Safe Use of EO/FO - Sensitization

[Guest guest]

Hey Selene,

 

> dumb Question time.

> EO= essential oil?

> FO= fragrane oil?

 

Only dumb question is the unasked question. ;-)

 

EO is correct .. FO is Fragrance Oil.

 

> What is the difference?

 

EO is a natural extraction from a plant .. FO is a man made synthetic.

 

> are eo's/fo's ok for some things and not others?

 

Not in my book. Its expected that the major increase in MCS (Multiple

Chemical Sensitivity) that has been noted in the last 2+ generations is

due to exposure to synthetics.

 

> can they be used interchangeabley in recipes??

 

In some cases .. like soap .. but I would not. We can't expect any

physiological gain from an FO .. might get some psychological or

emotional gain if we like the odor. I often use the example of horse

manure .. soak some in water and the odor of the water might bring about

emotional euphoria for a feller who was raised on a ranch in Texas but

now lives in the Big Apple.

 

> Do some people become sensitive to them?

 

Matter of fact. I'm sensitized to a/some chemicals in " Just For Men. "

 

> Should they not be used from the bottle directly on the skin???

 

I can't speak for FOs .. one must read the directions and I would hope

that it will advise to not do that .. I've never had a bottle of FO in

my hand so I don't know for sure. As for EO .. NEVER DO IT .. under NO

CIRCUMSTANCES. That's what the Safety Manual " Plant Aromatics " covers

http://www.av-at.com/plantaromaticsavnp.html

 

We can rarely learn the chemical composition of an FO because the

manufacturers have lobbied (and succeeded) in having their ingredients

listed as " trade secrets " . But we can know what is in an EO by seeing

the GC or GC/MS.

 

> Thank you

> Selene

> She Who Watches and Waits

> windancr

 

Welcome fer'shur .. have a gud'un .. and keep smiling. :-)

 

Butch http://www.AV-AT.com

 

> On 9/20/05 at 10:13 AM Margaret Helm-Duell wrote:

>

>>I was one of the first people to say something to one of the

>>that what written on neat use of eo's. It wasn't lengthy,

>>but rather short and sweet.