need suggestions for fragrance free soap to wash equipment

[chunkyfrog]

The EWG, of course.
Wikipedia is often slammed, but it beats the heck out of any industry source.
In the past, I have suggested craft stores, in the DIY soap "making" section.
The soap portion is about as neutral as you can get.
I have been tempted to try goat milk soap, but suspect it is more scam than substance.

[Cpapian]

EWG.org

The Environmental Working Group is one of the most dishonest, malignant organizations short of terrorist groups. They are almost totally lacking in scientific credibility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environme ... sel_by_ABC

[/quote]

Granny ........ thems some pretty strong words. "one of the most dishonest, malignant organizations short of terrorist groups" ........ now I would have thought the tobacco companies would rank higher than them.

I am an open minded person and read the Wikipedia article. Nowhere did I see anything that concerns me particularly. It seems to me, there were one or two individuals in each case who disagreed with their methods. I doubt any organization like EWG would not be subject to criticism. Particularly from the Super Corporations that make and market the product.

Who was that doctor on TV who said "Everybody lies".

Information is information. Nothing more, nothing less.

If EWG is so very bad. can you suggest the name of a better organization where one can obtain information about the products we use?

[ChicagoGranny]

Granny ........ thems some pretty strong words. "one of the most dishonest, malignant organizations short of terrorist groups" ........ now I would have thought the tobacco companies would rank higher than them.

We've known for at least 75 years that cigarettes are deadly. Even uneducated people called them "coffin nails" in the 40s. Cigarette companies weren't deceiving many. People just didn't care, and today's young, beginning smokers don't care.

I am an open minded person and read the Wikipedia article. Nowhere did I see anything that concerns me particularly. It seems to me, there were one or two individuals in each case who disagreed with their methods.

The power of Wikipedia is its brevity PLUS the citations for people who want depth. Did you read any of the citations?

See what the scientists at the American Council on Science and Health have to say about EWG:

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) uses an authoritative sounding name to peddle scientific half-truths and outright fabrications. Along with Greenpeace and PETA, it is beloved by activists but detested by scientists.

Several years ago, George Mason University surveyed 937 members of the Society of Toxicology, an association of professional toxicologists. Nearly 4 out of 5 (79%) of those responding said that EWG -- as well as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) -- overstate the health risks of chemicals.

Despite this vote of no confidence in EWG by the scientific community, the organization manages to scare enough people to operate a $12.5-million budget. Telling people that unseen dangers lurk in their food and inside their homes is a lucrative business.

Full article: https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/05/25/de ... -you-11323

Here is what The Center for Accountability in Science has to say about EWG:

The group regularly publishes research and consumer advisories that receive significant media coverage, however that research isn’t peer reviewed or required to meet the editorial standards to be published in a reputable journal. Since the research is still generally reported by journalists in the same manner that they would report on more rigorously reviewed scientific findings, it can lead the public to unnecessarily worry about the safety of common foods and products.

For instance, the Environmental Working Group annually publishes a “Guide to Sunscreens.” The report rates popularly sold sunscreens based on whether the organization believes the ingredients cause cancer or reproductive problems and rates them as low, medium, or high hazard. The report isn’t published in any journal or reviewed by other researchers, but it’s regularly covered by top media outlets despite significant criticism from dermatologists. And not a single media outlet covered the fact that every single one of the partnering companies (those that have given financial support to EWG’s sunscreen campaign) were all given the best ratings.

Full article: https://www.accountablescience.com/issu ... ing-group/

Media Bias Fact Check has this to say about EWG:

Unfortunately, this source is weak in the area of science. For example, they have claimed that cell phones cause cancer when there is not evidence to support it. Due to pesticides, they often promote organic foods, which does not take into account that numerous pesticides are used in organic farming. They also are opposed to GMO, which goes against the consensus of science regarding safety.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/environm ... group-ewg/

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

If EWG is so very bad. can you suggest the name of a better organization where one can obtain information about the products we use?

That's a tough one. The internet is full of lies. A few years ago, the AG school at Penn State studied a large sample of internet information on agriculture. They found 90+% of the info about farming was just plain wrong. Much of it was intentionally wrong - activist groups and people blogging for Big Organic.

Maybe someone else can make a recommendation for you. I could only recommend Consumer Reports. Personally, I have years of experience with some groups for scientists where I can ask questions. (I am not a scientist myself.)

If you find a source of information that you are interested in, I would be happy to run it by some of the scientists I know.

[SewTired]

As an FYI, if you have contact dermatitis, surprisingly 'natural' cleaners are not necessarily your best choice. There are other choices for severe contact dermatitis combined with fragrance intolerance, but Orvus Paste was the most economical over all the stuff my bro tried.

Almost all the homemade soaps have a fragrance because of their base. I can't smell it because I have the opposite problem - no sense of smell.

[Bigmike52]

I have bought natural dishwashing soap at a local health food store and it worked fine. I seen a suggestion for Ivory dish soap but I believe it has changed as it never says 99% pure anymore. Dawn Dish detergent is hardly mild. Remember oil spills? Cleaned a lot of ducks with it......Mike

[ChicagoGranny]

Remember oil spills? Cleaned a lot of ducks with it

If a cleaning product won't get crude oil off a duck, it won't get body oils and gunk off a mask.

[Bigmike52]

I certainly hope you are not comparing my body oils to crude oil! If the manufactures of the equipment wanted something that dissolves grease I doubt they would have used the word "mild". If I have read the mask instructions correctly it says "Thoroughly clean by gently rubbing in warm water using mild soap."

[ChrisD]

I'v e always used Palmolive Pure + Clear.

https://www.target.com/p/palmolive-ultr ... lsrc=aw.ds

[palerider]

Dawn Dish detergent is hardly mild. Remember oil spills? Cleaned a lot of ducks with it......Mike

You're confusing "mild" with "ineffective". Rookie mistake.

Effective means that it broke up, and removed the oil. Which it did.
Mild means that it didn't harm the ducks. Which it didn't.

[palerider]

I certainly hope you are not comparing my body oils to crude oil!

Yeah, good point. Body oils are more tenacious and harder to get rid of than crude oil.

I've used Dawn for years on my masks.

[ChicagoGranny]

I have bought natural dishwashing soap at a local health food store and it worked fine.

I might try it. Which brand do you use?

[Bigmike52]

The product name is "Seventh Generation" free & clear. (says no fragrances-dyes-triclosan.) Costs less than $2.00 for 25 oz. as well it should since they took so much crap out of it the price should be cheaper.

[Cpapian]

My instructions for the equipment were to wash the tub, tubing, nasal pillow, and headgear on a weekly basis with mild soap or baby shampoo. (And to wash the nasal pillow daily). I have been using Burt's Bees fragrance free baby shampoo and wash. Target carried the shampoo but yesterday they had quit selling it in the store. I went to several grocery stores and drug stores and Walmart and couldn't find it. Had to order online which is not convenient.

Can anyone recommend some other soap to use? I can't handle scented - even some of the baby shampoos that say light scent are too much. Also my hands react (contact dermatitis) to all dish washing soap and to liquid hand soaps. I use a fragrance free glycerin liquid hand soap (Clearly Natural) but thinking the glycerin may not be good for the equipment?

My advice is to check out EWG website. It is a database of products and their ingredients. That is a fact. I have compared product ingredients at home and they have been in accord. https://www.ewg.org/guides/cleaners#.W4WaoKQXbxB

Despite granny's concerns, it is very useful. You get to see the ingredients of a variety of products. For example the Seventh Generation mentioned earlier has glycern in it. If you were to purchase that product, it might not be any better than the one you have at home already. You can also look up products you have had a bad reaction to to try to isolate what ingredients you have problems with; with an aim to avoid those ingredients in the future.

The A to F rating may cause many to have negative opinions about, but I see it as relative. If a chemical danger is not included, all products will be assessed on the same basis. If a chemical danger is overrated, all products will again be assessed on the same basis. I don't envision A products as being as effective as the grocery store products. The phrase " take it with a grain of salt" is appropriate here. Use it as a data base and make your own evaluation.

I look at it differently than others. I consider A to be the "holy grail" of environmental stuff. Mostly for people who are really really into that and are willing to pay for it. And I consider D - E as being pretty much regular grocery store variety. So, not a failure, but just the usual.

For example, I was buying an environmentally certified dishwashing liquid that was 2x the price of regular stuff. When I looked it up on EWG it was rated as only slightly lower than grocery store dish liquid. We went back to dawn and palmolive. But, I am finding the perfumes are lingering on the dishes even though my husband rinses a lot and very carefully. So I am rethinking that one. I might try 7th generation and see if it is better for smell.

I use Dr Brommers to wash my night guards. Just one drop on each, each morning. And on my APAP because the perfumes from the grocery store varieties overwhelm me. I have been using the same bottle for about 2 years and it is still 1/2 full.

Not everybody has the same sense of smell and not everybody has the same reactions to ingredients. I get blisters in my mouth from a lot of toothpastes, generally the newer ones. So I use a plain old available in the 70s type of toothpaste and I am fine.

I hope you find a good one.

[ChicagoGranny]

The product name is "Seventh Generation" free & clear. (says no fragrances-dyes-triclosan.) Costs less than $2.00 for 25 oz. as well it should since they took so much crap out of it the price should be cheaper.

That's the soap I recommended above in this thread:

Target

----------------> "Up&Up™ Free + Clear Liquid Dish Soap is tough on grease and stuck on food. This dishwashing liquid detergent leaves your dishes, glassware, pots and pans sparkling clean while being free of dyes and perfumes." https://www.target.com/p/up-up-153-free ... A-16600501

The link is Target.

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

What confused me was this:

I have bought natural dishwashing soap at a local health food store

Seventh Generation is available at many stores including Target and Walmart. It's ingredients are nearly identical to Ivory dish liquid. Ivory contains fragrance, SG does not. I don't like to smell the fragrance. That's why I recommend SG. SG and Ivory are equally safe and effective for cleaning CPAP masks. SG is a bit more expensive, but so little soap is used to wash my mask, it doesn't matter.

I certainly hope you are not comparing my body oils to crude oil!

I'll spare you the embarrassment of taking a poll.

[ChicagoGranny]

Despite granny's concerns, it is very useful. You get to see the ingredients of a variety of products.

You either failed to read, ignored or didn't understand the links I gave you.

EWG has a habit of withholding information that is unfavorable to its activist positions. The most egregious example is comparing pesticide residue on conventional fruits and vegetable with Big Organic's fruits and vegetables. They publish articles showing the amounts of residue on conventional compared to no residue on Big Organic. What they don't want you to know is that they only tested for pesticides used on conventional. They did not test for the pesticides used by Big Organic, so of course no residue was found on Big Organic. But, the FDA has tested thoroughly Big Organic and found similar levels of residue. Yes, Big Organic uses pesticides. There are over 400 approved, some of which are synthetic and some are more toxic than conventional pesticides. (But, don't worry, both types of crops are safe. You are just going to pay a lot more for Big Organic.)