New York Times article

[Guest guest]

Jay,

I think it is wonderful whenever a child succeeds no matter what causes the

success. I do not know what ABA is exactly, never having to go that route.

I do have a mercury poisoned child but raised this child casein free. She

did get diagnoses of ADHD, CAPD and as a teen Bipolar even though she missed

the Autistic diagnosis. I believe there are many interventions we parents

have done which " help " our children. CF/GF, ABA, whatever. I do know that I

" helped " my child by the CF diet. She never got diagnosed as autistic, she

sort of got by in school with some learning delays, and sort of blended in

with others in mainstream school. As she got older though the differences

became very apparent!!! She was not able to cope socially, educationally,

emotionally! Again my child was only " helped " by the diet. The child you

are discussing was " helped " by ABA. My child was not HEALED by the CF diet!

That was why the diagnoses built up as she matured. I think ABA was probably

a very good choice for this child but I would caution as the child gets older

that unless the childs system became healthy enough to loose the mercury,

other metals, or virus (if in fact they are problematic for this child) other

problems may present themselves as the child matures. I don't mean to

downplay the success, but to caution for the future.

Michele

[Guest guest]

Hi,

A few points:

First, I have been a member of this group for about 8 months. In

that time, I have contributed first my story of mercury poisoning and

experience with some supplements. I have discussed my experiences

with 2 DAN doctors in the NYC area giving insight into their

protocols and practices. Finally, I have provided my experience with

neuroleptic medications and especially the side effect of tardive

dyskinesia and side effect medications.

Second, as several members of this list are doing various

interventions (including ABA), ABA has been a topic on this list and

occasionally with great detail. Recall the rather lengthy and heated

discussion about Lovaas in which both Andy and M. took

part.

I thought that people on this list rooted for ASD children to do well

no matter the intervention. The article I sent to the list was about

an ASD child who has done remarkably well with behavioral

intervention and a list member (myself) getting recognition from a

major newspaper for his autism related work. I thought list members

could appreciate this and be happy for us.

Guess I was wrong.

Jay Goldwein

[Guest guest]

Jay,

Sorry if I sound a bit touchy. I don't mean to appear as such but of course you

can't see my face or hear my tone of voice.

Did I miss something?

Was someone rude?

Many of us are extremely busy taking care of kids, the holidays etc.

Most of us are doing so much in our own communities for awareness, support,

education etc. etc. We don;t always have time to answerr every email we receive.

I receive approximately 1000 emails a day because I belong to numerous lists

trying to learn more about my families medical issues.

Personally I have been writing letters, emails and faxing everyone I have ever

met on the whole Homeland security thing not to mention attending IEP's with

other parents, holding support meetings and still taking care of the kids (I

have 3 and all of them are ill to some extent or another) therapy sessions,

doctors appointments etc. etc.

We don't always have the time to pat everyone one the back.

We are thrilled when a child makes gains no matter what the treatment or

intervention.

We're glad you got some media attention.Congrats' on your success and congrats

on the media attention.

Don't take silence as not caring.

Remember we are all parents as well and very busy.

Donna J. Carver

Ohio Representative

Unlocking Autism

www.unlockingautism.org

[Guest guest]

> I thought list members

> could appreciate this and be happy for us.

>

> Guess I was wrong.

Hi Jay,

Honestly, we are all happy for you Congratulations!

Valentina

[Guest guest]

Hi I must have missed the article you are speaking about. That is great you got

something printed! I have a site I would love for you to visit and post your

story, Advocating for Autism at http://forums.delphiforums.com/uaca I am also

interested in your experience with Tardive dyskensia since my son was just dx'ed

with having that. Anything you could pass on to me, I would really appreciate.

Ca State Rep with Unlocking Autism

[ ] Re: New York Times article

Hi,

A few points:

First, I have been a member of this group for about 8 months. In

that time, I have contributed first my story of mercury poisoning and

experience with some supplements. I have discussed my experiences

with 2 DAN doctors in the NYC area giving insight into their

protocols and practices. Finally, I have provided my experience with

neuroleptic medications and especially the side effect of tardive

dyskinesia and side effect medications.

