power on and off to see if the salt cell had engaged after blowing…frequently, and daily!

I was extremely lucky that the bomb never went off. Yes- accidents happen…usually when not anticipated, or because we don’t have an understanding of what we are doing.

So my memory wandered further…searching for relevance, and I found myself hearing the fabled “The Three Little Pigs” from childhood…with the big bad wolf exclaiming, “Then I’ll huff, and I’ll puff, and I’ll blow your house in.”

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE PURE, ORGANIC SOAP

Quite a few customers at the markets on the weekend, quizzed me over soap making methods and safety issues...highly unusual. The odd person occasionally asks some questions- a few...tweaked my curiosity.

Then my memory likes to wander around and search for relevant fragments…triggered by words/associations. So now it’s replaying that infamous torture scene from the movie “Marathon Man”, where Dr Szell (Sir Lawrence Olivier) asks Babe Levy (Dustin Hoffman), “Is it safe?”…before wielding the dental probe into Levy’s decaying tooth. How could anyone attend a dental appointment thereafter, without apprehension? My memory grabs on to trivia and files it away.

Apparently, various soap making workshops have been run recently in Brisbane, & the take home message from that exercise in my opinion is that not enough information has been passed on to attendees over the importance of safety practices in handling caustic soda...with children attending these workshops also. I've refused to run soap making workshops because of safety issues...my business insurance would be promptly terminated!

As I’ve explained before, a caustic soda (sodium hydroxide/NaOH)/water solution or ‘lye’ is required to make soap. NaOH is a highly corrosive, caustic and reactive chemical, and it should always be handled with appropriate safety precautions in place.

Caustic soda is produced from an electrolysed sodium chloride brine solution. This process works in much the same way that chlorine is produced for salt water swimming pools- the salt water being passed over the charged plates of the chlorinator cell which breaks down the salt into its natural components…one of which is chlorine.

Caustic soda is a strong alkali and highly corrosive. When it is used commercially, stringent safety precautions are required:
-       chemical resistant clothing/apron, shoes, protective gloves and safety glasses/face shield must be worn
-       the area must be fitted with a fume exhaust hood, safety shower and eyewash fountain
-       NaOH must be stored in a dry place- away from metals, and locked away from child access.

Now there are some clues that should be observed with good reason.

NaOH is:
-       both colourless and odourless
-       slippery when wet
-       exothermic, generating extreme heat when exposed to moisture…heat sufficient to cause skin burns on contact
-       capable of melting some plastics from the generated heat when mixed with water
-       unstable when combined with anything other than lukewarm water…if the water is either too hot or cold, a volcanic reaction can occur
-       corrosive as a generated vapour/mist, and a respiratory irritant…severely damaging nose, throat and lung tissues
-       highly corrosive and capable of dissolving animal proteins…causing severe skin burns on contact
-       reactant with several metals…causing the highly explosive and flammable hydrogen gas to form- only stainless steel can be contacted safely
-       capable of producing deadly carbon monoxide gas, when in contact with any sugar.

That’s quite an extensive list of cautionary notes to be mindful of whilst handling NaOH in soap making. Accidents happen…without question. I have visions of spilling the lye on the floor- then falling over on the slippery surface and having my clothes drenched in the burning solution…and unable to get up! Only once have I had an accident- a tiny NaOH grain went unnoticed on a fingertip while I worked. It burnt a tiny deep hole through all layers of skin quickly.

Never become complacent over handling this chemical. I am acutely aware of safety issues always- even after making soap daily for several years. I wear protective items. I mix the water and caustic soda outside in fresh air. I use thermometers. I keep a bottle and bowl of vinegar on the bench- ready to neutralise any splashes/spills. I have the security of a swimming pool a step away from the workroom to jump into immediately. I take no obvious risks ever- one splash of the solution in my eye could cost me my sight.

I have taken issue over soap making kits being sold and promoted as an activity to be done by children. I find this prospect outrageous. Even with adult supervision, accidents happen in a split second. Children do not develop acceptable levels of thought processing and physical co-ordination skills until after the age of 10 years.

Beyond the potential recipe for disaster in a child handling NaOH, a child is curious and impatient. Once the soap is mixed and poured, it is left to firm up for 24 hours. The process of saponification continues during this period. The soap mixture goes through various stages as the molecular changes occur. The mixture generates its own heat, and gradually goes in to a clear gel state- starting at the centre and gradually expanding outwards to the edges. During this period, the mixture is still highly corrosive- it could in fact be used as a paint stripper. Do you really want a child impatiently poking their finger in to the mixture to gauge how firm it is?

Anyone using caustic soda to make cold process soap for public sale is required to be registered with NICNAS- National Industrial Chemicals Notification Scheme, Australian Government Dept. of Health and Ageing. Anyone not registered is liable to hefty fines- $33K for an individual/$165K for a company. If a soap maker makes a mistake in their calculations or measurements of caustic soda, severe burns could result.

