February 26, 2024

Febreze Air Effects: 86 Chemical Ingredients found by the EWG

Febreze is was being sold as "asthma-friendly," and this was unconscionable,
being that it was found to contain respiratory irritants and known asthmatic
allergens.  P&G even began selling Febreze X2, making it a very effective
weapon for those who want to inflict violent assault upon the type of asth-
matic whose respiratory tract is adversely reactive to any of the ingredients
in Febreze,  The victims include those suffering from Reactive Airways
Dysfunction Syndrome, Occupational Asthma due to lmolecular weight
agents, Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction, Irritant-induced Asth-
ma.  Then, a lawsuit was threatened upon P G, for false advertising.

Febreze Air Effects is showcased as
a technological odor eliminator that
will get you to breathe happily; as if
it were happy pills in a spray - even
space age magic that scientifically
makes odors disappear, despite the
fact that it kills no odor-producing
bacteria.

Febreze was heralded as phthalate-
free.  Yet, an ingredient detected
in it turns into Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, a metabolite implicat-
ed in Sick Building Syndrome.

 

 

Keep in mind that the manipulative nature of the U.S. Congress is such that
it enabled a law which spares the fragrance industry of revealing their pro-
ducts' ingredients to the public.  In fact, there is even a law which spares
frackers from revealing to the public the chemicals used in their industry.
Plus, a chemical doesn't have to be proven safe, in order to be placed in
a fragrance product.  Rather, a chemical needs to be proven harmful, in
order for the regulating of said chemical to occur.

We in America do not get to know which chemicals are tearing into our
bodies and which are flooding our water supplies.  Thus is the nature of
an oligarchy called the United States which consists in government to the
highest bidder.  The highest bidders are known as lobbyists and campaign
funders.  The lobbyist is the one who destroyed national unity.

At this point, enter the 501(c) non-profit charity organization known as
the Environmental Working Group;  the EWG.  Its mission is that of
using the power of public information, to protect public health and the
environment.  The EWG team comprises scientists, engineers, lawyers,
data analysts, and board members, a few of whom have reputable names.

One of the EWG projects was that of analyzing the contents of Febreze
Air Effects Hawaiian Aloha.   According to the scientists, it was nothing
more than a cauldron of chemicals; 87, to be exact.  In as much, Febreze
has a glut of fragrance chemicals combined with noxious non-fragrance
chemicals that easily drowns-out whatever existing odor was in the air
before Febreze was applied to the airspace in question.

Febreze is neither a 'germ killer' nor a fungicide, meaning that it does not
kill the microbiological beings known the produce odors.  Plus, a Consum-
er Reports test likened to the Febreze 'blindfold commercial' proved that
Febreze certainly does not eliminate odors.  If it did so, then a number of
the test subjects would not have reported being sickened by the smell of
the testing chamber.

If Febreze were an odor eliminator, a person would smell nothing, as soon
as Febreze were sprayed into his/her airspace; not even a fresh, light scent,
and certainly not the gaudy odor that announces Febreze's presence like a
clanging gong ... or like a cheap honky-tonk barroom tramp.  Ladies and
gentlemen, Procter & Gamble has become another Monsanto. 

Categories of Chemicals found in Febreze Air Effects Hawaiian Aloha

The cast of characters detected by EWG scientists in Febreze Air Effects
Hawaiian Aloha includes chemicals which fit the following categories:

1} Genotoxins & Mutagenic chemicals, 2} Bronchoconstrictors & Irritants,
3} Oxidative chemicals that produce allergenic compounds upon being ex-
posed to air, 5} Reproductive Toxins, 6} Indoor Air Pollutants,  7} Hepato-
toxins (liver cell killers,)  8} Cell-mediated allergens which produce skin
reactions upon those allergic.  Therefore, Febreze is not hypo-allergenic.

               The results  of Febreze Hawaiian Aloha Analysis,
              According to the Environmental Working Group:

If the report of the Environmental Working Group analysis is correct, and
if the ingredient formula of Febreze Hawaiian Aloha remained unchanged
since the publication of the EWG report, then the following applies:

Eighty-seven chemicals were detected in Air Effects Hawaiian Aloha, along
with water, amounting to 88 ingredients.  The 89th ingredient was regarded
as Fragrance.  But, fragrance is actually a mixture of molecular compounds.
It's not an ingredient unto itself, when measuring compounds.  Therefore, its
more proper to regard Febreze Air Effects Hawaiian Aloha as an 87 chemi-
cal product.

Only three Febreze ingredients were disclosed on the label by name.  The oth-
er ingredients were labeled under the titles "quality control ingredients" and
fragrance, meaning that their exact identities were hidden from the public.
There was one propellant detected in Febreze, incidentally.

In addition, keep in mind that, in the United States, the safety of any chemi-
cal does NOT have to been proven, in order for it to be used as an ingredient
in any household product.  Also in America is what is popularly called, the
"Trade Secret Law."  Such a law excuses require companies from revealing
their product line ingredients on their products' labels or anywhere else.  Of
course, this ever so conveniently hides from the public the reality of what it
inhales.

The Chromosome Chain Breaker

Concerning Febreze's mutagenic chemical it's 1,3-Dichloro-2-Propanol.
It's classified as a Clastogen.  Clastogens break chromosome chains.
_____________________________________________________________

Below is an outline of the ingredients Americans are purchasing, every time
they rush to a store, to get Hawaiian Aloha Air Effects sprayed throughout
their houses, taxi cabs, houses, apartments, offices, reception areas, storage
areas, classrooms, dance floors, shops, and automobiles.

            The Provider of Interleukin 6, the Inflammation Inducer

1] 2-ethyl-hexanol.  This chemical is a news article unto itself, in that it
     has been categorically identified as an indoor air pollutant which was
     found to activate a type of white blood cell which, in turn, produces a
     major inflammatory mediator, called Interleukin 6.  In as much, CD4+
     cells are activated by 2-ethyl-hexanol.  In sequence, 2-ethyl-hexanol
     has been implicated in the development of Building-related Illness, aka
     Sick Building Syndrome.  In fact:

     It has been reported that the number of people suffering 
     from occupational asthma and skin rashes triggered by 
    various chemicals in indoor air have increased markedly.  
    Two-ethyl-hexanol (2-EH) is known to be an indoor air 
    pollutant and its influence on health is of great concern.

     See:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19038237

   Asthma symptoms may be related to increased humidity in con-
   crete floor constructions and emission of 2-ethyl-1-hexanol, an
   indicator of dampness-related alkaline degradation of plastici-
   ser DEHP.

   Now, it's important for you to know that DEHP is a phthalate that
   comes from Febreze ingredient, 2-ethyl-1-hexanol.  The offshoot
   chemical is Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.  The pertinence to this is
   that Febreze was showcased as a phthalate-free product.

           See:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20146997

      The Hangover Chemical and Airway Obstructor


 2] Acetaldehyde.  This is the hangover chemical that emerges after
     excessive alcohol consumption.  The Procter & Gamble people
     bring it to you directly.  Incidentally, acetylaldehyde happens to
     be recognized as a cancer risk to the upper digestive tract.  Now,
     as far as concerns its presence in any artificial fragrance product,
     it obstructs the airways.

     See:  Airway obstruction induced by inhaled acetaldehyde in asthma.

               http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12371536

     Death at 180 Parts Per Million and Above


 3] Benzyl Acetate.  Produces respiratory tract irritation.  The con-
      tinued exposure to ambient levels of this compound at 50 parts
      per million will cause kidney damage.  Cats have died from this,
      at 180 parts per million.  See:

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/index.cfm?objectid=E87DA8C3-BDB5-82F8-F685ED7A7F920F9C

     A Suspect in Pancreatic Cancer Induction


     According to the University of Berkley, benzyl acetate is linked
     to pancreatic cancer, in addition to it being a respiratory irritant.  
     See:

     www.ehow.com/list_6130016_chemicals-found-fabric-softeners.html

     Automotive Additives and one Plasticizer


 4] Hexadecane.  This is known as cetane, a diesel fuel additive.
 5] Trimethyl  Pentanyl  Diisobutyrate.   A nail polish plasticizer.
 6] Diethylene Glycol Monoethyl Ether.  An anti-freeze additive.