Second, as several members of this list are doing various

interventions (including ABA), ABA has been a topic on this list and

occasionally with great detail. Recall the rather lengthy and heated

discussion about Lovaas in which both Andy and M. took

part.

I thought that people on this list rooted for ASD children to do well

no matter the intervention. The article I sent to the list was about

an ASD child who has done remarkably well with behavioral

intervention and a list member (myself) getting recognition from a

major newspaper for his autism related work. I thought list members

could appreciate this and be happy for us.

Guess I was wrong.

Jay Goldwein

=======================================================

[Guest guest]

> I thought that people on this list rooted for ASD children to do

well

> no matter the intervention.

Kinda sorta. We are somewhat sensitive to the idea that they will

improve more if the most appropriate intervention is used, but in a

philosophical way we do all want every single kid to get better from

whatever intervention is tried. We just would rather they not be

tried randomly. Which doesn't seem to be a factor in this instance.

> The article I sent to the list was about

> an ASD child who has done remarkably well with behavioral

> intervention and a list member (myself) getting recognition from a

> major newspaper for his autism related work. I thought list members

> could appreciate this and be happy for us.

Some of us are.

The kids deserve to get better no matter how it happens. Thanks for

being able to help someone who needed it.

>

> Guess I was wrong.

>

> Jay Go

[Guest guest]

Jay,

I was thrilled to see your article. We started ABA when my son was 23

months old, with no other interventions. We weren't familier with mercury

or GFCF at the time. ABA alone brought my child back to me. We

subsequently started GFCF and are now going to do chelation to help him get

more focus, better fine motor control, and better word retrieval for speech,

which are his remaining issues. He is in a typical kindergarten without a

shadow and gets pulled out for 1 hour each of OT and speech per week. He

still struggles, and things don't come easily for him, but he is a very

loving, sociable child and is a completely different child than the one we

started with. Just now, he said, " Dad, would you like to go to the Y to go

swimming today? " This is just typical communication in our house now a

days. It was a long time coming, with lots of baby steps, but we feel so

blessed to find ABA when we did. If we had it to do over, it would have

been great to know about the biological interventions sooner. I think his

ABA would have gone a lot faster and easier if we could have cleaned out his

system sooner. All this to say, we do appreciate what you ABAers do. You

have been a Godsend to our family.

Randee

[ ] Re: New York Times article

> > I thought that people on this list rooted for ASD children to do

> well

> > no matter the intervention.

>

> Kinda sorta. We are somewhat sensitive to the idea that they will

> improve more if the most appropriate intervention is used, but in a

> philosophical way we do all want every single kid to get better from

> whatever intervention is tried. We just would rather they not be

> tried randomly. Which doesn't seem to be a factor in this instance.

>

> > The article I sent to the list was about

> > an ASD child who has done remarkably well with behavioral

> > intervention and a list member (myself) getting recognition from a

> > major newspaper for his autism related work. I thought list members

> > could appreciate this and be happy for us.

>

> Some of us are.

>

> The kids deserve to get better no matter how it happens. Thanks for

> being able to help someone who needed it.

> >

> > Guess I was wrong.

> >

> > Jay Go

>

>

> =======================================================

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Jay,

We are all happy to learn when a child improves no matter how. This was a very

busy time for all of us. In addition to the routine struggles, we also had to

put up with the holiday fussing. I am one that normally does not read e-mails

on the weekends. Way to go, Jay. ABA is so good for children that it's the

only one method that some pompous fools that deny the effectivenes of other

interventions have not been able to deny.

G

[Guest guest]

Jay,

We have been doing all the biomedical interventions since the last 3

years as well as an ABA program with my son (now 6) and I believe

that for him, the combination is working very well. His personality

responds very well to the ABA/VB structure of learning. Whatever

improvements are brought about by chelation, diet etc, the ABA/VB

therapists still accelerate his learning by teaching him stuff faster

than he can figure out himself, I am convinced that ABA/VB is

responsible to a large extent for his fine-motor skills doing from

severely delayed to age appropriate in less than 6 months. And I see

similar improvements in him that you described in the case you sent

out earlier, and a lot more good stuff too.

