Reference Books vs AT Books ** Rose Question ** II

[Guest guest]

Hey Debbie,

 

> Thanks, as always Butch!

 

Welcome you are .. as always. ;-p Some of you are gonna think my reply

is too lengthy .. and maybe it is, but I have this problem about making

statements in a vaccum without explaining WHY .. I don't think learning

comes from memorizing facts .. it comes from understanding why facts are

facts. And there is nothing mystical about aromatherapy .. the more you

learn the more understanding you get and the more you begin to question

previously learned info. If you really want to learn AT and about EO

then you need to approach it with an open and inquiring mind .. and not

by becoming mesmerized by what you read in this or that book.

 

So its a long reply .. maybe cause I'm feeling ornary today. ;-p

 

> What confuses me is that in the back of her book, on pg.404, both the

> Moroccan and the Bulgarian are listed as rose damascena, which is why

> I had the question in the first place. Do you think that is just a

> misprint?

 

Might be a misprint .. might be she doesn't know the difference. I see

that she mentions Bulgarian Rosa damascena but doesn't mention Turkish

Rosa damascena .. though the Turks produce 5 X more than the Bulgarians.

 

I notice that she calls Patchouli " Pogostemon patchouli " and I've never

heard of that .. its " Pogostemom cablin " as far as I know.

 

I notice that she refers to Pimento as " Pimenta officinalis " .. which is

a second botanical handle for " Pimenta dioica " .. or .. ALLSPICE .. but

she doesn't distingish between that and West Indian Bay (often called

Bay Rum) which is named " Pimenta racemosa " or " Pimenta acris, " which can

lead to confusion and use of the wrong oil by many folks.

 

I notice she has Violet Leaves (Viola odorata) listed under Essential

Oils and though there are UNFOUNDED rumors of such an oil existing, I

bet you won't find anyone who has ever had any cause its not practical

or commercially efficient to distill it; its produced through solvent

extraction as an Absolute and an Absolute is NOT an Essential Oil.

 

I'll stop there and just say that folks who publish expose their work to

critique .. and critique shouldn't be taken as a slam dunk.

 

Its not unusual to find writers reaching beyond their area of expertise.

And keep in mind that real experts in a subject NEVER try to write a

" Complete " book on anything. They limit the subject and deal with it

effectively. I'm not going to knock writers for their errors because

writing a book is an undertaking I'm not willing to accept, but I will

critique if asked to do so and I know its easier to critique a book than

to write one. But I say again that unreferenced books that merely

regurgitate previously published unreferenced material help keep the

cottage industry of AT in Never-Never Land. And a Bibliographys are NOT

references .. the way they're listed in most AT books would not even be

accepted for a 101 freshman course in the worst college around.

 

In March 2002 .. on this list .. I wrote that if you use Worwood's book

to compile a collection of info on EOs, you got a rough job cut out for

you .. especially when it comes to the Geraniums or Pelargoniums .. fact

is, somewhere she lists Geranium as a mineral and she rarely discusses

species or types of the P. graveolens. The first error is obviously an

oversight or misprint.. but the latter?

 

A reference book contains references .. but references to previously

published books that contain no references does not make a reference

book - it makes a novel. Some aromatherapy teachers use the novels as

a basis for the continuation of misinformation, disinformation, urban

rumor .. and worse yet, plain old greedy marketing hype .. :-(

 

Rarely is an AT book out and out worthless .. but there are exceptions

to this .. some are worthless. But they are normally regurgitations or

paraphrasing of previously published data. And continuance or bad info

keeps the cottage-industry of AT from gaining credibility.

 

I wrote yesterday .. we don't gotta be experts on the subject to write

an Aromatherapy book .. and unless we put out dangerous info we can't

really be criticized cause there are no universal standards upon which

to base criticism. This is not true for essential oils and hydrosols ..

if somebody wants to write on them they better do their homework first.

 

I say again .. the closest we can get to accurate information on EOs is

Sylla Shepherd-Hanger's Aromatherapy Practitioner Reference Manual in

two volumes .. its not perfect but its tbe best around and you can see

it and order it at http://www.AV-AT.com/manual01.html

 

The only publication on scientifically proven safe dilutions of EOs is

Martin Watt's Plant Aromatics. The old edition was $75 .. I published

the new, revised edition and offer it for $43.90 .. it can now be seen

and ordered at URL http://www.av-at.com/plantaromaticsavnp.html

 

And if you are interested in taking an Aromatherapy correspondence

course, there is one by Martin Watt that has received raves from those

who have taken it .. even from those who previously took other courses.

If you wanna pay by credit card you can go through me for a registration

number and receive a 10% discount on Option 1 of the course. If you own

Plant Aromatics (Full-Version) you get an additional $13 discount as the

course includes a Mini-Version. You can review the course at this URL

http://www.aromamedical.demon.co.uk/course/coursedetails.html

 

> I really think the recipe has some merit, b/c Worwood's main area of

> research expertise is aromatherapy and its effect of endometriosis and

> infertility, so there is a lot of research behind her blends in this

> area.

 

Maybe .. but if you go on some other lists .. like Idma where you find a

lot of folks who are so-called professional aromatherapists and teachers

of AT .. and make the same statement .. you might get some disagreement.

 

> Bottom line -- it sounds like you are saying that the damascena, no

> matter where it is from, has a higher amount of the benefical

> chemicals in its profile, if I am reading this correctly.

 

No m'am .. I didn't say that. There will be slight differences in the

chemical profiles of EO from different Origins .. and its supposed that

different profiles result in different therapeutic capabilities. I'm

not going to say that more or less of this or that chemical component is

gonna be more beneficial for this or that. Somebody says they know WHY

a particular oil is good for a particular ailment they're dancing twixt

smoke and mirrors. Natural synergies .. and I am NOT talking about the

so-called synergies folks get by mixing this and that EO .. are perfect.

Thousands of years of natural selection and survival of the fittest have

created perfect organisms. Chemists/researchers can isolate specific

chemicals and say this or that chemical did this or that .. but it means

nothing when you look at the whole oil .. which is what we are dealing

with if we stay in the realm of natural. Even with in vivo and in vitro

testing we can only determine if results are positive/negative through

observation .. not through quantification.

 

That might be translated as meaning .. look at the laundry lists of

blends of EO and try them .. as long as levels of use are not in the

area of toxicity .. or the oils mentioned are not otherwise harmful,

then you might gain benifits from that blend. Healing can be more than

kicking Big Bad Bug Butts .. it can come via psychological or emotional

healing. State of mind is something they know is important but they

don't know why. I miss the days of my youth .. I live in a city now and

from time to time I'd love to have a blend of Horse Manure Absolute and

Alfalfa Hay EO .. with maybe a tincture of Tobacco Barn thrown in. ;-p

 

And my final statement is one that would draw disagreement from most of

the aromatherapy practitioners .. that is that I think there is a lot of

hype around in this and that blend because the so-called synergistic

effects .. that is, the whole being greater than the sum of the parts,

is not proveable except through observation and I believe that one can

get the same or better result from a single oil .. or a mix or a couple

of oils. My statement is sacrilege or kicking the sacred cow of AT in

that it allows us to use less oil .. which results in less sales. ;-p

 

> Debbie

> deb

> Cure your winter blues with some springy soaps!

> http://www.debrasrhapsody.com/rhapsody/soaps.shtml

 

Y'all keep smiling, Butch http://www.AV-AT.com

 

Bulk/Wholesale/Retail GC Tested EO, Rose Otto, Hydrosols and other nice

things sent from our store in downtown Friendsville, MD. Pop: 600