     A Literal Triple Threat to Health

 7] Dichlorohydrin, also known as 1,3-Dichloro-2-Propanol and
     1,3-DCP.   Carcinogenic, Hepatotoxic, and Genotoxic.   In fact,
     Dichlorohydrin was  clearly shown through scientifically valid
     testing, and according to generally accepted principles, to cause 
     cancer.  EVIDENCE ON THE CARCINOGENICITY OF 1,3-
     Dichloro-2-Propanol (1,3-DCP; α,γ-Dichlorohydrin)
  
     See:  oehha.ca.gov/prop65/hazard_ident/pdf_zip/13dcp.pdf 

     As was previously mentioned, Dichlorohydrin has been found
     to cause liver damage, commensurate with the level of exposure
     to it.  For example, a 34 year old man suffered from fulminant
     hepatitis after cleaning a tank in which there were traces of
     dichlorohydrin.  In spite of daily plasma exchanges, he died
     10 days after exposure.  A 27 year old man with much lighter
     exposure showed only slight liver dysfunction.

     See:  http://het.sagepub.com/content/13/4/267.abstract

     As far as goes this Air Effects ingredient being a mutagen, it's
     specifically classified as a clastogenic chemical.  As a review,
     a clastogenic chemical literally causes breaks in chromosome
     chains.  Genotoxicity of 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol in the SOS 
     chromotest and in the Ames test.   Elucidation of the geno-
     toxic mechanism.
 
    See:   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1913979

     Poison Roulette.  Pick your additive.


 8] Denatured Alcohol, aka methylated spirits.   This is ethanol
      mixed with a poisonous additive that makes the alcohol unable
      to be consumed without extremely ill effects.  Originally, it was
      10% methanol (CH3OH.)   Today, denatured alcohol might con-
      tain methyl denatonium benzoate, methyl isobutyl ketone, ethyl
      ketone, acetone, denatonium benzoate.  Protecter & Gamble's
      people think nothing of you spraying this in the home of chil-
      dren, asthmatics, and pets.

     The Oxidizing Terpene
    
 9] Linalool.  A terpene that easily oxidizes.  Oxidized linalool is a
     skin sensitizer.  When exposed to air, it readily forms allergenic
     compounds.  It's recognized by experts as something that great-
     ly contributes to fragrance allergy which emphasizes the need 
     of testing with compounds that patients are actually exposed 
     and not only with the ingredients originally applied in com-
     mercial formulations.  Spraying Febreze, therefore, yields
     more chemicals than are in the canister, bottle, clip-on, etc.   

     See:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19125719

      Bronchial Hyperresponsiveness in Spray Form

10] Limonene.  "Bronchial hyperresponsiveness was related to
       indoor concentrations of limonene."  It tortures susceptible
       persons, otherwise known as people who are atopic.  See:
      Asthmatic symptoms and volatile organic compounds,
      formaldehyde, and carbon dioxide in dwellings.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7627316

      Limonene is also a contact allergen of the terpene family.  This
      means that, upon being exposed to air, limonene produces the
      allergenic substance that effects the skin, in addition to it being
      an assault upon the respiratory tracts of atopic persons.

      We continue with more ingredients detected by the EWG ...

     
11] Alpha-pinene.  It's a confirmed allergen.   See:  Gas chrom-
      atography:  an investigative tool in multiple allergies to 
      essential oils.

               http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12534533

12] Butylated Hydroxytoluene.  This food additive happens to be a
       well established asthma trigger for a subset of asthmatics.  This
       is BHT.

13] Benzothiazole.  Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis
       showed this to be one of four most toxic chemicals in artificial turf.

       http://www.ehow.com/about_6165648_artificial-turf-asthma.html

14] Cyclamen Aldehyde.  This is member of the Formaldehyde
       family.  Refer to:

http://www.archive.org/stream/formaldehydeando003763mbp/formaldehydeando003763mbp_djvu.txt

15] Geraniol.   A well established B-cell mediated allergen and the
       primary ingredient in Java type citronella oil.  This is a contact
       allergen, even through airborne contact.  See:  Cytochrome
       P450-mediated activation of the fragrance compound 
       geraniol forms potent contact allergens.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18824010

16] Methylpyrrolidone.  In Europe, Methylpyrrolidone is regarded
      as a reproductive toxicant.   It is also an irritant, meaning that it
      will make Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome patients fight
      to get a full breath, for as long as they are exposed to it.

17] Alpha-Ionone.  Respiratory sensitizer and skin sensitizer, mean-
       ing that it's something to which a person can become allergic, in
       repeated exposure thereof.  It's also an irritant, meaning that a per-
       son can have an adverse reaction to it without first developing an
       allergy to it.

       http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/99250.htm

18]  Butylphenyl Methylpropional.  This is Lilial, a known sensitiz-
        er (an allergen that has the power to make you become allergic
        to it.)  It's also known as Lilialdehyde, a member of the formal-
        dehyde family.  As well as being used as a powerful fragrance,
        it's also an intermediate for the agrochemical synthesis.  See:
        Identification of Lilial as a fragrance sensitizer in a perfume
        by bioassay-guided chemical fractionation and structure ac-
        tivity relationships.

       http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11140386

19] Fragrance.  This is actually a mixture of ingredients, and not an
      ingredient unto itself.  None the less, it's pertinent to note that the
      EWG's Further Toxic Concern for "fragrance" is "Neurotoxicity,     
      Allergies/immunotoxicity, Miscellaneous." 

      Febreze Air Effects additionally contains the following,
      according to the Environmental Working Group, as of 2011:

    | BENZYL ACETATE   |   2-tert-BUTYLCYCLOHEXANOL |
    | ETHYL OCTANOATE   |   DIETHYLHEXYL FUMARATE  |
    | HEXYL SALICYLATE | CYCLAMEN ALDEHYDE | NEROL |
    | PRENYL ACETATE   |   2,6-DIMETHYL-7-OCTEN-2-OL |

    | 1-TRIMETHYL-2-CYCLOHEXENYL-1-PENTEN-3-ONE  |
    | 2,6-DIMETHYL-7-OCTEN-2-OL   |   HEXYL CINNAMAL |
    | 3-METHYL BUTYL ACETATE | DIPROPYLENE GLYCOL |
    | 4-tert-BUTYLCYCLOHEXYL ACETATE  |  ACETATE CIS  |

    | ETHYL BUTYRATE   |   DIMETHYLBENZYL CARBINYL
      BUTYRATE  |  CYCLOHEXYL PROPIONATE  | HEDIONE |
    | P-TERT-BUTYL CYCLOHEXYL-HEXYL BUTYRATE  |
    | 2-METHOXY-p-CRESOL   |  HEXYL ISOBUTYRATE,  | 

      Note:   There were more chemicals found in Febreze
                  Air Effects than what has been posted above.
      ____________________________________________________

      As is cited elsewhere on this site, fragrance is a medically recog-
      nized trigger of flare-ups in Asthma, Rhinitis, Sinusitis, Urticaria,
      and Dermatitis, as well as flare-ups in Vocal Cord Dysfunction
      Syndrome,  Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome, and Small
      Airways Disease.  Furthermore, the twenty most common chemi-
      cals found in 31 tested fragrance products are listed at the follow-
      ing web page:
                               http://users.lmi.net/wilworks/ehn20.htm 
       ___________________________________________________

             All the Test Subject Plants Allegedly Died, in Both Tests

There's also the matter of every test plant allegedly dying in a supervised
Quebecois scholastic project.  Febreze was allegedly applied in both series
of tests.  In the second test, Febreze was heavily applied, and it was alleged
to have caused the test subject plants to die in a matter of hours.  In the first
test, it allegedly took a few days for all of the test subject plants to die.  The
conclusion was that Febreze burnt the cell walls of the plants, preventing any
further photosynthesize from occurring.  For the record, I was informed of
this scholastic project, from Quebec, even before it began.