Thanks for the good work and getting the word out,

Gowri

> Hi,

>

> A few points:

>

> First, I have been a member of this group for about 8 months. In

> that time, I have contributed first my story of mercury poisoning

and

> experience with some supplements. I have discussed my experiences

> with 2 DAN doctors in the NYC area giving insight into their

> protocols and practices. Finally, I have provided my experience

with

> neuroleptic medications and especially the side effect of tardive

> dyskinesia and side effect medications.

>

> Second, as several members of this list are doing various

> interventions (including ABA), ABA has been a topic on this list

and

> occasionally with great detail. Recall the rather lengthy and

heated

> discussion about Lovaas in which both Andy and M. took

> part.

>

> I thought that people on this list rooted for ASD children to do

well

> no matter the intervention. The article I sent to the list was

about

> an ASD child who has done remarkably well with behavioral

> intervention and a list member (myself) getting recognition from a

> major newspaper for his autism related work. I thought list

members

> could appreciate this and be happy for us.

>

> Guess I was wrong.

>

> Jay Goldwein

[Guest guest]

Hi to all. I have so many web sites listed that I read periodically. But,

can someone tell me what these are?

ABA

DSMA

DSMP

Thanks, Rhonda

6 yr old ADHD, ODD, DSI

[Guest guest]

> Hi to all. I have so many web sites listed that I read

periodically. But,

> can someone tell me what these are?

>

> ABA

> DSMA

> DSMP

you'll find some help here:

/files/Glossary

ABA = applied behavioral analysis, a form of educational/interactive

therapy

DMSA and DMPS are chelation agents, used for detoxification of

mercury. [DMSA also removes lead.]

best wishes,

Moria

[Guest guest]

They had a full page on article on autism in the last Friday's New

York Times on how it affected siblings. 1/3 of the article was on the

front page. Maybe they are doing a series.

.

[Guest guest]

My question if these LP's were just as intelligent as an AP's with three

times larger brain. Does that mean that modern day LP's (whose brain

size is now equal in size to modern day AP's) are three times smarter

than modern day AP's?

________________________________

From: Joe [mailto:joseph.stramondo@...]

Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 3:58 AM

dwarfism

Subject: New York Times Article

Hi All,

I found this Times article interesting, but maybe a bit offensive

with its treatment of modern dwarfism. In fact, they even use

the " m " word. What does everyone think?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/04/science/04skull.html

cheers

Joe

===

[Guest guest]

Hi Joe,

I think he is using the word midget in the context of this being a

small but proportionate adult:

midget: A person of extremely small stature who is otherwise normally

proportioned.

whereas if he had said " dwarf " , he would have been making an incorrect

statement or misleading physically:

dwarf: An abnormally small person, often having limbs and features not

properly proportioned or formed.

And I didn't read it as a negative article, they are studying this

being's skull size and comparing it to the information they had based

their beliefs on in the past. He doesn't say that what we know as

dwarfs or people of short stature are any less intelligent than folks

of average height because of height. They are basing it on skull size

and comparing it to similar sized skulls in other creatures.

------from the NY Times-----------

Dr. , a primatologist at the Field Museum in Chicago,

said that he and colleagues in Britain were preparing a paper

contending that the examined braincase was too small to be explained

easily by ordinary dwarfism or the tendency of isolated people on

islands to become smaller over generations. In such cases, Dr.

said, brain size would usually not diminish by the same amount as body

size. Dr. said that he was not ready to rule out microcephaly

on the basis of a test of a single microcephalic braincase. But Dr.

Falk pointed out that of all the specimens compared with the

braincase, the microcephalic's was the least similar.

" The scaling of brain to body isn't at all what we'd expect to find in

Pygmies, and the shape is all wrong to be a microcephalic, " Dr. Falk said.

