Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Dermal Safety Testing ** Cocoa Absolute

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Thank you for your thoughts, Butch

Sandy

 

In , Butch Owen <butchbsi@s...> wrote:

> Hey Sandy,

>

> > Butch, Kathleen and Martin

> > Thank you for the answers. Seems to be some conflicting views on use

> > in products that go on the skin.

>

> Yes .. if its not used in commercial products then its not tested by the

> cosmetics or flavoring industry and published by the omnipotent

> agencies.

>

> > Does that mean it shouldn't be used in those 'edible oil' products

> > either..*snickering*

>

> Not at all. ;-p

>

> > Martin says " There is no skin safety data and therefore to use it for

> > any skin contact purposes would be foolish "

>

> Martin says my smoking and drinking Kentucky Bourbon is foolish too.

> And he might be right .. but I'm a helluva lot more healthy than most

> folks I know .. or maybe its more accurate to say 99% of those I know.

> Does that mean I think folks should smoke? Nope! But they should

> oughta have a toddy of Kentucky Bourbon now and then. ;-p

>

> If in AT, we only used those oils that have skin safety data for dermal

> application then around 65-70% of the oils available would be verboten.

> And we should not hold our breaths waiting for dermal testing simply

> because its only done if a company wants to produce a commercial skin

> care product. Almost without exception, this information is available

> from cosmetics/perfumery companies and compiled by R.I.F.M. (Research

> Institute for Fragrance Materials) and their sister organization the

> I.F.R.A. (International Fragrance Research Association).

>

> But .. is it to say that because they haven't said X number of folks

> didn't show signs of irritation, sensitization or Mad Cow Disease that

> we should not use the product? Martin says yes .. I say its somewhere

> twixt maybe and no.

>

> No doubt in my mind that those cats will publish something one of these

> days .. or find it published elsewhere because I KNOW that the largest

> users of Cocoa Absolute is the French Cosmetics/Flavorings Industry.

> I know that the manager of the French company I visited this summer,

> who showed me some of the Cocoa Concrete being shipped to his parent

> company in France, works for a French Perfumery Company.

>

> > Butch says " Perfume, soap, lip balms and diffusing is the normal

> > method of use. "

> > Sandy

>

> That's not all Butch said .. you left out an important part.

>

> I wrote:

>

> > I don't USE Cocoa Absolute .. I just sell it .. but from what buyers

> > tell me about usage I can answer some of this.

> > Perfume, soap, lip balms and diffusing is the normal method of use.

>

> And that's a fact. ;-p

>

> But there is one question you asked that neither Martin or I answered:

>

> > Are there any problems using it in skin, lip, massage, etc. products?

>

> Martin wrote that its foolish cause its not tested .. maybe that is an

> answer. My answer is a question. WHO do you know .. or have you EVER

> HEARD .. of a problem using Cocoa Absolute on skin? I have not.

>

> So .. its your call if you want to wait for the R.I.F.M. or I.F.R.A to

> publish something saying this or that has been tested for dermal use.

> For that matter .. more than half the EO used in Aromatherapy for other

> than dermal use have had NO FORM OF TESTING .. NONE WHATSOEVER!!

>

> I think there is a big difference in saying something is UNSAFE and

> saying something has not been tested. I doubt that Jello or Banana

> Pudding or Chocolate Covered Cherry Candy has been tested for dermal

> application either .. but those of you who have raised little rugrats

> know they eat half of it and wear the other half. ;-)

>

> One of my resolutions for 2004 was to try to lean more toward dealing

> with proven hazards rather than unproven potential problems. I firmly

> believe in the safety limits outlined in Plant Aromatics because they

> are the results of testing http://www.AV-AT.com/manual01.html

>

> But I'm not ready to accept that an oil should not be used dermally

> because the R.I.F.M. or I.F.R.A. hasn't blessed it .. just as didn't

> accept that Chiropractors were useless back when the AMA refused to

> recognize them .. or that Psychometry is a hoax because its not proven

> to the scientific geeks .. or that Aromatherapy does not work because

> it is not recognized by the FDA, AMA, AKC and UN Security Council.