Quebec School Febreze-on-Plant Test
______________________________________________________________

         Lysol undid Procter & Gamble's advertising with one sentence

The 2013 Lysol commercial provides a reality check for Febreze users.  It
mentions that Febreze doesn't kill germs  ...  bacteria  ...  viruses  ...  mold.

Now, the odors of decomposing material usually come from the metabolites
of microbiological beings.  They are the emissions that the microbiological
beings send into the air.  This includes the mycotoxins that emit from mold.
Well, if Almighty & Ever-living Febreze does not kill 'germs,'  then the me-
tabolites and mycotoxins of the various 'germs' are still being emitted into
the air, along with their odors, no matter what quantity of Febreze is spray-
ed into a trash can, on moldy furniture, on a mildewed towel, etc. 

In light of this, Febreze commercials are marked with conflict of interest.
They're designed to persuade you to buy the product line, not to objective-
ly inform the people about Febreze.  After all, Protector & Gamble never
warned the public of the asthma, splitting headaches, etc. that Febreze has
triggered.  Plus, P&G never publicly disclosed the dozens of chemical in-
gredients in Febreze.  In as much, those who do not sale Febreze and who
are not competing against Procter & Gamble in the marketplace are the re-
liable sources of Febreze's metabolic mechanisms.   Thus, whatever Proc-
ter & Gambles' people claim about Febreze must be entirely ignored, due
to Procter & Gamble's conflict of interest and ulterior motive.

There are additional red flags attached to the Febreze product line, along
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.   In fact, according to the Environmental Working
Group, Febreze has a Propostion 65 chemical in its formula: acetaldehyde.
It's outlined below.  Thus, it isn't an exaggeration to state that Procter &
Gamble has become another Monsanto.

http://ens-newswire.com/2013/01/25/procter-gamble-must-scrub-carcinogen-dioxane-from-tide/

The Trade Secret Law and the Violation of Americans'
right to know what's going into their respiratory tracts

In America, chemical ingredients don't have to be proven safe, in order
to be included in a fragrance product that sits for sale on store shelves.
Furthermore, the infamous trade secret laws do not require fragrance
manufacturers to disclose to the public any of the ingredients in their
fragrance products.
____________________________________________________________ 

If it deeply penetrates the fabric, 
it will NOT depart from the fabric.
Such a thing is known as contamination.

Background of that which necessitated further investigations on Febreze

A woman once wrote to me, asking how to get the smell of Febreze out of
her sofa.  The answer is to send it to Procter & Gamble's headquarters and
make its personnel get the Febreze odor out of it.  Another woman wrote to
me and informed me that Febreze is her worst nightmare.  Yet another lady
wrote to me and thanked me for given her the insight to remove Febreze
from her nightstand and entire home, being that the removal of it resulted
in the cessation of her symptoms.  Her letter was the second most detailed
one that I ever received in my life.  In fact, an asthmatic woman who works
in a sporting goods store told me that the Febreze automobile clip-on was
her worse assailant, and that she was able to detect from a notable distance
an automobile that had two Febreze clip-ons attached to its dashboard.  In
addition, another person easily concurs that Febreze clip-ons are the worst
nightmare of any automobile clip-on product, in this age of obnoxiously
invasive chemical fragrance gluttons.

A pharmaceutical ingredient used in 30 drugs 
is heralded as the star of the Febreze Show

The Procter & Gamble Outreach people disseminated the claim that a star
ingredient exists in Febreze which scientifically absorbs odors.  That claim
turned out to be a fraudulent misrepresentation; a severe twisting of the fact.

The heralded Febreze ingredient was/is a pharmaceutical ingredient in 30
or so drugs, mostly oral ones.  It was/is used as a complexing agent and the
transporter of the principle ingredient in a those 30 drugs, thereby making
a drug's active ingredient more readily available to the body.

The heralded Febreze ingredient is a sugar; a cyclic oligosaccharide which
has a cavity at its center that can pick up any one of a number of molecules
temporarily.  Thus, it has the ability to make complex compounds, and thusly
is the reason why it is categorized as a 'complexing agent.'  It's a derivative of  
C42H70O35, a sugar known as cyclodextrin.

This sugar was discovered in 1891.  If it were as divine as Procter & Gamble 
make it out to be, then mankind would have been using it ubiquitously in the 
past 120 years, spraying it everywhere on everything.  The Procter & Gamble 
outreach people make it out to be the ultimate panacea in the history of the 
universe.  But, it isn't a cure of any ailment, especially asthma.  It's a trans-
port molecule. 

This sugar has a cavity at its center which is hydrophobic.  This means that it
will repel water.  Therefore, whatever molecule is absorbed into its cavity will
be released into the first medium of water it encounters.  This is known as be-
ing water soluble.

This sugar was used in 30 or so prescription drugs for the sake of increasing
a drug's solubility in water, thereby increasing the drug's delivery deeper into
the body; to increase the 'bio-availability' of the 30 or so pharmaceutical drugs
that used cyclodextrin as a supporting ingredient.  The cavity is much like a
bomber's bomb bay, opening its doors and dispensing its bombs into a medi-
um of water.

The Impact of this Sugar Molecule on the Human Body

Clearly understand the following:  Cyclodextrin molecules sprayed from a
bottle of Febreze will collect into their cavities any molecule that will fit in-
side of them.  There will be NO covalent bonding involved.  No new sub-
stance is made.  Therefore, cyclodextrin is merely a molecule container;
a molecule's taxi cab - a molecular holding station.  Therefore, Procter &
Gamble lied when it claimed that 87-chemical Febreze eliminates odors
for once and for all.  In fact, in stating that it eliminates odor is to claim
that Febreze has the power to suspend the Law of Conservation of Mass.
Such a claim is psychosis, outside of divine miraculous intervention.

Your lungs are 83% water, and you inhale cyclodextrin molecules whenever
you are in a room where Febreze was sprayed.  This means that those stench-
related molecules you intended to eliminate get carried deeply within your
body and get dropped off inside of you, with NO change in their molecular
constitutions.  Cyclodextin is merely a component in a drug delivery system
that you inhale without a prescription when you enter a room reeking with
Febreze and its other 86 chemical ingredients. 

The one facet in pharmaceutical history which 
proves the Febreze advertisers to be outright liars.

Of course, the Procter & Gamble outreach people say that pharmaceutical in-
gredient cyclodextrin does the odor eliminator job.  Well, if cyclodextrin had
the power to absorb molecules and render them inactive, then cyclodextrin
would never have been used as a carrier molecule, in delivering 30 drugs' 
active ingredients into the depths of the human body.  Cyclodextrin would
have eliminated those 30 active ingredients, too.  Therefore, either the man-
ufacturers of 30 pharmaceutical drugs are lying or Procter & Gamble is ly-
ing to humanity.  Either cyclodextrin causes zero change to molecules that
enter its cavity, or it eliminates the active mechanism in all of them.

The decisive difference between cyclodextrin in pharmaceuticals and cyclo-
dextrin sprayed in an airspace of foul odors and putrefying material is this:  

Pharmaceuticals are made in sterile environments, and no appreciable con-
taminants are involved.  An active pharmaceutical ingredient approved by
the FDA is the molecule that medical cyclodextrin will absorb into its cav-
ity and deposit into the watery human body.  Plus, very little is used, when
comparing a bottle of medicine smaller than your hand to an entire living
room, store, office, taxi cab, or locker room flooded with Febreze.

Procter & Gamble's cyclodextrin derivative absorbs molecules that are not
in any type of sterile environment, but rather in an environment of rotting
fish, mildewed fabric, molding mattresses, musty attic trunks, and the con-
tents of a musty trunk.  The molecules of trash absorbed by cyclodextrin
molecules are then inhaled by those in the room, and the molecules from
the trash can are deposited in the body.  Procter & Gamble simply made
trash molecules, mildew molecules, mycotoxins, and the molecules of de-
caying fish more bio-available to the human body.  Keep the following in
mind:

Contamination is synonymous with penetrating deeply, and 
Febreze's sickeningly sweet sugar chemical penetrates & clings,
reminiscient of candida in the intestines.

