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.
Health effects / Other evidence
A 2006 citizen petition asked FDA to revoke diacetyl's GRAS status because of studies linking the buttery flavor chemical to severe respiratory reactions; as of GAO's 2010 report FDA had not decided it, 3 years after its 180-day interim letter.
Moderate evidence: GAO only reports the petition and FDA's inaction; it does not evaluate the diacetyl evidence. Status is as of December 2009.
Source: GAO 2010, GAO-10-246 Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
EPA's 2006 ADBAC assessment classed the chemical as corrosive to rabbit skin, a category I eye irritant, and category II by inhalation (rat LC50 between 0.054 and 0.51 mg/L).
Moderate evidence: Animal acute studies on a concentrated test substance, summarized by the agency; not a measure of consumer exposure to diluted products.
Source: EPA RED 2006 Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
The 1984 CIR report said polysorbates 'enhance the activity of known chemical carcinogens' in multiple studies; the 2015 draft says the data were 'not consistent' and the Panel 'was not concerned', and no new carcinogenicity data were found.
Moderate evidence: Positions are from the same industry-funded panel; the underlying tumor-promotion studies were not re-examined in the draft.
Source: CIR 2015 draft Industry-funded Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
Hydrogen peroxide tested positive in many in vitro genotoxicity assays but negative in the in vivo tests CIR lists; the panel dismissed the positives as irrelevant to cosmetic use because the chemical breaks down quickly on skin.
Moderate evidence: The dismissal rests on the panel's reasoning, not on measurement of skin or mucosal dose in people; industry-funded panel; draft.
Source: CIR 2018 draft (Do Not Cite or Quote; PCPC-funded CIR) Industry-funded Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
An expert panel of EU endocrine-disruption researchers estimated that hormone-disrupting chemicals plausibly cost the EU about EUR 163 billion a year (about EUR 322 per person, 1.28% of GDP), counting only a handful of chemicals.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Modeled median across 1000 simulations using expert-panel probabilities of causation, not a measured cost; moving the probability bands shifts the median between about EUR 112 and 180 billion. Same author group wrote the earlier reports it updates, funded by the Endocrine Society and three foundations.
Health effects / Other evidence
The panel says frequent use of bleach, ammonia and degreasing sprays has been consistently associated with asthma in cleaning workers, but the specific chemicals and mechanisms are unclear because cleaning products contain many ingredients, some irritants and some sensitizers.
Moderate evidence: Occupational cleaners, not consumers; consensus statement; cited studies used qualitative exposure assessment.
Health effects / Review of other studies
Published cases of lasting asthma after a single accidental inhalation (RADS) have most often involved chlorine or chlorine-releasing chemicals, including cleaning of bathrooms, kitchens and toilets (44 cases in one series) and accidentally mixed chemicals at work.
Moderate evidence: Review of case reports, series and conference abstracts; mostly workplace accidents; frequency of report is not potency or incidence; no exposure levels.
Source: Walters 2020, Occupational Medicine Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
Ontario's MAiD Death Review Committee reported on a woman in her 50s with multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome (MCSS) whose housing efforts, including renovations funded after a Human Rights Tribunal ruling, "did not satisfactorily address her MCSS symptoms."
Moderate evidence: One purposively selected case summarized by a government committee, not representative; the copy is non-official and the report does not name the person.
Source: Ontario MDRC Report 2024-3 (OCC, 2024; non-official copy) Link to this fact
Health effects / Review of other studies
A 2014 Lancet Neurology review by Grandjean and Landrigan counted 12 industrial chemicals now recognized as causing developmental brain toxicity in humans, double the 6 recognized in 2006: lead, methylmercury, PCBs, arsenic, toluene and ethanol, plus manganese, fluoride, tetrachloroethylene, chlorpyrifos, DDT/DDE and PBDE flame retardants.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
The authors' own classification, not a regulatory ruling; evidence per chemical ranges from pooled analyses (lead) to cross-sectional studies (manganese, fluoride, DDT). None is a fragrance ingredient.
Source: Grandjean & Landrigan 2014, Lancet Neurology, The Lancet Neurology Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
The Endocrine Society's 2015 expert panel (EDC-2) concluded that endocrine-disrupting chemicals, including BPA and phthalates, are contributing to chronic disease burdens related to obesity, diabetes, reproduction, thyroid, cancers and neurodevelopment; the panel states this narrative conclusion removes 'any doubt'.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
A society consensus judgment, not a regulator or systematic review; the same text concedes causality is hard to prove in humans and cannot yet be inferred for obesity/T2D. Authors are mostly publicly funded academics with no industry funding disclosed.
