What do you think?
Rate this book
The Case Against Fragrance
Kate Grenville had always associated perfume with elegance and beauty. Then the headaches started.
Like perhaps a quarter of the population, Grenville reacts badly to the artificial fragrances around us: other people’s perfumes, and all those scented cosmetics, cleaning products and air fresheners. On a book tour in 2015, dogged by ill health, she started wondering: what’s in fragrance? Who tests it for safety? What does it do to people?
The more Grenville investigated, the more she felt this was a story that should be told. The chemicals in fragrance can be linked not only to short-term problems like headaches and asthma, but to long-term ones like hormone disruption and cancer. Yet products can be released onto the market without testing. They’re regulated only by the same people who make and sell them. And the ingredients don’t even have to be named on the label.
This book is based on careful research into the science of scent and the power of the fragrance industry. But, as you’d expect from an acclaimed novelist, it’s also accessible and personal. The Case Against Fragrance will make you see—and smell—the world differently.
Like perhaps a quarter of the population, Grenville reacts badly to the artificial fragrances around us: other people’s perfumes, and all those scented cosmetics, cleaning products and air fresheners. On a book tour in 2015, dogged by ill health, she started wondering: what’s in fragrance? Who tests it for safety? What does it do to people?
The more Grenville investigated, the more she felt this was a story that should be told. The chemicals in fragrance can be linked not only to short-term problems like headaches and asthma, but to long-term ones like hormone disruption and cancer. Yet products can be released onto the market without testing. They’re regulated only by the same people who make and sell them. And the ingredients don’t even have to be named on the label.
This book is based on careful research into the science of scent and the power of the fragrance industry. But, as you’d expect from an acclaimed novelist, it’s also accessible and personal. The Case Against Fragrance will make you see—and smell—the world differently.
208 pages, Paperback
First published January 30, 2017
28 people are currently reading
905 people want to read
About the author
Kate Grenville
39 books831 followersKate Grenville is one of Australia's best-known authors. She's published eight books of fiction and four books about the writing process. Her best-known works are the international best-seller The Secret River, The Idea of Perfection, The Lieutenant and Lilian's Story (details about all Kate Grenville's books are elsewhere on this site). Her novels have won many awards both in Australia and the UK, several have been made into major feature films, and all have been translated into European and Asian languages.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews
Read
January 11, 2018Reading this book made me afraid to breathe.
October 6, 2017
Kate Grenville looks at the way artificial fragrances have negatively impacted her life. Like many people, Kate gets migraines from perfume, cleaning products and other artificial fragrances. This is her first scientifically researched non-fiction book that looks into the negative health effects of wearing––and being surrounded by––fragrances.
This book will make you hyper-aware of the everyday products that unnecessarily contain fragrances–washing powders, bin liners, air fresheners, deodorants. You will get on a train and realise how many people are wearing perfume and, if you’re an unlucky person like Kate, start to feel a headache coming on.
What’s interesting about The Case Against Fragrance is that so many people are affected in this way. Kate uses examples from people around the world where they suffer from mild hay fever-like allergies to being hospitalised because they can’t breathe.
Kate’s research is astounding, particularly because there was so little to go on in the first place. She talks about social effects–that some workplaces have implemented anti-fragrance policies. She talks about health consequences–that we don’t actually know what our bodies are absorbing and what’s happening to us. And she talks about her own navigation through workplaces, book tours and everyday life.
Kate writes about her own experiences as well as her social and scientific research on the history of fragrances and their health effects. This book is engaging, thought-provoking and will make you think twice about spraying perfume each morning.
‘One spritz of aftershave or perfume can leave other people retching and clutching their heads—you never see that in the ads.’
Kaz Cooke
‘Beginning with her own physical reaction to fragrance that begins with a headache a lot of us know ourselves, she investigates the fragrance industry and its side-effects and interweaves these facts with the personal to create an accessible work of non-fiction.’
ArtsHub
‘By 2015, Grenville was getting headaches from those stinky diffusers in taxis, from washing powder, from scented candles, and was sprinting through hotel foyers with a scarf over her nose. But instead of going mad, Grenville did what she does best: fixed her intelligent and discerning eye on the problem. This reader started out sceptical and ended up convinced: we have hardly any idea what goes into the manufactured smells we surround ourselves with. Read this, and gasp.’
Courier Mail
‘This book is based on careful research into the science of scent and the power of the fragrance industry. But, as you’d expect from an acclaimed novelist, it’s also accessible and personal.’
Better Read Than Dead
‘Face-dense and extensively referenced, the book is a delight to read and never gets bogged down…While some of the science has been simplified, the book generally conveys the sense of it correctly…Well developed and thoughtful. Read The Case Against Fragrance and you will never think about fragrance in the same way again. If you have been suffering fragrance in silence, you will know you are not alone.’
Conversation
‘In this appealingly written exploration, Kate uncovers the dark side of the fragrance industry, from the carcinogens in after-shave to the hormone disruptors in perfume that mimic oestrogen.’
Child
‘Readable, interesting and informative.’
Big Book Club
‘Grenville expresses hope though that our society will find solutions to the fragrant violation of personal space based on courtesy and civility rather than on regulation and policy.’
Australian Book Review
‘You may be familiar with Australian novelist Kate Grenville’s work but she enters new territory here. After exposure to perfumes and scents delivered ill-health her way, Grenville got curious as to why…The result is a fascinating (and worrying) exposé of the potentially damaging health effects of fragrances and the laxity of their regulation. Grenville digs into the science of scent as well as the intrigue of a multi-billion-dollar industry and makes it beautifully accessible in the process.’
WellBeing
‘The Orange Prize-winning novelist’s discovery that she reacts badly to the artificial fragrances all around us led her to investigate what is in fragrances, what it does to people and whether it is properly tested for safety…The result is this accessible and personal book on the science of fragrance.’
Bookseller
‘[Grenville] raises valuable questions about the potentially harmful chemicals surrounding us every day and why we so unabashedly live in ignorance of them.’
Reader’s Digest UK, Best New Books to Read This Summer
‘Grenville sets out to unlock the dark science—the volatile compounds, conspiracies and carcinogens—hiding in perfume, the ingredients of which are regularly listed as alcohol, water and the mysterious catch-all “fragrance”.’
New Statesman
‘In some places, though, the danger [of fragrance] is beginning to be taken as seriously as passive smoking 30 years ago…it sounds silly, until you read Kate Grenville’s explosive exposé and wonder why no one ever told you this stuff before.’
Mail on Sunday
‘An accessible, intelligent, seriously researched—and terrifying—book.’
Daily Mail UK
This book will make you hyper-aware of the everyday products that unnecessarily contain fragrances–washing powders, bin liners, air fresheners, deodorants. You will get on a train and realise how many people are wearing perfume and, if you’re an unlucky person like Kate, start to feel a headache coming on.
What’s interesting about The Case Against Fragrance is that so many people are affected in this way. Kate uses examples from people around the world where they suffer from mild hay fever-like allergies to being hospitalised because they can’t breathe.
Kate’s research is astounding, particularly because there was so little to go on in the first place. She talks about social effects–that some workplaces have implemented anti-fragrance policies. She talks about health consequences–that we don’t actually know what our bodies are absorbing and what’s happening to us. And she talks about her own navigation through workplaces, book tours and everyday life.
Kate writes about her own experiences as well as her social and scientific research on the history of fragrances and their health effects. This book is engaging, thought-provoking and will make you think twice about spraying perfume each morning.
‘One spritz of aftershave or perfume can leave other people retching and clutching their heads—you never see that in the ads.’
Kaz Cooke
‘Beginning with her own physical reaction to fragrance that begins with a headache a lot of us know ourselves, she investigates the fragrance industry and its side-effects and interweaves these facts with the personal to create an accessible work of non-fiction.’
ArtsHub
‘By 2015, Grenville was getting headaches from those stinky diffusers in taxis, from washing powder, from scented candles, and was sprinting through hotel foyers with a scarf over her nose. But instead of going mad, Grenville did what she does best: fixed her intelligent and discerning eye on the problem. This reader started out sceptical and ended up convinced: we have hardly any idea what goes into the manufactured smells we surround ourselves with. Read this, and gasp.’
Courier Mail
‘This book is based on careful research into the science of scent and the power of the fragrance industry. But, as you’d expect from an acclaimed novelist, it’s also accessible and personal.’
Better Read Than Dead
‘Face-dense and extensively referenced, the book is a delight to read and never gets bogged down…While some of the science has been simplified, the book generally conveys the sense of it correctly…Well developed and thoughtful. Read The Case Against Fragrance and you will never think about fragrance in the same way again. If you have been suffering fragrance in silence, you will know you are not alone.’
Conversation
‘In this appealingly written exploration, Kate uncovers the dark side of the fragrance industry, from the carcinogens in after-shave to the hormone disruptors in perfume that mimic oestrogen.’
Child
‘Readable, interesting and informative.’
Big Book Club
‘Grenville expresses hope though that our society will find solutions to the fragrant violation of personal space based on courtesy and civility rather than on regulation and policy.’
Australian Book Review
‘You may be familiar with Australian novelist Kate Grenville’s work but she enters new territory here. After exposure to perfumes and scents delivered ill-health her way, Grenville got curious as to why…The result is a fascinating (and worrying) exposé of the potentially damaging health effects of fragrances and the laxity of their regulation. Grenville digs into the science of scent as well as the intrigue of a multi-billion-dollar industry and makes it beautifully accessible in the process.’