----------------------

What do others think?

And it's interesting that the word 'pygmy' is not used more often as a

slur:

Pyg·my also Pig·my

1. Greek Mythology. A member of a race of dwarfs.

2. also pygmy A member of any of various peoples, especially of

equatorial Africa and parts of southeast Asia, having an average

height less than 5 feet (127 centimeters). Not in scientific use.

3. pygmy

1. An individual of unusually small size.

2. An individual considered to be of little or no importance.

Thanks for sharing the link, someone had mentioned it in conversation

recently, but I was in a horizontal position (all tucked in) and

refused to get up to check online.

>

>

> Hi All,

>

> I found this Times article interesting, but maybe a bit offensive

> with its treatment of modern dwarfism. In fact, they even use

> the " m " word. What does everyone think?

>

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/04/science/04skull.html

>

> cheers

>

> Joe

[Guest guest]

--

I think you're right, but ... the New York Times copy desk should know that

there is no scientific basis for these definitions. " Midget " is a made-up

word dating back only to the 1860s. In fact, " dwarf " is perfectly fine word

for an LP whose limbs are proportionate. Barnum himself used " dwarf " to

describe his most famous employee, Stratton (Tom Thumb), since the

M-word had not yet been coined when Barnum wrote his autobiography, in the

1850s.

Dan

On 3/5/05 8:28 AM, " M " <petite_isla@...> wrote:

> Hi Joe,

>

> I think he is using the word midget in the context of this being a

> small but proportionate adult:

>

> midget: A person of extremely small stature who is otherwise normally

> proportioned.

>

> whereas if he had said " dwarf " , he would have been making an incorrect

> statement or misleading physically:

>

> dwarf: An abnormally small person, often having limbs and features not

> properly proportioned or formed.

>

> And I didn't read it as a negative article, they are studying this

> being's skull size and comparing it to the information they had based

> their beliefs on in the past. He doesn't say that what we know as

> dwarfs or people of short stature are any less intelligent than folks

> of average height because of height. They are basing it on skull size

> and comparing it to similar sized skulls in other creatures.

>

>

> ------from the NY Times-----------

> Dr. , a primatologist at the Field Museum in Chicago,

> said that he and colleagues in Britain were preparing a paper

> contending that the examined braincase was too small to be explained

> easily by ordinary dwarfism or the tendency of isolated people on

> islands to become smaller over generations. In such cases, Dr.

> said, brain size would usually not diminish by the same amount as body

> size. Dr. said that he was not ready to rule out microcephaly

> on the basis of a test of a single microcephalic braincase. But Dr.

> Falk pointed out that of all the specimens compared with the

> braincase, the microcephalic's was the least similar.

>

> " The scaling of brain to body isn't at all what we'd expect to find in

> Pygmies, and the shape is all wrong to be a microcephalic, " Dr. Falk said.

> ----------------------

>

> What do others think?

>

> And it's interesting that the word 'pygmy' is not used more often as a

> slur:

>

> Pyg·my also Pig·my

> 1. Greek Mythology. A member of a race of dwarfs.

> 2. also pygmy A member of any of various peoples, especially of

> equatorial Africa and parts of southeast Asia, having an average

> height less than 5 feet (127 centimeters). Not in scientific use.

> 3. pygmy

> 1. An individual of unusually small size.

> 2. An individual considered to be of little or no importance.

>

> Thanks for sharing the link, someone had mentioned it in conversation

> recently, but I was in a horizontal position (all tucked in) and

> refused to get up to check online.

>

>

>

>>

>>

>> Hi All,

>>

>> I found this Times article interesting, but maybe a bit offensive

>> with its treatment of modern dwarfism. In fact, they even use

>> the " m " word. What does everyone think?

>>

>> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/04/science/04skull.html

>>

>> cheers

>>

>> Joe

[Guest guest]

YES! It was very biased and piece of garbage!

