PurSleep Product Safety

DreamStalker wrote: But the real issue is how does all this oil affect global climate change?

I thought your profile said you were over your interest in politics.

DreamStalker wrote: Does respiration of essential oils increase CO2 volumes?

Breathing increases C02 volumes.

DreamStalker wrote: If so, is it more significant than cattle manure?

Cattle manure is perfectly natural (other than the artifically manufactured manure), but it should still be kept a minimum of ten inches from the blower's intake.

jnk wrote:

DreamStalker wrote: But the real issue is how does all this oil affect global climate change?

I thought your profile said you were over your interest in politics.

Global climate change is not political ... politicians just try to be earth scientists What can I say ... I'm just really weird.

jnk wrote:

DreamStalker wrote: Does respiration of essential oils increase CO2 volumes?

Breathing increases C02 volumes.

But at a rate less than or greater than with essential oils?

jnk wrote:

DreamStalker wrote: If so, is it more significant than cattle manure?

Cattle manure is perfectly natural (other than the artifically manufactured manure), but it should still be kept a minimum of ten inches from the blower's intake.

Is termite methane anything like black horse manure? ... is it better or worse than cattle manure at say 12.568 inches from the blowers intake?

@ Dreamstalker and jnk:

DreamDiver wrote:SWS,

I'm looking at the Air Candy ingredients and you're right, it does say 'fragrance'. Thanks for pointing that out. It makes sense that more citizens are asking for full disclosure on product chain of custody. If I knew that one pile of beans was grown locally and that the other was grown in another country halfway across the globe, I'm more likely to by the more local beans. But grocers in many states generally don't disclose that information yet. If we had a true product chain of custody, the end-user might come to recognize certain farms as having superior quality. That farm might be able to charge more for their preferred organic clary sage essential oil, for instance.

I have only used 'calm', 'peace' and 'creme', all of which are in the Pur-Sleep line of oils. I haven't actually used the Air Candy line of oils.

It will be interesting to see if industry will regulate itself, or if the government will have to step in. For the peanut guys, it looks like the government might have to.

Just a side note: I read once that Vanilla was once used in place of antifreeze during WWII when citizens at home couldn't get antifreeze. Does anyone know if that's true?

I don't personally have anything against AirCandy or Bret. But I do strongly favor fairness and accuracy regarding product information. I also favor frank, open discussion when the health of many people are involved. So I am not at all picking on Bret. Rather I think Bret and his products deserve impartiality in our discussions here. This is important health stuff, and I think social dynamics might have actually gotten in the way of rigorously discussing every angle of this issue.

Here are my observations of the AirCandy product safety assumptions and details:

1) People here repeatedly voice assurances that Bret has done adequate health and safety "homework" on their behalf,

2) However, when it comes to AirCandy, Bret says there simply aren't Tisserand like references (making item one above insubstantial).

3) So for lack of that AirCandy health and safety "homework", Bret can only rely on the syllogism that AirCandy is probably no worse than plenty of fragrant chemical products that large corporations currently produce with lacking chemical disclosure.

4) People will probably continue to assume that AirCandy artificial essential oils should enjoy "safe association" with genuine essential oils---and the PurSleep website very strongly promotes the association between those two very different chemical products.

I actually have absolutely no problem with that syllogism in item three above. And I have no problem with informed people using artificial fragrances. But let's not get confused into thinking that AirCandy, as an artificial fragrance, somehow inherits the "homework" and risk profile associated with natural essential oils. Rather Bret very clearly tells us that AirCandy enjoys a risk association similar to other undisclosed cosmetic grade fragrances employed by large corporations.

-SWS wrote:I don't personally have anything against AirCandy or Bret. But I do strongly favor fairness and accuracy regarding product information. I also favor frank, open discussion when the health of many people are involved. So I am not at all picking on Bret. Rather I think Bret and his products deserve impartiality in our discussions here. This is important health stuff, and I think social dynamics might have actually gotten in the way of rigorously discussing every angle of this issue.