>

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Sandy,

 

> Butch, Kathleen and Martin

> Thank you for the answers. Seems to be some conflicting views on use

> in products that go on the skin.

 

Yes .. if its not used in commercial products then its not tested by the

cosmetics or flavoring industry and published by the omnipotent

agencies.

 

> Does that mean it shouldn't be used in those 'edible oil' products

> either..*snickering*

 

Not at all. ;-p

 

> Martin says " There is no skin safety data and therefore to use it for

> any skin contact purposes would be foolish "

 

Martin says my smoking and drinking Kentucky Bourbon is foolish too.

And he might be right .. but I'm a helluva lot more healthy than most

folks I know .. or maybe its more accurate to say 99% of those I know.

Does that mean I think folks should smoke? Nope! But they should

oughta have a toddy of Kentucky Bourbon now and then. ;-p

 

If in AT, we only used those oils that have skin safety data for dermal

application then around 65-70% of the oils available would be verboten.

And we should not hold our breaths waiting for dermal testing simply

because its only done if a company wants to produce a commercial skin

care product. Almost without exception, this information is available

from cosmetics/perfumery companies and compiled by R.I.F.M. (Research

Institute for Fragrance Materials) and their sister organization the

I.F.R.A. (International Fragrance Research Association).

 

But .. is it to say that because they haven't said X number of folks

didn't show signs of irritation, sensitization or Mad Cow Disease that

we should not use the product? Martin says yes .. I say its somewhere

twixt maybe and no.

 

No doubt in my mind that those cats will publish something one of these

days .. or find it published elsewhere because I KNOW that the largest

users of Cocoa Absolute is the French Cosmetics/Flavorings Industry.

I know that the manager of the French company I visited this summer,

who showed me some of the Cocoa Concrete being shipped to his parent

company in France, works for a French Perfumery Company.

 

> Butch says " Perfume, soap, lip balms and diffusing is the normal

> method of use. "

> Sandy

 

That's not all Butch said .. you left out an important part.

 

I wrote:

 

> I don't USE Cocoa Absolute .. I just sell it .. but from what buyers

> tell me about usage I can answer some of this.

> Perfume, soap, lip balms and diffusing is the normal method of use.

 

And that's a fact. ;-p

 

But there is one question you asked that neither Martin or I answered:

 

> Are there any problems using it in skin, lip, massage, etc. products?

 

Martin wrote that its foolish cause its not tested .. maybe that is an

answer. My answer is a question. WHO do you know .. or have you EVER

HEARD .. of a problem using Cocoa Absolute on skin? I have not.

 

So .. its your call if you want to wait for the R.I.F.M. or I.F.R.A to

publish something saying this or that has been tested for dermal use.

For that matter .. more than half the EO used in Aromatherapy for other

than dermal use have had NO FORM OF TESTING .. NONE WHATSOEVER!!

 

I think there is a big difference in saying something is UNSAFE and

saying something has not been tested. I doubt that Jello or Banana

Pudding or Chocolate Covered Cherry Candy has been tested for dermal

application either .. but those of you who have raised little rugrats

know they eat half of it and wear the other half. ;-)

 

One of my resolutions for 2004 was to try to lean more toward dealing

with proven hazards rather than unproven potential problems. I firmly

believe in the safety limits outlined in Plant Aromatics because they

are the results of testing http://www.AV-AT.com/manual01.html

 

But I'm not ready to accept that an oil should not be used dermally

because the R.I.F.M. or I.F.R.A. hasn't blessed it .. just as didn't

accept that Chiropractors were useless back when the AMA refused to

recognize them .. or that Psychometry is a hoax because its not proven

to the scientific geeks .. or that Aromatherapy does not work because

it is not recognized by the FDA, AMA, AKC and UN Security Council.

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...