Don’t take our word for it. Here’s every fact on this site, with its evidence grade, its caveats, and a link to the source, so you can check us.
We start you on the strong ones: findings that have been replicated or come from one large, well-controlled study. Moderate and weak facts are here too, labeled for what they are. Use “Link to this fact” to share a single card.
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Several store-brand and name-brand antibacterial bandages (including Care Band, Curad, CVS, Equate, Top Care, Up & Up, Urgo, Walgreens) and Hansaplast wound spray are reported to contain benzalkonium chloride.
Weak evidence: Brand list is the authors' and reflects 2018; formulations change.
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Behentrimonium chloride appears in the CIR industry concentration survey mostly at 2-5% in hair conditioners and 2-3% in hair dyes, with no concentration reported for body lotions or moisturizers (six uses listed), so body-lotion use at 1-5% claimed elsewhere is not documented in the survey.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
The survey omits concentrations for several categories; absence of a figure is not evidence that no such products exist. CIR is financed by the Personal Care Products Council, the cosmetics industry trade association.
Source: Becker et al. 2012 (CIR), Int J Toxicol, International Journal of Toxicology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Benzalkonium chloride is added to some plaster of Paris bandages (the manufacturer of the tested brand confirmed it) but not all; two other brands believed to lack it gave negative patch tests in this patient.
Weak evidence: One patient; the authors say the two comparison products are benzalkonium chloride-free only 'to the best of our knowledge'.
Source: Wong and Watson 2001, Australasian Journal of Dermatology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
A commercial product database (SkinSAFE) lists 10,998 skin care products containing benzalkonium chloride or a related quaternary ammonium compound such as benzethonium chloride, all liquids such as moisturizers, liquid soaps, shampoos and conditioners.
Weak evidence: Authors' relay of one commercial database; not independently counted; product list not given.
Source: [[src-2018-trends-patch-testing-mayo-clinic-standard-series|Veverka 2018]], Dermatitis® Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
In the Mexican study, DEHP metabolites were higher among body lotion and deodorant users, but the differences largely disappeared among women who did not drink bottled water, so cosmetic and packaging routes could not be separated.
Weak evidence: DEHP is not a fragrance ingredient; do not turn this into a fragrance claim. Multiple comparisons and low power acknowledged by the authors.
Source: Romero-Franco 2011, Environment International Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Self-reported survey
In this Swedish sample the diethyl phthalate metabolite MEP was not higher with fragrance use in mothers or children; it was higher with sunscreen (mothers) and eye make-up (children, only 6 users), in contrast to US studies where perfume use was the strongest MEP predictor.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Frequency-of-use question rather than 24-hour recall, very few weekly fragrance users (5 children), borderline CIs, Swedish MEP far below US levels; a null in a small sample, not evidence that perfume is free of DEP.
Source: Larsson 2014, Environment International Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
The only fragrance-solvent marker in this study, urinary MEP (from diethyl phthalate), was folded into a five-metabolite 'personal care product' phthalate sum that was not significantly associated with ADHD-type behavior overall (RR 1.16, 0.98-1.37).
Weak evidence.
Caveats
The sum is dominated by dibutyl-type metabolites; MEP was not analyzed alone in the PDF; hyperactivity subset 1.25 (1.07-1.47) was nominally significant; cannot separate DEP from the fragrance mixture it rides in.
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
In the same study, scented household cleaning products were not linked to higher levels of any measured chemical, and urine BPA was lower in children from homes that used them (ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.98), so 'scented products' did not behave as one exposure.
Weak evidence: Likely chance or residual confounding on a wide multi-model estimate; shows heterogeneity of product categories rather than a protective effect.
Source: Fandiño-Del-Rio 2024, Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Pools and wastewater treatment can chlorinate or brominate phenolic personal-care ingredients such as parabens, bisphenols and UV filters, creating derivatives that are not on any label; the authors call for toxicity work on these emerging products.
Weak evidence: The paper tested lab-made derivatives and cites environmental and urine levels from the authors' own earlier review; it did not measure any in consumer products.
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Few surveyed UAE women knew how fragrance is regulated: only 11.9% knew fragrance chemicals need not be fully disclosed on labels, 30.2% knew fragranced products emit hazardous air pollutants, and 82.2% believed natural ingredients are healthier.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Open-link snowball sample of 461 women, mostly young and university-educated; self-report, no exposure measurement; not weighted, so not a UAE prevalence. Knowledge items copied from Klaschka/Steinemann; Germany 2019 gave 27.5% and 55.6% on the disclosure and natural items.