WellBeing
‘The Orange Prize-winning novelist’s discovery that she reacts badly to the artificial fragrances all around us led her to investigate what is in fragrances, what it does to people and whether it is properly tested for safety…The result is this accessible and personal book on the science of fragrance.’
Bookseller
‘[Grenville] raises valuable questions about the potentially harmful chemicals surrounding us every day and why we so unabashedly live in ignorance of them.’
Reader’s Digest UK, Best New Books to Read This Summer
‘Grenville sets out to unlock the dark science—the volatile compounds, conspiracies and carcinogens—hiding in perfume, the ingredients of which are regularly listed as alcohol, water and the mysterious catch-all “fragrance”.’
New Statesman
‘In some places, though, the danger [of fragrance] is beginning to be taken as seriously as passive smoking 30 years ago…it sounds silly, until you read Kate Grenville’s explosive exposé and wonder why no one ever told you this stuff before.’
Mail on Sunday
‘An accessible, intelligent, seriously researched—and terrifying—book.’
Daily Mail UK
March 5, 2017
After a painful process to discover her own sensitivity to artificially produced fragrances, Australian author Kate Grenville took herself down the rabbit hole of researching the incidence of sensitivities like hers, winding back through the ways in which these products are concocted and how the changes needed must come from those who use the products (as those who create them are either self-regulating or able to go around any restrictions to remain in the industry.)
There are already plenty of books about this topic - such as "Slow Death By Rubber Duck" - written by science journalists or those who work within the field, and so the real reason I picked this particular book up is that it was written by Kate Grenville. This is already an interesting and worthy subject for further exploration and debate, but I have read enough dry books with citations, so I wanted a writer of Grenville's calibre to bring the argument to life.
This is unfortunately where the book didn't grab me, as I didn't necessarily feel Grenville's argument went far beyond, "Artificially created smells are bad, some people are really sensitive to them, so knock it off." This read more like the extension of a magazine essay on the topic, or at least provided little more than I've heard her say in interviews about her fragrance sensitivity - so as a full length book I think it needed a little more depth.
I'm already won on the argument against fragrance, thanks to other books I've read, not working in an office with other people, having a child prone to eczema and just generally not growing up in an era where wearing perfume was the expectation. In negotiating other fields of daily life with chemicals (such as the various arguments attempted in the anti-vaccination cause) I feel I am not only literate, but also very wary of the "natural = good, unnatural = bad" heuristic that I sometimes feel Grenville is prey to.
For example, it's all well and good to present an intimidating list of chemicals that one finds in the ingredients list of a product - it's another to perhaps explain how those chemical names are constructed, therefore giving readers the tools to understand it all, rather than simply dismissing anything with a complicated list. Grenville quickly alludes to the fact organic chemists use nomenclature that explains their constituents, but not how it works.
(Basically, have you ever known someone with a lot of middle names because the parents were forced to name their child after all the aunts, uncles, grandparents etc? That's how chemical names work - they reveal the bits that make them up, but also how they are joined, which makes a big difference. Technically methanol and ethanol have the same elements but they're bound differently, hence why they're toxic to humans in such completely different doses and ways.)
This is why people keep falling for the, "Ban dihydrogen monoxide" joke - when presented with a scary chemical name, we sometimes forget that "natural" things consist of chemicals we often assign to only man-made things.
What I maybe expected was a little more exploration of how we came to use these artificial fragrances - initially why it was better to use artificial musk than kill deer to smell good. Why it's not enough for clothes and rooms to be clean, they have to smell clean. Why we encourage men and women to need aftershave and perfume to be sophisticated and desirable. Why the product shots of deodorant ads don't simply show someone applying the product in the intended way, but that they must be bathed in an excessive mist. Why we feel it is more polite to knock the next toilet user down with a sickening wave of air freshener than the smell of what we might have done (and the next person might be doing themselves.)
Or we could have had more about Grenville's own thinking and reflecting on the role of fragrance in her life prior to developing the sensitivity - how her own mother used fragrances, how as a woman she was encouraged to use them, etc. There could have been space for how fragrance has been used in literature, as an addition to character (which is why Patrick Suskind's protagonist in "Perfume" was so unusual in having no aroma.)
This is because while it's well and good to frighten people with the scary chemical story, it might also be just as powerful to the argument to analyse why people feel the need to use these products in the first place, to show why they might need to tone it all back. But this is also because as the nitty gritty of the science is outside of Grenville's field of expertise, providing a rich narrative reflection of the world we live in is what Grenville can do best.
There are already plenty of books about this topic - such as "Slow Death By Rubber Duck" - written by science journalists or those who work within the field, and so the real reason I picked this particular book up is that it was written by Kate Grenville. This is already an interesting and worthy subject for further exploration and debate, but I have read enough dry books with citations, so I wanted a writer of Grenville's calibre to bring the argument to life.
This is unfortunately where the book didn't grab me, as I didn't necessarily feel Grenville's argument went far beyond, "Artificially created smells are bad, some people are really sensitive to them, so knock it off." This read more like the extension of a magazine essay on the topic, or at least provided little more than I've heard her say in interviews about her fragrance sensitivity - so as a full length book I think it needed a little more depth.
I'm already won on the argument against fragrance, thanks to other books I've read, not working in an office with other people, having a child prone to eczema and just generally not growing up in an era where wearing perfume was the expectation. In negotiating other fields of daily life with chemicals (such as the various arguments attempted in the anti-vaccination cause) I feel I am not only literate, but also very wary of the "natural = good, unnatural = bad" heuristic that I sometimes feel Grenville is prey to.
For example, it's all well and good to present an intimidating list of chemicals that one finds in the ingredients list of a product - it's another to perhaps explain how those chemical names are constructed, therefore giving readers the tools to understand it all, rather than simply dismissing anything with a complicated list. Grenville quickly alludes to the fact organic chemists use nomenclature that explains their constituents, but not how it works.
(Basically, have you ever known someone with a lot of middle names because the parents were forced to name their child after all the aunts, uncles, grandparents etc? That's how chemical names work - they reveal the bits that make them up, but also how they are joined, which makes a big difference. Technically methanol and ethanol have the same elements but they're bound differently, hence why they're toxic to humans in such completely different doses and ways.)
This is why people keep falling for the, "Ban dihydrogen monoxide" joke - when presented with a scary chemical name, we sometimes forget that "natural" things consist of chemicals we often assign to only man-made things.
What I maybe expected was a little more exploration of how we came to use these artificial fragrances - initially why it was better to use artificial musk than kill deer to smell good. Why it's not enough for clothes and rooms to be clean, they have to smell clean. Why we encourage men and women to need aftershave and perfume to be sophisticated and desirable. Why the product shots of deodorant ads don't simply show someone applying the product in the intended way, but that they must be bathed in an excessive mist. Why we feel it is more polite to knock the next toilet user down with a sickening wave of air freshener than the smell of what we might have done (and the next person might be doing themselves.)
Or we could have had more about Grenville's own thinking and reflecting on the role of fragrance in her life prior to developing the sensitivity - how her own mother used fragrances, how as a woman she was encouraged to use them, etc. There could have been space for how fragrance has been used in literature, as an addition to character (which is why Patrick Suskind's protagonist in "Perfume" was so unusual in having no aroma.)
This is because while it's well and good to frighten people with the scary chemical story, it might also be just as powerful to the argument to analyse why people feel the need to use these products in the first place, to show why they might need to tone it all back. But this is also because as the nitty gritty of the science is outside of Grenville's field of expertise, providing a rich narrative reflection of the world we live in is what Grenville can do best.
October 11, 2017
As someone with an academic background in olfactive chemistry, it shocked me that something like this got published. Doesn't pop science at least fact check? You want to make a case against fragrance that's fine, but you really need a science-literate editor or co-author otherwise you just look stupid. This book has a profound lack of understanding of the basics of organic chemistry let alone human olfaction and the complexities of reaction and sensitisation. There are incredibly liberal interpretations of study results as well as straight-up junk science. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. There are inferences here that are beyond logical leaps into obfuscation. There is also no accounting for dosage and application. Ya, if you inhale an 80% solution of 1-4-dioxane for an hour it will cause liver failure, but it's not bioaccumulating and you don't absorb enough through skin contact to be harmful. The .0001% solution in a fragrance that is airborne for 10 seconds in a sprits isn't going to hurt you. You are at far greater risk driving your car on the interstate with the windows down for an hour breathing in the exhaust fumes or going to a salon to get a keratin treatment or acrylic nails put on.
January 18, 2018
Sentetik kokuyu mümkün olduğunca hayatımdan çıkartacağım.
February 2, 2017
“I hadn’t realised just how hard it was to avoid fragrance in one form or another. But I learned cunning. I sprinted through the scented foyers of hotels with a scarf over my nose. In cabs I sat in the back, asked the driver to remove the fragrance diffuser, opened the window and stuck my head into the slipstream like a dog, arriving bedraggled and windblown”
The Case Against Fragrance is the second non-fiction book by award-winning Australian novelist, Kate Grenville. It came about when she realised it was fragrance that was the cause of her headaches and discovered the dearth of objective information available about sensitivities to fragrance. You may think you don’t use very much fragrance, but you are probably unaware of just how insidiously your fragrance load accumulates.
Your own personal load, unless you are using fragrance-free products, will go something like this: you wake from sleeping between sheets washed in fragranced laundry detergent; you shower with fragranced soap or gel, use fragranced shampoo and conditioner; you rub fragranced lotion into your skin, use fragranced hair products, put on deodorant, all that before you even reach for the spray bottle of scent that will be your intentional use of fragrance for that day.
