This article has a headline engineered with shock value connotations, but when you read it carefully, it takes pains to rein the suggestions of the title in as much as possible while still stirring the pot. It’s a kind of artistry you need to get papers published these days.
All that aside, it’s an interesting thing to think about but it’s not a basis for any kind of personal health recommendation and the authors state that. I have relevant expertise and this is a very complicated area that people routinely want to be boiled down into black and white simple advice. What this article seems to say is that lotion can affect the oxidation chemistry nearby it, but it’s not yet known if that is an effect with consequences that are on the whole negative or positive.
I would criticize the authors for their use of the word disrupt, because of the negative connotation carried by that word when talking about human biological systems. They use a softer, more neutral word, perturb, to express the same idea later in the article, which I think better expresses the idea without an emotional tinge to it.
hackernewds · 2h ago
Just posting to not just upvote, but also say that you have a very calm thought process and write with clarity
mannycalavera42 · 1h ago
posting to upvote the upvote
photochemsyn · 57m ago
"A commercial lotion composed of aqua, glycerin, Brassica campestris seed oil, Butyrospermum parkii butter, ceteareth-12, ceteareth-20, cetearyl alcohol, ethylhexyl stearate, Simmondsia chinensis seed oil, tocopherol, caprylyl glycol, citric acid, sodium hydroxide, acrylates/C10-30 alkyl acrylate crosspolymer, sodium gluconate, and phenoxyethanol was chosen for this experiment."
Personal health recommendation: You'd be better off rubbing down with olive oil or sunflower oil than with that concoction, most likely. The ancient Greeks got some things right.
BugsJustFindMe · 6m ago
> Personal health recommendation: You'd be better off rubbing down with olive oil or sunflower oil than with that concoction, most likely
What evidence can you point to that supports this "most likely" assertion that isn't purely naturalistic fallacy?
> The ancient Greeks got some things right.
The pantheon of capricious gods living on mount olympus?
dylan604 · 4h ago
The opening paragraph is precisely why so many people have moved to natural ingredient products and fragrance free. Some fragrance makers have new for formulas with “clean” ingredients, but they are still proprietary and come with a “trust us” promise. It’s interesting to see the specifics of what these products can do other than what’s advertised on the tin.
kstrauser · 4h ago
[flagged]
riffraff · 3h ago
You jest, but there's a ton of people convinced they can use rock alum which is natural and so is better than industrial deodorants which contain aluminium.
kajecounterhack · 1h ago
I'm similarly puzzled by "uncured bacon" which afaik still uses naturally occurring nitrites. How they're allowed to call it uncured when it's clearly still cured is beyond me.
PaulHoule · 1h ago
I can't use those aluminum containing antiperspirants at all -- they violently irritate my eyes if I put them on my skin.
kstrauser · 2h ago
My inner chemistry geek weeps.
hackyhacky · 3h ago
I only use naturally-ocurring radium and free-range poison ivy.
CoastalCoder · 3h ago
But is the poison ivy ethically sourced?
I'm wondering if you have its informed consent.
xyst · 3h ago
I see you are a man of culture.
anal_reactor · 3h ago
My skin care routine is "I showered in some not-so-distant past" and sunscreen. You hit diminishing returns very quickly. Showering more than once a week has no health benefits, it's just so that other citizens of your overcrowded city wouldn't complain about your natural smell.
roughly · 2h ago
> it's just so that other citizens of your overcrowded city wouldn't complain about your natural smell.
Yes, that’s correct. You’ve cracked the code. People don’t want to smell you, that’s why we shower regularly.
I’d suspect there are other parts of your life where you could combine that keen perceptive wit with these revelations to perhaps elucidate other social mysteries and dilemmas you’ve faced.
anal_reactor · 1h ago
I honestly think that this is actually valuable insight. It's important to distinguish things we do just to fit into the society from things we truly want to do. I'm not saying we never should do the former, we obviously should, but I think it's worth it to be aware of the choice. Most people just follow mindlessly the current social trends "because everyone does it".
roughly · 57m ago
A conversation I’ve had with several people is: do you want to be right or do you want to get shit done? I dabbled in management for a bit, and spending time figuring out how different people communicated, how to hear and speak to them, and what their motivations were meant I could build a team out of anyone. Same here - yes, it’s all an ape dance, but we’re all apes, and if you know the dance moves, it’s a whole lot easier to move through the tribe.
