Talk:Perfume intolerance

Heading text

Info about the topic of Perfume intolerance

• http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?hl=en&safe=strict&q=%22perfume%20intolerance%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws

--222.67.205.143 (talk) 10:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

• http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=en&safe=strict&q=%22perfume%20intolerance%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=sw

--222.67.205.143 (talk) 10:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Also known as Fragrance sensitivity:

• http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&safe=strict&q=%22fragrance%20sensitivity%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.39.240.134 (talk) 17:41, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Deletion candidate?

This artice needs some _serious_ cleanup and ref improvement. Websites giving medical advice is in itself not reliable sources. Ref. to the actual study, not the semi-serious involved part. Martinor (talk) 20:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC) It might also be an idea to actually check that all the sources given verify the article text, as one of them don't (tell me if i'm wrong, couldn't find it). Martinor (talk) 21:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree. This article needs deleted. Maybe they should replace it with the AMA Fragrance Regulation recognizing Fragrance Sensitivity. ~2026-48102-58 (talk) 00:37, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Most of this article is fiction

The only thing that matches the sources is a few symptoms. The rest seems to come from sources that give info that could be about allergies in general or deodorants. I would like to chop this down to a sentence or two, and perhaps merge into allergy. Comments? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Correct. Perfume Allergy and Perfume Sensitivity is two separate topics, with coordinating research. People with allergic IgE allergies are having different reactions than someone with a Sensitivity that is normally a Mast Cell issue or neurological issue. ~2026-48102-58 (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Done. I've ditched all the sources used, even the most credible of the lot, http://www.exitallergy.com/allergy-articles/allergy-and-deodorant.php because they wrote "lips and skip" instead of "lips and skin". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure this is sufficient reason for removing a source, however since the link to exitallergy seems to be unavailable now, it becomes an academic point.

This page seems to be a reasonable start in describing an emerging subject.There are increasing contributions to this topic in research journals, for example -

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10416290 A controlled comparison of symptoms and chemical intolerances reported by Gulf War veterans, implant recipients and persons with multiple chemical sensitivity.

- which is referenced on the wikipedea multiple chemical sensitivity page. I don't think it is reasonable to assert that this page is 'mostly fiction' therefore, rather that it's data is under-researched and referenced at present. I would like to see the page edited for grammatical and spelling errors and hope to do this at the same time as tightening up its content, and linking it to the MCS page.

The opening sentences do seem contradictory, however -

"Perfume intolerance is a condition wherein people exhibit sensitivity or quasi-allergic reations to ingredients in perfume. The most common quasi-allergic reactions to perfume or fragrances added to products is contact dermatitis,[1][2] although other symptoms may occur, including allergic conjunctivitis.[3] Perfume intolerance However, two studies show that inhalant like allergies and sensitivity/intolerances are experienced by a subset of the US population, in the form of asthma and chemical sensitivities."

- the term 'quasi-allergic' is rather loaded, especially as the next sentence refers to 'allergic' conjunctivitis and the following one 'inhalant like allergies'. I would therefore like to suggest 'allergic-type' symptoms instead of 'quasi-allergic' in the meantime.

There is also a case for pointing out that a multitude of unknown ingredients can legally be included in a product under the label 'fragrance' or 'perfume', and to list a few more of them, rather than just Cinnemaldehyde. This kind of information would be useful to researchers and MCS sufferers and would be more appropriate here than on the main MCS page.