Source: AlBlooshi 2026, Frontiers in Toxicology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
GC-MS of the tested perfume listed 18 library-matched volatiles by peak-area percent, including linalool, methyl ionones, linalyl anthranilate, Ambrox and macrocyclic musk-type compounds (wiki reading of library names), with the largest peak 26.9% of area.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Peak area is not concentration; several formulas and library scores in the table look wrong (one match score of 198); ethanol and solvent not reported; identification is by library match only.
Source: Al-Sowayan 2026, Frontiers in Pharmacology Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
In a week-long study of 7 working adults in Leipzig, the air at home made up 42-73% of the airborne chemicals they breathed, more than the outdoor air or their workplaces.
Weak evidence: N=7, one week, 25 VOCs; home share includes infiltrated outdoor air.
Source: Gokhale 2008, Science of the Total Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
In a real shower test, limonene in the bathroom air rose to about 80, 150, and 380 ppb as the amount of shower product went up, roughly in proportion to the amount used.
Weak evidence: One participant, one bathroom, PTR-MS; limonene only; peaks last minutes.
Indoor air / Hypothesis
A computer model of a morning shower found fragrance terpenes from the products react with indoor ozone to make formaldehyde (about +4 ppb), other aldehydes, irritant PAN-type nitrates, and a little fine particle matter, even with strong ventilation.
Weak evidence: Modeled (INDCM), not measured; increments are small and last about an hour; water-soluble products may dissolve in shower water, so these are upper limits.
Indoor air / Animal study
A continuously running essential-oil diffuser is now the exposure pattern with an animal result attached to it: continuous ambient lavender exposure advanced puberty in rats, while a larger once-daily nasal dose did not.
Weak evidence: Neither exposure was quantified, so the comparison shows a pattern, not a dose-response; with five animals per group the difference rests partly on one outlier.
Source: Kim & Lim 2022, Journal of Korean Medical Science Link to this fact
Indoor air / Instrument measurement
In a small closed test room, three short bursts of aerosol hairspray pushed fine-particle (PM2.5) readings to about 90 µg/m³, roughly 2.5 times the US 24-hour outdoor standard, though only for minutes.
Weak evidence: Uncalibrated consumer monitor; tiny room; short peak vs 24-h standard; primary spray aerosol, no fragrance characterized.
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
A fresh, 10-minute-old mixture of limonene and ozone, at concentrations close to the high end measured in real homes and offices, made people's eyes blink significantly more often in a small controlled study, at roughly 2,000 times less limonene than pure limonene alone needs to irritate eyes.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
This is the paper's own LOEL (residual 0.23 mg/m3 limonene + 0.08 mg/m3 ozone, +17%, p=0.003) and was previously mis-cited on our evidence base to Klenø & Wolkoff 2004. Now verified as primary, but the same lab's own comparable re-test of Klenø & Wolkoff 2004 gave a 3.5x smaller effect (12% vs 42%) at nearly identical residual concentrations, and no dose-response held across the paper's own four LOPs mixtures (R2=0.7, ns).
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Methacrolein, a known limonene/isoprene ozonolysis product, produced a similarly-sized eye-blink-frequency increase on its own (+18% at 286 ppb) as the freshly reacted limonene-ozone mixture did, supporting the idea that it is reaction products, not parent limonene, that irritate eyes.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Methacrolein was tested alone, not measured inside the LOPs mixtures, so this is an analogy of magnitude, not a demonstration that methacrolein specifically drives the limonene-ozone effect. Single small study, single lab.
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Whether an office air-conditioning filter was new or had been in service for about 10 months made no measurable difference to ozone or particle chemistry, or to occupants' reported symptoms, during ozone-limonene exposure.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Compares only new vs. moderately used (MERV 13) filters at fixed ventilation/recirculation rates; does not test badly fouled filters or other filter grades, so it should not be read as showing filter replacement is never protective.
Indoor air / Review of other studies
During ordinary house cleaning with bleach, chlorine gas concentrations can peak at up to about 0.5 parts per million, and trichloramine is thought to reach similar concentrations when bleach reacts with ammonia or other nitrogen-containing substances.
Weak evidence: This is the authors citing a separate domestic-cleaner cohort study (their own ref. 15) as background, not a measurement made on the children or homes in this study.
Source: Nickmilder, Carbonnelle & Bernard 2007, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
A single portable air cleaner's benefit reached into a nearby room without its own cleaner, cutting PM2.5 by about 58% and PM10 by about 60% on average, though this secondary-room reduction did not reach statistical significance across the whole sample.
