PurSleep Product Safety

[-SWS]

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks. I was thinking that particles might get breathed into areas of the lungs that would make it less likely for the particles to then be breathed out. But molecules of chemicals breathed in are likely just breathed in, period, huh?

Again, we're not discussing dust particles or other very large and heavy particulate matter. I personally don't think there will be a vast difference in presenting 200,000 of those molecules with CPAP versus presenting 200,000 of those same molecules without CPAP. I think the number of molecules exposed to lung surface or tissue and the chemical absorption rate will be more or less comparable in both cases.

In other words, when it comes to air born chemical molecules, I don't think CPAP will significantly improve what was probably an efficient exposure-and-absorption rate in the first place. That's just my opinion so it ain't worth much.

[jnk]

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks. I was thinking that particles might get breathed into areas of the lungs that would make it less likely for the particles to then be breathed out. But molecules of chemicals breathed in are likely just breathed in, period, huh?

Again, we're not discussing dust particles or other very large and heavy particulate matter. I personally don't think there will be a vast difference in presenting 200,000 of those molecules with CPAP versus presenting 200,000 of those same molecules without CPAP. I think the number of molecules exposed to lung surface or tissue and the chemical absorption rate will be more or less comparable in both cases.

In other words, when it comes to air born chemical molecules, I don't think CPAP will significantly improve what was probably an efficient exposure-and-absorption rate in the first place. That's just my opinion so it ain't worth much.

I know it is "only" opinion you are offering when it comes to these sorts of questions, but it is your approach in the way you explain your thought process as you create connections between the facts, while clearly demarcating the unknowns, that I always find so valuable.

Frankly, I often learn more from the way you frame your questions than I do from most people's answers!

[jnk]

Okay. This thread is about PurSleep Product Safety. So my question for Bret is as on-topic as a question can be.

I'm confused about the PurSleep product safety text on the PurSleep web site. Here's what it says:

Are Essential Oils Safe?

Essential oils are the aromatic component of plants and are derived from botanical materials (herbs, citrus, flowers, leaves, etc.) through simple distillation techniques. We use only the highest quality 100% pure therapeutic-grade essential oils....

http://www.pur-sleep.com/content/?page=3&pg=1#cp_3_1

I think there's plenty of room for consumer confusion reading that page. If I'm not paying close attention to the details, then I'd think that page probably implies that PurSleep as an aromatic product line fits that bill of safety. But when I look a little closer at details, it clearly appears as if the FAQ page discusses only the safety of "100% pure therapeutic-grade essential oils". Ooops! My guard was initially down so I got subconsciously fooled. I'm sure that wasn't on purpose since the PurSleep product line evolved toward offering synthetic aromatics while the FAQ page clearly did not.

The product safety information released on the PurSleep web site and at the beginning of this thread are all limited to the initial PurSleep product line: the "100% pure therapeutic-grade essential oils". However, as we have probably discussed ad nauseum in this thread, that's not at all relevant to "synthetic cosmetic grade fragrances". We know what's in the PurSleep 100% natural essential oils, but we have absolutely no idea what's in the artificial PurSleep fragrances.


So the unanswered question remains: What details are known, if any, about the artificial chemicals comprising PurSleep artificial fragrances?


I would also propose that PurSleep and CPAP.COM rework text to minimize implied confusion about "100% pure therapeutic-grade essential oils" product safety versus "synthetic cosmetic grade fragrances" product safety. Despite this thread aiming to discuss PurSleep product safety, so far I have read only assurances about "100% pure therapeutic-grade essential oil" product safety. I would suggest being abundantly clear about exactly which fragrances are 100% pure essential oils, and which fragrances contain artificial chemicals.



As a final side note, let’s compare estimated hours of chemical exposure between Vick’s Vapo rub and undisclosed PurSleep synthetics:

Vicks- 49-to-80 hours of annual exposure (assuming 7 to 10 eight-hour nights of annual exposure to address colds)
PurSleep- 2,920 hours of annual exposure (if used eight hours nightly)

But this is a discussion forum for all things CPAP related, and that's why PurSleep is up for discussion here versus other incidental chemical exposures. We already know what's in Vicks. But considering the annual hours of chemical exposure, consumers here deserve better disclosure about the entire combination of artificial chemicals that are employed in the PurSleep cosmetic grade synthetic fragrances.

Back-to-topic bump.

[SleepGuy]

I figure that my personal exposure to the fragrance oils in Downy is pretty much 24/7, or 8760 hours a year.