anal_reactor · 51m ago
I want to be right, but I need to get shit done. I take part in the social dance to the minimum degree that gives me what I need. Regarding the rest of my time, I spend it looking for people with whom I can be right. That feels way more pleasant than the social dance.
roughly · 14m ago
One thing I’d say about this is that other people will have perspectives that you do not that can help you be more right if you can hear it from them. You’ve got one life, one set of experiences, one brain, and the same 24 hours in the day as everyone else. Leverage other people - even if they’re not “right”, they can help you be less wrong.
iinnPP · 3h ago
Not showering for a week means I have a headache all day. So evidently not everyone is doing it for someone else.
perching_aix · 3h ago
That doesn't sound normal? Why would you get headaches from not showering? Never heard of such a thing.
iinnPP · 2h ago
It's not terribly uncommon. My wife also has it. It's also related to the length of my hair, where longer hair is significantly worse. Presumably it's the oil build up as my hair is extremely oily and fine.
edit: I am fully aware that not washing leads to less oil build up over time, but I have tried and doctors have tried and that boat has sailed.
perching_aix · 2h ago
I'd imagine a hair wash in the sink also does the job when in a hurry then? Do dry shampoos work too, or does it need a wet wash?
iinnPP · 12m ago
Yes, washing the hair in any capacity works. Unsure about dry shampoo.
cma · 2h ago
Could be muscle tension or something helped by the warm water
dghlsakjg · 1h ago
Your returns are nowhere close to diminishing, even for people with close to no physical activity or sweating, people can tell if you haven't showered for a week.
cko · 3h ago
But what about dating? The nether regions should be washed in anticipation for certain activities. There are no diminishing returns for that.
kstrauser · 3h ago
Just date people who’ve had a bad case of COVID. Problem solved!
jajko · 2h ago
All you need is a modest trauma to the nose in right direction. Bones shifting a bit will cut forever hair-like nerves going from your nose sensors back to brain, effectively making you lose the sense of smell. When asked some doctor friends they confirmed harm is permanent.
zonkerdonker · 2h ago
Ok, so dont shower, and punch my date in the nose. Got it!
immibis · 1h ago
Sir this is HN. Nobody is dating.
Also sex is a different thing from dating.
anal_reactor · 1h ago
When you realize that through most of human history people married because of teenage sex drive or economic necessity rather than emotionally mature relationships, then the whole dating thing loses its appeal really fast.
Also, the smell of sweat of someone attractive turns me on really hard.
> Babe I love it how you naturally smell
> That's great but I just bought a new generic cherry shampoo
lurking_swe · 3h ago
some of us exercise, and have oily skin, and break out with acne if we don’t shower right away.
some of us live in hot climates where a cold shower genuinely feels amazing and cools the body down.
some of us enjoy showering daily, because the bed sheets get less dirty that way, which means less laundry to do, and reduces my stress.
some of us are married to a lady and want a happy home life (lol).
a sample size of 1 (you) does not mean it’s true for everyone. Just saying. :)
9283409232 · 2h ago
I worked with someone with your mindset and he smelled horrible in the office to the point where HR had to step in and talk to him about hygiene.
xyst · 3h ago
Somebody needs to touch grass
mirekrusin · 3h ago
You're not using mixture of amygdalin from organic apricot kernels, coca leaves mixed with unripe seed pods of opium poppy? Does wonders.
8bitsrule · 3h ago
"the human health impacts of many such chemicals remain poorly understood"
The effects of ritual bathing (soap, scrubbing with washcloths, etc.) on the skin may also be "poorly understood". Many people also wear regularly-washed clothing.
When I look at the laundry-list of chemicals in personal-care products (soaps, shampoos) (and in foods ... sometimes, wow!) I often wonder how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
dvh · 2h ago
Occasionally when I shower I get this vivid vision: a man comes home from hard days work and takes a shower. Grabs his shampoo but only squirts out half of his usual amount because shampoo bottle is empty, he thinks it will be enough but after applying it instantly feels it's not enough, so he grabs his wife's shampoo, squirts the second half and rubs it onto his hair. Few seconds later his hair bursts into fire because different chemicals in two completely different shampoos reacted together. How plausible is this scenario?
jemmyw · 1h ago
I don't think it's very plausible for shampoo but it's relevant for toothpaste for sensitive teeth. There's are two mechanisms for sensitive teeth, one is to flood the nerve with potassium ions using potassium nitrate, i.e. saltpetre. The other method is to block access to the nerve endings with other chemicals. You could potentially mix toothpaste and get your mouth to warm up slightly.
tyre · 2h ago
I love this website
mannycalavera42 · 1h ago
yeah bro, we besties
PaulHoule · 1h ago
Didn't the Joker contaminate personal care products so they did in a Batman movie?
bdangubic · 2h ago
I am not bald because of hereditary reason but this! :)
davrosthedalek · 1h ago
No worries, the stuff in the wife's bottle is the same, just more expensive.
droopyEyelids · 2h ago
This happened to me and the water itself caught on fire somehow
WalterBright · 40m ago
I agree. We should go back to the Roman days when clothes were washed in urine.
amarcheschi · 3h ago
>When I look at the laundry-list of chemicals in personal-care products I often wonder how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
A lot of effort
12_throw_away · 2h ago
>> how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
> A lot of effort
Into testing the long-term biochemical and environmental consequences? lol no absolutely not. Source: I work in this field.
amarcheschi · 1h ago
At least in eu, regulation is present to at least try to ensure that products are quite safe for the customers and for the environment
hiddencost · 3h ago
Good news (sarcasm), they laid off all the people responsible for that.
12_throw_away · 4h ago
Heh, is this bad ... who knows? Chemistry, environmental chemistry, and biochemistry are absurdly complex and full of interlocking Chesterton's Fences. But the profit motive means we don't really spend much time looking into them before tearing them down.
EugeneOZ · 4h ago
Actually it sounds kinda good.
fwip · 3h ago
Not sure why you got downvoted. The researchers state:
“If we buy a sofa from major furniture company, it’s tested for harmful emissions before being put on sale. However, when we sit on the sofa, we naturally transform some of these emissions because of the oxidation field we generate,” said lead author Jonathan Williams, who heads the study of organic reactive species at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. “This can create many additional compounds in our breathing zone whose properties are not well known or studied. Interestingly, body lotion and perfume both seem to dampen down this effect.”
Which, if you're worried about the effects of unstudied compounds, lotion will help protect you against.
ricardobeat · 2h ago
That’s like saying diarrhea will protect you against ingesting unknown poisons. Disrupting natural processes rarely comes without unintended side effects.
fwip · 1h ago
Sure, but it depends on what you consider to be "natural processes," and what you don't. The oxidation of sitting on a plastic^W vegan leather couch is not a "natural" process, but sitting on wood probably is. It's also not "natural" to be closed up with the results of that oxidation for most of the day, as most of our evolution happened with plenty of access to fresh air. We definitely have evidence that people were using oils and lotions for much longer than we've had modern synthetic materials or "air-tight" building methods.
The science is definitely still out, but I don't think it's unreasonable to think that inhibiting this reaction might be beneficial.
userbinator · 2h ago
This sounds like a good thing, in contrast to the doom-and-gloom "scary chemicals!!!11" articles that seem to have flooded journals and news in the recent years. I believe it's basically saying there is an antioxidant effect from lotions and perfumes.
Globally, PCP usage is widespread
Skimmed the article at first, and this made me chuckle. I wonder if that was deliberate.
rsync · 2h ago
"I believe it's basically saying there is an antioxidant effect from lotions and perfumes."
Which would be of no value.
There is no mechanism - no pathway - for ingested or applied "antioxidant" delivery into the cell where we believe we see oxidation or damage due to free radicals, etc.
... and even if there were it would probably have a terrible impact because it appears that the oxidation and free-radicals are an essential cell signaling mechanism which triggers apoptosis.
Which is a fancy way of saying: cells use these tools to kill themselves when they are performing badly. You would not want to interrupt this process.[1]
This won’t lead to people using less lotion, but it will lead to fancy lotions adding “OH precursors” as the new science buzzmarketing term
AnotherGoodName · 4h ago
Which is funny since the exact opposite, anti-oxidants, have been a fad to add for the past 20years.
woleium · 4h ago
Antioxidant supplements provide no benefit, may even be harmful. See 2007 meta-analysis by Goran Bjelakovic, Dimitrinka Nikolova, Lars Gluud, Rosa G. Simonetti, and Christian Gluud, published in JAMA:
“Mortality in Randomized Trials of Antioxidant Supplements for Primary and Secondary Prevention: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis”.
A meta-analysis is just a dilution of facts, in the exact proportion to have homeopathic efficacy.
thinkingtoilet · 4h ago
You eat anti-oxidants. So unless you're eating your lotions this isn't related and can't be the opposite.
fredfish · 3h ago
If an actual nutritionist says you can eat it every monkey in a lab coat knows they can sell it as a lotion with substantially less work than testing something else.
iinnPP · 3h ago
Skin absorbs. So it's at least partially related.
giantg2 · 4h ago
With how bad for us the common fragrances are in regards to things like cancer risk, endocrine disruption, etc, its surprising that nothing has changed. Most products have fragrance free alternatives.
FredPret · 3h ago
I once worked for a large consumer goods company. We had a conference about scents.
We saw a clear correlation between richer consumers and a preference for subtler scents or even no scent.
This even applied across countries: third-world consumers liked aggressive floral scents, but in Northern Europe and North America, the scents are way less concentrated and tend to be more toward subtle alpine or linen.
All this was 15-20 years ago; today I notice that no soap in my house smells like anything at all.
jopsen · 1h ago
> today I notice that no soap in my house smells like anything at all.
Same here, and all ja e store branded products certified allergy friendly.
tyre · 2h ago
Personally, I prefer neutral lotions and detergents because I wear my own cologne. It could be because
It could also be because we’re using more products. If my face moisturizer and sunscreen had different scents, that would be unfortunate. It would limit my options to those that went together.
I don’t normally want my face to smell like anything (again, cologne) but if I did I would choose only one product that’s scented. Probably beard oil.
amarcheschi · 3h ago
I'm a perfume fan (hobbyist? I don't know how to name it), and I wonder if this still holds. Nowadays, the "luxury" brands such as the Arab ones, and even the "western" European niche catering to the biggest spenders are making a lot of oud fragrances, gourmands, incense perfumes... Basically anything thick, dense, almost syrupy. They don't limit to this, of course, but ouds became much more common in the last years
washadjeffmad · 38m ago
There's a particular Middle Eastern market I visit where the cash reeks to high hell of cologne.
It turns out a few of the customers douse their dollars with their personal scents to remind everyone who's spending money with them, and I suppose to see where it might be circulating.
an_aparallel · 1h ago
In Sydney. It has destroyed the olfactory field imo. I cant stand the ambroxan(?)...it smells like IPA on PCP :/
amarcheschi · 1h ago
Sauvage is a big ambroxan offender, a cold sharp metallic note that pierces the brains around the person wearing it, who clearly has no brain for damage to be suffered (/s)
omnimus · 1h ago
Can you recommend some fragrances or a brand that does some contemporary subtle forresty mossy but also is not crazy expensive posh branding endeavour?
amarcheschi · 1h ago
I'm not entirely sure I understood your request, something foresty? Not a lot into those, anyway
Helan vetiver and rum, don't know if it's available in usa. Has a rum note as well as moss, I've definitely heard people around me saying it smells like forest, to me it's more of a mossy scent
Erbolario Periplo, but it's more Mediterranean bushes
Dsquared original wood
Maybe lalique encre Noire or encre Noire sport
I'd suggest to try them before buying them
alwa · 4h ago
In fact, it was specifically one of those alternatives which was under test here:
“a fragrance-free body lotion containing linoleic acid (Neutral, Unilever body lotion for sensitive skin; 0% colorants and 0% perfume)”
Sounds like they blame the phenoxyethanol? Which serves a preservative kind of role?
giantg2 · 2h ago
Yeah, my comment was just to add that scents have so many other issues than just what's in the article.
rowanG077 · 4h ago
This is the first time I'm hearing they are bad. Could you share some research about this?
amarcheschi · 3h ago
At least in the eu there are quite strict rules regulating cosmetics. Hell, lilial in perfumes was banned just to stay safe because they couldn't determine an "average exposure" and went on by banning it in perfumes to reduce what would have been the real exposure, even if it wouldn't have caused issues by being used in perfumes standalone (so not how it's used in cleaning products)
They might not be perfect, of course, and they're always improving
rowanG077 · 3h ago
Yes of course, there are a ton of bad substances. But I as not aware of something that is. Ubiquitously used, known bad and not banned in the EU.
giantg2 · 2h ago
EU is much better than the US for ingredient safety. I'm not sure of the EU stuff specifically, but it looks like there's still some concerns over some perfume ingredients, if not the fragrance itself. You'll probably have to do more research yourself.