Charlie

> I read the NYT article on the vaccine autism link and was again

> extremely disappointed with what I saw as overt bias. I'm writing to

> the NYT Ombudsman with a complaint. I'd be interested in knowing if

> anyone else had the same reacion?

[Guest guest]

>

> , I'd be more than happy to try to get that article for you, if

> someone could tell me the name of the article and the date of the

> publication (I can't seem to find any particular reference to it when I

> review past messages.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Dede

>

Thank you for offering Dede. I have the article now (thank you Anya, ,

,

Rosemary) and I wrote a letter to the NY times - I'm waiting to hear whether

they will

publish it.

Very strange that he tries hard to persuade us that naturals being more

expensive than

synthetics is a myth, that the opposite is true, and at the same time he proudly

tells us

that fragrances are mostly synthetic. Since this clearly doesn't make commercial

sense, I

can't imagine many people believing him.

But when he talks about fragrances being compoased of hydroxycitronellal,

dihydromercenol, methyl anthranilate etc. this does have the ring of truth. So I

think his

(presumably unintended) exposure of a chemical-based industry may turn people

off the

very thing he is trying to turn them on to. And, as Anya has suggested, it may

not endear

him to those in that industry.

The public's memory may be short, but at the same time, once your words are in

print in

this way you can't take them back.

Tisserand

[Guest guest]

ambientgravity33 <tisserand@...> wrote:

>

> , I'd be more than happy to try to get that article for you, if

> someone could tell me the name of the article and the date of the

> publication (I can't seem to find any particular reference to it when I

> review past messages.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Dede

>

Thank you for offering Dede. I have the article now (thank you Anya, ,

,

Rosemary) and I wrote a letter to the NY times - I'm waiting to hear whether

they will

publish it.

Very strange that he tries hard to persuade us that naturals being more

expensive than

synthetics is a myth, that the opposite is true, and at the same time he proudly

tells us

that fragrances are mostly synthetic. Since this clearly doesn't make commercial

sense, I

can't imagine many people believing him.

But when he talks about fragrances being compoased of hydroxycitronellal,

dihydromercenol, methyl anthranilate etc. this does have the ring of truth. So I

think his

(presumably unintended) exposure of a chemical-based industry may turn people

off the

very thing he is trying to turn them on to. And, as Anya has suggested, it may

not endear

him to those in that industry.

The public's memory may be short, but at the same time, once your words are in

print in

this way you can't take them back.

Tisserand

hello and everyone

I worked for a time with a homoeopathic doctor, who studied in Israel after

leaving the cancer hospital in London disillusioned. She found that the

treatments were killing the patients just as much as the illness iteself.

She often talked to me about how she would in hospital go to a function where

a particular pharmaceutical company would be selling their latest drugs to the

hospital and profusely hand out freebies so that it would urge the doctors to

use them.

The reason why I am bringing this up is maybe the same thing is happening here

in the perfume world...... no accusations just a thought. My thoughts are they

are still chemical can be absorbed through the skin and can/could cause problems

.........I have had clients with allergies to perfume that clear up after using a

naturally based perfume with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV filters

that they put in alcohol in the perfumery industry. The dreadful metallic

claggy scent that happens often with synthetic molecules and aromas after a

period of time on the skin does not happen with naturals.

with every good wish

janita haan morris

---------------------------------

Try the all-new . " The New Version is radically easier to use " –

The Wall Street Journal

[Guest guest]

My

> thoughts are they are still chemical can be absorbed

> through the skin and can/could cause problems

> ........I have had clients with allergies to perfume

> that clear up after using a naturally based perfume

> with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV

> filters that they put in alcohol in the perfumery

> industry.