Source: Gore et al. 2015, Endocr Rev 36(6):593-602, Endocrine Reviews Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
In a random survey of 1,582 adults in the Atlanta, Georgia metro area (1999-2000), 12.6% said they were allergic or unusually sensitive to everyday chemicals like cleaning products, paints, perfumes, detergents and insect spray, and 3.1% said a doctor had diagnosed multiple chemical sensitivity or environmental illness.
Moderate evidence: Self-report only, one metro area; sampling frame, interview mode and response rate are not reported in this brief; no clinical verification.
Source: Caress & Steinemann 2004 (AJPH), American Journal of Public Health Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
About 7 in 10 Atlanta adults who called themselves chemically sensitive were women (71.7%), but about 3 in 10 were men (28.3%), and they spanned all ages and education levels.
Moderate evidence: Women were over-represented in the sample itself (60.7%), so the authors say the sample exaggerates the gap; no sex-specific prevalence is printed.
Source: Caress & Steinemann 2004 (AJPH), American Journal of Public Health Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
In a 2005-06 national phone survey of 1,058 US adults, about 3 in 10 adults with asthma (31.4%) also said they are unusually sensitive to everyday chemicals, and about 1 in 3 of those chemically sensitive (34.9%) said they have asthma.
Moderate evidence: Self-reported answers, one cross-sectional survey, no clinical confirmation or confidence intervals for the overlap; shows co-occurrence, not cause or order.
Source: Caress & Steinemann 2009 (Toxicol Ind Health), Toxicology and Industrial Health Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
The review's list of adult ADHD mimics is psychiatric and sleep-related; it does not name chemical exposure, chemical intolerance, thyroid disease or long COVID.
Moderate evidence: Silence in one narrative review is not evidence that such conditions never mimic ADHD.
Health effects / Review of other studies
The review says lead is the one ADHD-linked chemical exposure whose associations are unlikely to be fully explained by residual confounding, but still grades it as risk factor not proven causal, and advises reducing toxin exposure for children.
Moderate evidence: Lead is not a fragrance ingredient; the review is narrative; the 'unlikely confounded' view is the authors' reasoning, not a pooled adjusted estimate.
Source: Thapar 2013, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry Link to this fact
Health effects / Other evidence
The sensory differences in these adults with ADHD were concentrated in hearing and activity-level items; taste/smell, vision and touch averaged below 3.0 on every quadrant, so the study does not show broad sensory sensitivity, and gives no evidence of smell or chemical sensitivity.
Moderate evidence: Per-modality means have no norm data; activity-level items overlap ADHD symptoms; 9.5% had impaired hearing; taste and smell are combined in one modality.
Source: Bijlenga 2017, European Psychiatry Link to this fact
Health effects / Review of other studies
Despite its title, this review found no study that tested how chemical exposure, a child's MAOA gene variant and childhood trauma combine to affect ADHD; the authors call that literature sparse.
Moderate evidence: The statement is the authors' own; MAOA candidate-gene studies and the three trauma studies point in conflicting directions.
Source: Nilsen and Tulve 2020, Environmental Research Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
In a test of 6 best-selling US air fresheners and laundry products, researchers found 98 chemical detections (58 different chemicals) released into the air; none appeared on any product label, and only 1 (ethanol) appeared on a safety data sheet.
Moderate evidence: N=6 products, headspace only, semi-quantitative.
Source: Steinemann 2009, Environmental Impact Assessment Review Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
4 of the 6 products released at least one chemical the Clean Air Act classifies as a hazardous air pollutant (acetaldehyde, chloromethane, or 1,4-dioxane), and none was listed.
Moderate evidence: Paper text says 5 of 6; tables support 4. Two of three HAPs come from the base formulation, not fragrance.
Source: Steinemann 2009, Environmental Impact Assessment Review Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
When researchers tested 25 best-selling US laundry, cleaning, personal-care, and air-freshener products, they found 133 different chemicals released into the air, but only 1 of them was listed on any product label.
Moderate evidence: Single headspace sample per product; VOC counts depend on detection threshold.