You wear clothes washed in fragranced laundry detergent; you might have an air freshener in the loo, and your loo paper might be fragranced too; your dishwashing detergent probably smells of lemon; your cosmetics may well be fragranced. Then you walk out the door: does your car have a deodoriser? Or maybe the taxi has a diffuser going; or you sit next to someone on the bus who’s just refreshed their perfume, so you get to share that. Are there fragrance diffusers going in your workplace? Are the cleaning products they use fragranced?
So what? you say. Because you might be one of the many lucky ones who is apparently not adversely affected by fragrance. But you might just be inflicting your fragrance load on someone who is sensitive, someone who gets a headache or starts to wheeze at a strong whiff of fragrance. Or there may be effects, on others and also on you, that you never dreamt of. Because what exactly is in fragrance? The only people who know are the manufacturers, and they’re not telling.
Even more shocking is that all the regulation of and research into ingredients is controlled by the fragrance industry, so adverse findings might never make it to the public eye. Without being excessively alarmist, Grenville explains how we are exposed to compounds that might have as profound effects as some drugs, without our knowledge, and why.
Grenville presents a wealth of facts about fragrance, and the fragrance industry, but her explanations are accessible to everyone: you don’t need to be a scientist to understand what she’s telling you. Twenty pages of comprehensive notes supporting Grenville’s text are evidence of her extensive research into this subject. She tells it simply and even occasionally with humour, but the result is a surprising and disturbing revelation. Grenville’s latest oeuvre is a quick but salutary read that will change the way you think about fragrance. Essential reading for all humans.
The Case Against Fragrance is the second non-fiction book by award-winning Australian novelist, Kate Grenville. It came about when she realised it was fragrance that was the cause of her headaches and discovered the dearth of objective information available about sensitivities to fragrance. You may think you don’t use very much fragrance, but you are probably unaware of just how insidiously your fragrance load accumulates.
Your own personal load, unless you are using fragrance-free products, will go something like this: you wake from sleeping between sheets washed in fragranced laundry detergent; you shower with fragranced soap or gel, use fragranced shampoo and conditioner; you rub fragranced lotion into your skin, use fragranced hair products, put on deodorant, all that before you even reach for the spray bottle of scent that will be your intentional use of fragrance for that day.
You wear clothes washed in fragranced laundry detergent; you might have an air freshener in the loo, and your loo paper might be fragranced too; your dishwashing detergent probably smells of lemon; your cosmetics may well be fragranced. Then you walk out the door: does your car have a deodoriser? Or maybe the taxi has a diffuser going; or you sit next to someone on the bus who’s just refreshed their perfume, so you get to share that. Are there fragrance diffusers going in your workplace? Are the cleaning products they use fragranced?
So what? you say. Because you might be one of the many lucky ones who is apparently not adversely affected by fragrance. But you might just be inflicting your fragrance load on someone who is sensitive, someone who gets a headache or starts to wheeze at a strong whiff of fragrance. Or there may be effects, on others and also on you, that you never dreamt of. Because what exactly is in fragrance? The only people who know are the manufacturers, and they’re not telling.
Even more shocking is that all the regulation of and research into ingredients is controlled by the fragrance industry, so adverse findings might never make it to the public eye. Without being excessively alarmist, Grenville explains how we are exposed to compounds that might have as profound effects as some drugs, without our knowledge, and why.
Grenville presents a wealth of facts about fragrance, and the fragrance industry, but her explanations are accessible to everyone: you don’t need to be a scientist to understand what she’s telling you. Twenty pages of comprehensive notes supporting Grenville’s text are evidence of her extensive research into this subject. She tells it simply and even occasionally with humour, but the result is a surprising and disturbing revelation. Grenville’s latest oeuvre is a quick but salutary read that will change the way you think about fragrance. Essential reading for all humans.
December 28, 2024
I, like Kate Grenville, cant tolerate strong smells - natural or synthetic.
Privet, white Cedar and jasmine flowers will do me in just as much as perfumed cleaning fluids, deodorants and expensive French scents, so I was very pleased to read Kate's impassioned plea for a low-perfume level world.
I can track perfume molecules in the street, let alone in a tram, bus or in the theatre. Smell then cough, as my airways constrict.
I cant remember when I read it, but I wholeheartedly agree that perfume users would consider us with hypersensitive reactions.
Privet, white Cedar and jasmine flowers will do me in just as much as perfumed cleaning fluids, deodorants and expensive French scents, so I was very pleased to read Kate's impassioned plea for a low-perfume level world.
I can track perfume molecules in the street, let alone in a tram, bus or in the theatre. Smell then cough, as my airways constrict.
I cant remember when I read it, but I wholeheartedly agree that perfume users would consider us with hypersensitive reactions.
July 31, 2019
Audiobook
For 30 years I’ve been aware of the chemicals and toxins used in fragrances and other products which prompted me to use fragrance free laundry, cleaning and bathroom products however, I was blown away by Kate Grenville’s extensive research, I had no idea how much more I’d learn from this incredible informative book.
Thank you Kate Grenville for writing this excellent book.
For 30 years I’ve been aware of the chemicals and toxins used in fragrances and other products which prompted me to use fragrance free laundry, cleaning and bathroom products however, I was blown away by Kate Grenville’s extensive research, I had no idea how much more I’d learn from this incredible informative book.
Thank you Kate Grenville for writing this excellent book.
August 26, 2018
I once read a book with an audacious claim. In explaining it, the author started at the conclusion and developed all the supporting evidence from the conclusion first, skewing the data toward bias every step of the way. This book is very similar. What we end up with is a book that is logically inconsistent and overtly biased.
Though I am someone who loves fragrances, I do try to keep an open mind. And since there are relatively few books on the topic of fragrance to start with, seeing a book against fragrance piqued my curiosity. I suspected that it would probably pretend to be scientific while slanting the evidence according to a personal agenda. I was right.
The author is very sensitive to fragrance. She explains that in the first chapter. She wanted to research the science of fragrance. But apparently she didn't try to suppress her bias against fragrance. In essence, she wanted to corroborate the evidence to be against fragrance from the start. The thing about Grenville is that she does a clever job at disguising her bias or misdirecting your attention. She presents some evidence here and there, but she never stays for long, and she never--EVER--tries to look at the evidence from the other side to see where the evidence actually leads.
Her point of view hinges upon three main points: fragrances should be banned because they can causes sensitivities, fragrances use icky bad synthetic ingredients which are obviously bad because you can't pronounce the words, and fragrances can be deadly to your health--because...babies. She makes other points, but those are the main ones.
Let's tackle all of these. First: fragrances should be banned. She doesn't say this opinion outright, but it's not hard to connect the dots. She suffers from severe headaches because of fragrances, and since others do too, fragrances should be banned. She mentions that many companies are banning fragrances in the office--despite the fact that they are mostly doing it be not legally culpable in case someone sensitive tries to sue--and that many other companies should follow their lead. She cites the fact that second-hand smoke is deadly and that smoking in buildings is unlawful in many places. For one, people have the freedom to do whatever they want. Smoking isn't a very good analogy since the evidence that smoking (and second-hand smoke) is bad for you is conclusive, whereas it isn't for perfumes. She actually mentions the tension between not allowing something and retaining liberty, which is always a tug-of-war. The thing is that while she's saying this point, she mentions that people are allowed to smoke in their own privacy, and if some of that smoke wafts into your home and you inhale it, there's nothing you can do. If that's so, the same goes for perfumes. People wear them in their own private bubble, and if someone else briefly smells it, there should be nothing wrong with that. Business can do whatever they want, however, even though I might disagree with the rules. But the problem with laws against fragrances is that only a small percentage of people are sensitive at all, and making rules that discriminate against the majority for the sake of a minority isn't right--especially if there is no evidence that fragrances are dangerous (spoilers: there isn't).
Second point: fragrances use synthetics with long names, thus they are bad. This is obviously a snarky oversimplification of her point, but she does make it clear that she thinks synthetics are bad, and does cite a random health expert who said (to paraphrase), "If you can't pronounce it, don't eat it." This makes little sense. When you think of all the toxic natural byproducts in the world and many of the nontoxic manmade materials (like many medicines), it's hard to conclude that natural products are healthy while manmade "synthetic" ones are harmful. What if I told you that you daily consume foods with chemicals such as Retinol, Niacinamide, Pyridoxamine, Cyanocobalamin, Cholecalciferol, and Tocopherols, and that consuming those chemicals can cause severe health conditions like liver damage, brain swelling, type 2 diabetes, and neurological damage? You'd probably really want to avoid those foods, right? The thing is that if you avoid those foods, you'll die from a lack of vitamins A, B3, B6, B12, D, and E--the names we commonly call those icky chemicals. So in the sufficient dosage, vitamins are essential for healthy living, while at extreme doses, they are toxic. Grenville makes a slight-of-hand when it comes to this very thing. On one hand she mentions the evil chemical names of perfumes, then on the other she mentions the idea of "toxicity is the dose" being an idea originating in the 17th century--as if it's just an antiquated protoscientific idea akin to leeching and drinking mercury. She cites IFRA (the regulating body over the perfume industry) and their limitations over a long list of perfume ingredients--some being natural, which she conveniently leaves out. She seems to think that IFRA really hasn't gone far enough with their regulations. She doesn't present enough evidence about the dosage of materials, and when she does, she tends to exaggerate their effects claiming that they're probably worse than they seem.
The last point: fragrances can be deadly. There is an attempt at science in this book, but it is a bad one. She present some breadcrumbs of evidence here and there, but because the science leads to inconclusive data, she's left in a position where she has to defend the science as accurate and also not adequate enough. In at least a couple of places, she made the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy. She would say something like, "Studies have shown that molecules accumulate in the body," without presenting these studies and not explaining them. She would then use that premise as a way of furthering the idea that "synthetics are bad" by saying that these synthetic aroma molecules can be absorbed into your body through your lungs (because "a study"), and that this must be bad for you. And also, what if babies accumulated these molecules in their bodies?! She uses babies like human shields to her argument, knowing that people would never want to harm babies. Now even IF you do absorb these chemicals into your body, and even IF they accumulate, and even IF synthetics are bad for you, how much is the toxic dose? No answer is given. In a particularly egregious comedy of errors, she talks about the scientific "evidence" of musks accumulating in your body. Somehow that develops into the idea that these act as hormones, hormone levels left unchecked can lead to health issues, and they can hurt babies. Wear musks = hurt babies. This is one of many cases where the evidence leads her to correlations in a parallel study, and she interprets that as causation into the parallel topic. It's the worst with this train of thought on musks, but she does it other places too, asking questions like (paraphrased) "Is it a coincidence that multiple sclerosis is on the rise?" As if it's not a coincidence at all, that the correlation is evidence that perfume may cause MS. What I think is funny is that part of the evidence of this whole musk/hormone train of thought seemed to indicate that perfume use may actually be a hormonal cause of transgenderism. She presented points that would leave someone to conclude that, though she never went down that rabbit hole. It's possible that she just thinks that idea is (rightly) absurd, and that it wasn't worth mentioning. But given the evidence, it's clear that she has biases for and against certain things. She wants to rid the world of perfume--but of course, she won't be labeled a bigot for it.
When she concludes the book, she ultimately says that the evidence against perfume is inconclusive. Well, why did we read this book? Why did you write it? She says that you should think of abstaining from perfumes as risk control. Yet I have no clue what the risks even are or how severe they are. Eating dessert every night is a risk. Driving a car is a risk. Taking a walk in nature in the sunlight is a risk. Everything has risks. But so what? Many of the tasks we make everyday are acceptable risks that we take because we're willing to live with the potential drawbacks in order to experience the joys or conveniences they bring. I have no idea if perfume is a risk, but the author did not make a convincing argument that would change my mind. But even if were a risk, it seems a minimal one, one that I'm gladly accepting to enjoy the pleasures that perfume brings.
Don't read this book.
Though I am someone who loves fragrances, I do try to keep an open mind. And since there are relatively few books on the topic of fragrance to start with, seeing a book against fragrance piqued my curiosity. I suspected that it would probably pretend to be scientific while slanting the evidence according to a personal agenda. I was right.
The author is very sensitive to fragrance. She explains that in the first chapter. She wanted to research the science of fragrance. But apparently she didn't try to suppress her bias against fragrance. In essence, she wanted to corroborate the evidence to be against fragrance from the start. The thing about Grenville is that she does a clever job at disguising her bias or misdirecting your attention. She presents some evidence here and there, but she never stays for long, and she never--EVER--tries to look at the evidence from the other side to see where the evidence actually leads.
Her point of view hinges upon three main points: fragrances should be banned because they can causes sensitivities, fragrances use icky bad synthetic ingredients which are obviously bad because you can't pronounce the words, and fragrances can be deadly to your health--because...babies. She makes other points, but those are the main ones.
Let's tackle all of these. First: fragrances should be banned. She doesn't say this opinion outright, but it's not hard to connect the dots. She suffers from severe headaches because of fragrances, and since others do too, fragrances should be banned. She mentions that many companies are banning fragrances in the office--despite the fact that they are mostly doing it be not legally culpable in case someone sensitive tries to sue--and that many other companies should follow their lead. She cites the fact that second-hand smoke is deadly and that smoking in buildings is unlawful in many places. For one, people have the freedom to do whatever they want. Smoking isn't a very good analogy since the evidence that smoking (and second-hand smoke) is bad for you is conclusive, whereas it isn't for perfumes. She actually mentions the tension between not allowing something and retaining liberty, which is always a tug-of-war. The thing is that while she's saying this point, she mentions that people are allowed to smoke in their own privacy, and if some of that smoke wafts into your home and you inhale it, there's nothing you can do. If that's so, the same goes for perfumes. People wear them in their own private bubble, and if someone else briefly smells it, there should be nothing wrong with that. Business can do whatever they want, however, even though I might disagree with the rules. But the problem with laws against fragrances is that only a small percentage of people are sensitive at all, and making rules that discriminate against the majority for the sake of a minority isn't right--especially if there is no evidence that fragrances are dangerous (spoilers: there isn't).
Second point: fragrances use synthetics with long names, thus they are bad. This is obviously a snarky oversimplification of her point, but she does make it clear that she thinks synthetics are bad, and does cite a random health expert who said (to paraphrase), "If you can't pronounce it, don't eat it." This makes little sense. When you think of all the toxic natural byproducts in the world and many of the nontoxic manmade materials (like many medicines), it's hard to conclude that natural products are healthy while manmade "synthetic" ones are harmful. What if I told you that you daily consume foods with chemicals such as Retinol, Niacinamide, Pyridoxamine, Cyanocobalamin, Cholecalciferol, and Tocopherols, and that consuming those chemicals can cause severe health conditions like liver damage, brain swelling, type 2 diabetes, and neurological damage? You'd probably really want to avoid those foods, right? The thing is that if you avoid those foods, you'll die from a lack of vitamins A, B3, B6, B12, D, and E--the names we commonly call those icky chemicals. So in the sufficient dosage, vitamins are essential for healthy living, while at extreme doses, they are toxic. Grenville makes a slight-of-hand when it comes to this very thing. On one hand she mentions the evil chemical names of perfumes, then on the other she mentions the idea of "toxicity is the dose" being an idea originating in the 17th century--as if it's just an antiquated protoscientific idea akin to leeching and drinking mercury. She cites IFRA (the regulating body over the perfume industry) and their limitations over a long list of perfume ingredients--some being natural, which she conveniently leaves out. She seems to think that IFRA really hasn't gone far enough with their regulations. She doesn't present enough evidence about the dosage of materials, and when she does, she tends to exaggerate their effects claiming that they're probably worse than they seem.
The last point: fragrances can be deadly. There is an attempt at science in this book, but it is a bad one. She present some breadcrumbs of evidence here and there, but because the science leads to inconclusive data, she's left in a position where she has to defend the science as accurate and also not adequate enough. In at least a couple of places, she made the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy. She would say something like, "Studies have shown that molecules accumulate in the body," without presenting these studies and not explaining them. She would then use that premise as a way of furthering the idea that "synthetics are bad" by saying that these synthetic aroma molecules can be absorbed into your body through your lungs (because "a study"), and that this must be bad for you. And also, what if babies accumulated these molecules in their bodies?! She uses babies like human shields to her argument, knowing that people would never want to harm babies. Now even IF you do absorb these chemicals into your body, and even IF they accumulate, and even IF synthetics are bad for you, how much is the toxic dose? No answer is given. In a particularly egregious comedy of errors, she talks about the scientific "evidence" of musks accumulating in your body. Somehow that develops into the idea that these act as hormones, hormone levels left unchecked can lead to health issues, and they can hurt babies. Wear musks = hurt babies. This is one of many cases where the evidence leads her to correlations in a parallel study, and she interprets that as causation into the parallel topic. It's the worst with this train of thought on musks, but she does it other places too, asking questions like (paraphrased) "Is it a coincidence that multiple sclerosis is on the rise?" As if it's not a coincidence at all, that the correlation is evidence that perfume may cause MS. What I think is funny is that part of the evidence of this whole musk/hormone train of thought seemed to indicate that perfume use may actually be a hormonal cause of transgenderism. She presented points that would leave someone to conclude that, though she never went down that rabbit hole. It's possible that she just thinks that idea is (rightly) absurd, and that it wasn't worth mentioning. But given the evidence, it's clear that she has biases for and against certain things. She wants to rid the world of perfume--but of course, she won't be labeled a bigot for it.
When she concludes the book, she ultimately says that the evidence against perfume is inconclusive. Well, why did we read this book? Why did you write it? She says that you should think of abstaining from perfumes as risk control. Yet I have no clue what the risks even are or how severe they are. Eating dessert every night is a risk. Driving a car is a risk. Taking a walk in nature in the sunlight is a risk. Everything has risks. But so what? Many of the tasks we make everyday are acceptable risks that we take because we're willing to live with the potential drawbacks in order to experience the joys or conveniences they bring. I have no idea if perfume is a risk, but the author did not make a convincing argument that would change my mind. But even if were a risk, it seems a minimal one, one that I'm gladly accepting to enjoy the pleasures that perfume brings.
Don't read this book.
January 24, 2018
A clear and interesting summary of the evidence that fragrance (in cleaning products, perfumes etc) can have negative health impacts on people. Grenville over-eggs the epidemiological pudding a bit sometimes, and the book clearly has a strong agenda, but it raises some important concerns and questions on a topic I'd never really thought about.
March 17, 2017
Grenville is not a scientist, but she has used her formidable research skills to present her case against fragrance. Early on she says that,
using fragrance is a choice,and my hope is that this book might give people the chance to make that choice an informed one.
