# Adulterated Essential Oils or how fake is what they are selling to you?



## NubianSoaps.com (Oct 26, 2007)

http://www.cropwatch.org/adulterationupdate08.pdf


----------



## MF-Alpines (Mar 29, 2010)

Interesting. Thanks, Vicki.


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

I read it, but I don't know what to take from it. Young Living claims to be pure and has AFNOR and IOS certifications on their oils, but we use them neat (undiluted) all the time (some even internally - ones labeled as a food supplement), and you all tell me undiluted of the bulk oils will hurt the skin. The YL are labeled as 100% EO and EC AFNOR standard. How could they be diluted if they are certified? When you get the bulk oils, do they come with certification? We have a supply of YL oils we use medicinally and aren't buying right now, because we have a good stash. I'm trying to decide if when I start buying again for medicinal use, if I want to stick with the YL EOs even though they are so high priced, or use bulk EOs medicinally. I don't want to pay more than I need to, but I also want to use high quality medicinally... How does this article affect your perception of what you buy?


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

If by AFNOR/IOS, you mean "*Association Française de Normalisation* (*AFNOR*) is the French national organization for standardization and its International Organization for Standardization member body," from what I can tell, that "certification" is pretty much meaningless. From the AFNOR website: http://www.afnor.org/en/core-activi...n-questions-about-standardization#standardize
*How can conformity with standards be proven? *

Conformity with standards can be the subject of a declaration by the supplier under its sole responsibility. It thus commits to the quality of its production, service or organization. The supplier or client can also ask that this conformity be attested to by a third party (laboratory, inspection body, certification body, etc.), which checks that the product, service or system concerned meets the requirements of the standard.

In other words, they come up with the standards, they then say that they are in conformity with the standards that they came up with, and that means that they are certified. How convenient. The standards would have nothing necessarily to do with whether or not the EOs are diluted.


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

Thanks Stacey! Wow, that does sound pretty stupid - so they write the standard and don't do any policing of people who use it. Lame.


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

From what I gathered, I'm not even sure if AFNOR writes the standard. It looked to me like they might coordinate the writing of the standards, but that the standards are developed by a consensus among all those who would be affected by them who want to be involved in their development. Here's more from that link (I didn't copy everything, just the more interesting bits.)

*What is a standard? *

A standard is a reference document approved by a recognized standardization institute such as AFNOR. It defines the characteristics and voluntary rules applicable to activities. It is the consensus between all stakeholders in a market or business sector.

* What is the purpose of a standard? *

A standard is used to define a common language between the economic players/manufacturers, users and consumers, to clarify and harmonize practices and to define the level of quality, safety, compatibility and the least environmental impact of products, services and practices. It facilitates trade discussions, both nationally and internationally, and contributes to better structuring the economy and facilitating the daily lives of all.

*What is the difference between standards and regulations? *

Regulations are issued by public authorities. They are the expression of a law or rule. Their application is mandatory. 
Standards are voluntary in nature. Conforming to them is not mandatory. They represent companies' commitments to satisfying a recognized and approved level of quality and safety. Standards can support regulations by being cited as reference documents. Only 1% of standards are mandatory.

* Why include standardization in the company's strategy? *

Standardization concerns all types of organization, irrespective of their size or business sector. A company can become involved in the field of standardization to anticipate the future requirements of its market and promote and protect its practices, products or services. When a company contributes directly to developing standards, it effectively equips itself with a powerful lever for focusing the market in favour of the practices it deems preferable. When it applies standards, the company improves its performance, improves the confidence of its clients and thus increases its market shares.

*How is a standard drafted? *

Any economic player can propose a draft standard. This proposal is submitted to a standardization commission, either existing or created specially, where all partners interested in the future standard meet. According to need, the draft is processed at the national, European or world level. 
Once prepared, the draft goes into validation phase. This is the public consultation (open to all) known as the CEN/CENELEC enquiry. The text of the standard is thus enriched by a set of comments before becoming definitive in nature to be submitted for validation by the standards institute: this is certification. This entire process lasts from one to three years. The standards are then regularly reviewed.


----------



## NubianSoaps.com (Oct 26, 2007)

Thanks Stacy you beat me to it. Angie it hasn't changed my perception, purchasing any of my bulk essential oils and rebottling into 1 pounders so it's easier to use and mix, you really can't even do this in your enclosed soap room, let alone get it on your skin. When you buy a pound of peppermint essential oils for $13.00 a pound and resell it in drams for that same price....and it can be used on your skin, it simply disgusts me. Any benefits anyone is getting from using these products, simply doesn't outweigh the lies, the usury...especially the whole being a christian based business.


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

And for more interesting reading:

http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/young.html


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

And pretty much the same goes for the YL spin-off company, doTERRA. There is all sorts of good info out there on aromatherapy, essential oils, etc, but if someone tells me that their EOs are "so pure" that you can ingest them or put them on your skin undiluted, I would run very fast in the opposite direction. (And "therapeutic grade" is entirely fabricated, btw.)


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

Thank for helping me understand this better. Do you have any resources for determining how dilute the bulk oils need to be before they are safe to go on the skin?

I've seen the quackwatch article before, but I personally don't trust the guy that runs that website. He has a pretty firm bias against alternative medicine. My children and I have personally been seen by at least two MD doctors on his list and got sound medical help from them. He's even got Oprah and Dr. oz on his list - basically anybody that suggests any kind of lifestyle healing.

But I do have a general dislike for multilevel marketing companies. I'd rather buy my oils elsewhere if I can do so safely. We have found lavender works great on burns, peppermint soothes headaches, cypress soothes achey leg muscles. I can't say the products I've been sold don't work as I wish them too, but I don't like to overpay.


----------



## MF-Alpines (Mar 29, 2010)

Great discussion. Thanks for all that info, Stacey.


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

Well, agree with the outlook of the owner of the site (quackwatch) or not, there are references at the bottom of that article that are worth looking into. And real aromatherapists aren't very fond of YL, either, from what I can tell. If you want good EO info, I think that Robert Tisserand is a reputable source.


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

Thanks, I've been reading through Tisserand's blog. I think I'll order one of his books....


----------



## NubianSoaps.com (Oct 26, 2007)

Actually if you listen to Dr. Oz or Oprah they do not endorse ANY products, which makes these companies claims all the more suspicious.


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

Oh I'm not saying YL isn't suspicious, just that the Quackwatch guy is a quack himself - evidenced by him targeting Oprah and Dr. Oz among many others. So I have to have evidence from another source to write off somebody. The trouble with YL is I think they have some good lawyers. It is hard to find a good aromatherapy source that will come out and say YL aren't good. They beat around the bush about it. On Tisserand's blog I see places where he disagrees with their methods and the usage information they disseminate, but he doesn't come out and say the oils are diluted. Don't get me wrong if you put oregano or clove on your skin it is going to burn like the dickens, but peppermint we use neat all the time. * I'm not defending YL at all*, just trying to understand where to find alternate sources of information and alternate products that can safely be used as I am accustomed to using them.


----------



## hsmomof4 (Oct 31, 2008)

I agree with you on the good lawyers part. 

I don't know if I'd call his treatment of Oprah "targeting." But she is a very smart and influential woman. She knows what gives good ratings. If there is someone on her show, they gain immediate respectability, whether that makes any sense or not. Maybe it would be better if he said something like, "Just because someone is famous and has a TV show, doesn't mean that you should give their opinion or those of their guests any more weight than anyone else's." And I can understand why he might be frustrated that people don't seem to think critically and do their own research. (And I don't mean Oprah, I mean the kind of person who gets their medical advice off of a graphic on Facebook.) That might well translate into criticism of those who facilitate that sort of mindset.


----------



## swgoats (May 21, 2010)

Dr. Barrett targets anyone who doesn't toe the line of mainstream medicine. I don't know what else to call it but targeting when he adds a person's name to a list of questionable people on a website called Quackwatch. His list includes many people who have been helpful to me and includes doctors I've personally used. You can understand why I wouldn't be a fan.


----------