Ashleigh Marsh (talk) 18:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I also think it's worth pointing out that it's unlikely one could be allergic to perfumes in general, as they tend to have quite a variety of ingredients. It's like saying you're allergic to vegetables. Furthermore, the only ingredient that is common to most perfumes is the particular solvent used, which is usually ethanol. It therefore stands to reason that someone who is indeed allergic to ethanol would therefore be allergic to alcoholic beverages which principally contain it. I would say it's more likely that a majority of people claiming a "perfume allergy" are simply experiencing the nocebo effect; they've become convinced that the smells commonly associated with perfumes cause an allergic reaction and thus experience some of the effects (eye watering, increased mucous secretion, etc). It probably stems from possible obsessive-compulsive origins; the person becoming preoccupied with the smell of strong perfumes and escalating the obsessive thought patterns into a nocebo-condition. The second part of this post is just conjecture, but based on reasonable extrapolation that should be backed up by a study. The first part however is pure logic, I think it stands on it's own. LiamSP (talk) 02:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

The entire article seems dubious, and the sources don't meet WP:MEDRS. I would suggest maybe rolling it into the MCS article. What we're talking about here is essentially MCS. --sciencewatcher (talk) 05:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

The problem with this argument is that it sounds logical only because it starts by defining the problem incorrectly.

Nobody needs to be “allergic to perfume in general” for perfume allergy to be a real phenomenon. People are allergic to specific fragrance chemicals, and perfumes are mixtures containing numerous fragrance compounds. The European Commission has explicitly recognized fragrance allergy as a significant and relevant problem and, historically, identified 26 fragrance allergens requiring individual labelling. Taken down to 24 because two were banned. Its scientific review subsequently recently identified 54 individual fragrance substances and 28 natural extracts as established contact allergens in humans, with additional substances classified as likely or possible allergens. The EU has since expanded its labelling requirements to include 56 additional fragrance allergens.

So, the “allergic to vegetables” analogy is a false analogy too. Someone can be allergic to peanuts without being allergic to every food in the supermarket, and someone can be allergic to particular fragrance compounds without being allergic to every molecule in every perfume.

The ethanol argument is another non sequitur. Fragrance allergy is not synonymous with ethanol allergy. Allergic contact dermatitis from fragrance is a recognized immune reaction to particular fragrance chemicals; ethanol being a common solvent does not make ethanol the allergen. Indeed, clinical references specifically describe fragrance allergy as allergic contact dermatitis caused by fragrance chemicals, and patch testing is used to identify the relevant allergens. Airborne Contact Dermatitis is now also recognized as these aerosols will land on your skin from airborne sources like air fresheners.

And the claim that people reporting reactions are therefore probably experiencing a “nocebo effect,” much less that this supposedly “probably stems from obsessive-compulsive origins,” is not logic at all. It is conjecture, and remarkably prejudicial conjecture at that. You actually admit that the second half is conjecture, while simultaneously presenting it as a “reasonable extrapolation.” That's precisely the sort of unsupported speculation that does not belong in this discussion.

There is also an important distinction being completely missed here: allergic reactions, irritant reactions, and other adverse responses to fragranced products are not necessarily the same thing. Reserch distinguishes allergic contact dermatitis from irritant reactions and notes that fragrance exposure can produce dermatitis and trigger asthma flares in susceptible people.

The irony is that the comment invokes “pure logic” immediately after making a basic category error. The actual evidence says that fragrance allergy is real, that numerous individual fragrance substances can act as allergens, that people can be sensitized to multiple fragrance chemicals, and that identifying those substances is precisely why allergen labelling exists. Outside of allergies people can also have non-allergenic reactions, including mast cells, and various CNS reactions to these VOCs found in fragrance mixtures.

Diagnosing strangers with a nocebo condition or implying OCD without evidence isn't logic—it is speculation dressed up as medical reasoning. ~2026-48102-58 (talk) 00:19, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. — Diannaa (talk) 01:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Symptoms

From personal experience, blinding tears can be a symptom. Dodson et al. refer to "mucosal symptoms" but don't specify tears.173.66.5.216 (talk) 17:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Alternative medicine or not?

MCS's article claims it's "unrecognized and controversial" and lumps it in alternative medicine, but this article takes "a form of MCS" as uncontroversial and not alternative medicine. Which is it? 129.101.213.116 (talk) 07:23, 5 February 2022 (UTC)