She presents studies (among people who get migraines, around half get them from fragrance - pg24), lists signs and symptoms, defines terms, lays out the history of the use of scent and how scent is produced, reveals the various industry and government bodies who regulate the use of fragrances and chemicals as well as providing anecdotes about her experience with fragrance intolerance.
Did you know that 'when you smell something, it's because little bits of it have just gone up your nose'? Grenville goes on to explain how this actually occurs and why it can be beneficial for us.
Full response here - http://bronasbooks.blogspot.com.au/20...
using fragrance is a choice,and my hope is that this book might give people the chance to make that choice an informed one.
She presents studies (among people who get migraines, around half get them from fragrance - pg24), lists signs and symptoms, defines terms, lays out the history of the use of scent and how scent is produced, reveals the various industry and government bodies who regulate the use of fragrances and chemicals as well as providing anecdotes about her experience with fragrance intolerance.
Did you know that 'when you smell something, it's because little bits of it have just gone up your nose'? Grenville goes on to explain how this actually occurs and why it can be beneficial for us.
Full response here - http://bronasbooks.blogspot.com.au/20...
August 15, 2025
Absolutely one of the best scientific non-fiction books I’ve read - I’m obsessed and couldn’t put it down!
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I’m a chronic headache and migraine sufferer, and have had headaches 5-7 days a week since I can remember. My life has consisted of taking Tylenol daily because of this for about 15 years. My head always hurts. Of course, migraines are a thousand times worse as they mean I’m immobilized for as long as they’re present.
Becoming pregnant this year, one of my first aversions was to fragranced anything - candles, perfumes, scent in all products. The thought of lighting one of my favourite candles made me nauseous, and the perfume that my mom and I got together that I LOVED a few months back suddenly had me making her pull over the car so I could throw up, and kindly asking her not to wear it anymore around me. And reading this book made me realize - I haven’t had daily headaches while being pregnant. And I haven’t been using any fragrance…
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Kate Grenville writes in a way that is accessible to anyone to read, whether you have a science background or not. Having a degree in a science field, I found myself very intrigued by the chemistry side of fragrance, but it’s not necessary to understand the concepts. I saw so many reviews for this book complaining about Kate’s stance on fragrance - but the book is literally called The Case Against Fragrance, so what did you expect?
The author suffers from fragrance sensitivity very strongly where she can’t be in rooms with any kind of fragrance. She offers people’s experiences with fragrance that are quite severe, and others that are moreso daily inconveniences. The research is so strong in this book that even though there is little looked at behind the words “fragrance” and “parfum” on labels, the correlation appears strong enough to make a conclusion.
I’ve done my research on fragrance for a few years now, leading me to swap my laundry detergent for something fragrance free, as well as all of my beauty and skincare products. Anything can be classified as “fragrance”, and the FDA does not require any kind of chemical testing on these products before the hit the market which is terrifying! We simply don’t know what is in these products, and no one seems keen to tell us either. So many parfums are endocrine disruptors and give us strong reasons to believe many may be carcinogenic. There are studies that show specific chemicals used in fragrance cause direct reproductive issues, especially in the case of certain chemicals acting like oestrogen and confusing our body. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want the reason I go out to be because I used Burberry Her.
This was such a strong book, and it has convinced me to make the final push to eliminate scented candles and perfumes out of my life, which is something I never thought I’d say (as I LOVE these products when not pregnant). I don’t want myself or my baby with less respiratory strength breathing in chemicals that we don’t know the effects of. I highly recommend everyone read this book or do some kind of research into the fragrance industry just to make yourself a better informed consumer. We deserve to know what impacts products we buy have on our health!
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I’m a chronic headache and migraine sufferer, and have had headaches 5-7 days a week since I can remember. My life has consisted of taking Tylenol daily because of this for about 15 years. My head always hurts. Of course, migraines are a thousand times worse as they mean I’m immobilized for as long as they’re present.
Becoming pregnant this year, one of my first aversions was to fragranced anything - candles, perfumes, scent in all products. The thought of lighting one of my favourite candles made me nauseous, and the perfume that my mom and I got together that I LOVED a few months back suddenly had me making her pull over the car so I could throw up, and kindly asking her not to wear it anymore around me. And reading this book made me realize - I haven’t had daily headaches while being pregnant. And I haven’t been using any fragrance…
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Kate Grenville writes in a way that is accessible to anyone to read, whether you have a science background or not. Having a degree in a science field, I found myself very intrigued by the chemistry side of fragrance, but it’s not necessary to understand the concepts. I saw so many reviews for this book complaining about Kate’s stance on fragrance - but the book is literally called The Case Against Fragrance, so what did you expect?
The author suffers from fragrance sensitivity very strongly where she can’t be in rooms with any kind of fragrance. She offers people’s experiences with fragrance that are quite severe, and others that are moreso daily inconveniences. The research is so strong in this book that even though there is little looked at behind the words “fragrance” and “parfum” on labels, the correlation appears strong enough to make a conclusion.
I’ve done my research on fragrance for a few years now, leading me to swap my laundry detergent for something fragrance free, as well as all of my beauty and skincare products. Anything can be classified as “fragrance”, and the FDA does not require any kind of chemical testing on these products before the hit the market which is terrifying! We simply don’t know what is in these products, and no one seems keen to tell us either. So many parfums are endocrine disruptors and give us strong reasons to believe many may be carcinogenic. There are studies that show specific chemicals used in fragrance cause direct reproductive issues, especially in the case of certain chemicals acting like oestrogen and confusing our body. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want the reason I go out to be because I used Burberry Her.
This was such a strong book, and it has convinced me to make the final push to eliminate scented candles and perfumes out of my life, which is something I never thought I’d say (as I LOVE these products when not pregnant). I don’t want myself or my baby with less respiratory strength breathing in chemicals that we don’t know the effects of. I highly recommend everyone read this book or do some kind of research into the fragrance industry just to make yourself a better informed consumer. We deserve to know what impacts products we buy have on our health!
February 14, 2017
Next week I will have the very great honour of interviewing author Kate Grenville to talk about her latest book, the non-fiction A Case Against Fragrance (Text Publishing 2017). Like many of you, I have enjoyed Kate's fiction and stories over the years, and I found this book to be a most interesting departure.
The Case Against Fragrance is exactly that: a scientific, but highly readable and accessible, account of why fragrance (or scent or perfume) in products may not be as exotic and wonderful as the advertising may have us believe; why, in fact, fragrance may actually be making us sick.
Kate realised some years ago that scent - not only from perfume, but also from body lotions, shampoos, candles, air fresheners, and more - was contributing to her headaches and nausea. When she decided to investigate, she found an amazing number of people reporting anecdotal evidence of the same phenomenon, with afflictions ranging from headaches to migraines, from skin allergies to tummy upsets, from poor concentration to asthma and respiratory difficulties. And once she began to research in earnest, compiling statistics and data from a range of scientific studies, she found that this was only the tip of the iceberg, with concerns about conditions as serious as cancer and hormone disruption.
But if fragrance is really so bad, why aren't more people opposed to it? Why is it so commonly used in everything from personal products to laundry detergents to baby toiletries? This book attempts to answer that question. Kate has managed to collate an enormous amount of scientific research and condense it into a book that is easily understandable by those of us without a science degree, as well as being a balanced representation of her findings. She sets out to help people make informed decisions about the products they choose to inhale and to put on their skin.
I found this book fascinating. The history of fragrance and the timeline of production of both natural and synthetic perfume was interesting; the regulation of the industry (or lack thereof) and the 'acceptable' levels of known harmful chemicals used was eye-opening.
Fifty years ago no-one would have dreamed of restricting the use of tobacco as no-one understood the dangers of the smoke. Is there a similar case against fragrance? Perhaps in fifty years' time, we will find it astounding that molecules of scent were willingly ingested and absorbed by the masses, without thought of the potentially dangerous effects.
The Case Against Fragrance is exactly that: a scientific, but highly readable and accessible, account of why fragrance (or scent or perfume) in products may not be as exotic and wonderful as the advertising may have us believe; why, in fact, fragrance may actually be making us sick.
Kate realised some years ago that scent - not only from perfume, but also from body lotions, shampoos, candles, air fresheners, and more - was contributing to her headaches and nausea. When she decided to investigate, she found an amazing number of people reporting anecdotal evidence of the same phenomenon, with afflictions ranging from headaches to migraines, from skin allergies to tummy upsets, from poor concentration to asthma and respiratory difficulties. And once she began to research in earnest, compiling statistics and data from a range of scientific studies, she found that this was only the tip of the iceberg, with concerns about conditions as serious as cancer and hormone disruption.
But if fragrance is really so bad, why aren't more people opposed to it? Why is it so commonly used in everything from personal products to laundry detergents to baby toiletries? This book attempts to answer that question. Kate has managed to collate an enormous amount of scientific research and condense it into a book that is easily understandable by those of us without a science degree, as well as being a balanced representation of her findings. She sets out to help people make informed decisions about the products they choose to inhale and to put on their skin.
I found this book fascinating. The history of fragrance and the timeline of production of both natural and synthetic perfume was interesting; the regulation of the industry (or lack thereof) and the 'acceptable' levels of known harmful chemicals used was eye-opening.
Fifty years ago no-one would have dreamed of restricting the use of tobacco as no-one understood the dangers of the smoke. Is there a similar case against fragrance? Perhaps in fifty years' time, we will find it astounding that molecules of scent were willingly ingested and absorbed by the masses, without thought of the potentially dangerous effects.
February 16, 2017
W37. Pretty good although nothing astounding.