And that would be direct dermal as well as "inhalation therapy."

Funny that I don't see much worry about Downy--couldn't even find mention on their whole website about safety of their fragrances. They're not even regulated as cosmetics despite the direct dermal exposure....

The truth is that as for fragrance oil safety there is very little information available as to safety. There is no Tisserand volume on Fragrance Oil Safety. So I've said all I can say on that since I am not a manufacturer of fragrance oils. I source oils from an FDA licensed and approved maufacturer who marks everything I buy as being "cosmetic grade."

There's no much more to say--though I do find it rather curious that a thread about a product's safety keeps morphing into a thread about how to copy the product....but since imitation is really a form of praise, I take it as a compliment! Before I came along with the PurSleep idea the only mention on the boards here about using aromatic anything with CPAP was extremely negative: Never Ever in a Million Years! So it's nice to see attitudes change over time because this is something that seems to be helping a lot of people tolerate their therapy.

SG

[ozij]

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks. I was thinking that particles might get breathed into areas of the lungs that would make it less likely for the particles to then be breathed out. But molecules of chemicals breathed in are likely just breathed in, period, huh?

Again, we're not discussing dust particles or other very large and heavy particulate matter. I personally don't think there will be a vast difference in presenting 200,000 of those molecules with CPAP versus presenting 200,000 of those same molecules without CPAP. I think the number of molecules exposed to lung surface or tissue and the chemical absorption rate will be more or less comparable in both cases.

In other words, when it comes to air born chemical molecules, I don't think CPAP will significantly improve what was probably an efficient exposure-and-absorption rate in the first place. That's just my opinion so it ain't worth much.

I know it is "only" opinion you are offering when it comes to these sorts of questions, but it is your approach in the way you explain your thought process as you create connections between the facts, while clearly demarcating the unknowns, that I always find so valuable.

Frankly, I often learn more from the way you frame your questions than I do from most people's answers!

Well said, -SWS and jnk.
Thank you for bringing the real issues back into focus, -SWS.

The confusion of those product lines can be clearly seen, at this point of time (March 1, 03:48 UTC) where cpap.com sells an Air-Candy package . The text describes EOs, and even the link to the FAQ within the text points to the misleading Are Essential Oils Safe? rather than to the informative What are the differences between Essential Oils and Air Candy Oils?.

You have to do a lot of searching through the linked FAQ's to find out that Air-Candy is different. The question, so clearly formulated by -SWS deserves an answer from SleepGuy:

What details are known, if any, about the artificial chemicals comprising PurSleep artificial fragrances?

O.

[StillAnotherGuest]

Again, we're not discussing dust particles or other very large and heavy particulate matter. I personally don't think there will be a vast difference in presenting 200,000 of those molecules with CPAP versus presenting 200,000 of those same molecules without CPAP. I think the number of molecules exposed to lung surface or tissue and the chemical absorption rate will be more or less comparable in both cases.

I would submit that the CPAP scenario would offer greater exposure because the pressurized lung has a greater functional residual capacity (FRC)(which is one of the ways CPAP works, see the split_city threads), revealing more alveolar surface, and the concentration of fragrance would increase in that the vacuum effect would be more efficient than random room diffusion. But those are just 2 of the many variables, there's also the concentration of the oil in question, the amount being used, it's volatility and distance from the intake.

Thank you for bringing the real issues back into focus, -SWS.

What, are you a baseball hater? What kind of an American are you?

Wait, don't answer that.

You have the knack of bringing focus to issue as well, o., so to refresh your and -sws' points:

The confusion of those product lines can be clearly seen, at this point of time (March 1, 03:48 UTC) where cpap.com sells an Air-Candy package . The text describes EOs, and even the link to the FAQ within the text points to the misleading Are Essential Oils Safe? rather than to the informative What are the differences between Essential Oils and Air Candy Oils?

You have to do a lot of searching through the linked FAQ's to find out that Air-Candy is different. The question, so clearly formulated by -SWS deserves an answer from SleepGuy:

What details are known, if any, about the artificial chemicals comprising PurSleep artificial fragrances?

SAG

[Catnapper]

OK so I am a little slow to catch up here. I have an idea of what the 8E >60 was supposed to be. I think it was a typo for the abbreviation i.e. which stands for "that is". (It is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase "id est" and used to clarify what was said previously. ) The person probably hit the 8 instead of the capital I to go with the E. It was meant to say, "that is, greater than 60." No only a typo but typed without the periods after the i and the e. The 8 is almost above the i on the keyboard and an easy mistake in typing.

