By  Dr. Joseph Mercola

The scent wafting from your clothing is the result of fragrances added to reduce the obnoxious scent of synthetic clothing. As fragrance isn’t regulated, manufacturers are free to add any toxic chemicals to achieve their goals.

• In his first documentary film production, Jon Whelan presents overwhelming evidence showing dangerous chemicals are added to clothing and other products by design, to reduce cost and increase profits.
• The scent wafting from your clothing is the result of fragrances added to reduce the obnoxious scent of synthetic clothing; since fragrance is not regulated, manufacturers are free to add any toxic chemicals to achieve their goals.
• Although Europe practices precautionary principles, the U.S. assumes chemicals are safe until proven otherwise. Unfortunately, it may take many years before science can prove a toxin triggers negative health effects, unnecessarily exposing you to danger.
• Laundry detergent, fabric softener and dryer sheets also add fragrance to your clothing, much of which may be vented to your neighborhood through your dryer, contributing to declining air quality.

In his first documentary film production, Jon Whelan, a single dad after his wife died from breast cancer, presents overwhelming evidence that dangerous chemicals are added to products by design.

As he discusses in this interview about his documentary “Stink!,” available on Netflix and YouTube, fragrances and scents are a dangerous, yet purposeful addition to products you use daily.

Your sense of smell is one of the most primal of your five senses. It is a key to survival, is often the first warning of safety or danger and is linked to memory.

In fact, a powerful attraction to fragrances is manipulated by advertisers and marketers in order to sell clothing, personal care products and laundry products.

You can recognize up to 10,000 different smells and, according to Stuart Firestein, Ph.D., of Columbia University, this system is very closely connected to the limbic system, said to contain your most basic drives.

A study in 2015 published in Chemosensory Perception investigated how odor-evoked memories influence consumers’ perception of a product. Researchers found fragrances evoking stronger personal emotional memories were preferred by the study participants.

It is not surprising scent is powerfully connected to emotion and memory and drives buying decisions.

Unfortunately, companies add toxic fragrances to mask the odor of noxious chemicals and as scent branding to acquire new customers and keep customers.

Smelly pajamas led to documentary film

The documentary film “Stink!” was triggered when Whelan purchased a pair of pajamas from the children’s clothing company Justice for his daughter.

After opening the package, he found a weird smell. Whelan called the company to be sure the clothing was safe but was stonewalled by company representatives.

Returning to the store, he found all of the packaged pajamas had the same odor. At this point, he decided to tape the conversations he had with Justice and other companies and began delving into the addition of chemicals to clothing and personal care products.

In a telling conversation with Procter and Gamble, manufacturer of a long list of cleaning and personal care items, including Crest toothpaste, Dawn dish soap, Pampers diapers, Tide laundry detergent and Pantene shampoo, the representative claimed they didn’t add a carcinogenic chemical to their products, it was just “there.”

[…]

As with exposure to many different toxins, one exposure at a low level may not trigger an immediate health condition, but what about repetitive or chronic exposure?

[…]

The effect from toxins is cumulative and can add up quickly when you’re exposed to chemicals in your food, furniture, air and clothing, all at once and on a daily basis.

Whelan believes if the legislature won’t ban a chemical that regulators know causes cancer, then it may be nearly impossible to fight for transparency and health protection against a highly-motivated and richly-funded industry destined to forfeit profits if they are forced to stop using cheaper, damaging and dangerous chemicals.

[…]

Dangerous endocrine disruptor chemicals

Whelan uses the example of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in his documentary, stating exposure to these has an inverted dose-response curve.

In other words, the danger is higher with lower-level exposure over long periods of time. Your exposure occurs with the use of personal care products, food packaging materials and clothing.

Vague arguments and claims have been used to dispute reports showing the use of toxic chemicals may be poisoning adults and children, causing damage beginning even before birth.

[…]

However, the American Academy of Pediatrics, a group of over 65,000 well-educated and science-based pediatricians in the U.S., agree with Kristoff and is asking parents to limit their children’s exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals found in plastic.

They warn these chemicals, such as phthalates, nitrates and bisphenol, may damage children’s health for years to come.

Research from the World Health Organization (WHO) has even suggested a ban on endocrine-disrupting chemicals may be needed to protect the health of future generations. Their research is one of the most comprehensive studies on different disrupting chemicals to date.

Dr. Leonardo Trasande, an expert in children’s environmental health, believes children are more susceptible due to their dose exposure.

And, as noted by Dr. Claire McCarthy, a pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, “Because the exposure is small and gradual we don’t even realize it’s happening.”

Fighting to keep chemicals in your products

Whelan believes the solution should be mandatory transparency so companies would make better decisions about what they use in their products and consumers could make informed decisions about what they buy.

Instead, companies are operating under the honor system set up by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) while fighting to keep cheap chemicals in their products so they can be made inexpensively, thereby protecting profits.

Unfortunately, the public pays for these cheaper products on the back end by spending thousands treating diseases triggered by overexposure to chemicals, which can build up in your system when you’re exposed to multiple products, such as personal care items, new furniture and carpeting and even clothing.

Whelan points out that the world knows formaldehyde causes cancer, yet manufacturers are not removing it from their products. In fact, the U.S. was caught using products with heavy levels of formaldehyde in environmentally damaged areas.

[…]

Prop 65 mandates labeling federal government doesn’t regulate

California has taken a more proactive approach to the health of its citizens.

In a study spearheaded by the Environmental Working Group, researchers found 287 chemicals in the cord blood of newborns. These babies were essentially born pre-polluted before ever consuming a single manufactured product.

In 1986 California voters approved an initiative best known as “Proposition 65,” requiring the state to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects.

Since it began, it includes nearly 800 chemicals, and manufacturers are required to notify consumers when these chemicals are included in their products.

According to the American Cancer Society, the risk of developing cancer was 40% in men and nearly 37% in women as of 2014. Their global cancer facts and figures suggest this number will grow to 50% by 2030.

Europe practices precautionary principles; the U.S. does not

In the documentary, Whelan reveals the American Chemistry Council spent $121,000 per congressman to assist election campaigns.

The influence pays dividends since it requires legislative action to alter the current status where manufacturers release chemicals under an honor system requiring proof chemicals are safe for consumer use prior to distribution.

Currently, the U.S. does not use precautionary principles, but rather acts under the assumption chemicals are “innocent until proven guilty.” The opposite is true in Europe, where if a chemical is suspected dangerous, it’s phased out.

However, proving guilt is nearly impossible in the short term as these chemicals often accumulate over years in your body before the effects are noticeable. This works to the advantage of the industry.

For example, one of the world’s most popular chemical weed killers, Roundup, made by Monsanto (now Bayer), has been on the market since 1974.

After 45 years on the market, Monsanto was ordered to pay $289 million when a jury found Dwayne Johnson’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma was at least partly triggered by glyphosate in Roundup, to which he was exposed as a school groundskeeper.

The judge upheld the guilty verdict but later reduced the damages to $78 million.

After the verdict, the presiding judge, Suzanne Ramos Bolanos, commented the company “acted with malice, oppression or fraud and should be punished for its conduct.”

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/toxic-chemicals-clothing-scent-corporate-profits-cola/