Source: Steinemann 2011, Environmental Impact Assessment Review Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
11 of 25 best-selling fragranced products (44%) released at least one chemical the EPA classes as a probable cancer-causing air pollutant, such as acetaldehyde or 1,4-dioxane, though the study couldn't tell whether these came from the fragrance or the rest of the formula.
Moderate evidence: Headspace, not exposure; mostly base-formula compounds.
Source: Steinemann 2011, Environmental Impact Assessment Review Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Counting the word "parfum" undercounts scented children's products, because essential oils and individual fragrance chemicals are listed under other names.
Moderate evidence: Undercount size not measured for these products.
Source: Uber 2024, Jornal de Pediatria (Rio de Janeiro) Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
In a test of 42 fragranced baby products (shampoos, lotions, oils, sprays), 95% of the chemicals they released into the air were not listed on the label, safety data sheet, or company website.
Moderate evidence: Headspace presence only; Australian products.
Source: Nematollahi 2018, Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
In a German test of six air fresheners, more than 90% of the chemicals they released were not declared on the product.
Moderate evidence: Secondary citation of Uhde & Schulz 2015 (not in our evidence base); by number of substances (>75% by concentration).
Source: Steinemann 2017, Building and Environment Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Self-reported survey
When companies replace a chemical of concern, they often swap in one with far less safety data; one firm found a supplier's 'safer' substitute only looked safer because more of its ingredients were kept confidential.
Moderate evidence: Interview quotes and one anecdote.
Source: Scruggs 2011, Environmental Science & Policy Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Journalism
Laboratory testing commissioned by US campaigners found 38 chemicals not listed on the label across 17 popular fragrances, 14 per product on average, including hormone-disrupting synthetic musks.
Moderate evidence: NGO report, not peer reviewed; numbers now verified against the primary (Sarantis 2010, in our evidence base); one sample per product, tentative library IDs, no concentrations.
Source: Sealey 2016 (citing Sarantis 2010, Not So Sexy), Environment International Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
The single word 'fragrance' on a label can stand for dozens to hundreds of chemicals. The fragrance industry's own inventory (RIFM) lists about 2,600 chemicals in current active use, plus roughly 3,500 discontinued materials it keeps only for internal read-across comparison.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Primary now read directly (Date 2020, RIFM): ~2,600 active-use + ~3,500 discontinued = the 'over 6,000' figure in its abstract. Rádis-Baptista 2023 paraphrased this as '6,000 known, 2,000 used,' which is not what Date 2020 reports. This is the industry's own inventory count, corroborated only within RIFM's own publications, not independently, so it stays at moderate rather than strong.
Source: Rádis-Baptista 2023, Journal of Xenobiotics Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
Several hundred different label names can signal fragrance (chemical names, over 50 essential oils by common or Latin name, and synonyms such as aroma, parfum, perfume, and scent), so dermatologists say allergic patients are very unlikely to find fragrance-free products by reading labels alone.
Moderate evidence: Expert opinion.
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Once in the air, scent chemicals such as linalool, ionones, and the woody musk OTNE ('Iso E Super') reacted with ozone to form dozens of new oxidized chemicals, including a hydroperoxide. None of these was in the product.
Moderate evidence: Compound identities are tentative (formula-level mass spectrometry); products unquantified; no hazard testing.
Source: Wu 2024, Environmental Science & Technology Letters Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
Plastic particles are added to cosmetics on purpose for texture, a silky or powdery feel, opacity, shimmer, and as carriers for other ingredients, not only as scrub beads; and the EU chemicals agency's definition does not count liquid, semi-solid, or water-soluble polymers as microplastics.
Moderate evidence: Definition statement is the review's reading of ECHA; check against Regulation (EU) 2023/2055.
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
In 2018, testing commissioned by Breast Cancer Prevention Partners of 25 personal care and 7 cleaning products found chemicals flagged for cancer, hormone disruption, respiratory, or developmental hazards that were not on the label; 99 of the 124 were on the fragrance industry's own ingredient list.
Moderate evidence: Not peer reviewed; labs, detection limits, and concentrations not reported; hazard = database flag; IFRA list includes multifunctional solvents/preservatives.
Source: BCPP 2018 Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Lab tests commissioned by US campaigners found 38 chemicals not listed on the label of at least one of 17 popular perfumes; 10 of them had no toxicity study in PubMed.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
NGO report (Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and EWG), not peer reviewed; one purchase per product; 'secret' means absent from at least one product's label; detection is not exposure or harm.