September 13, 2017
I got an ADC from Netgalley for review.
I selected this because it was something I had never though about: fragrance and how it affects us all. It was incredible, and I could tell as I was reading it was making a lasting impact on me. I was already buying fragrance-free products for laundry use. I will now make a concerted effort to broaden my use of fragrance-free products. The amount of chemicals we are putting on our bodies and out into our air, often with no idea of the contents or effects, is staggering and honestly frightening.
Recommended for any one and every one with skin.
I selected this because it was something I had never though about: fragrance and how it affects us all. It was incredible, and I could tell as I was reading it was making a lasting impact on me. I was already buying fragrance-free products for laundry use. I will now make a concerted effort to broaden my use of fragrance-free products. The amount of chemicals we are putting on our bodies and out into our air, often with no idea of the contents or effects, is staggering and honestly frightening.
Recommended for any one and every one with skin.
January 29, 2021
Mmffffgghhh... why did it take me so long to finish this?? Admittedly, the first 15% of the book was more about the history of the author and why she decided to write this book and justifying why she wrote the book etc etc.
But the rest of the book...🤯
I mean, before the 15% mark, I was like...did we need 175pages to tell us why some people are allergic to fragrance??
After the 15% mark, yes...yes we did need all the pages to understand why some people are allergic to fragrance. But more than that, what all these artificial fragrance actually does to the human body!!!
The author laid down the reasons very clearly, with cited scientific sources and she was very good at presenting the information. I do believe it takes a lot of skill to communicate data and scientific fact as plainly and clearly as she did.
I’m definitely going to be scrutinising ingredient lists a lot more from now on 👀 laundry detergent, I’m coming for you first!
But the rest of the book...🤯
I mean, before the 15% mark, I was like...did we need 175pages to tell us why some people are allergic to fragrance??
After the 15% mark, yes...yes we did need all the pages to understand why some people are allergic to fragrance. But more than that, what all these artificial fragrance actually does to the human body!!!
The author laid down the reasons very clearly, with cited scientific sources and she was very good at presenting the information. I do believe it takes a lot of skill to communicate data and scientific fact as plainly and clearly as she did.
I’m definitely going to be scrutinising ingredient lists a lot more from now on 👀 laundry detergent, I’m coming for you first!
June 23, 2017
What a thought-provoking and interesting book this is, one which opened up for me a subject about which I was totally unaware – sensitivity to fragrance. When Kate Grenville began to get headaches, she discovered it was because she was reacting adversely to any sort of artificial fragrance, including perfumes. So she set of on an exploration to find out exactly what goes into fragrances and what might be at the heart of her sensitivity. It’s an extremely well-researched account, written in a lively, accessible and anecdotal way and it’s a book that has actually changed the way I think. Or rather made me think for the first time about the perfumes and fragrances that we are daily subjected to and whether these might be detrimental to our health. This is an important book and one which I hope will be widely read.
Read
June 3, 2017As a fellow sufferer from fragrances etc on the train, I can relate to Kate's account of this. The middle chapters are devoted to the more scientific details of just what are in perfumes, including many synthetic/man made ingredients now.
March 15, 2017
As something of a perfume collector, I thought I owed it to myself to read this book and find out more about what is in those fragrances in the cupboard.
Kate Grenville has long known that she has an intolerance for fragrances that give her headaches. When it reached a point where she was almost totally incapacitated during a book tour, she decided to research the matter and wrote this book.
Grenville points out that, in modern society, fragrance is almost inescapable. It's not just the perfumes that we wear. It's also added to every imaginable household product from toilet paper to laundry liquid. Stores, restaurants and hotels spray fragrance in the air. It's ubiquitous, and that's a problem for people that are affected by it, like Grenville.
Any attempt to identify what is causing these problems founders on a few issues. First, trade secrets legislation means that the contents of "fragrance" ingredients don't have to be revealed. Second, there are thousands of ingredients commonly used in fragrance, and only a subset of these have ever been tested for safety. Finally, nearly all of the testing and certification is done by the fragrance industry itself, so conflict of interest issues apply.
Even what we do know is somewhat alarming. Grenville provides an extensive list of compounds known or suspected to be carcinogenic that are either used in fragrances or can form when fragrance ingredients interact with the air (as they unavoidably will). Chief among these is formaldehyde, although there are others.
Another concern is the prevalence of synthetic musk compounds that have proven to be almost indestructible. These compounds bioaccumulate so that they become more prevalent the higher up the food chain you go. That means that the very highest levels are seen in the most vulnerable: breastfeeding babies and foetuses in utero. These musk compounds can mimic the action of hormones such as oestrogen, creating over-supply which can lead to birth defects, genetic abnormalities and cancer.
Grenville is quick to point out that it is impossible to pin this on fragrance specifically, because there are so many other potential triggers for such conditions to emerge over a lifetime. Indeed "the case against fragrance" is largely a circumstantial one. Grenville shows that there are potentially harmful chemicals in fragrances, they have reached a point of ubiquity in the environment, and people are having adverse reactions. But there is no smoking gun; it is impossible to say for sure that there is causality here, and no scientific study would draw the kinds of conclusions that Grenville invites us to make here.
So what to do? The author's solution is a bit simplistic. For one, she advocates embracing fragrance-free versions of products. That's fine, except she does not apply anything like the same scrutiny to those alternatives. Just as decaffeinated coffee is not necessarily better for you due to the added chemicals, how does one know whether or not a fragrance-free detergent contains no harmful chemicals either?
More interesting is Grenville's suggestion that fragrance-free workplaces may become the norm. If a scientific institute such as the US Centres for Disease Control can adopt a policy that says "Fragrance is not appropriate for a professional work environment", then it's possible to imagine that this may one day become more widespread particularly if, as in the US, there are OH&S lawsuits decided in favour of people with fragrance intolerances.
Decades ago the idea of passive smoking was seen as cranky, now it is enshrined in law. We do not have the right to deprive others of a healthy and safe work environment; that is a very clear legal precedent. So maybe one day people who wear perfume will be like the smokers of today, skulking out the back giving themselves a shot of Shalimar before washing it off and heading back inside.
Kate Grenville has long known that she has an intolerance for fragrances that give her headaches. When it reached a point where she was almost totally incapacitated during a book tour, she decided to research the matter and wrote this book.
Grenville points out that, in modern society, fragrance is almost inescapable. It's not just the perfumes that we wear. It's also added to every imaginable household product from toilet paper to laundry liquid. Stores, restaurants and hotels spray fragrance in the air. It's ubiquitous, and that's a problem for people that are affected by it, like Grenville.
Any attempt to identify what is causing these problems founders on a few issues. First, trade secrets legislation means that the contents of "fragrance" ingredients don't have to be revealed. Second, there are thousands of ingredients commonly used in fragrance, and only a subset of these have ever been tested for safety. Finally, nearly all of the testing and certification is done by the fragrance industry itself, so conflict of interest issues apply.
Even what we do know is somewhat alarming. Grenville provides an extensive list of compounds known or suspected to be carcinogenic that are either used in fragrances or can form when fragrance ingredients interact with the air (as they unavoidably will). Chief among these is formaldehyde, although there are others.
Another concern is the prevalence of synthetic musk compounds that have proven to be almost indestructible. These compounds bioaccumulate so that they become more prevalent the higher up the food chain you go. That means that the very highest levels are seen in the most vulnerable: breastfeeding babies and foetuses in utero. These musk compounds can mimic the action of hormones such as oestrogen, creating over-supply which can lead to birth defects, genetic abnormalities and cancer.
Grenville is quick to point out that it is impossible to pin this on fragrance specifically, because there are so many other potential triggers for such conditions to emerge over a lifetime. Indeed "the case against fragrance" is largely a circumstantial one. Grenville shows that there are potentially harmful chemicals in fragrances, they have reached a point of ubiquity in the environment, and people are having adverse reactions. But there is no smoking gun; it is impossible to say for sure that there is causality here, and no scientific study would draw the kinds of conclusions that Grenville invites us to make here.
So what to do? The author's solution is a bit simplistic. For one, she advocates embracing fragrance-free versions of products. That's fine, except she does not apply anything like the same scrutiny to those alternatives. Just as decaffeinated coffee is not necessarily better for you due to the added chemicals, how does one know whether or not a fragrance-free detergent contains no harmful chemicals either?
More interesting is Grenville's suggestion that fragrance-free workplaces may become the norm. If a scientific institute such as the US Centres for Disease Control can adopt a policy that says "Fragrance is not appropriate for a professional work environment", then it's possible to imagine that this may one day become more widespread particularly if, as in the US, there are OH&S lawsuits decided in favour of people with fragrance intolerances.
Decades ago the idea of passive smoking was seen as cranky, now it is enshrined in law. We do not have the right to deprive others of a healthy and safe work environment; that is a very clear legal precedent. So maybe one day people who wear perfume will be like the smokers of today, skulking out the back giving themselves a shot of Shalimar before washing it off and heading back inside.
November 29, 2017
A wake-up call. But once again, tax-cheating elites only care about profits and minimising costs of their shitty products with cheaper ingredients goes unpunished.
I doubt a 'no personal sprays policy' in the workplace will really have much effect. We're now seeing the insanity of people buying insecticides to stick on the wall of their kitchen. They have automatic timers to spray a squirt every 30 minutes or so. Boggles the mind, but I just cringe and am reminded of this scenario with 'air-fresheners' (ha!) whenever I see cases of kids born with cancer. When will people wake up? Governments need to stuff up and let people down so they trust them less because too often the refrain of toxic products (be they financial or food or mechanical) is 'But the government wouldn't allow it to be sold right?!' No you ignoramus, the government doesn't give two shits about you or your health. Taxes on cigarettes was revenue. Regulations (if any) are beaten back by industry lobbyists and right-wingers whinge about so much government intrusion in our lives.