Weak evidence: Overall WSRT p=0.089 (PM2.5) and p=0.114 (PM10) in the secondary room; only the daytime-only comparison was borderline significant (p<0.1).
Source: Lu 2024, Aerosol and Air Quality Research Link to this fact
Indoor air / Lab study (cells or chemistry)
This study's in vitro bronchial-cell BKC aerosol doses used for transcriptomics (40.5-634.8 ng/cm2, derived from real commercial disinfectant concentrations of 0.1-0.4% BKC) are roughly comparable in order of magnitude to independently estimated human nasal-spray epithelial doses from approved BKC-preserved pharmaceutical products (about 90-3,020 ng/cm2, per Johnson 2018), unlike many mechanistic-study doses in the wiki that sit orders of magnitude above measured real-world exposure.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Cross-source, order-of-magnitude comparison only: the product type (disinfectant vs. pharmaceutical), BKC concentration, tissue (bronchial vs. nasal) and deposition model all differ between the two studies, so this is not a validated equivalence.
Source: Kim et al. 2025, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Link to this fact
Indoor air / Review of other studies
Benzo[a]pyrene levels in fumes from 12 tested scented candles ranged from 0.1 to 7.5 ng/m3, against a WHO guideline value of 1 ng/m3.
Weak evidence: Secondhand citation from this review (Orecchio 2011 not independently read for this evidence base); not this paper's own measurement.
Source: Adamowicz 2019, Cancer Prevention Research Link to this fact
Indoor air / Review of other studies
Measured benzene and naphthalene concentrations emitted by burning candles were reported below the standards considered to exert a toxic biological effect, while sulfur dioxide and benzopyrene concentrations might exceed recommended values in some tested candles.
Weak evidence: Secondhand summary of multiple chamber studies (Derudi, Orecchio) not independently read for this evidence base; heterogeneous across candle brands/types.
Source: Adamowicz 2019, Cancer Prevention Research Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Burning scented candles indoors can release formaldehyde, CO2, and volatile organic compounds at levels above indoor background.
Weak evidence: Cites a secondary source (an air-freshener book chapter) not otherwise in this evidence base; not independently checked here against primary chamber measurements.
Source: Nazir et al. 2024, Annals of Medicine & Surgery Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Lighting one scented candle for 5 minutes in an ordinary room raised PM10 near the candle (1.52x baseline, 39.9 ug/m3) and kept PM2.5/PM1 elevated for a full hour 3 m and 6 m away (up to 1.97x baseline, ~26-31 ug/m3), with all measured peaks staying below Korea's 24-hour indoor air quality guideline (100 ug/m3 PM10, 50 ug/m3 PM2.5).
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Pilot study of 3 residential houses, one unspecified scented candle burned once for 5 minutes; no replication across candle types, scents, or house configurations, and no chemical (VOC/PAH) measurements.
Source: Yun et al. 2025, Scientific Reports Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Finer particles (PM2.5, PM1) from a lit scented candle did not simply decay with distance: their concentration kept rising over the hour measured at 3 m and 6 m from the candle, while PM10 peaked and declined fastest at the candle itself, consistent with warm particle-laden air traveling along the ceiling into adjacent spaces (the Coanda effect).
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Single pilot measurement per location per house (3 houses); mechanism (Coanda effect) is the authors' interpretation, not directly visualized or measured (e.g., no airflow tracer or thermal imaging).
Source: Yun et al. 2025, Scientific Reports Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
After lighting a scented candle, a nano-sized bacterial extracellular vesicle population (Phyllobacterium myrsinacearum n-ABE) rose from a minor pre-burn component to 23.8-24.0% relative abundance at the candle spot and 6 m away, the first reported detection of this species' extracellular vesicles in indoor air; the authors attribute this to heat/combustion-triggered growth or apoptosis of the existing airborne bacterial population, not a new bacterial source.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Single pilot study (3 houses), no independent no-candle control run in parallel (before/after design only), no health-outcome or exposure-dose measurement, and the growth-vs-apoptosis mechanism is the authors' proposed interpretation rather than a directly demonstrated causal pathway.
Source: Yun et al. 2025, Scientific Reports Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
In the one NASA 1989 defoliation test (Marginata, benzene), the plant with all its leaves cut off removed slightly MORE benzene from the sealed chamber over 24 hours (70%) than the same species with full foliage (66%), suggesting root/soil microorganisms, not leaves, did most of the removal.