The P&G Outreach people boldly stated that Febreze is deeply penetrating.
Well, such a thing is known as contamination and/or a staining mechanism.
Blood on fabric/carpeting is an example of how you don't want to penetrate
deeply into fabric.  People experienced in cleaning warn against scrubbing
a blood-ridden carpet too hard, lest the blood penetrate deeply into the car-
peting and never come out of it.

When you are cleaning, you do NOT want deeply penetrating molecules
involved.  Such things are all the more contaminating.  Remember blood
soaked carpeting, all the while keeping in mind that Procter & Gamble
makes  Febreze was made to sound like the air of the gods for no other
purpose than to have Procter & Gamble make hundreds of millions of
fast bucks during this era of the airhead;  during this era marked by the
dumbing down of America.

Febreze's cyclodextrin is an invader that takes over the material it pene-
trates.  It's a thief ... an unwelcome squatter who doesn't go away ... a pig
molecule that settles in fabric and takes control of it.  If you're a notably
sensitive asthmatic adversely reactive to chemicals, or a reactive airways
patient, you will continue to smell Febreze's sugar chemical and the effect
will be like Chinese water torture.

The dominating presence of cyclodextrin becomes obnoxious and sicken-
ingly sweet.  That odor, to persons physically sensitive, doesn't go away.
Rather, the taste of cyclodextrin clings to the mouth.  Such people keep
washing and rinsing clothing reeking with the smell of Febreze to no
avail.  They could not get that smell out. 

No person should be forced to smell the same odor continually.  After all,
you don't eat the same food continually.  You don't look at the same color
continually, and you don't hear the same one song continually.  You should
not be forced to smell the same sickeningly sweet sugar chemical until the
end of days.  Febreze is a contaminant, and certain types of asthmatics, like
coal mine canaries, can smell the contamination of Febreze's deeply pene-
trating substance that will not prevent any kind of bacteriological infection,
will not cure cancer, and will certainly not cure asthma.

Cyclodextrin is attached to a number of toxic drug reactions, notably those
of the lungs and kidneys.  The kidneys are 79% water.  Now, cyclodextrin
was mostly used in drugs that are ingested.  Only once was the cyclodex-
trin world used in a nasal spray; a hormonal spray called 17β-Estradiol,
an estrogenic steroid.  Cyclodextrin was also used rectally and intraven-
ously.

When it comes to Febreze, this chemical is inhaled.  The effects of inhaling
this chemical, and applying it topically, as well as ingesting it are different.
Keep in mind that the safety of chronically inhaling this sugar was not estab-
lished when this sugar was being added to oral drugs, made to be ingested. 
The vast majority of drugs containing cyclodextrin are oral drugs ... NOT
inhalants.

The following is an absolute must-read, in order for you to understand how
irresponsible Procter & Gamble is disseminating throughout modern civili-
zation a pharmaceutical ingredient that should never be ubiquitously sprayed
at will, along with 86 other chemicals ...

 ... and that such a chemical should never be put into the hands of cab drivers
who used it to hide the presence of cigarette smoke in those taxi cabs falsely
advertised as smoke-free ...

... and that such a chemical should never be put in the hands of tourists who
rent no-smoking beach houses and then spray Febreze to the point of toxicity,
in the mistaken belief that the smoke is being absorbed and eliminated from
the beach house that is actually being contaminated by Febreze.

                 *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3147107/ 
                 *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * 

August 2013 Update:

As of August 2013 there is a new TV commercial advertising something
called Febreze Clear, meaning that the new Procter & Gamble product is
alleged to be free of the glut of fragrance chemicals that EWG scientists
reported to have detected in Febreze Hawaiian Aloha.

Keep in mind that some of the harmful chemicals reported to have been de-
tected in Febreze Hawaiian Aloha were NOT fragrance chemicals.  Thus,
Febreze Free, if it is like Hawaiian Aloha minus the fragrance chemicals,
has all of the menacing chemicals within it, including the following:     

2-ethyl-hexanol,  a diesel fuel additive,  an anti-freeze additive,  a nail polish
plasticizer,  one of the most toxic chemicals in artificial turf,  a chemical that
has been known to kill cats at 180 ppm and cause kidney damage at 50 ppm,
and other chemicals.  Therefore, if the non-fragrance ingredients in Febreze
Free are the same as the ones in Febreze Hawaiian Aloha, you will still have
the same contamination.

For the new Febreze commercial to have had any credibility, a certified ex-
pert in the field needed to state what mechanism in Febreze could eliminate
odors for all time, as if Febreze had the divine power to suspend the Law of
Conservation of Mass.

Of course, Febreze doesn't finish off stench-related molecules for all time.  It
merely delivers molecules deeply into the human body and into mankind's
water supplies.

Here is a quick example as to how Febreze doesn't absorb odors in the way
the Procter & Gamble people claimed Did you ever stand near a taxi cab
or a no-smoking-allowed motel room where Febreze was sprayed days prior,
in the attempt to deceptively hide cigarette smoke?  If so, did you notice, on
every occasion, an odor likened to pasty ash and tarry chocolate ... a type of
chocolate that no Belgian confectioner would ever use?  I did.

In the matter of Febreze, the concern is the bio-accumulative effects of in-
haling a pharmaceutical ingredient for absolutely no medical purpose, on a
daily basis. The other concern is why some people still smell the Febreze
months after it was sprayed near linens, upholstery, kitchen wares, etc. 

Odor Eliminators don't emit odors as gaudy as those emitted from Febreze

The initial gaudy smell of Febreze is following by a persistently sickeningly
sweet smell, due to the lingering effect of the synthesized sugar in Febreze.
The lingering effect of that synthetic sugar molecular is equal to the Chinese
water torture.  It clings and does not politely disappear.  In as much, Febreze's
so-called proprietary "odor eliminator" ingredient has an odor; one likened
to sugar that reportedly clings to the mouth in a very irritating fashion.  In
addition, it is neither a poison eliminator nor a toxin eliminator nor an aller-
gen eliminator.  Rather, it's a phthalate creator and allergen creator, as well
as chromosome chain disruptor, and a severe asthma trigger.

None the less, two woman who have neither asthma nor sinus headaches spoke
of Febreze the same way in which less-than-discrete women spoke about Burt
Reynolds and Robert Redford in the 1970s, George Clooney and Don Johnson
in the 1980s, and Brad Pitt in the 1990s.  Their thesis statement seemed to have
been, "With Febreze around, who needs a man."  Those two women didn't own
Febreze.  Febreze owned them.

Products that have light odors do not trigger such crass fetish behavior, as did
Febreze in two instances.  Thus, it is false advertising to claim that the clinging
odor of sickeningly sweet Febreze is anywhere near light and fresh.  The term
"light & fresh" denotes safe & harmless.  Well, Febreze is a violent asthma trig-
ger, as well as a persistent one.  It's assault & battery on the more vulnerable re-
spiratory tracts of humanity ... all for frivolous vanity.

Bio-accumultive Effect

Plus, there are the 86 other chemicals to consider;  the ones reported to have
been detected in Febreze Hawaiian Aloha.  None the less, the first point of
concern is the fact the Febreze has triggered  gnawing, clinching, gripping
asthma attacks, and that it lingers for far too long a time, making it able to
repeatedly trigger asthma.  This is a rude invasion of personal property and
a ruthless imposition upon the respiratory tracts of a certain class of asthma
sufferer. 

Adjuvant Effect

Concerning the pharmacological aspect, there is the matter of Adjuvant
Effect.  This is when a couple of chemicals team-up to cause harm.

Pharmacological Effect

There is additionally the matter of one chemical being consumed by the
body which causes another chemical's level in the same body to be ele-
vated, as if the triggering chemical were a cue ball.  The classic example
of this type of pharmacological reaction is the organophosphate category
of pesticide.  Its presence elevates the level of acetylcholine in the lungs.

Oxidation Effect

There is also the oxidation effect in this falsely advertised product, at
least with the terpenes in Febreze.  Very simply, exposing an oxidative
chemical to the air will result in the formation of allergenic substances.
Such is the case with the fragrance ingredients Linalool and Limonene.
That is to say, spraying Febreze causes the formation of chemicals in
addition to what was put into Febreze at the factory.

Exorbitantly gaudy levels of chemical spray products,
when used by those with deadened senses.

Enter those members of the elderly who never achieved discipline, in
this hedonistic age.  These are the pathological pleasure seekers.  Con-
cerning them, realize the following pattern  The elderly are known to
crank up the volume on a radio and blow out everyone else's ears in
the process.  Elderly women, unaware of how addicted to chemicals
they have become, are known to crank up the volume on the chemic-
ally-laden fragrance products, thereby suffocating nearby asthmatics.

Why would you want to make your home, workplace, auto,
meeting hall, waiting room, or rec room a toxic waste dump?

In light of all the chemicals in Febreze, if you do use this product,
you are doing nothing more than contaminating your home, your
motor vehicle, your taxi cab, your apartment, your office, your
store.  In addition, if you happen to have an asthmatic neighbor,
you are suffocating that person out of house and home.

Now, autism has been statistically linked to the presence of certain
chemical classes and pesticide types.  Therefore, it is advisable to
keep Febreze away from developing children, as well as people
with allergic dermatitis and respiratory disease.

Consumer Reports Magazine wasn't impressed.

Consumer Reports Magazine did its blind test also, and reported that
the responses of the test subjects included those which were less than
laudatory.  There were people sickened by Febreze.  In fact, I received
emails by persons who were ill in an unexplainable fashion, and then,
as soon as they got rid of the Febreze in their bedrooms, kitchens, etc,
their symptoms completely vanished.

The 1980s Cigarette Commercial

In the 1980s, there was a TV commercial which pointed out the truth that
cigarette smoke nestles into all of the clothes in the closet of any cigarette
smoker, thereby resulting in the smell lingering in every piece of clothing
owned by a smoker.  Febreze, with its dozens of synthetic chemicals, in-
vades your life in the same way.  Clothing, upholstery, etc can easily reek
with Febreze.  However, the lingering effect is the sickeningly sweet one.
If you don't notice the smell, then welcome to the world of the neurotoxin
effect. 

Why would you want your nerve cells killed-off?  Febreze isn't divine, in
any fashion.  Febreze doesn't bring enlightenment, and it doesn't cure any
disease.  It smells like a vandalized fragrance warehouse.

Plus, there is another series of questions you must consider:

Is or is not the Febreze pump and plug-in mostly water, and is or is not the
cyclodextrin ingredient immersed in that base of water, thereby negating the
purpose of the cyclodextrin derivative in Febreze?  Remember, cyclodextrin
is hydrophobic.  It doesn't absorb anything in water, including water spray,
from a Febreze bottle.  Yet, it emits that sickening sweet smell that eventual-
ly has the effect of a perpetual Chinese Water Torture session.  When it's wet
it collects nothing into its cavity.  It's emitted in wet-spray form.

The pharmaceutical world advocated that cyclodextrin be used as a means to
prevent the stomach irritation caused by certain drugs.  However, this involves
orally ingesting a drug ... not inhaling it with 86 other chemicals.

This brings us to a reality check for the users of Mr. Clean with Febreze.  Well,
is Mr Clean or is it not mostly water?  Is or is not cyclodextrin unable to absorb
anything in water?  Plus, is there or is there not dozens of other chemicals in
Mr. Clean?  In as much, is this product Mr. Clean or Mr. Contaminant?

In review:

Procter & Gamble makes that one chemical sound like a cure-all ... as if it were
the solution to all of mankind's ills.  Yet, it was discovered as far back as 1891
and registered in 1953, only having been used in limited drug preparations, and
as an occasional food stabilizer until Proctor & Gamble starting their Febreze
campaign, making it sound like magical fairy dust.  If cyclodextrin is so effec-
tive for the good of manking, then why wasn't it used decades sooner in house-
hold products?

The point in contrasting pharmaceutical preparations with Febreze goes as fol-
lows:  A patient only encountered cyclodextrins in small quantities, such as in
one pill every 2 to 4 to 24 hours.  A person is glutted with the cyclodextrin de-
rivative in Febreze for as long as a person, a dashboard clip-on, a plug-in, or a
canister releases Febreze into the air.

 There are 86 other chemical ingredients to consider

No matter what you say about cyclodextrin and its derivatives, you still need to
justify the inclusion of the other 86 chemicals that qualified scientists detected
in Febreze Hawaiian Aloha.  You must furthermore justify the asthma attacks
and incapacitating headaches that some people were forced to endure, on ac-
count of the rude imposition of Febreze in their airspace.

Quite frankly, the cyclodextrin in the Febreze product line immediately becomes
so overburdened with the task of absorbing the other 86 chemicals in Febreze that
it does not have the room to absorb the stench molecules in your trash can, the
mildew molecules in your towels, musty collectors' items, and moldy furniture.

http://www.ewg.org/research/greener-school-cleaning-supplies/school-cleaner-test-results?schoolprod=219 

 The Ultimate Red Flag:  Monsanto's Connection to Procter & Gamble

Here is your reality check, America:  The top institutional stockholders of
Monsanto were mostly the same as those of Procter and Gamble.  A tree
is known by its fruits.  A corporation is known by its affiliations.   Now, it
has been sufficiently ascertained that Monsanto is the corporate personifica-
tion of evil, making Darth Vader look like a merit badge boyscout in com-
parison.  Whatever corporation is owned by the entities who own Monsanto
can reasonably be assumed to operate according to the same unconscionable
lack of moral standards.  Well, observe the major stock owners of Monsanto
and P&G.  Deja vu.  The following is NOT a misprint:

Monsanto's                                             Procter & Gamble's
top institutional stockholders               top institutional stockholders

  1} Fidelity Investments, aka FMR,        1}The Vanguard Group, Inc.
       otherwise known as Fidelity
       Management & Research Co.           2} State Street Corporation.
  2} The Vanguard Group, Inc.                3} BlackRock Institutional Trust Co.
  3} State Street Corporation.                  4} Fidelity Investments, aka FMR,
                                                                     otherwise known as Fidelity
  4} (one which hasn't P&G stock)              Management & Research Co.
  5} BlackRock Institutional Trust Co.   5} (one which hasn't Monsanto stock)
  6} (one which hasn't P&G stock)         6} Northern Trust Corporation.
  7} Northern Trust Corporation.            7} Bank of New York Mellon Corp.
  8} (one which hasn't P&G stock)         8} (one which hasn't Monsanto stock)
  9} Bank of New York Mellon Corp.    9} (one which hasn't Monsanto stock)
10} (one which hasn't P&G stock)       10} (one which hasn't Monsanto stock)

Monsanto's 1st,  2nd,  3rd,   5th,  7th,  and  9th  top institutional stockholders
are  P&G's  4th,  1st,   2nd,  3rd,  6th,  and  7th  top ones.  Keep in mind that
corporate management does what pleases the major stockholders.

There are additional red flags attached to the Febreze product line, along
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.

 https://biography.omicsonline.org/china/monsanto/jon-r-moeller-239825

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. 

 https://ens-newswire.com/procter-gamble-must-scrub-carcinogen-dioxane-from-tide/

At this point, we need to review the one observation which 
indicts the false advertising of Procter & Gamble's Febreze . . . 

If Febreze were the odor eliminator that Procter & Gamble claimed it was,
a person would smell nothing as soon as Febreze were sprayed into the air.
If Febreze is an odor eliminator, then it would also eliminate the odors of
the many aromatic chemicals that it contains.  In fact, test subjects of a Con-
sumers' Report test smelled, at times, the very things that Procter & Gamble
claims to be eliminated whenever Febreze is used.  Some of the test subjects
where sickened by what they smelled.

The irony is that the ingredient which Procter & Gamble falsely calls an
odor eliminator has an odor.  It's likened to a toxic form of sugar.  It has,
more than once, been reported to cling to the mouth persistently, in a very
annoying way.  It has been a rude intrusion.