Couldn't agree with you more on that one, -sws!

Another important consideration is price (and given the current economic state, becomes the #1 priority for a lot of people). The savvy consumer is now aware that Bret sells his "Bubblegum" for $17.95 per 15 ml:



whereas LorAnn sells her Bubblegum for $5.50 per 30 ml:



Now, if SAG were taking this personally, he would ask why Bret is "hosing" cpaptalk posters, but since he isn't, he won't, because after all

SleepGuy wrote:I am having a lot of fun giving this stuff away

which is a load of

DreamStalker wrote:cattle manure

Look! More Happy Faces--->

SAG

Well, I'm personally not fond of casting value judgments, as opposed to objectively discussing facts.

I think there are plenty of ways that PurSleep all-natural essential oils and PurSleep artificial fragrances might have been cast as near-equivalents or essential-oil bunk mates on the PurSleep website. One of those ways the two might have been cast as near-equivalents is simply the evolution of the PurSleep product line.

Product evolution or not, the artificial fragrances and the all-natural essential oils are aggressively "image-cast" and priced as near equivalents on the PurSleep web site. And yet artificial fragrances and all-natural essential oils are not successfully delineated as health-and-safety equivalents by Bret in this thread.


That very safe image of PurSleep aromatic products, and our own PurSleep health-and-safety assumptions were founded on very clear initial information exchanges like this:

newsletter wrote: ...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


There are plenty of friendly and bonding interpersonal dynamics on this message board when it comes to PurSleep sales and happy customer testimonies. That's potentially a good sign. But there are also plenty of unanswered artificial-chemical questions in this thread. Bret has every opportunity to step into this thread with clear information to dispel any wrong assumptions about how artificial fragrances and all-natural essential oils got to be near-equivalent health-and-safety bunk mates on his web site. And Bret has every opportunity to clearly change or even justify the implied near-equivalent association between those two dissimilar health-related chemical products on his website as well.

Generally speaking if it looks like a duck and acts like a duck, then it's probably a duck. The ducks and swans on the PurSleep website somehow manage to paddle and peddle together as one happy herd of essential-oil swans. Bret has every opportunity to "help people" by more clearly sorting the ducks from the swans on his website. There are undoubtedly apnea weary and unsuspecting consumers who would very strongly prefer to avoid the likes of phthalates and other artificial chemicals in their essential oils. That requires being able to very clearly distinguish the swans from the ducks over at the PurSleep pond. This thread remains available to Bret for the dissemination of clear and accurate PurSleep information as well.

-SWS wrote:Well, I'm personally not fond of casting value judgments, as opposed to objectively discussing facts.

OK, how about a "value" judgement that's a fact?

For instance, you can get a 4.2 ounce bottle of Halston Z-14 cologne (hey, I like it) for about 20 bucks. That's 126 ml of product.

Given the above prices for Bret's Bubblegum fragrance, the equivalent amount would cost $150.78!! Does it make any sense that essence of Bubblegum should be 8.4 times more expensive than Halston??

SAG

OK, men, help me out here. PurSleep Bubblegum is $35.90 an ounce (30 ml). Who uses a cologne/after shave that's more expensive per oz than Bubblegum?

SAG

SleepGuy wrote:That sounds a little too complicated to me. I prefer to stand by Tisserand's Essential Oil Safety and the FDA list of essentail oils that are "Generally Recognizes as Safe" for human consumption. I admit that I am not all that sophisticated and that I tend to be simple minded but I can't see how any aromatic molecule could cause lung damage. To my simple mind, anything that helps me use my CPAP is good. I would much rather live with the risk that my lungs will become completely plugged with tiny aromatic molecules than die from untreated apnea and/or one of its co-morbid conditions.

Well, that's certainly another totally inappropriate scare tactic-- to infer that unless unless one uses PurSleep, one will die from untreated sleep apnea is an exaggeration beyond comprehension.

What is seen again, however, is the syllogistic logic that is used to include the the completely inappropriate use of fragrance oils under the umbrella of aromatherapy and essential oils.

Further, I think there's need to clarify the hazard here. The danger is not from some sort of "complete plugging" as the other poster states, but rather on an entirely different level, namely, nanoparticles, and a chemical, rather than a mechanical effect. Indeed, smaller particle size is not safer, it may very well be substantially worse. In Nanotoxicology Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2004;61:727-728 K Donaldson, V Stone, C L Tran, W Kreyling, P J A Borm, it is noted

There is a considerable existing database in the lung particle toxicology literature that shows NP (nanoparticles) of various sorts to have extra toxicity, by which we mean that the same material in the form of NP is more toxic than in the form of larger, still respirable, particles. Of special concern is the apparent ability of NP to redistribute from their site of deposition. Thus following inhalation exposure, NP have been reported to travel via the nasal nerves to the brain, as has been described for polio virus, and to gain access to the blood and other organs as reviewed by Kreyling and co-workers.

Very small particles and structures could have a range of effects that are not seen with conventional particles For instance they may not be detected by the normal phagocytic defences, allowing them to gain access to the blood or the nervous system. Very small particles are smaller than some molecules and could act like haptens to modify protein structures, either altering their function or rendering them antigenic, raising the potential for autoimmune effects.

http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/61/9/727

Coming Up Next: Ken Donaldson and Nanotoxicology

Today's Consumer Value Tip: New Directions sells 16.6 ounces of Essence of Bubble Gum for $15.41. So doing a price comparison:

PurSleep Bubblegum $35.90 per ounce
New Directions Bubblegum 92 cents per ounce

SAG

SAG, your point about price structure has been very clearly made numerous times. I personally feel price structure is a voluntary decision between willing consumers and vendors. Not only is your repeated point about price structures way off-topic for a product safety discussion, but when it's hammered away as a tactic, I personally fail to see impartiality at your end of a product safety discussion. Rather, in my own view your discussion clearly takes on the characteristics of a subjective campaign.

When it comes to taking issue, we can clearly present our points, we can repeatedly bash with our views, or we can take that a step further and bash with whatever tactics are handy. A summary of my views are clearly presented in my two posts above. I'm not thrilled that my comment about employing impartiality and objectivity in our product-safety discussions was used to resume what seems like an end-object campaign rather than an impartial discussion. SAG, I dearly appreciate your views and your moral character, much more than I appreciate your subjective tactics in this thread. I do think your heart's in the right place.

But there are plenty of people here who are very happy with Bret and his innovative product lines. I only take very strong issue with the few points that I have summarized in my two posts above. I'm not at all interested in a rhetorical campaign either for or against PurSleep. There's actually quite a bit that I like about what PurSleep and Bret have done on this message board.

Bret, good luck to you and PurSleep. Most importantly good luck to all apnea consumers everywhere! See you in the next thread.

-sws wrote:SAG, your point about price structure has been very clearly made numerous times...

I know, there, -sws, and I can't tell you how torn I was between using repetition to underscore the point vs just letting it ride. Clearly, the discussion points remain one-sided as our valid concerns go unanswered, met only with silence. And since SAG prides himself on using "fresh" and "original" material for his posts, new ways of presenting the same point become an increasingly difficult challenge.

But then came the post by DreamDriver at about 170 posts into the thread:

DreamDriver wrote:Pur-Sleep has done the research and uses only GRAS essential oils.

which although you responded to quite nicely, made it clear that things are not (clear). Nowhere near (clear). Now, I don't know if if that was because our, or my, posts are not clear, or people just read the last post or two, or whatever. Either way, I find these points to be important, and that repetition (or "bashing", call it what you want) is a necessary tool in forum discussion.

In re:

Today's Consumer Value Tip: Today's Consumer Value Tip: New Directions sells 16.6 ounces of Essence of Bubble Gum for $15.41. So doing a price comparison:

PurSleep Bubblegum $35.90 per ounce
New Directions Bubblegum 92 cents per ounce

selling product at a price 39 times more than a competitor is so absurd that it's pathetic, and deserves to be repeated. BTW, did you notice that New Directions has the MSDS and C of A's for their fragrances, and the Gas Chromatography Analysis for the essential oils? I think that offers some assurance of quality product.