Well what crock, 'self-regulation' is a farce. Too much damage is done too late. Especially when it comes to these synthetic fragrances in everything to cover up the cheap mineral oil that stinks or the detergents to pretend something is clean. Flame retardents and formaldehydes (and other VOCs) are endemic. Air Force bases now have a ticking time bomb (from 1980s) for over a 100 years of fire-fighting foams that seeped in to soils and waterways, giving kids and adults all sorts of problems and cancers. These new technologies are rarely if ever tested for safety on humans over their lifetime. They also don't take in to account the bioaccumulation and toxic cocktail effect of dozens and dozens (for some ignorants I can barely fathom that it would be hundreds) of products used every day.
We seriously need to stop being shocked by so many people getting cancer. I'm over that shit. It's just inevitable now, I can't even act shocked, maybe I'm cold-hearted but I just think 'well it was only time!'
The idea of fragrance-free zones like hotels or public spaces such as concert halls is interesting and we can only hope that it becomes more prevelant. Though it's doubtful it would be fully enforced. All it takes is one selfish person to shower themselves in these carcinogenic chemicals.
In a fantasy, of my utopia there is a whole world where people are sensible and we don't allow these cheap toxins to pervade, just like there are restaurants now that are certified as glutin-free for coeliacs. These synthetic fragrances affect all of us though and stronger regulations are required because the companies don't care about the health of people, they're evil - just one eye on the bottom line. Whilst we, the people, still have some power we must force and enforce tough regulations on the use of chemicals and the levels that are permitted.
Out of a register of over 40,000 chemicals on the market, only 3,000 have been assessed for safety and that's only on animals, which is pathetic on so many levels. This is just in Australia. The EU and Canada know the risk is too great and the health costs too high, so have banned many of these chemicals. The USA has even banned some that Australia hasn't and vice-versa. It's bizarre.
Animal testing is outdated and cruel. We can now use computer modelling. But true to form and with an eye to propping up an easy and profitable industry China has set that world back by requiring all cosmetic products from the west require animal testing to be done in China by China. Go figure. All those years and after pioneering cruelty-free methods, China has thrown it all out. Typical.
I doubt a 'no personal sprays policy' in the workplace will really have much effect. We're now seeing the insanity of people buying insecticides to stick on the wall of their kitchen. They have automatic timers to spray a squirt every 30 minutes or so. Boggles the mind, but I just cringe and am reminded of this scenario with 'air-fresheners' (ha!) whenever I see cases of kids born with cancer. When will people wake up? Governments need to stuff up and let people down so they trust them less because too often the refrain of toxic products (be they financial or food or mechanical) is 'But the government wouldn't allow it to be sold right?!' No you ignoramus, the government doesn't give two shits about you or your health. Taxes on cigarettes was revenue. Regulations (if any) are beaten back by industry lobbyists and right-wingers whinge about so much government intrusion in our lives.
Well what crock, 'self-regulation' is a farce. Too much damage is done too late. Especially when it comes to these synthetic fragrances in everything to cover up the cheap mineral oil that stinks or the detergents to pretend something is clean. Flame retardents and formaldehydes (and other VOCs) are endemic. Air Force bases now have a ticking time bomb (from 1980s) for over a 100 years of fire-fighting foams that seeped in to soils and waterways, giving kids and adults all sorts of problems and cancers. These new technologies are rarely if ever tested for safety on humans over their lifetime. They also don't take in to account the bioaccumulation and toxic cocktail effect of dozens and dozens (for some ignorants I can barely fathom that it would be hundreds) of products used every day.
We seriously need to stop being shocked by so many people getting cancer. I'm over that shit. It's just inevitable now, I can't even act shocked, maybe I'm cold-hearted but I just think 'well it was only time!'
The idea of fragrance-free zones like hotels or public spaces such as concert halls is interesting and we can only hope that it becomes more prevelant. Though it's doubtful it would be fully enforced. All it takes is one selfish person to shower themselves in these carcinogenic chemicals.
In a fantasy, of my utopia there is a whole world where people are sensible and we don't allow these cheap toxins to pervade, just like there are restaurants now that are certified as glutin-free for coeliacs. These synthetic fragrances affect all of us though and stronger regulations are required because the companies don't care about the health of people, they're evil - just one eye on the bottom line. Whilst we, the people, still have some power we must force and enforce tough regulations on the use of chemicals and the levels that are permitted.
Out of a register of over 40,000 chemicals on the market, only 3,000 have been assessed for safety and that's only on animals, which is pathetic on so many levels. This is just in Australia. The EU and Canada know the risk is too great and the health costs too high, so have banned many of these chemicals. The USA has even banned some that Australia hasn't and vice-versa. It's bizarre.
Animal testing is outdated and cruel. We can now use computer modelling. But true to form and with an eye to propping up an easy and profitable industry China has set that world back by requiring all cosmetic products from the west require animal testing to be done in China by China. Go figure. All those years and after pioneering cruelty-free methods, China has thrown it all out. Typical.
December 16, 2017
The most powerful parts of this book are when Grenville lets the reader inside her own experience: detailing that insane battle anyone who has a disability or a sensitivity feels around not wanting to be "that person", while increasingly struggle to function capably. The book's most memorable image is of Grenville duct taping the door to her hotel room, in an attempt to keep the air breathable for her, knowing she isn't even going to tell her agent about this, because it is the kind thing a crazy person does, while simultaneously planning to just surruptiously pack tape from now on. It perfectly captures the way that this kind of sensitivity can be completely isolating, not only physically, but socially as well.
And it is that isolation which fuels the rage of the science in the book, as Grenville works out that she is not, in fact, crazy, and worse, she is not alone. Her doctors, the research community and even perfume journalists all understand well that some people react to distilled fragrance the way she does. It isn't that people don't have these experiences, it is just that they aren't considered significant enough to make a real difference. The gorgeous fantasy of the perfect scent - and the multibillion dollar industries based on it - trumps the real experience of dysfunction every time.
As a kid, my mother's daily application of perfume represented to me her transformation into a public person more than anything else. I can still smell the wafting scent as she kissed us goodbye. I assumed then, that I would also have a signature scent, but turns out I was far too disorganised and disconnected for any regular beauty routine. Nevertheless, as an adult, when I started dating someone with a severe reaction to scent, I initially was dismissive, assuming an oversensitive approach from a man unused to beauty regimes. It didn't take long, however, to realise the strength of his reaction: anything from 5-minute sneezing binges, to eyes too full of tears to see, to welts on the skin. I learned about how to skirt heavily fragranced environments, check the backs of things to make sure they really were "for sensitive". Sure sometimes, I'm sure it would have been fine. But when the consequences are pain for someone you love, you get cautious. And most of all, I learned about the kinds of ways this sensitivity can limit your life, places you won't go, things you won't do. Many of us think of the most vocal of those with sensitivities, but there is an army of people who don't want to cause a fuss, and simply reduce their external life to avoid it.
Perfume is hardly alone in this - people with mobility problems, pain issues etc all find the modern world a difficult environment in a way that would be easy to fix. But it is a good example of how we demonise those who ask for a healthier space, without much understanding of the science of why they might be right.
Lest anyone think this book (as opposed to this review!) is a polemic, it is not. It is part personal experience, and part formidable research (make no mistake, Grenville's research is the foundation stone of her fiction and she is no less tenacious, incisive and thorough here). At times, the evidence felt like it weighed the book down for me - a rare thing given my propensity for dense non-fiction - as it had a tone of Grenville deeply needing her audience to believe her. In the end, perhaps I wanted more polemic, more sense of how we ended up here, more of a sense of a way forward.
Those who suffer from perfume will find much to empathise about here. But it is those of us who swan through oblivious who probably most need to read it.
And it is that isolation which fuels the rage of the science in the book, as Grenville works out that she is not, in fact, crazy, and worse, she is not alone. Her doctors, the research community and even perfume journalists all understand well that some people react to distilled fragrance the way she does. It isn't that people don't have these experiences, it is just that they aren't considered significant enough to make a real difference. The gorgeous fantasy of the perfect scent - and the multibillion dollar industries based on it - trumps the real experience of dysfunction every time.
As a kid, my mother's daily application of perfume represented to me her transformation into a public person more than anything else. I can still smell the wafting scent as she kissed us goodbye. I assumed then, that I would also have a signature scent, but turns out I was far too disorganised and disconnected for any regular beauty routine. Nevertheless, as an adult, when I started dating someone with a severe reaction to scent, I initially was dismissive, assuming an oversensitive approach from a man unused to beauty regimes. It didn't take long, however, to realise the strength of his reaction: anything from 5-minute sneezing binges, to eyes too full of tears to see, to welts on the skin. I learned about how to skirt heavily fragranced environments, check the backs of things to make sure they really were "for sensitive". Sure sometimes, I'm sure it would have been fine. But when the consequences are pain for someone you love, you get cautious. And most of all, I learned about the kinds of ways this sensitivity can limit your life, places you won't go, things you won't do. Many of us think of the most vocal of those with sensitivities, but there is an army of people who don't want to cause a fuss, and simply reduce their external life to avoid it.