In addition, take to heart the following, when you encounter someone who
has a literally fetish for Febreze:  Animals have found anti-freeze to smell
and taste wonderful.  They died after lapping-up a puddle of it.  Simply be-
cause these animals found anti-freeze to have been wonderful in taste and
odor, it didn't make it any less deadly than it is.  Sometimes the most dead-
ly blades are the shiniest.  Sometimes the sharpest shards of glass which
can effectively slit your wrists reflect the colors of the rainbow.
_________________________________________________________ 
     ______________________________________________________

 © Patrick Anthony Pontillo: except for the 1892 satirical masterpiece
                                               drawn by Charles Allan Gilbert titled,
                                                All is Vanity.
    ______________________________________________________
    ______________________________________________________

February 24, 2024

Monitored Scholastic Febreze Experiment: Every test subject plant died, went the report.


If Febreze is not registered as an herbicide, it should be, according to the
findings of a supervised Quebecois scholastic project.   Febreze was re-
ported ... to me directly ... as having killed the test-subject plants, in two
distinct tests.  The plants were doing fine, in Canada, until the spraying
of the Febreze product line was commenced.

It took three weeks for the plants to die in the first recreated Febreze atmos-
phere, and it only took hours for Febreze to kill all of the test-subject plants
in the second test.

In the second test, Febreze was used in a high dosage.  In that environment,
not even a day passed, before the test-subject plants were dead.

The basic summary of the test is that Febreze burnt the plant cells, thereby
preventing the plants from making photosynthesis.  If the Febreze product
line is as harmless and as detoxifying as Proctor & Gamble's advertisers
make it out to be, then the test-subject plants wouldn't have been killed
during both phrases of the test.  Rather, Febreze would have made the
plants more vibrant.

You now have a general idea of what Febreze can do to you, your family
members, your students, your regular customers/clients, your employees,
your apartment neighbors, your taxi cab passengers, your house guests,
and your pets, as well as the sufferers of low-weight molecular asthma,
Reactive Airways Dysfuncfunction Syndrome, Irritant-associated Vocal
Cord Dysfunction, and other valid environmental illnesses.

http://www.bluemarblealbum.com/2013/10/chemically-laden-febreze.html

Consumer Reports Magazine Chimes in on Febreze

Before all else, you need to understand that the pertinence of this outline
is that Febreze has been a nightmare to certain patients who suffer from
specific types of respiratory disease.  That is to say, Febreze has been
assault & battery to these persons.  Plus, it was found to contain 87
chemical ingredients, by the scientists of the Environmental Working
Group.

http://www.bluemarblealbum.com/2013/10/chemically-laden-febreze.html

http://www.bluemarblealbum.com/2013/10/the-plant-killing-properties-of-febreze.html
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Update:  The Consumer's Union of the U.S. Incorporated  has report-
ed that their tests have found Proctor & Gamble to be apparently lying
to the public about its Febreze product line.  All that was surmised was
Febreze's inability to eliminate odors, as this site has long since stated. 

In fact, Consumer Reports Magazine stated that the Febreze product line
is NOT the magical eliminator of odors that it has been advertised to be. 
Thus, those two affiliated entities concur with the article posted below.
The article was originally posted in the Summer of 2011.

Concerning the report, test subjects were placed in a setting which con-
tained long-standing sardines and the litter box scoopings of two large
cats, along with an odor of the Febreze product line.  The non-profit or-
ganization, as well as Consumer Reports, reported that the test subjects
described the affected area in the following ways:

I wanted to throw up.”  ...  “Flowers gone bad, dirty diapers, old
garbage.”  ...  “Like a men’s room in a truck stop.”   ...   “It’s not
exactly pleasant, and I don’t want to inhale.”  ...  “air freshener,
cat urine, and a hamster cage.”

The bottom line is that Febreze didn't eliminate or successfully mask
the other odors that were deliberately placed in the same setting.  More-
over, to people with reactive respiratory diseases, the Febreze odors per-
petually linger in absorbent material such as clothing and upholstery.
The Febreze odor clings and remains, torturing those with Reactive Air-
ways Disease, Irritant-induced Asthma, and other reactive conditions.

In fact, people not chemically sensitive have complained about getting
the smell of Febreze out of fabrics.  This product is a rude invasion of
privacy, where Proctor & Gamble infiltrates clothing & upholstery, in
having Febreze set in fabrics of other people, as if to rule the people
who own the contaminated fabrics.  It's a rude imposition to say the
least.

For Further Reading:

http://shopping.yahoo.com/news/does-febreze-air-effects-give-odors-the-boot--20121011.html

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2012/11/does-febreze-air-effects-give-odors-the-boot/index.htm 
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

February 23, 2024

Avoidance, aka Environmental Control:
Board-certified doctors' orders.

The AMA, the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology
(the AAAAI), and the American Lung Association (the ALA) have all
acknowledged the following:

They acknowledged the existence of Chemical Sensitivity as it applies
to Asthma and Asthma-like conditions, as well as sinusitis and adverse
skin conditions such as dermatitis and urticaria (rashes.)  This includes

1}  Occupational Asthma due to Low Weight Molecular Agents,
2}  Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction.
3} Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome,
4)  Irritant-induced Asthma, .
5} Small Airways Disease.

All three associations have acknowledged that chemical-bearing agents can
trigger asthma attacks in susceptible persons. This includes chemically laden
fragrance products.  In as much everyone on earth needs air to breath.  No one
needs vain and gluttonous amounts of artificial fragrances products.

Each organization advocates the practice of Environmental Control; 
of avoiding airborne agents which trigger one's asthma.   In fact, the
AMA has formally referred to Avoidance as "Control of Factors Con-
tributing to Asthma Severity."   In French medical Literature, avoid-
ance is known as "Strict Eviction."  

Examples of recognized asthma triggers in the chemical category
include:

[A] "NO2" from gas stoves and fireplaces,  fumes from
        kerosene heaters, and volatile organic compounds
        from carpeting, cabinetry, plywood, particle board,
         and fumes from household cleaning products."

[B] "Air pollutants such as tobacco smoke, wood smoke,
        chemicals in the air and ozone"

      "Occupational exposure to vapors, dusts, gases or fumes"

      "Strong Odors or sprays such as perfumes, household clean-
        sers, cooking fumes (especially from frying), paints, or var-
        nishes"

[C] "Perfume, paint, hair spray, or any strong odors or fumes."

http://www.epa.gov/asthma/chemical_irritants.html

http://asthma.about.com/od/asthmatriggers/qt/chemictriggers.htm

http://www.aaaai.org/patients/publicedmat/tips/occupationalasthma.stm

http://www.lungusa.org/healthy-air/home/resources/cleaning-supplies.html

http://www.lungusa.org/lung-disease/asthma/about-asthma/understanding-asthma.html

http://www.lungusa.org/lung-disease/asthma/living-with-asthma/take-control-of-your-asthma/asthma-triggers.html

An American Lung Association already stated:

"Perfume, room deodorizers, cleaning chemicals, paints, and
  talcum powder are examples of triggers that must be avoided
  or kept at very low levels."

The same American Lung Association furthermore states:

"These 'triggers' can set off a reaction in your lungs and   other 
  parts of your body." Now, place an emphasis on "other parts
  of your body," and keep in mind that:

Avoidance also applies to Anaphylaxis, Chemically-induced Hepatitis,
Irritant Rhinitis, Dermatitis, Urticaria (rashes), Irritant-associated Vo-
cal Cord Dysfunction, Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome, etc.

The AMA's Admitting to the Converse Relationship Between 
Pollution Levels and Hospital Admissions Due to Asthma

Five to six thousand people die each year from asthma, in the United
States alone, and one of the highest asthma-related death rates has
been in Harlem, NY, as well as Detroit.   Ever so coincidentally, the
environs of Harlem are venues for NYC waste sites. Concerning this,
the AMA has expressly stated that:

"fluctuations in the levels of air pollution correlate with asth-
 ma symptoms and hospital admissions."   [Report 4 of the AMA's
 Council on Scientific Affairs (A-98)]
===============================================

The segment posted below appears in another Atlantic America article.
This means that it might look familiar to you.  In fact, the information in
quotations, as well as the asthma chart, was provided by the American
Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology, in its publican information
literature.  Needless to say, charts can be invaluable for individuals seek-
ing to learn fact. 