Oh well, it makes sense to me.

[StillAnotherGuest]

Well, I tried the ol' Google method of loading in the phrase before and the phrase after, 'cause often you can get a snippet of the article even if it's protected. I suppose if you're patient, you could get the whole article that way.

Anyway, this showed up:



SAG

[-SWS]

Bret, I apologize for the hard-hitting questions. I have absolutely no interest in copying your fragrances. If my objective was to be yet another PurSleep, then I'd simply go wholesale shopping for fragrances exactly the way you did. That sure seems like a much easier approach than asking a few not-likely-to-be-answered chemical questions on a message board.


Here's what I was REALLY after with my very simple and straightforward question (that question in bold text several posts above): I wanted to understand how much research and thought went into selling artificial fragrance chemicals instead of offering only 100% all-natural essential oils. After all, those 100% all-natural essential oils were never a chemical mystery, potentially laden with phthalates and who knows what else.


Bret, I wanted to understand how your product philosophy changed from this commendable and even confidence-inspiring level of concern:

...Bret was developing a business that required the use of aromatic essential oils. Aromatic essential oils are fragrant oils extracted from plants chiefly through distillation, a method of separating substances in a boiling liquid. As Bret went on he learned about essential oils, the concept of scent and the benefits of 100% pure, natural oils...

When asked why he chose all natural aromatic essential oils instead of cheaper, man made scents Bret said "There is a marked difference between natural and artificial scents. Most of us have never smelled natural scents due to price. I couldn't stomach the idea of using something artificial in a CPAP which you use every night. The essential oils Pur-Sleep uses are FDA approved for every night use.

https://www.cpap.com/DisplayNewsletter/29

To this level of satisfaction at offering a chemical mystery referred to above as the "cheaper, man made scents":

I figure that my personal exposure to the fragrance oils in Downy is pretty much 24/7, or 8760 hours a year.

And that would be direct dermal as well as "inhalation therapy."

Funny that I don't see much worry about Downy--couldn't even find mention on their whole website about safety of their fragrances. They're not even regulated as cosmetics despite the direct dermal exposure....

Synthetic or not, your AirCandy offerings are priced the same as your essential oils. So that begs another straightforward question: Do any of your essential oils now contain artificial chemicals? If I'm unclear about exactly which PurSleep products are presently all-natural and which contain synthetic chemicals, then there may be others who are also unclear. So it would be great if you specified on the PurSleep web site exactly which of your fragrances contain artificial chemicals so that consumers who want to steer clear of those artificial choices can very easily do just that. That way we don't have to wonder if the cpap.com PurSleep FAQ is either up-to-date or out-of-date with respect to PurSleep product changes.

Thank you, sir.

[ozij]

Phthalates in cosmetics: Hazardous to your health? From the Mayo Clinic:

Answer July 16, 2007
Phthalates are chemicals used in hundreds of consumer products, from cosmetics and shampoos to vinyl flooring and food packaging. They are used to make materials soft and flexible, like nail polish (so it won't chip as easily) and hair spray (to avoid stiffness).

Some consumer groups claim that phthalates in consumer products pose a danger. But scientists are still unsure if phthalates pose any health risks. Some studies suggest phthalates may lower testosterone levels in men, which contributes to obesity and type 2 diabetes. Other studies suggest a link between delayed sexual development in boys and girls and exposure to phthalates. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined there is still not sufficient proof that phthalates in consumer products are dangerous enough to require regulation.

How can you tell if the cosmetics or beauty products you use contain phthalates? Cosmetics are required to list all of their ingredients on the product labels. So check the product labels on your cosmetics. But other products, such as perfume, are not required to do this. You can contact the manufacturer, if you have questions about the phthalate content in a specific product. There are Web sites that claim to provide lists of products that contain phthalates, but the accuracy of such Web sites isn't known.

Added emphasis mine.

Could you let us know, Bret, which -if any - of the Air Candy line contains phthalates? That information would give users a
choice of going by the more lenient FDA decision, or the more rigorous European standards.

I do realize this

"At the present time, FDA does not have compelling evidence that phthalates, as used in cosmetics, pose a safety risk. If FDA determines that a health hazard exists, the agency will advise the industry and the public, and will consider its legal options under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act in protecting the health and welfare of consumers."

Apprears in the FDA site. http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cos-phth.html

However, I would appreciate a straight forward informative reply specifically about the products you sell.

O.