There's tons more than this, but here's some high level stuff. The most concerning part is that some of the 4000+ fragrances in use are known and suspected carcinogens.
They've been around for a while, but they were harder to find. Even as a kid there was stuff like arm and hammer washing detergent that was scent free. Although now there are at least 5 free and clear choices at the Walmart.
indus · 1h ago
Is soap included? I seldom use body soap during a shower. Probably once a quarter, when my SO threatens me with consequences.
I am not a researcher, but I have a simple evolutionary theory that soap was invented in the last few thousand years and became a mass-market product after the beginning of industrialization.
If we survived and evolved without the use of something in the last few million years, then why is that thing needed?
xeonmc · 2m ago
Is your name Richard, by any chance?
sjducb · 58m ago
Lots of plants can be used as soap with minimal processing (crush the plant in your hand while rubbing it on something). It’s likely that most of our ancestors used soap and we evolved to expect it. Just like we evolved to eat cooked or ground up food.
pandarus · 57m ago
jesus
flint · 4h ago
This is why I get outside and sweat every day.
peanut_merchant · 4h ago
Not well versed in the field, what are the basic implications of this for health?
PaulHoule · 4h ago
In the 1970s there was a lot of talk about ‘healthful negative ions’ and a fad for negative ion generators even though many of those also generated hazardous ozone.
Hydroxyl ions are a significant kind of negative ion in the atmosphere and they’re known to be good because they react with and clean out pollutants like methane
Here's some more research, since I have a tiny ozone generator in my fridge and I got worried:
Ozone concentrations as low as 70ppb are hazardous when you're exposed to it for several hours [1]. Estimates for Ozone's olfactory threshold aren't trustworthy, since you go nose-blind to it pretty quickly [2], but it seems like it's probably around 20-40ppb before olfactory fatigue sets in [3,4].
My takeaway is that Ozone generators for rooms/basements/etc are definitely a bad idea. The best-cited olfactory thresholds are all in the same order of magnitude as that 8-hour hazard threshold, and with nose-blindness being a significant factor, you just don't want to mess around with that.
Inside a fridge, though? As long as you don't actually smell any ozone when you open the fridge, and you don't just shove your head in the fridge for hours on end, I'd think you're probably fine.
> A 2018 review found that negative air ions are highly effective in removing particulate matter from air. [6]
But the Ozone. Ozone sanitizes and freshens, but is bad for the lungs at high concentrations.
whitexn--g28h · 4h ago
The article does not come to any health conclusions, just studies the impact on indoor air chemistry.
GeoAtreides · 4h ago
if only there was a 'Discussion' section in the article, that goes over the basic implication of the study results... if only.
braaileb · 3h ago
Yeesh, who taught you to debase others.
maipen · 4h ago
Unrelated: This is why reading comments is becoming useless.
People react to the news without opening the article.
Its so annoying.
Related: This article shows an interesting study but it’s hard for me to interpret what does this translate to?
I think we should minimize very complex and synthetic products to our bodies. Although sometimes it’s necessary when we harm our body (e.g. long sun bathing sessions)
heavyset_go · 3h ago
> Although sometimes it’s necessary when we harm our body (e.g. long sun bathing sessions)
Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are basically crushed rocks that absorb UV and are used in sunscreens.
neuroelectron · 3h ago
You get what you pay for
superkuh · 4h ago
Cloudflare products disrupt the human ability to read science.org articles. The article text available to me:
>Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
Turning on JS and doing the captchas just results in more captchas, forever, with no end. I have emailed science.org about this in the past but they only fixed it on the blogs, not the main site.
userbinator · 2h ago
Hint: TLS fingerprinting.
(No problems with accessing this site without JS. You just need to make your client look like one of the officially-sanctioned browsers.)
mfro · 3h ago
I have this problem when using the JShelter addon if I enable the privacy switches. Your browser is probably resisting fingerprinting.
perching_aix · 3h ago
That is very curious, because I have both JS and all manners of clientside storage disabled, yet can access the site fine.
I guess maybe my CGNAT IP is reasonably well trusted and that's the difference?
benibela · 2h ago
the internet is being ruined everywhere.
This week I wanted to download some old HN front pages on the command lines and only got "403 sorry"
But really, I wouldn't worry about the result of this study _at all_ in daily life. It's quite surprising to me that this would be the top HN article at the time of this comment.
867-5309 · 1h ago
limonene, linalool, "parfum" are the scourge of this age
fiatjaf · 2h ago
This is impossible to read.
metalman · 3h ago
wow!, we are emiting a potent biocidal gas strait through our skin!.....it explains so much!
and ya, O³ is going to chemicaly break almost anything it touches, which will definitly yield some bad to have on you stuff if the precursor is
just wrong.
also , most definitly there is a wide diference in peoples indidual chemistry, so this phenominon will join many others in waiting for a more nuanced understanding of how human biochemistry works.
All that aside, it’s an interesting thing to think about but it’s not a basis for any kind of personal health recommendation and the authors state that. I have relevant expertise and this is a very complicated area that people routinely want to be boiled down into black and white simple advice. What this article seems to say is that lotion can affect the oxidation chemistry nearby it, but it’s not yet known if that is an effect with consequences that are on the whole negative or positive.
I would criticize the authors for their use of the word disrupt, because of the negative connotation carried by that word when talking about human biological systems. They use a softer, more neutral word, perturb, to express the same idea later in the article, which I think better expresses the idea without an emotional tinge to it.
Personal health recommendation: You'd be better off rubbing down with olive oil or sunflower oil than with that concoction, most likely. The ancient Greeks got some things right.
What evidence can you point to that supports this "most likely" assertion that isn't purely naturalistic fallacy?
> The ancient Greeks got some things right.
The pantheon of capricious gods living on mount olympus?
I'm wondering if you have its informed consent.
Yes, that’s correct. You’ve cracked the code. People don’t want to smell you, that’s why we shower regularly.
I’d suspect there are other parts of your life where you could combine that keen perceptive wit with these revelations to perhaps elucidate other social mysteries and dilemmas you’ve faced.
edit: I am fully aware that not washing leads to less oil build up over time, but I have tried and doctors have tried and that boat has sailed.
Also sex is a different thing from dating.
Also, the smell of sweat of someone attractive turns me on really hard.
> Babe I love it how you naturally smell
> That's great but I just bought a new generic cherry shampoo
some of us live in hot climates where a cold shower genuinely feels amazing and cools the body down.
some of us enjoy showering daily, because the bed sheets get less dirty that way, which means less laundry to do, and reduces my stress.
some of us are married to a lady and want a happy home life (lol).
a sample size of 1 (you) does not mean it’s true for everyone. Just saying. :)
The effects of ritual bathing (soap, scrubbing with washcloths, etc.) on the skin may also be "poorly understood". Many people also wear regularly-washed clothing.
When I look at the laundry-list of chemicals in personal-care products (soaps, shampoos) (and in foods ... sometimes, wow!) I often wonder how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
A lot of effort
> A lot of effort
Into testing the long-term biochemical and environmental consequences? lol no absolutely not. Source: I work in this field.
“If we buy a sofa from major furniture company, it’s tested for harmful emissions before being put on sale. However, when we sit on the sofa, we naturally transform some of these emissions because of the oxidation field we generate,” said lead author Jonathan Williams, who heads the study of organic reactive species at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. “This can create many additional compounds in our breathing zone whose properties are not well known or studied. Interestingly, body lotion and perfume both seem to dampen down this effect.”
Which, if you're worried about the effects of unstudied compounds, lotion will help protect you against.
The science is definitely still out, but I don't think it's unreasonable to think that inhibiting this reaction might be beneficial.
Globally, PCP usage is widespread
Skimmed the article at first, and this made me chuckle. I wonder if that was deliberate.
Which would be of no value.
There is no mechanism - no pathway - for ingested or applied "antioxidant" delivery into the cell where we believe we see oxidation or damage due to free radicals, etc.
... and even if there were it would probably have a terrible impact because it appears that the oxidation and free-radicals are an essential cell signaling mechanism which triggers apoptosis.
Which is a fancy way of saying: cells use these tools to kill themselves when they are performing badly. You would not want to interrupt this process.[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power,_Sex,_Suicide
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/20579...
We saw a clear correlation between richer consumers and a preference for subtler scents or even no scent.
This even applied across countries: third-world consumers liked aggressive floral scents, but in Northern Europe and North America, the scents are way less concentrated and tend to be more toward subtle alpine or linen.
All this was 15-20 years ago; today I notice that no soap in my house smells like anything at all.
Same here, and all ja e store branded products certified allergy friendly.
It could also be because we’re using more products. If my face moisturizer and sunscreen had different scents, that would be unfortunate. It would limit my options to those that went together.
I don’t normally want my face to smell like anything (again, cologne) but if I did I would choose only one product that’s scented. Probably beard oil.
It turns out a few of the customers douse their dollars with their personal scents to remind everyone who's spending money with them, and I suppose to see where it might be circulating.
Helan vetiver and rum, don't know if it's available in usa. Has a rum note as well as moss, I've definitely heard people around me saying it smells like forest, to me it's more of a mossy scent
Erbolario Periplo, but it's more Mediterranean bushes
Dsquared original wood
Maybe lalique encre Noire or encre Noire sport
I'd suggest to try them before buying them
“a fragrance-free body lotion containing linoleic acid (Neutral, Unilever body lotion for sensitive skin; 0% colorants and 0% perfume)”
Sounds like they blame the phenoxyethanol? Which serves a preservative kind of role?
They might not be perfect, of course, and they're always improving
https://taenk.dk/system/files/2022-01/Whats-that-smell-repor...
https://health.osu.edu/health/general-health/how-fragrances-...
That itself is a big change that took a while.
I am not a researcher, but I have a simple evolutionary theory that soap was invented in the last few thousand years and became a mass-market product after the beginning of industrialization.
If we survived and evolved without the use of something in the last few million years, then why is that thing needed?
Hydroxyl ions are a significant kind of negative ion in the atmosphere and they’re known to be good because they react with and clean out pollutants like methane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl_radical
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/144358/detergent-li...
Ozone concentrations as low as 70ppb are hazardous when you're exposed to it for several hours [1]. Estimates for Ozone's olfactory threshold aren't trustworthy, since you go nose-blind to it pretty quickly [2], but it seems like it's probably around 20-40ppb before olfactory fatigue sets in [3,4].
My takeaway is that Ozone generators for rooms/basements/etc are definitely a bad idea. The best-cited olfactory thresholds are all in the same order of magnitude as that 8-hour hazard threshold, and with nose-blindness being a significant factor, you just don't want to mess around with that.
Inside a fridge, though? As long as you don't actually smell any ozone when you open the fridge, and you don't just shove your head in the fridge for hours on end, I'd think you're probably fine.
[1]: https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/facts/SH.html [2]: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H... [3]: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19602703... [4]: https://spartanwatertreatment.com/ozone-safety/
HA ⇌ H+ + A-
TIL that Hydroxyl ions bind to methane and thereby clean the air?
Air ioniser: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_ioniser :
> A 2018 review found that negative air ions are highly effective in removing particulate matter from air. [6]
But the Ozone. Ozone sanitizes and freshens, but is bad for the lungs at high concentrations.
Related: This article shows an interesting study but it’s hard for me to interpret what does this translate to? I think we should minimize very complex and synthetic products to our bodies. Although sometimes it’s necessary when we harm our body (e.g. long sun bathing sessions)
Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are basically crushed rocks that absorb UV and are used in sunscreens.
>Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
Turning on JS and doing the captchas just results in more captchas, forever, with no end. I have emailed science.org about this in the past but they only fixed it on the blogs, not the main site.
(No problems with accessing this site without JS. You just need to make your client look like one of the officially-sanctioned browsers.)
I guess maybe my CGNAT IP is reasonably well trusted and that's the difference?
This week I wanted to download some old HN front pages on the command lines and only got "403 sorry"
although I do not get that now
But really, I wouldn't worry about the result of this study _at all_ in daily life. It's quite surprising to me that this would be the top HN article at the time of this comment.