The AAAAI's public education material 
on the subject of Occupational Asthma

Concerning the AAAAI that Barrett cited in his campaign to convince
mankind that Environmental Illness is merely a matter of mental illness,
it published an instructional website about Occupational Asthma.  The
AAAAI has already acknowledged that Occupational Asthma can be
caused by a number of chemicals at nontoxic/ambient levels, afflicting
a number of  workers employed in a number of  industries.

     Acrylates  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adhesive handlers
     Amines  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Shellac & lacquar handlers
     Anhydrides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plastic, epoxy resin users
     Chloramine-T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Janitors, cleaning staff
     Dyes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . Textile workers
     Fluxes   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Electronic workers
     Formaldehyde/glutaraldehyde . . .  Hospital staff
     Persulfate  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hairdressers
     Isocyanates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spray painters, Insulation
                                                               installers; plastic, rubber,
                                                               foam manufactory workers.

         The same public education material of  the AAAAI states:

          "The cause may be allergic or nonallergic in nature,
            and the disease may last for a lengthy period in some  
            workers, even if they are no longer exposed to the
            agents that caused their symptoms
."

           "Inhalation of  some substances in aerosol form can
            directly lead to the accumulation of  naturally oc-
            curring chemicals in the body, such as histamine or 
            acetylcholine within the lung, which in turn lead to 
            asthma."

            "For example, insecticides, used in agricultural work,
            can cause a buildup of  acetylcholine, which causes
            airway muscles to contract, thereby constricting air-
            ways."

           "Allergic occupational asthma can occur in workers
            in the plastic, rubber or resin industries following
            repeated exposure to small chemical molecules in 
            the air."

          "If occupational asthma is not correctly diagnosed
           early, and the worker protected or removed from the
          exposure, permanent lung changes may occur and 
          asthma symptoms may persist even without exposure."

          "Up to 15% of  asthma cases in the United States may
           have job-related factors."

          "Isocyanates are chemicals that are widely used in many 
           industries, including spray painting, insulation installa-
           tion, and in manufacturing plastics, rubber and foam.
           These chemicals can cause asthma in up to 10% of ex-
           posed workers."

The aforementioned illustrates that Chemical Sensitivity, as it applies to
asthma and rhinitis, is acknowledged as valid and authentic by the same
AAAAI that Barrett elected to use, in order to support his assertion that
chemical sensitivity is merely a psychological illness.

Conclusion

Stephen Barrett can mock the diagnostic title, Multiple Chemical Sensi-
tivity, all that he wants to.  It will not take away the fact is that chemical
sensitivity has already been recognized in case specific form.  Nor will
it take away the fact that the sufferers of those case-specific forms of
chemical sensitivity need to avoid the chemicals which exacerbate their
medical conditions.
_________________
The following quote is
directly from the AMA 

Avoidance and AMA (CSA) Report 4 (A-98)

Avoidance is not 'detrimental.'  Nor is it nonsense.  Avoidance is a
medical necessity.  And as it applies to asthma, the AMA has stated:

   Regardless of the efficiency of clinician assessment and pa-
   tient self-monitoring, if the patient's exposure to irritants
   or allergens to which he or she is sensitive is not reduced 
   or eliminated, symptom control and exacerbation rate may
   not improve.  Formerly titled 'Environmental Control,' the
   key points in this area logically include efforts by clinicians
   to pinpoint causative agents and to provide specific advice 
   on how to avoid or reduce exposures to environmental or
   dietary triggers and drugs that may provoke or exacerbate 
   symptoms." AMA Report 4, Council on Scientific Affairs (A-98)
   ============================================

February 22, 2024

The Objective Medical Findings of Chemically Sensitive Patients

Mainstream medical science has already proved the existence of
chemical allergies.  Immediate onset and delayed reactions have
long since been proven to exist.  The reaction occurring within an
hour are known as an Immunoglobin-E reaction.  It occurs by the
process of "haptenation."  Haptenation is simply the act of a low-
weight molecule taking a piggy-bank ride on a much larger mole-
cule, thereby enabling an allergic reaction to transpire.

Chemicals have also been proven to trigger what is known as cell-
mediated delayed allergic reactions.  These mostly affect the skin.
Next comes the delayed Immunoglobin-G reaction.  This reaction
adversely affects the respiratory system.  In summary, these involve
adverse reactions to non-toxic levels of chemical exposure.  Such
low levels are known are ambient levels. 

Today, testing for IgE-meditated chemical allergies is done through
RAST testing.  It used to be done through the traditional skin prick
test.   In as much, it's at the OCCUPATIONAL PANEL where the
request for chemical allergy testing is listed on ye olde RAST TEST
ORDER FORM.  Therefore, don't look for any "chemical panel" on
a RAST TEST form.  Look for the occupational one.

Plus, there are other objective medical findings attached to those suf-
fering from Chemical & Irritant Sensitivities, in addition to the presence
of classical allergic inflammatory mediators.  In fact, Irritant Sensitivities
involve sensitivity to those chemicals which don't provoke the classical
allergic reaction.   Some chemicals were found to trigger other kinds of
"inflammatory mediators."  In as much, Chemical Sensitivity is basically
an inflammatory disease.  Very simply, it triggers physical inflammation
somewhere in the body.
_____________________________________________________

Posted below is a partial list of objective medical findings that have en-
tered into the records of chemically sensitive patients and into research
documentation.   It appears after an introduction and a narration of a re-
latively recent case study.   The introduction shows how objective med-
ical findings can be entirely missed during a "cursory medical examine.
The case study also confirms that, simply because insurance company
attorneys allege something in a workman's comp case, it doesn't mean
it's true.

Not Detected by the Standard Chest CT Scan.
Yet Detected via the End-expiratory CT Scan.


A January 2002 article that remains posted on the Fox News website
declared it "junk science."   It was/is the emergent illness which afflict-
ed persons exposed to the debris of  the World Trade Center collapse.
Unofficially called "World Trade Center Syndrome," its distinctive fea-
ture was the "the WTC Cough,"  and its symptoms included shortness
of  breath.

The article attributed the ills of  the afflicted WTC cleanup crew mem-
bers to the 2002 "flu season."   It furthermore attributed the ills of Man-
hattan residents to "anxiety salted with hypochondria."  Its conclusion
was that only "minor and transient health effects from the site" were
to be expected.   The conclusion was wrong.

A newly emerged illness had just made the scene, and just as quickly on
the scene was a political operative ridiculing people's notice of it.  Then
came November 30, 2004, when it was officially disclosed that some of
the afflicted crew members of  the ground zero cleanup operation were
actually suffering from the trapping of  air.   These workers were suffer-
ing from Small Airways Disease, and it was the end-expiratory CT scan
that confirmed it to be true.   The standard chest CT scan overlooked it. 

The Fiberoptic Rhinolaryngoscopy Detects that
which the Garden Variety Cursory Exam Overlooks


The upper airway endoscopy is recognized by mainstream medicine as
an effective means by which pathologies of the septum, nasopharynx,
turbinates, mucosa, adenoids, eustachian tube orifice, tonsils, posterior
tongue, epiglottis, glottis, and vocal cords can be easily seen.   It was
the fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam which resulted in researchers
realizing (in the early 1990s) that the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
Syndrome which was presumed to involve no objective medical find-
ings showed signs of being a physical pathology.  In fact, the golden
rule for diagnosing Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction came
to be that of  a flexible fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic examination, per-
formed upon a patient only when he/she is symptomatic. 

The human body is regarded as exceptionally complex.  Therefore, the
reasonably minded person should understand that the cursory physical
exam and garden variety testing do not detect everything.  This under-
standing, in addition to the preceding paragraphs, offers insight as to
why a number of  chemically sensitive persons have been declared to
have no objective medical findings.

The narration posted directly below should offer more detailed insight
to this.  It involves a case study which teaches us that, simply because
corporate defense attorneys assert something in a workman's comp
case, it doesn't automatically mean that it's true.