[JoyD.]

by TXKajun on Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:02 am

*yawn* *bigger yawn*
Yet another totally meaningless concern has been raised about essential oils, aromatherapy and health. Geez, I don't even know where to start on this.....scented candles, Glade mists, Oust, plug-in scent doohickies, perfume, cologne, soap, Pinesol, etc, the list of scented products we all use on a regular basis in our daily lives is darn near endless. But for darn sure, the essential oils aren't any worse than any of the things I've just mentioned and are probably a bunch better (I speak from experience for both me and Sweetie with EOs).

Sheesh, give it a rest, will ya??? If you don't like the product, just don't buy it or use it.
Kajun

Ditto

Joy

[-SWS]

Ditto

Hey! I resemble that! Glad you're here to weigh in!

Retired; former Microbiologist, Pharmaceutical Sales Representative, Certified Nutritionist

Well, a veritable slue of worldwide phthalate discussion sure did manage to find its way into this thread. Didn't it?

Reading between the lines (not that your post had very many) I think you just might be telling us: 1) phthalates are not part of the AirCandy chemical profile after all, 2) phthalates may be in there, but don't even bother worrying about those phthalates, or perhaps even, 3) as it turns out there's nothing but wholesome goodness in the AirCandy chemical profile. Well, I guess another possibility is that you're saying: "Don't bother to ask what's in there---whatever it is, it's fair game simply because people don't have to buy it." ...But then again, you just might be saying: "Quit discussing what I think is boring stuff, let alone quit discussing it on a public discussion board of all places."

So if this issue really is a biochemical "no brainer" for you, then please share what you know about AirCandy artificial fragrances. We too would like to reach that same yawn-state coupled with laughter. Welcome to the message board. Your timing couldn't be better.



P.S. ...But then again, you could be saying: "Our environment is so laden with chemical junk, that there's really no point in worrying about loading a little more chemical mystery into our CPAP machines each night." There's a clear challenge reading between lines when a post contains only one word. Again, welcome aboard!

[JoyD.]

SWS wrote . . .re. my meager "ditto" response . . .
Reading between the lines (not that your post had very many) I think you just might be telling us: 1) phthalates are not part of the AirCandy chemical profile after all, 2) phthalates may be in there, but don't even bother worrying about those phthalates, or perhaps even, 3) as it turns out there's nothing but wholesome goodness in the AirCandy chemical profile. Well, I guess another possibility is that you're saying: "Don't bother to ask what's in there---whatever it is, it's fair game simply because people don't have to buy it." ...But then again, you just might be saying: "Quit discussing what I think is boring stuff, let alone quit discussing it on a public discussion board of all places." -- So if this issue really is a biochemical "no brainer" for you, then please share what you know about AirCandy artificial fragrances. We too would like to reach that same yawn-state coupled with laughter. Welcome to the message board. Your timing couldn't be better.

P.S. ...But then again, you could be saying: "Our environment is so laden with chemical junk, that there's no point in worrying about loading a little extra mysterious junk in our CPAP machines each night."

U-huh

Actually, probably your "PS" says it all. Two drops placed "outside" the machine . . . is no doubt a lot safer than using hairspray and a lot of other things we do to inhale unhealthy chemicals regularly. (Don't know anything about AirCandy artificial fragrances except that they aren't natural essential oils.) I'm just amazed that this post has received the number of responses it has . . . and now I've added two more

Joy

[-SWS]

Two drops placed "outside" the machine . . . is no doubt a lot safer than using hairspray and a lot of other things we do to inhale unhealthy chemicals regularly.

Please don't you dare tell us that you've brazenly walked down the hairspray aisle at Walgreen's. Some of us have a weak constitution when it comes to hearing scary chemical stories...

I'm just amazed that this post has received the number of responses it has . . . and now I've added two more

Oh, fine... once again the split-second "clarity thinkers" are making us poor "convoluted thinkers" envious. I'm still not certain what I think of the whole phthalate issue (regardless of whether AirCandy contains them).


Here's where this poor, confused convoluted thinker stands at this point in the thread:

Essential Oils for CPAP- truly like the idea
Artificial Fragrances for CPAP- cautious, but not yet entirely dissuaded either
PurSleep Products- genuinely appreciate the way Bret solicits user feedback toward product decisions
This Thread (a product safety discussion started by Bret)- So what's the point in Bret throwing a party if no one shows?

I'm still a Bret fan as well.

[Lee Lee]

Me too, and I love my Pursleep.
Thank you, Bret.
Lee Ann