Weak evidence: Single species tested this way (n=1 comparison), report itself says the mechanism 'cannot be fully explained at this writing'.
Source: Wolverton 1989 Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Thermal degradation and combustion of styrene-containing polymers (such as polystyrene) releases styrene into the air; in one measurement of smoke from municipal structural fires, styrene along with benzene, toluene, naphthalene, and 1,3-butadiene accounted for 31% of total VOC concentration.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Single cited study (Austin et al. 2001) of structural-fire smoke, not candle combustion or routine household conditions; IARC 2019 does not discuss candles specifically and this should not be extended to a candle-specific claim.
Source: IARC 2019 (Vol. 121) Link to this fact
Indoor air / Government agency
EPA warns that overwatered indoor houseplants can promote growth of microorganisms in the soil that may affect allergic individuals.
Weak evidence: Assertion, no measurement or citation given.
Source: US EPA, "The Inside Story" Link to this fact
Indoor air / Review of other studies
Diethyl phthalate (DEP), the phthalate most consistently tied to fragrance use, has been detected in household dust in a German study, alongside the plasticizer phthalates DEHP, DINP, and DBP.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Relayed secondhand through Crinnion 2010, a narrative review in a naturopathic-medicine journal already flagged elsewhere in this evidence base for reproducing outdated/imprecise figures; the underlying German house-dust study itself is not in our evidence base and has not been checked directly. Presence in dust does not establish that fragrance products (rather than other DEP sources, e.g. plastics) are the dust's source, and does not establish an ongoing-exposure mechanism or a health effect.
Source: German house-dust study, via Crinnion 2010, Alternative Medicine Review Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
In a two-week home-exposure study of 8 people, everyone had stopped noticing a constant pleasant household odor within two weeks, but when the odor was removed, only half had fully regained their sense of it after another two weeks, and one person had not recovered at all.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
N=8, single small study (Dalton & Wysocki 1996) described secondhand by this review; its exact participant count and odorants conflict with how the same senior author's own 2000 review describes an apparently related dataset (n=10, different odorants) — see C367.
Source: Pellegrino 2017, Physiology & Behavior Industry-funded Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Room surfaces appeared to soak up the solvent and re-release it, flattening and extending the decay in the house; a model with a re-emitting sink matched measured levels, while a model without one over-predicted.
Weak evidence: The sink parameters were estimated from other experiments and fitted, not measured directly; stagnant air pockets were argued against but not excluded.
Source: Tichenor 1990, Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
In a 1996 Hong Kong pilot, five freshly dry-cleaned garments stored in a poorly ventilated, carpeted bedroom wardrobe pushed bedroom perchloroethylene (PCE) to 494 micrograms per cubic meter on the first day, against outdoor readings below about 1 microgram.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
One bedroom per ventilation condition (3 total), no randomization, 24-h tube samples; ventilation not measured during the tests; government-commissioned (no industry funding); not children or health outcomes.
Source: Chao 1998, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The same dry-cleaned clothing gave far lower bedroom air levels where windows were open or ventilation was high: five garments peaked at about 76 and 100 micrograms per cubic meter in two better-ventilated Hong Kong bedrooms, versus 494 in the closed-up one.
Weak evidence: Three rooms; rooms also differ in carpet, floor level and AC use; ventilation rates (0.3 vs 2.7 vs 14 air changes per hour) come from earlier tracer tests, not from these runs.
Source: Chao 1998, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Bedroom PCE from newly dry-cleaned clothes fell by roughly 80 to 90 percent over seven days in the open-window rooms (for example about 76 to 12, and 100 to 13 micrograms per cubic meter), but the closed bedroom stayed about 6 times the California cancer benchmark of 16.9 on day 7.
Weak evidence: Five-garment bags-off tests only; 7 daily values from one occupied room each; benchmark is a lifetime average, daily values are not lifetime exposures.
Source: Chao 1998, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Leaving the dry cleaner's plastic bags on delayed the room-air peak by a day or more and usually lowered the week's average, but the bags were never removed in the tests, so the study does not show that the clothes release less solvent overall.
Weak evidence: Seven-day means were lower bags-on in 5 of 6 comparisons and equal at Site B with five garments; one fabric type, one cleaner; no post-bag-removal phase.
Source: Chao 1998, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The authors judged that the PCE from dry-cleaned clothing is not itself a major health concern in Hong Kong because most households dry-clean rarely and ventilate, but high levels can occur in poorly ventilated homes with frequent dry cleaning.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Authors' judgment from 3 rooms and a 500-household phone survey (64.6% dry-clean; 5% every 2-3 days, 34% every few months, 39% yearly); their own tables show some days above the CARB benchmark at all three sites.
Source: Chao 1998, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
In a 1999 Harvard study of six dry cleaners, pressing cut the perchloroethylene (PCE) left in dry-cleaned acetate cloth by about three-quarters (75%, SE 4%): about 1400 ug/g unpressed versus 680 ug/g pressed.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Six convenience-sampled shops, 25 cloths, one fabric (acetate, the highest-residual fabric); removal efficiency from three shops and eight pairs; 75% extraction recovery not corrected for; no funder stated.
Source: Brand 1999, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The same two patients did not react when re-exposed to isoeugenol at 10 µg/m³, a level the authors say a closed room with a plug-in containing 0.2% isoeugenol could reach in the worst case.
Weak evidence: Only 2 people; the 10 µg/m³ worst-case figure is the authors' own unpublished measurement.
Source: Schnuch 2010, British Journal of Dermatology Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Silk swatches held no detectable PCE at any of the seven dry cleaners in a 2011 study, while polyester, wool, and cotton did.
Weak evidence: One silk type (dupioni), one jacket per shop; the authors suggest tight fiber packing but did not test why, and methanol extraction could miss tightly bound solvent.
Source: Sherlach 2011, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Wool dry cleaned repeatedly at the same shop kept absorbing more PCE with each cycle (about 47 nmol/cm2 after one cleaning to about 195 after six, read from Fig. 5), while cotton and polyester leveled off.
Weak evidence: One shop, one jacket, 1-6 cycles, replicate extractions not independent garments; values read from a chart.
Source: Sherlach 2011, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
About half of the PCE in dry-cleaned wool swatches evaporated in 7 days at room temperature, whether the swatch was left open or kept in the cleaner's plastic.
Weak evidence: Wool from one shop; supplementary figures not in the paper; says nothing about how much remains safe to wear or store.
Source: Sherlach 2011, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
Smoldering Palo Santo and essential-oil candle chimneys raised spa room VOC even before any massage began.
Weak evidence: One Palo Santo day in one salon; attribution is the authors' inference, not tested.
Source: Pytel 2021, Environmental Science and Pollution Research Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The authors estimate clothing contributes about 10% of formaldehyde exposure and air inhalation about 90%.
Weak evidence: The 90% figure comes from the authors' own earlier Catalan indoor-air study, not measured here; clothing is not the main formaldehyde source by their model.
Indoor air / Other evidence
Hot, dry car cabins shift the particles from a spray smaller: at 25 degrees C the driver-seat nanoparticle share reached about 81% (versus about 65% at 10-20 degrees C).
Weak evidence: Single SUV and spray; the humidity explanation is the authors' interpretation; text and abstract disagree on the size of the rise (25.3 +/- 0.4% vs +/- 3.2%).
Source: Lee 2024, Science of The Total Environment Link to this fact
Indoor air / Measured in people or real products
The five cleaners with the highest hazard indices in the chamber test were all conventional: a glass cleaner driven by 2-butoxyethanol, isopropanol, and toluene (index about 20, read from Fig. 5), two bleach cleaners driven by chloroform, and two driven by formaldehyde.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
EWG-authored (advocacy nonprofit that ranks cleaners and licenses EWG VERIFIED to cleaner makers); Skyline Foundation grant; unblinded; Hazard index compares a 4-h chamber peak with exposure limits, some occupational, covering only 48% of emitted VOC mass; approximate values read from Fig. 5; mean hazard index differences were not statistically significant.
Indoor air / Other evidence
EWG warned that formaldehyde may form when terpenes from citrus and pine oil cleaners or essential-oil scents react with ozone in indoor air.
Weak evidence: Statement only on this page. Chamber studies elsewhere in our evidence base support the chemistry, but how much forms in a real home varies widely.
Source: EWG press release, Sept. 10, 2012, EWG press release (web page) Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
EPA's 2006 assessment found modeled inhalation margins for home mopping, wiping, trigger spray, aerosol deodorizer and carpet spray at 820 to 50,000 against a target of 100.
Weak evidence: Modeled with surrogate exposure data, an oral rabbit study as the inhalation endpoint, and judgment-based amounts handled; EPA itself called for confirmatory exposure data.