She Was Claimed to Have No Objective Medical
Findings to Verfiy Her Symptoms.  Multiple Medical
Findings Were Documented in One Day.


A woman whose workplace was a former coal tar research building be-
came ill six months after having worked there.   A laboratory confirmed
that her workplace was laden with very fine monofilament fibers.   The
smaller the molecular agent, the greater is its potential to infiltrate and
afflict the inner recesses of the complex human anatomy.   Furthermore,
there was also the matter of pesticide exposure, ambient solvent expos-
ure, and mold exposure to take into account, concerning her workplace
environment.

After the woman had initially become ill, she kept going to work, making
her condition worsen and making her have to quit work entirely.  In fact,
 a fellow employee of quit working and then moved to Arizona.  Other
fellow employees mentioned that they were being sickened, too.

The business no longer operates in the former coal tar research center.
Moreover, a large corporation was involved in this matter, despite the
fact that the antics of  a small fly-by-night business are described.   In
fact, the corporation's total stockholder equity was marked as being
over eleven billion dollars in 2005.

Her Symptoms

The woman's symptoms included:

[1]  a stinging tongue.
[2]  shortness of  breath.
[3]  burning nasal passages.
[4]  a metallic taste in the mouth.
[5]  an adrenal-like stream throughout her solar plexus.
[6]  headaches accompanied by the bruised feeling at the
         cheekbones and temples.
[7]  ice-like numbness pervading her upper-respiratory
        tract (on specific occasion.)

She detected the presence of particular airborne substances, simply be-
cause she unavoidably tasted them on her tongue.  In fact, one of her
symptoms was the metallic taste in her mouth.   She could no longer go
to the places she used to frequent without becoming symptomatic, be-
ing that a number of  airborne agents would now trigger her ills.  This
included fragrances, engine exhausts, and musty cardboard boxes.

She lived in the American state which, at the time, had the fourth worse
air quality in the United States.  In addition, she had no prior history of
asthma, no history of chronic upper-respiratory ills, and no history of
allergies.

She received the diagnosis of agoraphobia & panic attacks, by a "men-
tal health person."   The corporate attorneys involved in her workman's
comp case asserted that she had no objective medical findings to sup-
port her claims.   However, an allergist and immunologist gave her the
diagnoses of  Asthma, Rhinitis, and Chemical Sensitivities.  Meanwhile
a cytopathologist gave her the additional diagnosis of  Reactive Hyper-
plasia.   In fact, in emergency room settings, she received the Asthma
and Rhinitis diagnosis.   Yet, assertions of mental illness had been set
forth on record and asserted in court depositions as the cause of  her
ills.   The assertions were significantly weakened in less than an hour. 

Grossly Enlarged Turbinates, for Starters

On October 13, 2005, a fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam was per-
formed on her.  The exam was conducted by an ear nose throat and
allergy specialist who also happened to be a fellow of the American
College of  Surgeons.   The woman who was said to have no objec-
tive medical findings to support her symptoms was found to have:

[1]  postauricular adenopathy.
[2]  grossly enlarged turbinates.
[3]  shoddy posterior cervical adenopathy
[4]  some erythematous changes of the uvula.
[5]  some mild edema of the true vocal cords.
[6]  thickened coating over the dorsum of  the tongue.

The physician's impressions, as are stated on record, were:

[1]  multiple chemical and irritant sensitivities.
[2]  rhinitis and turbinate hypertrophy.
[3]  glossitis (tongue inflammation).

The conclusion is that, whatever be the medical condition this lady has,
it is one of  a physical origin and mechanism.   If she were not made ill
from workplace exposure, then she was made ill by some other physi-
cal cause. 

Gruntled Breathing and Rales Were Already Observed

The story isn't over, of course.   Objective medical findings had been
entered into her records even before the October exam.  She was doc-
umented as having "gruntled breathing" during an ER visit.   She was
also recorded as having wheezed and crackled during other ones. In
fact, she already was found to have adenopathy.  Plus, tachycardia,
erythema of  the oropharynx, and hypopotassemia had also been
entered into her medical records before the October 13th rhinolaryngo-
scopy.   Yet, she was branded with the "mental illness stigma," by the
corporate defense attorneys and one independent medical examiner
hired by the antagonistic corporation.

Furthermore, after she had become ill, she tested severely positive for
dust mites and no other high weight molecular agent (such as ragweed,
tree pollen, etc.)   Yet, she has no prior history of  allergies.  Now, she
was exposed to inordinate amounts of  dust at her former place of  work,
and a person can become sensitized to dust mites.   After all, there exist
cases where barn workers became sensitized to storage mites.

The account of  the chemically sensitive woman who has over a dozen
objective medical findings attached to her medical records can be ac-
cessed by clicking on the web link provided directly below. 

Corporate Welfare: Government paying for illnesses caused by corporations.

The Icy Numbing 

Chemical Exposure During Testing is Often a Necessity

There is one thing to note about a plurality of chemical sensitivity con-
ditions.   In order to acquire objective medical findings, you have to 
be examined while exposed to a chemical agent that assails you.  In
fact, you have to be tested /examined while symptomatic.  You will 
not acquire objective medical findings in a vaccuum, in most testing.

In light of this, it was not an unheard event for a chemically sensitive
patient to be found hunched over a waste basket after having been
administered a skin prick test.  Furthermore, patch testing has result-
ed in a few occasions of anaphylaxis, and being made symptomatic
before a rhinolaryngoscopic exam is not a painless event.   Moreov-
er, the inhalation challenge test that measures FEV1 and the such is
not recommended for those who are extremely hyperresponsive.

If the Detractors of  MCS Admit to Even One Objective
Medical Finding in any Type of Chemically Sensitive
Patient, the Effect of their Propaganda Will Be Diluted


If the detractors of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity disclose even one ob-
jective medical finding in chemically sensitive patients, they will risk ex-
tinguishing the disrespect and indifference that their literature serves to
incite.    This will incline people to take a very respectful view of envi-
ronmental illness.   In learning that there exists a spectrum of chemical-
specific, case-specific, single systemic, and systemic forms of chemical
sensitivity have already been found to exist, the public will surmise that
it will only a matter of  time before the controversy involving Multiple
Chemical Sensitivity will be resolved.  In light of this, a list of objective
medical findings in chemically sensitive patients is posted below:

Objective Medical Findings in the Chemically Sensitive

 Bronchial hyperresponsiveness in inhalation challenge testing.
         This includes things such as the drop in FEV1:
      Forced Expiratory Volume after 1 second of time.

        Objective skin whealing resulting from skin testing;
   See the article in Part 1, titled, Visible & Measurable
          Wheals Have Been Repeatedly Documented
.

   Simultaneous release of Leukotriene B4 and Interleukin-8;
    (LTB4 is a chemokine.  IL-8 is a toxin to neutrophils.)

     Permeability of upper-respiratory epithelial cell junctions;
      found in biopsy studies, via the electron micrograph

       Abnormal liver function in the absense of viral infection.

         Exorbitant presence of  n-acetyl-benzoquinoniemine;
            a toxic liver metabolite associated with P450
            cytochrome inducers such as acetaminophen.


             Paradoxical adduction of the true vocal cords.

                Testing positive in traditional patch testing.

                     Peripheral nerve fiber proliferation.

                       Nasal and/or laryngeal erythema.

                        Turbinate swelling/hypertrophy.

                         Edema of the true vocal cords.

                              Lymphocytic infiltrates.

                               Glandular hyperplasia.

                                     Angioedema.

                                      Anaphylaxis.

                                       Dermatitis.

Note 1:  There are fiber optic rhinolaryngoscopic exam find-
              ings that were not posted above.  In order to read
             of  the additional findings, see:  Rhinolaryngoscopic
             Examination of Patients with Multiple Chemical 
            Sensitivity Syndrome, found at:
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8452394

Note 2:  There are also instances of hematotoxicity triggered
             by nontoxic benzene exposure.  See:  Hematotoxcity
             in workers exposed to low levels of benzene, found
             at:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15576619

Note 3:  There is more that can be included, but the afore-
              mentioned things should suffice in proving a point.
              _____________________________________