Source: Sarantis et al. 2010 (Not So Sexy) Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
The only chemical analysis ever published of the products named in the 2019 lavender breast-growth case reports was done by an essential-oil trade group, covered two of the three products, and reported no numbers.
Moderate evidence: True of the published literature as read; the NIEHS reply to this letter (dgaa227) has not been read.
Source: Giroux & Orjubin 2020 (JCEM letter; Consortium Huiles Essentielles), The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Industry-funded Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Only 16% of the chemicals detected above the testing limit in these hair products were listed anywhere on the product label; fragrance ingredients were almost never named individually, appearing instead as the single word "fragrance".
Moderate evidence: Label concordance rose to 54% only for the highest-concentration chemicals (>1000 ug/g); 28 product/component labels checked.
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
A common personal-care-product ingredient can appear on ingredient labels under several different chemical names (the silicone D5 may be listed as 'cyclopentasiloxane' or 'cyclomethicone'), which may not read as the same substance to a consumer trying to identify or avoid it.
Moderate evidence: Based on this study's own tested product labels and general INCI naming conventions for volatile methyl siloxanes, not a systematic label-disclosure survey.
Source: Coggon 2018, Environmental Science & Technology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Independent laboratory testing not funded by the essential-oil or fragrance industry chemically confirmed that one of these colognes genuinely contained lavender oil (linalool and linalyl acetate), the only time this has been done for an actual implicated product in this literature rather than a reference oil bought for a lab study.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Confirms exposure identity for one bottle used by one patient; says nothing about the products used by the other two children in this report, or by any child in other lavender case reports.
Source: Diaz 2016, Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Self-reported survey
Only about 1 in 4 Germans (27.5%) know that fragrance chemicals do not have to be fully disclosed on a product's label or safety data sheet.
Moderate evidence: Awareness item, not a measurement of actual disclosure; Germany 2019, n=1,102.
Source: Klaschka 2020a, Environmental Sciences Europe Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
The chemical composition of all five fabric-softener dryer-sheet products tested was undisclosed (a trade secret); gas chromatography/mass spectrometry of one scented brand's emissions found only petroleum-derived aromatic compounds (toluene, styrene, xylenes, trimethylbenzene, isopropylbenzene) plus phenol and thymol — no fragrance terpenes, esters, or alcohols were detected, even though prior published analyses had found such compounds (limonene, linalool, benzyl acetate, and others) in fabric-softener emissions generally.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Only one of the five brands was chemically analyzed, and only qualitatively (recovery percentages unknown); about half of the detected GC/MS peaks could not be identified at all, so unidentified compounds — possibly including fragrance materials — cannot be ruled out.
Source: Anderson & Anderson 2000, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
The word 'parfum' on a cosmetic ingredient list can stand for up to several hundred fragrance chemicals, so a consumer cannot tell whether fragrance allergens beyond the 26 EU-labeled ones are present.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
The specific 'several hundred' figure is the author's characterization, citing industry practice, not a count from her own data; Nardelli et al. 2011 (cited) found 30 relevant fragrance allergens in specific products, only 18 of which are on the labeled list of 26.
Source: Klaschka 2012, International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
When low-molecular-weight PTFE micropowder (the fine Teflon powder used as a filler and slip agent) is manufactured by gamma-irradiating PTFE in open air, it releases PFOA — a persistent 'forever chemical' — at levels that can exceed the EU's regulatory limit: 28.3 ppb measured after air irradiation, versus a 25 ppb REACH limit that took effect in July 2020.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Measured by the manufacturer (Daikin Industries, a major fluoropolymer producer) and Osaka University on laboratory-irradiated PTFE samples, not on a finished consumer or cosmetic product; a single industrial lab's LC-MS measurements, not independently replicated in this evidence base.
Source: Oshima et al. 2020, Scientific Reports Industry-funded Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
A 1998 GC-MS survey of 71 European deodorants found 226 distinct fragrance and non-fragrance chemicals – more than ten times the 21 fragrance substances the same research group had specifically targeted and quantified in a companion study on the same products.
Moderate evidence: Single study, 1998 market snapshot (product formulations have changed since); no concentrations measured for any of the 226 chemicals, only presence/absence by product type.