Source: EPA RED 2006 Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The county quotes dry-cleaned-wool scenarios of perchloroethylene up to 240 milligrams per cubic meter in a sealed 3.4 m3 closet and 620 in a warm car, assuming all residual solvent vaporizes.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Theoretical ceilings with no ventilation; the figures differ from the ppm values on our Sherlach 2011 page (about 50 and 126 ppm, roughly 340 and 850 mg/m3), so they are not reconciled; not measured exposure.
Source: SCDHS 2018 Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
On cotton and polyester, fabric held more fragrance on cotton than polyester at 1 hour (geraniol about 182 vs 50 µM/g, eugenol about 261 vs 59), but the musk stayed several times higher on cotton at every time point.
Weak evidence: The paper's highlight says the fibers recovered similar amounts; its own Table 3 shows the musk gap persists. Room temperature only, one cotton and one polyester T-shirt, n = 3.
Indoor air / Other evidence
Baking soda raised the pH of the waste liquid from about 6 to 8.0-8.2 and lowered volatile acids by 17-23%, yet ammonia in the liquid rose (270 to up to 330 mg/L), so a deodorizer that cuts perceived odor can still shift which smelly chemicals are present.
Weak evidence: Ammonia was measured in the liquid, not the air, and the authors' argument that little of it evaporates at pH 8.2 is unmeasured reasoning.
Source: Qamaruz-Zaman 2015, Waste Management Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The CIR panel applied its standard 'not respirable' spray argument (95-99% of droplets over 10 micrometers) to a 4% hydrogen peroxide aerosol hair spray without saying whether it is a propellant spray, while noting propellant sprays yield a greater fraction of small droplets.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Industry-funded panel boilerplate, from the report's Use section (p. 8S); the Discussion (p. 58S) says only that the data suggest little potential for respiratory effects at relevant doses. The Panel's later respiratory data on propellant sprays are covered under C363.
Source: Becker et al. 2024, International Journal of Toxicology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
CTV reported, from her letters, that indoor cigarette and cannabis smoke moved through her building's ventilation, that more chemical cleaners were used in hallways, and that she sealed her bedroom vents and lived mostly in that room.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Her account via CTV; the Salvation Army, her landlord, replied only "we have nothing further to add" to her allegations. No air measurements. Death by MAiD is the subject; add 988 line in published use.
Source: CTV News, April 2022 (via Smoke-Free Housing BC; redacted copy), CTV News (news article) Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
OSHA says concentrations of many VOCs are consistently higher indoors, 'up to ten times higher', than outdoors, and lists cleaning supplies and pesticides among the thousands of product sources.
Weak evidence: A blanket multiplier with no data in the booklet; EPA pages say 2 to 5 times; primary data show compound-specific ratios from about 1 to about 60.
Source: OSHA 3430-04, 2011 Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
Industry chemists note that indoor air tests for secondhand smoke also pick up cooking, cleaners, furniture polish, perfumes, hair sprays, deodorants and building materials, and one conference-room scan found non-tobacco peaks larger than the tobacco-smoke peaks.
Weak evidence: Industry authors citing an industry report; shows measurement confounding, not that ETS is harmless.
Source: Rodgman & Perfetti 2013 Industry-funded Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The mice responded much more strongly to the reacted terpene/ozone mixture than the measured products alone would predict: adding up the known irritants explained only about 30-45% of the effect, leading the authors to propose an unidentified strong irritant.
Weak evidence.
Caveats
Depends on NOELs estimated by analogy for several products, aldehyde values the authors say may be underestimated, and the group's own 2008 re-measurement credits formaldehyde and residual limonene with about three-quarters; an unidentified irritant is a hypothesis, not a finding.
Source: Wolkoff 2000, Indoor Air Industry-funded Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
The authors advised limiting ozone and reactive scent chemicals such as pine and citrus oils in cleaners, maintaining ozone-emitting copiers, and discouraging ozone 'air cleaners' for odor removal.
Weak evidence: Precautionary advice from the authors on mouse data and no human exposure test at the time; the paper says human studies are needed to set levels.
Source: Wolkoff 2000, Indoor Air Industry-funded Link to this fact
Indoor air / Other evidence
In a blinded 22-person chamber experiment, injecting pure CO2 to about 1,000 ppm (vs 600 ppm) lowered scores on 6 of 9 scales of a decision-making simulation, and to about 2,500 ppm lowered 7 of 9, with ventilation and temperature held constant.
Weak evidence: N=22 students, one day, one test (SMS), one lab, no replication by the authors; a 2026 randomized trial (n=398) found no systematic decrement; the authors call for confirmation.
Source: Satish 2012, Environmental Health Perspectives Link to this fact
Information, not medical advice. See also: myths we won’t tell you.