I've been wondering if a large part of the sharp rise

in environmental allergies, eczema, and asthma may be,

in part due to the fact that just about every personal

care product we use contains " fragrance " which should

really be called " synthetic fragrance chemicals. " The

more I read, the more I am concerned as I am a person

who has all of these conditions and who tries to avoid

synthetic perfumes. When I am exposed to people who

are wearing strong perfumes I can sometimes have

severe asthma attacks. And I've been noticing lately

that even the " natural " shampoos, lotions, deodorants,

etc. that I buy from the health food store contain

" fragrance " and that many of them (such as those that

are persimmon or pear scented) most definitely contain

synths. So why is it that even the " natural " products

contain these things and are presented as " natural? "

I just can't help but wonder if I am often reacting to

these more subtle fragrances which I am exposed to all

the time. Also, how many other people may be reacting

to them who have no idea what causes their allergies?

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Glazer <juliaglazermail@...> wrote: My

> thoughts are they are still chemical can be absorbed

> through the skin and can/could cause problems

> ........I have had clients with allergies to perfume

> that clear up after using a naturally based perfume

> with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV

> filters that they put in alcohol in the perfumery

> industry.

I've been wondering if a large part of the sharp rise

in environmental allergies, eczema, and asthma may be,

in part due to the fact that just about every personal

care product we use contains " fragrance " which should

really be called " synthetic fragrance chemicals. " The

more I read, the more I am concerned as I am a person

who has all of these conditions and who tries to avoid

synthetic perfumes. When I am exposed to people who

are wearing strong perfumes I can sometimes have

severe asthma attacks. And I've been noticing lately

that even the " natural " shampoos, lotions, deodorants,

etc. that I buy from the health food store contain

" fragrance " and that many of them (such as those that

are persimmon or pear scented) most definitely contain

synths. So why is it that even the " natural " products

contain these things and are presented as " natural? "

I just can't help but wonder if I am often reacting to

these more subtle fragrances which I am exposed to all

the time. Also, how many other people may be reacting

to them who have no idea what causes their allergies?

hi julia

sadly it is because they want to make a quick profit and by using the word

natural and pure it gives another way of selling to the public

just in these last few days I have had a result from what has been described

as a natural.... from a supposed natural distributor which has quite stunned

me..... not naming names but I suppose one has to be on guard use ones

instinctive intelligence and nose ...... it still saddens me deeply ...tho....

asthma attacks I am not surprised about these as some of synthetic fragrances

manage to close the throat up......

stick to the simple and true and you can't go wrong.

love,

janita

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

>

> Glazer <juliaglazermail@...> wrote: My

>> thoughts are they are still chemical can be absorbed

>> through the skin and can/could cause problems

>> ........I have had clients with allergies to perfume

>> that clear up after using a naturally based perfume

>> with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV

>> filters that they put in alcohol in the perfumery

>> industry.

>

> I've been wondering if a large part of the sharp rise

> in environmental allergies, eczema, and asthma may be,

> in part due to the fact that just about every personal

> care product we use contains " fragrance " which should

> really be called " synthetic fragrance chemicals. " The

> more I read, the more I am concerned as I am a person

> who has all of these conditions and who tries to avoid

> synthetic perfumes. When I am exposed to people who

> are wearing strong perfumes I can sometimes have

> severe asthma attacks. And I've been noticing lately

> that even the " natural " shampoos, lotions, deodorants,

> etc. that I buy from the health food store contain

> " fragrance " and that many of them (such as those that

> are persimmon or pear scented) most definitely contain

> synths. So why is it that even the " natural " products

> contain these things and are presented as " natural? "

> I just can't help but wonder if I am often reacting to

> these more subtle fragrances which I am exposed to all

> the time. Also, how many other people may be reacting

> to them who have no idea what causes their allergies?

>

>

>

> hi julia

> sadly it is because they want to make a quick profit and by using

> the word natural and pure it gives another way of selling to the

> public

> just in these last few days I have had a result from what has

> been described as a natural.... from a supposed natural distributor

> which has quite stunned me..... not naming names but I suppose one

> has to be on guard use ones instinctive intelligence and

> nose ...... it still saddens me deeply ...tho....

> asthma attacks I am not surprised about these as some of

> synthetic fragrances manage to close the throat up......

> stick to the simple and true and you can't go wrong.