Source: Rastogi et al. 1998 (Contact Dermatitis 39:293), Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Methyl anthranilate, flagged by this 1998 GC-MS/SAR survey as an aromatic amine (a structural class linked to sensitization and other toxicity concerns), was found in 22 of 71 European deodorants tested, a chemical identity a fragrance label would not disclose since it is covered by the generic term 'parfum'.
Moderate evidence: Structural classification, not a clinical allergy finding for this specific compound in this paper; presence only, not concentration.
Source: Rastogi et al. 1998 (Contact Dermatitis 39:293), Contact Dermatitis Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Before candles were lit, the largest class of chemicals detected across the products was esters (30 of 34 dominant compounds identified), which manufacturers disclose on the label only as 'fragrance' or 'aroma oil.'
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Most of these ester identities were quantified by a predictive (ECN) method rather than authentic calibration standards, so individual concentrations carry more uncertainty than the 24 directly-calibrated target compounds; no specific health hazard was established here for most of the named esters.
Source: Ahn et al. 2015, Journal of Hazardous Materials Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
In the EU, an entire perfume or fragrance composition can be declared on the ingredient list as the single word 'parfum' or 'aroma', legally hiding every chemical in it except the handful of allergens that must be named separately.
Moderate evidence: Restates the regulation's text; not new data, and the same point is made by other evidence base sources.
Source: Tegengif 2022 Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Advocacy group testing
Only 2 of the 20 tested perfumes contained no suspected endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC) on their declared ingredient list; the other 18 contained at least one.
Moderate evidence: Counts declared ingredients only; a perfume could contain additional undisclosed EDCs hidden under 'Parfum'.
Source: Tegengif 2022 Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Government agency
The report states that the vast majority of chemicals in current commercial use have never been tested at all for endocrine-disrupting activity, and that unlike active ingredients in pharmaceuticals and pesticides, most materials, articles, and consumer goods are not required to declare their full chemical make-up, leaving many sources of hormone-disrupting exposure simply unknown.
Moderate evidence: General statement about global chemical commerce as a whole, not a count or rule specific to fragrance or personal-care ingredients.
Source: WHO/UNEP 2012 Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Hormone-disrupting chemicals in household cleaners, synthetic detergents, fabric softeners, air fresheners, and deodorants are almost always added as fragrance or preservative, not as the product's main ingredient, so their presence rarely shows up as a headline ingredient a shopper would notice.
Moderate evidence: Based on a database of listed ingredients matched to EPA hazard flags, not chemical measurement of the actual products; a single country's product registry (South Korea, 2020).
Source: Lee & Ji 2022, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
Certain hormone-disrupting chemicals recur together on the same product's ingredient list more often than chance: benzisothiazolinone with hexyl cinnamaldehyde in synthetic detergents, and the fragrance chemical Lilial (butylphenyl methylpropional) with citronellol in fabric softeners, identified by mining co-occurrence patterns across thousands of Korean household products.
Moderate evidence: Association-rule mining measures how often chemicals are listed together on ingredient lists, not their combined toxicity or exposure when the product is used.
Source: Lee & Ji 2022, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Government agency
EPA lists moth repellents and air fresheners among household-product sources of organic-gas (VOC) indoor air pollution, and notes that paradichlorobenzene, a chemical carrying an 'avoid breathing vapors' warning on moth-repellent labels, is also the key active ingredient in many air fresheners.
Moderate evidence: EPA names the shared ingredient and the moth-repellent warning; it does not separately assess air-freshener-specific health risk.
Source: US EPA, "The Inside Story" Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Measured in people or real products
In a database analysis of Korean household chemical products, the most prevalent chemicals flagged as endocrine disruptors were compounds added as fragrance ingredients or preservatives (e.g. linalool, D-limonene, hexyl cinnamaldehyde), not the product's main functional ingredient.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Ingredient-list matching against EPA CompTox/ToxCast hazard flags, not measured concentrations or confirmed toxicity in the products as sold; single-country (South Korea) database of household chemical products (air fresheners, cleaners, detergents, fabric softeners, deodorants), not personal-care/cosmetic products specifically.
Source: Lee & Ji 2022, Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
d-Limonene, a common fragrance/scent chemical, was detected in 100% of personal and area air samples in 7 nail salons despite not appearing as an ingredient on any safety data sheet the authors reviewed for the nail products used there.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Authors could not identify the actual source (possible fragrance classification, or an unreviewed product category such as lotions, scrubs, waxes or cleaning products); small pilot (7 salons).