SAG

I don't think price is the issue, myself. One poster may feel some gouging is going on. Or one poster may feel that the price means greater, or clearer, safety assurances should be expected for a product meant for use in conjunction with a medical therapy. I am not always in tune with the subtleties of argument (in the positive sense) that can occur among people of such insight, wit, passion, and experience who post on this board. I only try to be entertained and educated by it whenever possible.

I think most who already knew how they felt about PurSleep stopped following this thread long ago, as ditto-ed so well earlier by JoyD. I still say ditto on the thread having been useful for those interested in safety in connection with any and all products used in conjunction with CPAP, though. And I still say, at the risk of hammering my earlier point, that every time this thread gets bumped, PurSleep makes MORE sales. It drives the brand name into the eyes of every lurker watching the thread list. And posters worried about price are actually accomplishing that free advertising, amazingly enough. Now, whether that is good or bad, I don't know. But PurSleep, in my opinion does deserve to make money just like anybody else. Branding is branding, and the market eventually lets it be known what it will and will not bear (or bull, as in manure). And if we, for example, were to hold the medical industries to the standard of our only paying for a CPAP machine what it costs to make one, we'd all quickly be without machines. Anyone, and I do mean anyone, is free to compete with PurSleep any way they want. Right?

So I guess that's my social-dynamic vote in personally abandoning this thread. If PurSleep guy wants my further help in providing more free advertising, he'll have to start another thread, I guess. I might as well move on from this one before it accidentally catches up with Larissa.

I gotta say the few "jabs" over price and profit margins certainly detracts from the safety issues and brings the whole question of motive into play.

Oh, and no one was on my side or responding is not much of an excuse.

OK, maybe I'll just finish up with my previously prepared material and price comps and and call it a day (or maybe a week). Stuff like...

Did You Know...

750 ml of PurSleep Bubblegum fragrance oil will cost you $897.50, but you can get at least five 750ml bottles of "Johnny Walker Blue" premium scotch for the same price?

SAG

StillAnotherGuest wrote:OK, maybe I'll just finish up with my previously prepared material and price comps and and call it a day (or maybe a week). Stuff like...

Did You Know...

750 ml of PurSleep Bubblegum fragrance oil will cost you $897.50, but you can get at least 5 bottles of "Johnny Walker Blue" premium scotch for the same price?

SAG

LOL.

I'm still looking for a CPAP product that isn't gouging. I just got a "steal" by getting 12 UF filters and 2 foam filters for my CPAP off of ebay for ten bucks. 8 cents worth of raw materials for 10 friggen bucks and that was a HUGE discount off of buying from a cpap.com and I imagine an unreal discount off of what a DME gets from the insurance companies.

I ordered my 45 cents worth of 8 foot Snuggle hose for $18 so I could cut off the 2 feet and use it for my mask hose and cheek straps. Saved myself a whopping 15 bucks by going to cut and rubber band route... Woo hoo!!!

I'm bidding on ebay to stock up on the little $1.50 worth of material and mfg for these little Swift LT pillows. I think I can score one for ten bucks instead of the $29.99 "on-line discount" price.

So yeah, he joined the party. I bought into "the hype" and got the starter kit (I'm pretty tolerant of stuff so the smell is really a non issue for me...). I'm not displeased, but I don't see myself paying that kind of money for any more of the stuff. That's supply and demand and price points. He set the price, and I make the decision as to whether I pay that price or don't. If it was about 1/3, he might have another regular customer. But he didn't and it is what it is...

I think you could use the Johnny Walker "Red Label" (sale price for the whole jug pretty close to 15 ml of "Bubblegum") and do just as well.

Hmmmm. I think we're witnessing the birth of "Sag n' Sleep V"

BRB, gotta hit the liquor store.

SAG