THE CASE AGAINST FRAGRANCE
KATE GRENVILLE
Text Publishing, 2017, 198
pages
Review by Phil Shannon
The fragrance industry really
gets up Kate Grenville’s nose. The Australian
novelist has gradually worked out that artificially-scented consumer products,
from high-end perfume to toilet cleaner, were the cause of her debilitating
headaches and wooziness. In The Case Against Fragrance, Grenville
discovers that synthetic scent molecules literally get up the nose and attach
themselves to nerve receptors causing all manner of medical mayhem in the brain
and nervous system.
Scented products such as cosmetics,
shampoo, soap, after-shave, moisturiser, laundry detergents, cleaning products
and air fresheners have been scientifically implicated in a vast suite of
health problems including migraines (around half of sufferers have them
triggered by fragrance), sore eyes, breathing difficulties, asthma, skin rashes,
fatigue and, with high enough fragrance doses over time, some cancers. Over a third of all people report having some
sort of health problem from fragrance. The
problems are most acute, and potentially fatal, in the growing population of clinically-diagnosed
chemical sensitivity sufferers like Grenville.
Avoidance of fragrance is
virtually impossible - fragrances used
by other people or in air-conditioned buildings permeate the public air space, including
public transport, offices, concert venues, restaurants and shopping centres.
None of this worries the
fragrance industry, however. Artificial scents
are cheap to synthesise and have a large manufacturers’ market. They are not subject to profit-thinning
regulation - time-consuming and expensive safety testing of the chemical
ingredients of fragrances is avoided when the only safety watchdog is the
industry itself which magically transmutes conflict of interest between sales
and safety to a rewarding confluence of interest.
Grenville devotes much of her
book to unsnarling the technical tangle of polysyllabic alpha-numeric molecular
chemical compounds and their heath effects, and advocates a policy of using ‘fragrance-free’
products, but only occasionally touches on broader corporate and political
issues.
Nevertheless, her disgust with
the industry is evident. However nice
the product smells, the fragrance industry is malodorous. It produces an entirely unnecessary product,
wastes the valuable skills of many scientists and condemns huge numbers of
consumers to ill-health in known and as-yet-unknown ways, all in the pursuit of
money-making. What really stinks,
however, is the capitalist economic and political system which allows it to
happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment