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.
Skin allergy / Industry source
The industry once allowed the allergen citral only if mixed with a companion terpene (originally tested at about 20% d-limonene, later mandated at ≥25%), claiming the terpene 'quenched' the allergic reaction; the original 1976 evidence for this was a single unreplicated human test with no subject numbers reported and was already internally inconsistent, later industry HRIPTs could not reproduce quenching for a related aldehyde (cinnamaldehyde), and air-oxidized limonene, the proposed quencher, is itself now one of the commonest fragrance allergens (about 5% of patients tested).
Strong evidence.
Caveats
The failed replication documented in our evidence base is for cinnamaldehyde + eugenol/limonene, not citral + limonene itself; IFRA's formal withdrawal of the quenching rule is not documented in our evidence base. The founding 1976 test (Opdyke) also showed the effect failing at a different ratio of the same ingredients (cinnamic aldehyde:eugenol 2.5:1 sensitized where 1:1 had not), and its own essential-oil control (cinnamon bark oil) itself sensitized, contradicting the paper's own summary.
Source: Ford 1994 (RIFM) Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Animal study
Many fragrance chemicals become stronger skin allergens after the bottle is opened: limonene, linalool and geraniol react with air at room temperature to form hydroperoxides that, in mouse tests, sensitize at 5-10 times lower concentrations than the fresh chemical.
Strong evidence: Potency from mouse LLNA; cite Karlberg 2013 as primary; clinic data (Bråred Christensson, Sukakul) confirm oxidized forms are common human allergens.
Source: Pastor-Nieto 2021 (Karlberg 2013), Current Treatment Options in Allergy Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Lab study (cells or chemistry)
Chemicals that only become allergens after they are changed by air or by the skin's own enzymes are the worst-predicted group in the industry's own analysis (4.5- to 6.5-fold error, versus about 2-fold for directly reactive chemicals), because the dish assays cannot oxidize or metabolize anything.
Strong evidence: N=32 chemicals in the worst domain; TIMES-software-assigned mechanistic class, not exhaustively confirmed in vivo.
Source: Natsch 2015, Toxicological Sciences Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a double-blind study, deodorants containing as little as 0.01% cinnamic aldehyde (cinnamal) triggered allergic skin reactions within weeks in people already allergic to it, while an identical unscented deodorant on the other armpit, and the same deodorants used by 20 non-allergic people, caused no reactions.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Small cohort (9 sensitized test patients, double-blind arm), but statistically significant (P<.001) with a concurrent negative control group and randomized/blinded contralateral-axilla design.
Source: Bruze et al. 2003, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
For people already allergic to oxidized linalool (the air-exposed form of a common floral fragrance chemical), using a scented cream or perfume containing it at concentrations similar to real products (as low as 0.3% oxidized linalool, 0.056% linalool hydroperoxides) was enough to trigger eczema within three weeks of twice-daily use in a repeated-use trial.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Small N (6 completers); participants were pre-selected as already patch-test-positive, not a general-population sample; lowest concentration tested (0.1% in perfume) did not produce a formal positive.
Source: Andersch Björkman 2014, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
A positive patch test for oxidized linalool is not just a lab artifact: patients who test positive also develop real dermatitis from everyday-strength fragranced products used the way a consumer would use them, not only from the strong test doses used in the clinic.
Strong evidence: No irritant reactions occurred in vehicle controls, so the effect is allergic rather than irritant; the reverse case (a general population screen) was not tested here.
Source: Andersch Björkman 2014, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a controlled study, everyone already allergic to limonene hydroperoxides (11/11) developed a skin reaction within about a week of daily exposure to fine-fragrance-level doses of oxidized limonene (140 ppm and up); healthy people (0/17) had no reaction even at the highest dose tested.
Strong evidence: Single multicenter study; 11 allergic subjects and 17 controls.
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a 2015 survey of 187 US pediatric personal-care products marketed as hypoallergenic, dermatologist-recommended, fragrance-free, or paraben-free, 89% (167/187) contained at least one contact allergen from the standard NACDG screening tray, with a mean of 2.4 allergens per product.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Single-metro US convenience sample (six unnamed Redlands, CA retailers, 2013), label-based (no chemical verification, no concentrations), and allergen matching by an unaudited custom algorithm; the four marketing-term categories overlap (a product can carry more than one), so subgroup percentages are not independent comparisons.
Source: Hamann 2015, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a patch test of 3,119 people randomly sampled from the general population of five European countries, 2.6% tested positive to fragrance mix I and 1.9% to fragrance mix II, and 1.9% had a fragrance allergy judged clinically relevant (skin symptoms plus product avoidance).
Strong evidence.
Caveats
The largest, best-controlled general-population fragrance patch-test study to date (n=3,119 of 12,377 interviewed, harmonized protocol across 5 countries); the raw marker-positive rate is higher (4.1%) before the clinical-relevance filter, and about half of marker-positive people do not meet the stricter definition.
Source: Diepgen 2015 (EDEN), British Journal of Dermatology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a clinical study of 658 hand-eczema patients across 3 European centers, 67 (10.2%) reacted on patch testing to at least one fragrance chemical selected because it is common in household cleaning and personal-care products used on the hands.
Strong evidence: Clinic-referred hand-eczema population (3 tertiary centers), not a random sample of the general public.
Source: Heydorn 2003, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
More than half (54.5%) of the hand-eczema patients allergic to household-product fragrance chemicals would not have been identified by the standard Fragrance Mix I patch test alone.
Strong evidence: Applies to this hand-eczema clinic population and this specific 14-chemical panel; FM II (2008) and hydroperoxide testing have since narrowed but not closed the gap.
Source: Heydorn 2003, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Review of other studies
Oxidized forms of limonene and linalool, formed when these common fragrance terpenes react with air, are now treated as a standard, distinct fragrance-allergen category in mainstream dermatology, alongside fragrance mix I/II and balsam of Peru.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
This 2025 general-ACD review reflects consensus classification, not new prevalence data; primary prevalence numbers should be cited from Sukakul 2022, Bråred Christensson 2016/2012, or the EECDRG review already in our evidence base, not this source.
Source: Aristizabal-Torres 2025, JAAD Reviews Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a 5-year Danish patch-test survey of 17,716 eczema patients, 10.1% had fragrance allergy, and cosmetic products caused 42.1% of it; deodorants (25.3% of specific products listed) and scented lotions (24.4%) were the two leading culprits, together accounting for roughly half of all cases.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Clinic-referred eczema patients (Danish Contact Dermatitis Group members' consecutive patients), not a general-population sample; retrospective database analysis, not a prospective cohort.
Source: Heisterberg 2011, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
Deodorants were significantly more likely to be the reported cause of fragrance allergy in men than women (37.9% vs 21.1% of listed products, odds ratio 2.3), while scented lotion (odds ratio 2.6) and fine fragrances (odds ratio 4.2) were significantly more often the reported cause in women; shampoo showed no sex difference.
Strong evidence: Reflects differential product use by sex, not necessarily differential susceptibility to sensitization.
Source: Heisterberg 2011, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a Spanish study of 3,639 consecutive dermatitis patients at 22 clinics, 5.1% were allergic to oxidized limonene and 4.9% to oxidized linalool, two of the most common fragrance chemicals, at the recommended patch-test concentrations.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Figures are from a clinic-referred dermatitis population, not a general-population sample; positivity depends heavily on the concentration tested (see next claim), and one major network (IVDK) disputes whether these top concentrations over-call true allergy.
Source: Deza 2016, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
Positive reactions to oxidized limonene and linalool roughly tripled as the patch-test dose increased (limonene hydroperoxides 1.4% to 5.1%; linalool hydroperoxides 1.3% to 4.9% across three concentrations), and about a third to two-fifths of allergic patients would have been missed entirely at the next-lower dose.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Irritant reactions also rose slightly at the highest doses (up to 1.5-1.9%); whether this dose-response reflects true allergy or growing over-sensitivity of the test material is an open dispute.
Source: Deza 2016, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
Standard fragrance allergy screening tests (the fragrance mixes, HICC, Myroxylon pereirae, colophonium) missed about 70% of patients allergic to oxidized limonene or linalool; only 30-33% of hydroperoxide-allergic patients also reacted to any standard baseline marker.
Strong evidence: None.
Source: Deza 2016, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
About a quarter of patients allergic to either oxidized limonene or oxidized linalool reacted to both, while three-quarters reacted to only one, supporting that these are two distinct, specific fragrance allergies rather than a single non-specific reaction to hydroperoxide chemistry in general.
Strong evidence: Replicates an earlier international multicenter finding (25.3%/74.7%) in an independent, larger, single-country cohort.
Source: Deza 2016, Contact Dermatitis Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a patch test of 3,119 people randomly sampled from the general population of five European countries, more than 1 in 4 (27.0%) tested positive to at least one of 32 standard contact allergens; nickel (14.5%) and thiomersal (5.0%) were the most common.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
The largest, best-controlled general-population patch-test study of its kind (n=3,119 of 12,377 interviewed, harmonized protocol across 5 countries); a positive patch test indicates sensitization, not necessarily active dermatitis.
Source: Diepgen 2016 (EDEN), British Journal of Dermatology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
Women's overall contact allergy rate (35.5%) was roughly double men's (17.1%) in this general-population sample.
Strong evidence: OR 2.6 (95% CI 2.1-3.1) adjusted for age and skin complaints; nickel allergy (much more common in women, 22.2% vs 5.2%) drives most of the gap.
Source: Diepgen 2016 (EDEN), British Journal of Dermatology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Review of other studies
Fragrance ingredients rank alongside nickel as a leading cause of contact allergy in dermatology-clinic eczema patients, diagnosed in roughly 10-12% of those tested.
Strong evidence: Clinic (patch-tested, already-eczematous) populations, not the general population; figures are for FM I specifically.
Source: Johansen 2003, Am J Clin Dermatol 4(11):789-798, American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a double-blind study, deodorants containing isoeugenol at concentrations from 0.0063% to 0.2% triggered allergic skin reactions within weeks in 10 of 13 people already allergic to it, while identical unscented deodorants and the same products used by 10 non-allergic people caused no reactions.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Small cohort (13 sensitized test patients fully tabulated of 35 enrolled), but statistically significant (P<.001) with a concurrent negative control group (0/10) and a randomized, double-blind, contralateral-axilla design; unblinding confirmed the active deodorant caused every reaction.
Source: Bruze et al. 2005, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Government agency
26 fragrance chemicals must be individually named on EU cosmetic labels once they exceed 0.001% in leave-on products or 0.01% in rinse-off products.
Strong evidence: This is the labeling threshold in force under this 2021 document; a later EU regulation (2023) expanded the allergen list further and postdates this source.
Skin allergy / Measured in people or real products
In a 2018 meta-analysis pooling 28 general-population patch-test studies (20,107 people), the pooled prevalence of contact allergy to Myroxylon pereirae (balsam of Peru) was 1.8% (12 studies, 8,002 people, 95% CI 1.0-2.7%).
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Meta-analysis with substantial heterogeneity across the 12 pooled studies (I2 85.3%); general-population samples, not clinic-referred dermatitis patients, so this is a lower-bound estimate compared to referred populations.
Skin allergy / Other evidence
OEKO-TEX Standard 100 caps allergenic dyes at 50 mg/kg in every product class, including baby clothing, and names 22 disperse dyes (such as Disperse Blue 124 and 106) as allergenic; the baby class gets no tighter dye limit.
Strong evidence: Edition 02.2025; dyes outside the named list are not covered; GOTS 8.1 uses a lower 20 mg/kg residue limit.
Source: OEKO-TEX Service GmbH, Standard 100 limit values Annexes 4-5, Ed. 02.2025 Industry-funded Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Government agency
In 2012 the EU's scientific committee on consumer safety (SCCS) classified 82 fragrance ingredients (54 chemicals and 28 natural extracts, including all 26 then labeled) as established causes of contact allergy in people, on clinical evidence alone.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Counts reported patch-test and case-report evidence from the literature to October 2010; many counts rest on small or single-center series and publication bias; the classification measures allergy evidence, not a safe-use verdict.
Skin allergy / Government agency
EU regulators limited the combined amount of the quaternary ammonium conditioners cetrimonium, steartrimonium and behentrimonium chloride because the scientific committee said such formulations can irritate skin, especially when the compounds are combined.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
This states the regulator's stated rationale (recitals 3 and 4), which concerns skin irritation only, not sensitization or inhalation; the SCCS opinion behind it is not in our evidence base.
Source: Commission Regulation (EU) No 866/2014 Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Other evidence
The 2018 IARC list printed personal use of hair coloring products as Group 3 (Vols 57, 99, 2010) but occupational exposure as a hairdresser or barber as Group 2A.
Strong evidence: 2018 snapshot; hazard classification; occupational exposure differs from personal use.
Source: IARC 2018, Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs, Vols 1-123 Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Other evidence
About 3% of people referred for patch testing react to sodium disulfite: 2.7% (132 of 4,885) in North America in 2017-2018, 3.3% in 2019-2020, 2.9% in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and 3.1% pooled across nearly 40,000 patients in nine European countries.
Strong evidence: These are patients referred for testing, not the general population, and clinical relevance of a positive test often cannot be determined.
Source: Choi 2024, Cutis Link to this fact
Skin allergy / Other evidence
Eczema in childhood or atopic dermatitis is the strongest known risk factor for hand eczema, especially before age 30.
Strong evidence: Several independent population studies agree, but this is an observational association, and why (filaggrin, immune response, or both) is unknown.
What you can do / Review of other studies
Never mix bleach with ammonia or acidic cleaners: 13 published poisoning reports, including one death, came from mixing products.
Strong evidence: Case reports; not fragrance-related.
Source: Nazaroff & Weschler 2004, Atmospheric Environment Link to this fact
What you can do / Review of other studies
Choosing fragrance-free personal care products is a reasonable way to cut DEP exposure, since DEP is used as a fragrance solvent; label reading alone will not catch phthalates.
Strong evidence: Reasoned advice; not tested as an intervention in this paper.
Source: Crinnion 2010, Alternative Medicine Review Link to this fact
What you can do / Measured in people or real products
If you have unexplained or recurring dermatitis, ask whether patch testing will include oxidized linalool (and oxidized limonene); standard fragrance tests missed 60% of these allergies.
Strong evidence: Hydroperoxide tests now recommended for baseline series in Europe.
Source: Christensson 2012, Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
What you can do / Review of other studies
Never mix bleach with ammonia or acidic cleaners: it makes toxic chloramine or chlorine gas.
Strong evidence: Established chemistry; review restates it.
Source: Salonen 2024, Environment International Link to this fact
What you can do / Measured in people or real products
Choosing fragrance-free cosmetic and personal care products is an effective way to cut DEP exposure, since fragrance is consistently the most DEP-dense product category across three independent national surveys and DEP is never named on a label when present via fragrance.
Strong evidence: Based on product-content measurement across three independent surveys (Hubinger & Havery 2006, Dodson 2012, Koniecki 2011), not a tested behavioral intervention.
Source: Koniecki 2011, Environmental Research Link to this fact
What you can do / Government agency
Banning or phasing out a single chemical can measurably cut human exposure within a few years: after the US residential ban on the insecticide chlorpyrifos in 2000, New York children's blood levels of it fell significantly within a year and to less than half within two years, and after the US phase-out of leaded gasoline, children's average blood lead levels (NHANES data) fell sharply over the following decade.
Strong evidence: These are well-documented US regulatory case studies (chlorpyrifos, lead); the report does not claim the same speed of decline for every banned or restricted chemical.
Source: WHO/UNEP 2012 Link to this fact
What you can do / Government agency
EPA says to never mix chlorine bleach solution with other cleaning solutions or detergents that contain ammonia, because toxic fumes could be produced.
Strong evidence: Well-established chemistry (chloramine gas formation); stated here as a direct safety instruction, not a study finding.
Source: US EPA, "A Brief Guide to Mold, Moisture and Your Home" Link to this fact
What you can do / Government agency
New Zealand's 2026 cosmetics amendment bans PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) outright in cosmetic products, with a graduated phase-out: import and manufacture of PFAS-containing cosmetics permitted until 31 December 2026, supply until 31 December 2027, and mandatory disposal of remaining stock by 30 June 2028.
Strong evidence: Primary legal text (Schedule 4 Table 2 entry 2, structural PFAS definition; Schedule 2 transitional provisions, clause 4).
Source: Cosmetic Products Group Standard 2020 (NZ, HSR002552, consolidated and current to 1 Jan 2026) Link to this fact
What you can do / Government agency
In the EU an allergen on a packaged food's ingredient list must be emphasized in a typeset that clearly distinguishes it (font, style, or background color); with no ingredient list, a "contains" statement naming the Annex II allergen is required (Art. 21(1)).
Strong evidence: Applies to prepacked food; for non-prepacked food Member States set how the information is given (Art. 44).
Source: EU Reg 1169/2011 (OJ L 304) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
The UK veterinary regulator's Council said in 2017 that treatments should not 'delay or replace' treatments with a recognized evidence base: if you use a complementary remedy for a pet, keep the evidence-based treatment going.
Strong evidence: A professional position statement, not a legal rule or trial result; FAQ answers on how it applies are not in the capture.
Source: RCVS 2017 complementary and alternative medicines position statement Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
EWG will not license air fresheners, candles, plug-in or timed-release odor products, or liquid laundry and dishwasher pods, so an EWG Verified mark will not be found on those product types.
Strong evidence: Reflects the 10.24 criteria; EWG may change categories, and unlicensed products are not necessarily worse.
Source: EWG Verified criteria for cleaning products (10.24), Environmental Working Group, 2024 Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
FDA says you can recognize a homeopathic product by the word 'Homeopathic' on the label, ingredients listed by Latin or scientific names, and ingredients given as dilutions such as 1X, 6X, or 2C.
Strong evidence: Describes typical labeling ('generally include'), not a legal requirement for every product.
Source: FDA consumer page: Homeopathic Products, FDA web page Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
A GOTS 'Organic' label requires at least 95% certified fiber; 'Made with (x%) organic materials' requires at least 70%, so the label alone does not say the whole garment is organic.
Strong evidence: Excludes accessories from the percentage.
Source: GOTS 8.1 (2026) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
From 1 June 2026 OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 and ORGANIC COTTON limit bisphenols B, F, S, and AF to 200 mg/kg each; the Edition 02.2025 table allowed 1000 mg/kg. Bisphenol A (10 mg/kg) is not changed by the notice.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Notice does not state whether 200 mg/kg applies equally to baby articles; LEATHER STANDARD is 800 mg/kg (Bisphenol S with a 1-year transition) and ECO PASSPORT 1000 mg/kg. Industry-run scheme.
Source: OEKO-TEX Association, Limit values: New regulations 2026 (customer information, 03.03.2026) Industry-funded Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
The 2026 OEKO-TEX notice halves the limit for the flame retardant triphenyl phosphate (TPP) from 1000 to 500 mg/kg for STANDARD 100, LEATHER STANDARD, and ORGANIC COTTON (ECO PASSPORT stays 1000 mg/kg).
Strong evidence: Old value for the other three schemes is not in our evidence base; industry-run scheme.
Source: OEKO-TEX Association, Limit values: New regulations 2026 (customer information, 03.03.2026) Industry-funded Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
The 2026 OEKO-TEX notice adds new limits for the brominated flame retardant DBDPE and for Dechlorane Plus (1000 mg/kg each), n-hexane (100 mg/kg; 1000 for ECO PASSPORT) and vinyl chloride (1 mg/kg), and bans intentional use of the dye Reactive Brown 51.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
Limits are residue levels in the textile, set by a private scheme without published justification; vinyl chloride previously had only an emission limit (0.002 mg/m3) for carpets, mattresses and foams.
Source: OEKO-TEX Association, Limit values: New regulations 2026 (customer information, 03.03.2026) Industry-funded Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
For ingredient claims, cite GAO 2010 for the structure of the GRAS gap (voluntary notice, unknown count, no audits, no COI rules for company panels), and later sources for measured conflict-of-interest numbers.
Strong evidence.
Caveats
A February 2010 audit; the 2016 final rule changed procedures but kept notice voluntary, which remains true. FDA's August 2026 proposed rule (91 FR 51834, not final) would make notice mandatory; do not describe it as in force.
Source: GAO 2010, GAO-10-246 Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
NHMRC advises that homeopathy should not be used to treat health conditions that are chronic, serious, or could become serious.
Strong evidence: An agency recommendation, not a ban; the statement gives no legal restriction.
Source: NHMRC 2015 Statement on Homeopathy (CAM02) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
NHMRC warns that people who choose homeopathy 'may put their health at risk if they reject or delay treatments for which there is good evidence for safety and effectiveness.'
Strong evidence: The risk named is delay or rejection of effective care, not direct toxicity of homeopathic products.
Source: NHMRC 2015 Statement on Homeopathy (CAM02) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
NHMRC tells people considering homeopathy to get advice from a registered health practitioner first, and tells users to inform their practitioner and keep taking any prescribed treatments.
Strong evidence: 'Registered health practitioner' is defined by the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Australia).
Source: NHMRC 2015 Statement on Homeopathy (CAM02) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
NHMRC also assessed studies submitted by homeopathy interest groups and the public, in two rounds (before the overview and during consultation on the draft), using a similar method.
Strong evidence: The statement gives no counts for these submissions; see the Administrative Report.
Source: NHMRC 2015 Statement on Homeopathy (CAM02) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
Before giving a pet any complementary or alternative remedy, the UK small-animal vets' association says to check the evidence and the practitioner's qualifications, get a vet's diagnosis first, and ask your vet's advice.
Strong evidence: Professional-body position, not a legal rule or trial result.
Source: BSAVA position statement on complementary and alternative therapies (reviewed 2024) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
An NDC number on a dietary supplement is a red flag: FDA's rule says using an NDC on products outside the drug rules, such as dietary supplements and medical devices, may make the product misbranded.
Strong evidence: Text says a product 'may be deemed' misbranded, not that it automatically is. Text is the April 1, 2022 CFR edition; later amendments are not shown.
Source: 21 CFR 207 (2022 ed.) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
A US food that contains a chemical preservative must list its name together with a statement of its function, such as 'preservative', 'to retard spoilage' or 'a mold inhibitor' (21 CFR 101.22(j)).
Strong evidence: Exemptions apply under 21 CFR 101.100 and 101.22(d)-(f).
Source: 21 CFR 101.22 (eCFR 2026), Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Section 101.22 (eCFR) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
The text of 21 CFR 101.22 has not been amended since 2009 (74 FR 216), so the flavor, spice and preservative rules described in the wiki are still the rules as of October 2026.
Strong evidence: Based on the amendment history printed with the eCFR text; the eCFR page is labeled authoritative but unofficial.
Source: 21 CFR 101.22 (eCFR 2026), Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Section 101.22 (eCFR) Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
OSHA ranks source management (removing, substituting or enclosing the source) as the most effective way to lower indoor air pollutants, ahead of ventilation and administrative controls.
Strong evidence: Agency guidance, not a measured comparison; it adds 'when it can be applied practically'.
Source: OSHA 3430-04, 2011 Link to this fact
What you can do / Other evidence
Workers can raise an indoor-air complaint with their employer, file a confidential complaint with OSHA (1-800-321-OSHA), or have a NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation requested at no cost; OSHA also offers free confidential on-site consultation to small businesses.
Strong evidence: Process descriptions as of 2011; an HHE addresses unusual disease clusters and is not a routine complaint channel.
Source: OSHA 3430-04, 2011 Link to this fact
Information, not medical advice. See also: myths we won’t tell you.