> love,

> janita

>

i also wonder wonder wonder about the presence of all these synths

and how they give naturals a hard time, as a result.

sooo many people do not know how to try a flower water spritzer for

instance, shy~ing away from a full facial spritz and inhalation...and

this saddens me and is due to the synths causing peeps problems..we

need a lobbying agent...

grrrr.....

just curious, maybe we should have a yearly annual awards ceremony

and honour people in the naturals like CEW does for the

giants......so that we can start claiming our power back!!!!!!

L

[Guest guest]

My

> >> thoughts are they are still chemical can be absorbed

> >> through the skin and can/could cause problems

> >> ........I have had clients with allergies to perfume

> >> that clear up after using a naturally based perfume

> >> with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV

> >> filters that they put in alcohol in the perfumery

> >> industry.

> >

> > I've been wondering if a large part of the sharp rise

> > in environmental allergies, eczema, and asthma may be,

> > in part due to the fact that just about every personal

> > care product we use contains " fragrance " which should

> > really be called " synthetic fragrance chemicals. " The

> > more I read, the more I am concerned as I am a person

> > who has all of these conditions and who tries to avoid

> > synthetic perfumes. When I am exposed to people who

> > are wearing strong perfumes I can sometimes have

> > severe asthma attacks. And I've been noticing lately

> > that even the " natural " shampoos, lotions, deodorants,

> > etc. that I buy from the health food store contain

> > " fragrance " and that many of them (such as those that

> > are persimmon or pear scented) most definitely contain

> > synths. So why is it that even the " natural " products

> > contain these things and are presented as " natural? "

> > I just can't help but wonder if I am often reacting to

> > these more subtle fragrances which I am exposed to all

> > the time. Also, how many other people may be reacting

> > to them who have no idea what causes their allergies?

> >

> >

> >

> > hi julia

> > sadly it is because they want to make a quick profit and by using

> > the word natural and pure it gives another way of selling to the

> > public

> > just in these last few days I have had a result from what has

> > been described as a natural.... from a supposed natural distributor

> > which has quite stunned me..... not naming names but I suppose one

> > has to be on guard use ones instinctive intelligence and

> > nose ...... it still saddens me deeply ...tho....

> > asthma attacks I am not surprised about these as some of

> > synthetic fragrances manage to close the throat up......

> > stick to the simple and true and you can't go wrong.

> > love,

> > janita

> >

>

>

> i also wonder wonder wonder about the presence of all these synths

> and how they give naturals a hard time, as a result.

> sooo many people do not know how to try a flower water spritzer for

> instance, shy~ing away from a full facial spritz and inhalation...and

> this saddens me and is due to the synths causing peeps problems..we

> need a lobbying agent...

>

> grrrr.....

>

> just curious, maybe we should have a yearly annual awards ceremony

> and honour people in the naturals like CEW does for the

> giants......so that we can start claiming our power back!!!!!!

>

> L

>

Yes - a great way to attract press attention, and also to focus and build the

energies of an

industry/movement. Annual conference/trade show? I think Anya said something

about

events being planned...

Tisserand

[Guest guest]

> Rosemary) and I wrote a letter to the NY times - I'm waiting to hear

whether they will

> publish it.

>

> Tisserand

,

If I may be so bold... you might feel like giving us a sneek preview

of the letter you wrote, I would love to see it?

I'll put my money on it that they will publish it!

Ruth

[Guest guest]

janita morris <heartinmymouth@...> wrote:

<juliaglazermail@...

correction ..... should have been posted

janitamorris@heartinmymouth wrote

My

> thoughts are they are still chemical can be absorbed

> through the skin and can/could cause problems

> ........I have had clients with allergies to perfume

> that clear up after using a naturally based perfume

> with a vegetable alcohol and no denaturent or UV

> filters that they put in alcohol in the perfumery

> industry.

my fault...... should have made a separate entry

kind regards

janita

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Krista,

Would you give Natasha my email addy . . .

Kerry told her to talk to me . . . we're going to be traveling . .. but we'll have a laptop with us.

Thanks,

Rogene