Soap makers are also required to carry product insurance to protect the buyer’s health interests. Unfortunately, soap is now viewed as a high risk insurance item- largely because of claims brought about through many body-washes, which have a high margin for error in mixing. Product insurance for soap has escalated- with few insurers prepared to cover soap/related products- with insurance costing me 40% of every sale. That doesn’t leave much scope for profitability in the equation.

So my take home message to those thinking about making their own soap…please take note of the safety issues surrounding the use of caustic soda. Never treat it casually…ever!

Some safety tips in soap making to always observe:
-       wear protective chemical resistant gear
-       work in a well ventilated space
-       measure ingredients accurately
-       only use hardened glass and stainless steel utensils
-       have ready access to a water supply for emergency use
-       have ready access to vinegar…the acid will neutralise the alkali caustic soda
-       use thermometers in both the lye solution and oils before mixing at same lowered temperature
-       add caustic soda SLOWLY to lukewarm water- if added too quickly, corrosive vapour will form…which should not be breathed
-       never add water to caustic soda…a volcanic eruption will occur, causing dangerous splashes- only add NaOH to water
-       wash hands thoroughly after soap making
-       wash equipment used in isolation of anything else
-       reserve any equipment used solely for soap making
-       keep caustic soda and poured soap mixture out of the reach of children.

As I’ve explained before, caustic soda- although used to make soap- does not exist in the final soap product. It is a part of a manufacturing process, and it is rendered inert within 24 hours of combining the ingredients…resulting in a solid soap salt and glycerine as a by-product instead.

Back to “Marathon Man” and its relevance to safety in soap making. Levy answers, “No, it’s not safe- it’s very dangerous- be careful.” The memory dots are connected!

FACT FILES ON HANDMADE PURE, ORGANIC SOAP

How is soap made? Often when I’m stirring a batch of soap, I hear the words silently running through my head…”Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and caldron bubble.” (from Macbeth, William Shakespeare)…some words stick with you for life!

So how do you turn an oil into a solid to create soap? There’s a bit of simple chemistry that applies to the process. Basically, a fatty acid/oil is combined with an alkali/caustic soda (NaOH) to form a solid/fatty acid salt…soap. The reaction that occurs: fat/oil + 3NaOH/sodium hydroxide = glycerine +3soap.

A fatty acid has a unique combination of triglycerides…compounds made of 3 fatty acids attached to a single molecule of glycerol. Glycerol is the basis of all fats, made up of a three carbon chain…connecting the fatty acids together. When mixed with the alkali solution with 1 hydroxide ion (the sodium ion does not take part in the reaction at all), the triglycerides within the fatty acid/oil release the single glycerol molecule…which turns into glycerine. The fatty acids combine with the hydroxide ions to form a solid soap salt.

This process is called ‘saponification’- the oil used as an ingredient becomes termed a ‘saponified oil’ for identification, or is identified as a salt- like sodium cocoate (saponified coconut oil). There is no other way to turn an oil into a solid salt. The caustic soda solution- sometimes termed ‘lye’- is part of the chemical process but, through the molecular reconfigurations in the equation, becomes inert and transforms the glycerol into the beneficial element of glycerine.

Glycerine is therefore created as a by-product of the soap-making process…making the use of caustic soda in the process a bit of a no-brainer for any concern, as it does not exist in the resultant soap. Glycerine is an incredibly moisturising substance- attracting moisture from its surroundings…a 'humectant'. It’s the most valued ingredient used in the skin care industry, and it is usually filtered off in commercial soap manufacturing to be used in moisturisers.

At ilo ORGANICS, we hand-make our soaps using the cold process method of soap manufacture. This method yields a high percentage of natural glycerine, and the glycerine quality in our soaps cannot be surpassed, as it is derived from processing pure organic plant oils. All handmade, cold process soaps can in fact be termed ‘glycerine soaps’ because of the high glycerine content produced as a by-product. 

After the mixture has thickened through careful blending, it is poured into moulds and left for a day to continue the saponification process and firm up. The formed soaps are then left to ‘cure’- evaporate the water content from the lye used, and further harden- for a period of weeks. This period is determined by the soap cake size and the oils used- varying from 4-8 weeks in our soap types produced.

At ilo ORGANICS, we ‘superfat’ our soaps. This means that in our soap recipe calculations, we make an allowance so that not all of the oils are converted in the processing. This leaves a percentage of the oils in their natural form to further moisturise the skin. These suspended oils can sometimes rise to the surface- causing small pockets of darker discolouration. The clear sticky coating that also rises to the surface of the soap is the glycerine content.

So if you were thinking that soap was the harsh product that commercial manufacturers now marketing body-washes in their economic drive would have you believe, think again. Handmade, cold process soaps are true soaps made with time-honoured traditions and natural ingredients- unsurpassed for the gentle, moisturising cleansing care that they offer the skin.

At ilo ORGANICS, our soaps also offer the added benefit of being made with pure organic plant oils, and are completely chemical, colouring and fragrance free. Indulge your body and nurture your skin naturally…you’ll wonder how you ever lived without our soaps- moisturising skin care in one simple step! Back to the stirring...