- Title: BELGIUM / FRANCE: Is perfume safe? What REACH means for consumers
- Date: 17th November 2005
- Summary: BRUSSELS, BELGIUM (NOVEMBER 16 2005) (REUTERS) TWO WOMEN LOOKING AT PERFUMES IN DEPARTMENT STORE 'PURE POISON' PERFUME BOTTLE FROM DIOR, ON THE SHELF/ POISON SHOWER GEL ON THE SHELF 'LE BAISER DU DRAGON' (THE DRAGON'S KISS) PERFUME FROM CARTIER ON THE SHELF 'LE MALE' PERFUME FROM JEAN PAUL GAUTIER ON THE SHELF
- Embargoed: 2nd December 2005 12:00
- Keywords:
- Topics: European Union,Economic News
- Reuters ID: LVA8GSVCUJOHCSYE7AZSTWWUK190
- Story Text: The European Parliament sought on Thursday (November 17) to protect people from toxic substances, backing a landmark new law that for years pitted Europe's chemicals industry against environmental groups. Lawmakers voted in favour of an amended bill on Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH), designed to make companies prove that substances in everyday products like cars, computers or paint are safe. So what does REACH mean in every day life? Perfume may provide clarification. There may be more truth in perfume labels than we thought: 'Poison', 'The Dragon's Kiss' and 'Le Male' all contain toxic chemicals that are bad for your health say environmentalists Greenpeace. The non governmental organisation researched 36 well known designer brands including Dior, Cartier, Jean Paul Gautier and Chanel and found virtually all of them contained phthalates and synthetic musks. As the perfume industry makes clear, these chemicals are not dangerous when sprayed in one single dose. But what Greenpeace found is that when used repeatedly and over long periods of time they can accumulate in the body and be flushed into the water supply where they tend to persist and can cause serious health problems. Phthalate esters and synthetic musks belong to a group of contaminants known as bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) many of which are slow to break down in the environment. For example, another Greenpeace study showed rainwater in the Netherlands contained synthetic musk compounds including nitromusk musk ambrette, banned in the EU since 1995. They were found at 34 percent of the rainwater collection points suggesting long term environmental persistence. The report says these perfumes "could substantially contribute to individual's daily exposure to chemicals, some of which have already been recorded as contaminants in blood and breast milk". They add that there is also increasing evidence of potential endocrine-disrupting properties for certain musk compounds, essential in the manufacturing of perfumes. But none of the key chemical ingredients are listed on the perfume bottles leaving shoppers bemused about the potential health risks. One Belgian shopper looking for christmas presents in one of Brussels' largest department stores says the same rules should apply to cosmetics as with food labelling so that shoppers can have a choice. "Yes, as with food we should know what's in it so we can know ourselves whether to buy this product or that one," said Saida. Labelling is one of the issues which was on the table in Strasbourg this week when MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) discussed the draft bill on Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) after years of haggling and debate. Pressure groups see customer information as one small but crucial step towards pressuring the perfume industry into ditching the use of dangerous chemicals. Larry Wood, an American in Brussels, said he had purchased every perfume in the shop at least once in his life. Yet he had no idea they may contain chemicals he needed to be wary of. "I actually had no idea. Absolutely. I have heard people that had some allergies towards specific kind of products but not dangerous. I guess it would be nice to know what kind of danger it would pose. If it's long term or short term," Wood said. But there are good reasons why the perfume industry would prefer to keep the magic ingredients of their very expensive products a trade secret. "The answer? No, I would not buy it. If I knew there were toxic products in it I would not buy it," said another Belgian shopper, Madame Tirot. Greenpeace says customers need to know what they are buying and should be more demanding of industry. But more importantly all the chemicals used in products that come in direct contact with us and the environment should be tested for their safety and their contents changed if they are found to be dangerous. Greenpeace Belgium campaigns director Wendle Trio says phthalates and synthetic musks represent just a few of the chemicals used in fragrances and cosmetics. The others remain largely unknown. "Well, definitely customers should be more demanding and what they should demand for is a policy from the companies that produce these perfumes because nobody is capable to know all of the details of all the products that are in these perfumes and so we should get a policy from the companies that they substitute hazardous chemicals by safer alternatives if these are available on the market," he said. REACH can begin to answer this problem. It is designed to protect people from the adverse effects of chemicals found in a wide range of products. But the bill approved on Thursday (November 17) included a compromise that largely reduced the number of chemicals required to be tested. This was done in the drive to get approval in the EU legislature - key political groups agreed on changes to reduce the number of substances in the low-tonnage category that would require tests. Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Green Party are all campaigning against what they see as the watering-down of the legislation rendering it too weak to address the real problem of toxic pollution from everyday products. Yet support from the EU's executive Commission, the original author of the bill with powers to accept or reject amendments, is crucial for REACH to move on in the EU legislative process. REACH would force chemical makers to register the properties of substances with a central EU database. Those with highest concern, such as carcinogens, would require authorisation to be used. Lawmakers also supported a measure that would force firms to substitute safe chemicals for hazardous ones when alternatives are available. Germany, which has the largest chemical industry, succeeded in delaying a decision among member states scheduled for later this month. However Britain still plans to obtain a deal before its presidency concludes at the end of 2005. Some perfume companies are already responding to increasing consumer awareness and higher demand for more individual and natural products. Senteurs D'ailleurs in Brussels specialises in the niche market of exclusive perfumes for the discerning shopper looking for something different and more individual. If REACH succeeds, this exclusive niche market could pave the way for the mass produced perfumes of the future as they contain a little less chemicals and a little more essential essences. But, as perfume consultant Nathalie Grainger explains, there is as of yet no way of producing a chemical-free fragrance. "If you were to have a 100 percent natural perfume it would stay stable for a matter of hours, maximum. You need something to stabilise the perfume so that it actually stays intact on the skin and it doesn't evaporate or go off," Grainger said. Popular scents such as Lilly of the valley, violet and mimosa have to be reproduced in a laboratory environment Grainger said because their perfume dies as soon as the flowers are cut. As for natural musk, it is derived from deer gland which is now an illegal procedure. "You can no longer kill an animal in order to extract musk to stabilise a perfume so that has to be something that is synthetically produced," Grainger said. Grainger says there is a trend towards buying more natural and exclusive perfumes which are not necessarily more expensive than the designer brands found in larger department stores although that is mostly due to the fact that these niche market perfumes do not lavish a large part of their profits on aggressive advertising. Perfume manufacturers insist that none of their products are dangerous to people's health and have, by and large, endorsed the principle of getting the chemicals used in their products tested for safety. The fragrance industry is worth billions of dollars, not only because of the high cost of the end product and the widening world market, but also because of the related chemical companies that supply the synthetic products needed to manufacture them. But it does worry that REACH could cost them their profits by forcing them to substitute core ingredients such as the potentially dangerous phthalates Greenpeace found in brands such as Van Gils, Ralph Lauren's Polo Blue, Cartier's 'Baiser du Dragon' and Coty's Celine Dion, amongst others. The European Commission forecasts REACH will cost the whole chemical industry 2.3 billion euros (2.8 billion U.S. dollars) over 11 years. But it also says that the health benefits gained from REACH would be worth 50 billion euros over 30 years According to industry group CEFIC the EU's chemical industry had sales of 586 billion euros in 2004 making it leading chemicals producing area in the world followed by Asia and the US. Germany is Europe's largest chemicals producer with industry giants such as BASF and Bayer.
- Copyright Holder: REUTERS
- Copyright Notice: (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2014. Open For Restrictions - http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp
- Usage Terms/Restrictions: None