Perfume is hardly alone in this - people with mobility problems, pain issues etc all find the modern world a difficult environment in a way that would be easy to fix. But it is a good example of how we demonise those who ask for a healthier space, without much understanding of the science of why they might be right.
Lest anyone think this book (as opposed to this review!) is a polemic, it is not. It is part personal experience, and part formidable research (make no mistake, Grenville's research is the foundation stone of her fiction and she is no less tenacious, incisive and thorough here). At times, the evidence felt like it weighed the book down for me - a rare thing given my propensity for dense non-fiction - as it had a tone of Grenville deeply needing her audience to believe her. In the end, perhaps I wanted more polemic, more sense of how we ended up here, more of a sense of a way forward.
Those who suffer from perfume will find much to empathise about here. But it is those of us who swan through oblivious who probably most need to read it.
October 22, 2017
Look, I like a rant as much as the next person. Perhaps more! And there is content here that chimes with my own experiences and which I find interesting. That content, I would suggest is not the scientific content.
Grenville finds herself becoming ill after spending the day in the scented and fragrant world. She determines her illness is caused by "fragrance" a sort of catch-all term she uses to describe anything added to scent a product, to the point of duct-taping up hotel doors (and she knows how this makes her look, do not worry). Grenville goes into a rabbit warren of investigation of what chemical compounds go into consumer products and whether that is dangerous (don't worry! She thinks yes!).
Basically Grenville's thought process goes like this: I get migraines as a result of exposure to perfume -- all perfumes and fragrances are the same -- people are being exposed to "unnatural" "fragrances" in higher numbers than ever before -- this is leading to illness because anything natural is good, and anything unnatural is bad -- if something is bad for me it must be bad for everyone else as well.
I am not a scientist, but I don't think the science here is particularly well deployed -- certainly there are components of "fragrance" that are a bit alarming. But then again, putting a big list of the terrifying laboratory names of ingredients doesn't necessarily mean much. The suggestion that "fragrance" is causing MS is particularly ill-considered. In addition, Grenville adopts a folksy tone, which allows her to suggest and insinuate without actually openly saying what she means. I am a bit wary of this -- be open with your evidence and allow investigation. Acknowledge the complexity of the evidence.
Anyway, I get migraines too. They are awful. I don't have the option of never being exposed to a blinking light again. Lights are going to blink. I am tilting at windmills. People don't have to wear perfume and cologne and scented deodorant. They probably will though. It is very unfortunate that Grenville develops migraines as the result of exposure to "fragrance". But I don't think we get to make the world in the manner most suitable to us. I feel for people who are cut off from the ordinary world by similar experiences -- it would be terrible. I don't think this is a particularly good case for everyone else.
Grenville finds herself becoming ill after spending the day in the scented and fragrant world. She determines her illness is caused by "fragrance" a sort of catch-all term she uses to describe anything added to scent a product, to the point of duct-taping up hotel doors (and she knows how this makes her look, do not worry). Grenville goes into a rabbit warren of investigation of what chemical compounds go into consumer products and whether that is dangerous (don't worry! She thinks yes!).
Basically Grenville's thought process goes like this: I get migraines as a result of exposure to perfume -- all perfumes and fragrances are the same -- people are being exposed to "unnatural" "fragrances" in higher numbers than ever before -- this is leading to illness because anything natural is good, and anything unnatural is bad -- if something is bad for me it must be bad for everyone else as well.
I am not a scientist, but I don't think the science here is particularly well deployed -- certainly there are components of "fragrance" that are a bit alarming. But then again, putting a big list of the terrifying laboratory names of ingredients doesn't necessarily mean much. The suggestion that "fragrance" is causing MS is particularly ill-considered. In addition, Grenville adopts a folksy tone, which allows her to suggest and insinuate without actually openly saying what she means. I am a bit wary of this -- be open with your evidence and allow investigation. Acknowledge the complexity of the evidence.
Anyway, I get migraines too. They are awful. I don't have the option of never being exposed to a blinking light again. Lights are going to blink. I am tilting at windmills. People don't have to wear perfume and cologne and scented deodorant. They probably will though. It is very unfortunate that Grenville develops migraines as the result of exposure to "fragrance". But I don't think we get to make the world in the manner most suitable to us. I feel for people who are cut off from the ordinary world by similar experiences -- it would be terrible. I don't think this is a particularly good case for everyone else.
June 14, 2018
I am so glad I came across this book and the information inside.
I have suffered with breathlessness from perfume and scented products for a long time now but have never seen it discussed in magazines or elsewhere. It was only through reading this book and Grenville's research that I now know how common this is. The book also reveals the reason why it is so common and the hidden secrets in perfume production. A truly fascinating book.
I was given this book by NetGalley and the publisher. This is my voluntary and impartial review.
I have suffered with breathlessness from perfume and scented products for a long time now but have never seen it discussed in magazines or elsewhere. It was only through reading this book and Grenville's research that I now know how common this is. The book also reveals the reason why it is so common and the hidden secrets in perfume production. A truly fascinating book.
I was given this book by NetGalley and the publisher. This is my voluntary and impartial review.
April 12, 2018
Easy to read, hard to ignore. I was predisposed to this book after losing many days of my life to migraine triggered by fragrance. But oh my goodness, I had no idea. This is such an important topic and carefully researched work. Thank you so much for writing this Kate Grenville. I look forward to the day when the danger and general craziness of fragrance is more widely understood.
April 17, 2017
So glad this book was written; it seems it's not just me who is affected by the clouds of fragrance we're subjected to. You'll re-think your need for perfumed laundry powder, fragranced bin liners, room 'fresheners', soy wax melts, the list goes on and on...
October 16, 2019
Like a very long essay.
February 27, 2020
Kate Grenville has achieved her objective with me. After listening to The Case Against Fragrance I now feel guilty for taking the room diffuser my partner gave me for Christmas to work and then after finding the scent too overpowering and it giving my headache when it was enclosed in my office, putting it out in the greater office and reception area to give everyone a fragrance headache.
This is a rather one sided look into fragrance and the fragrance industry but it had a nice blend of description with the science. It's unfortunate that scientific terminology and chemical names do not go well in an audiobook, but if you aren't fixated on the detail and are happy with the overall story, then this book will do you fine.
Really there is no escaping exposure to fragrance, but the book does help in getting you to consider some external factors that may be causing your headache, allergic reaction or other illness. I have a few products that I am now keen to test for producing symptoms like headache, nausea and sneezing.
Ultimately, I think I will be more conscious of the products I buy and their fragrances. I've never been much of a consumer of scented candles, essential oils or incense, but there are other ways I can reduce our household's contribution to fragrance pollution. Having read The Case Against Fragrance hasn't put an end to me using perfume, but I might be more frugal in applying it, and I would definitely refrain from using perfume if someone told me it made them feel sick.
This is a rather one sided look into fragrance and the fragrance industry but it had a nice blend of description with the science. It's unfortunate that scientific terminology and chemical names do not go well in an audiobook, but if you aren't fixated on the detail and are happy with the overall story, then this book will do you fine.
Really there is no escaping exposure to fragrance, but the book does help in getting you to consider some external factors that may be causing your headache, allergic reaction or other illness. I have a few products that I am now keen to test for producing symptoms like headache, nausea and sneezing.
Ultimately, I think I will be more conscious of the products I buy and their fragrances. I've never been much of a consumer of scented candles, essential oils or incense, but there are other ways I can reduce our household's contribution to fragrance pollution. Having read The Case Against Fragrance hasn't put an end to me using perfume, but I might be more frugal in applying it, and I would definitely refrain from using perfume if someone told me it made them feel sick.
June 6, 2017
I am someone who does experience annoying symptoms when someone sits next to me wearing perfume or when I'm stuck on a train full of heavily cologne-d men, so I was really interested in reading this book to learn a bit more about fragrance and it's impacts. I found Grenville's discussion of regulations and chemical testing informative and relevant, and the information about possible correlations and side effects pretty scary! I already avoid a lot of frangranced products because I do suffer from excema, but I don't generally check the labels as thoroughly as I could, and didn't even think about checking some products mentioned. As this is a non-fiction book with a fair amount of scientific discussion, the writing is not as enjoyable as in Grenville's novels (as I expected), but she's straight to the point, and relates her own experiences and opinions to her findings, which keeps it interesting, and the short length means she doesn't ramble or repeat herself needlessly which I appreciate. Overall an interesting read.
August 17, 2017
Kate Grenville on a book tour starts getting headaches feeling ill.As she starts seeking cures answers to why she will suddenly get a headache she zeroes in on cologne&other perfumed products even cleaning products,Kate takes us on her investigation learning about the chemicals in cologne perfumed products.Told in a true mystery style her real intimate search for help kept me turning the pages&I learned about chemicals dangers of cologne a fascinating valuable read,Thanks to Net Galley &Textbpublishing for a free advanced readers copy for an honest review.
August 29, 2024
An interesting, informative non fiction book about how artificial fragrances can cause headaches and general illness. Some synthetic chemicals have been linked to asthma and allergies.
The author highlights that there are many scented products that have potentially damaging ingredients. Regulatory authorities do not test all the ingredients involved in making a particular fragrance. Due to copyright laws, manufacturers are not required to disclose all the ingredients that make a particular fragrance.
This book was first published in 2017.
The author highlights that there are many scented products that have potentially damaging ingredients. Regulatory authorities do not test all the ingredients involved in making a particular fragrance. Due to copyright laws, manufacturers are not required to disclose all the ingredients that make a particular fragrance.
This book was first published in 2017.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews