with the fact that it has triggered brutal asthma attacks and other adverse
reactions. In fact, the severe reaction scenario was the sole purpose for
having embarked on an extensive research project involving Febreze.
The logic was that something incredibly violent had to have been attached
to Febreze, for it to have triggered asthma no less tortuous than an anaconda
wrapped around your chest. The respiratory radar turned out 100% correct.
It turned out that there were a number of things deadly wrong with Febreze.
Next came a supervised Quebecois scholastic project that allegedly resulted
in Febreze killing 100% of the test plants, in two different tests. News of
the project's outcome necessitated even more research on Febreze.
The logic was that any fragrance product that kills tested plant life as quick-
ly as Febreze did, while triggering violent asthma attacks, has got to have
something attached to it which must be banned from civilization. It turned
out that the product line should instead be called Febreze Air Defects.
In addition, there is a nexus between the infamous Monsanto corporation
and Procter &Gamble. Firstly, P&G's Chief Financial Officer ever so co-
incidentally is on Monsanto's board of directors; Jon Moeller. Secondly,
as is shown at the end of this relatively long article, six of Monsanto's top
ten institutional stockholders are six of P&G's top ten.
http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130131-914679.html
Incidentally, Procter & Gamble was recently sued in California, for its vio-
lation of Proposition 65; specifically due to the level of 1,4 dioxane in its
Tide Detergent product. Incidentally, according to the Environmental
Working Group, Febreze has a Propostion 65 chemical in its formula,
namely acetaldehyde which is outlined below. Thus, it is not a lie to
state that Procter & Gamble has become another Monsanto.
http://ens-newswire.com/2013/01/25/procter-gamble-must-scrub-carcinogen-dioxane-from-tide/
__________________________________________________________