Hidden ingredients / Review of other studies
Danish product checks cited in a 2004 review found parabens in 77% of 215 cosmetics (0.01-0.87%) and 87% of skin creams, with ingredient labels wrong about parabens in about 10% of products.
Moderate evidence: Secondhand from Rastogi 1995 and 2000, and from 1990s Danish and Swedish products; not re-checked in this evidence base; current formulations differ.
Source: [[src-2004-endocrine-disrupters-estrogenic-chemicals-body-care-cosmetics|Harvey & Darbre 2004]], Journal of Applied Toxicology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Several flavor chemicals in this review (menthol, carvone, camphor, borneol, terpineol, ionones, damascones and the musks muscone, and civettone) are also fragrance materials, but the FEMA review assesses them only as swallowed food ingredients; it gives non-oral data 'less weight' and has no inhalation or skin-allergy assessment.
Moderate evidence: The paper says some inhalation data may substitute when flavor exposure is far smaller than inhaled exposure; it does not claim any airborne or skin risk from these substances.
Source: Adams 1996, Food and Chemical Toxicology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
By FEMA's 2009 count there are more than 2,400 single flavoring chemicals and about 300 natural flavor complexes in US use, more than 2,700 holding FEMA GRAS status, and about 2,000 of them have no explicit FDA regulation, so the Expert Panel's conditions of use are the main rule for them.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Rounded industry counts from 2009; the paper's own totals are only approximately consistent. Written by two FEMA employees and supported by FEMA (the flavor industry trade association); it is the industry's own account of its own program.
Source: Hallagan 2009, Food and Chemical Toxicology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
In a 2010 Danish store survey, 19 of 1,272 cosmetic labels (1.5%) listed MI alone; chemical analysis of the products found 14 of the 19 had more than 50 ppm and 5 had about 100 ppm, in rinse-off products, leave-on creams, and wet wipes (2 contained none detectable).
Moderate evidence: One country, one month (October 2010), 9 stores, labels possibly duplicated across stores of the same owner; not a market-wide share, and the products are not named.
Source: Lundov 2011, British Journal of Dermatology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
The same audit estimated, with 95% confidence, that at least 62% of the 8,105 chemicals allowed in US food lack a published feeding study, and at least 54% of directly added additives.
Moderate evidence: Sampling estimate, not chemical-by-chemical search; flavor-industry literature reviews are under-captured by the databases, so the flavor gap may be overstated.
Source: Neltner et al. 2013, Reprod Toxicol, Reproductive Toxicology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
FDA's own database of almost 4,000 chemicals allowed directly in food had a staff comment of 'no or insufficient toxicology data' for almost 25% of them (2013 review of the database).
Moderate evidence: Counts the agency's database comments, as reported by the Pew authors; data gap, not proof of hazard. More detail in Neltner 2013 (data gaps).
Source: Maffini 2013, Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Animal study
In a Dutch government study, isoeugenol was the only one of five skin-allergy fragrance chemicals to stimulate the lymph nodes of mice that breathed it (about 7-fold more cell growth after 6 hours a day for 3 days), while limonene and linalool did not.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Mice (6 per group), one lab, nose-only at 75 mg/m3, an unvalidated assay tested mostly on strong sensitizers; a hazard signal, not human disease. Government-funded (NVWA), no industry money declared.
Source: ter Burg 2014, Inhalation Toxicology Link to this fact
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
Dyes and finishing chemicals in clothing are not declared on labels; EU rules from May 2012 require only fiber composition and country of origin, so doctors can hardly detect new textile allergens or the disappearance of old ones.
Moderate evidence: The authors' regulatory description of Regulation (EU) 1007/2011 as of 2013-14; not a survey of labels, and later rules may differ.
Hidden ingredients / Other evidence
The paper's own authors state that its numbers for the fragrance chemical 2-phenylethanol are not an accurate picture of real exposure, because concentration data came from two companies and every product was assumed to contain it.
Moderate evidence: Statement is the authors' own caution; it cuts both ways (could over- or under-estimate).
Source: Safford et al. 2015, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology Industry-funded Link to this fact
Information, not medical advice. See also: myths we won’t tell you.