(www.science.org)

204 points XzetaU8 | 2 comments | 29 Jun 25 17:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.509s | source

Show context

giantg2 ◴[29 Jun 25 18:25 UTC] No.44415200[source]▶

With how bad for us the common fragrances are in regards to things like cancer risk, endocrine disruption, etc, its surprising that nothing has changed. Most products have fragrance free alternatives.

replies(5): >>44415266 #>>44415279 #>>44415490 #>>44415554 #>>44415989 #

1. alwa ◴[29 Jun 25 18:34 UTC] No.44415266[source]▶

>>44415200 #

In fact, it was specifically one of those alternatives which was under test here:

“a fragrance-free body lotion containing linoleic acid (Neutral, Unilever body lotion for sensitive skin; 0% colorants and 0% perfume)”

Sounds like they blame the phenoxyethanol? Which serves a preservative kind of role?

replies(1): >>44416055 #

2. giantg2 ◴[29 Jun 25 20:16 UTC] No.44416055[source]▶

>>44415266 (TP) #

Yeah, my comment was just to add that scents have so many other issues than just what's in the article.

↑

Personal care products disrupt the human oxidation field