|
Well, I got into your reality cracking page looking for anonimity and I think it was the best mistake i've already did. I think I am going to send you some essays from my own and while i don't do this, I am only researching and i discovered a home-page that you may find great (See I'm nothing from those guys). As i Know you aren't going to enter there sooner i'll send you some essays from that page to see if you take a look at there faster. Something I must tell you, is that when you first visit the site you'll see some misthycal boolshits, but skip that. Copied from www.trufax.org In trying to understand the reasons for the increase in violent crime, it is useful to note that this increase has been paralleled by an equivalent growth in other varieties of pathology -- both medical and social. Let me show you some figures: a.. the incidence of epilepsy and other seizures disorders has risen from 2.7/l000 persons in the population in 1940 to 10/l000 today -- a 300% increase. b.. the incidence of asthma has risen from less than 1% of the population in 1840 to 5% today -- a 500% increase; c.. the number of cases of autism has risen from a total of 11 cases in 1943 to about 120,000 today; d.. the number of cases of diabetes has risen from 600,000 in the mid-1940s to 13 million today; since the population of the country has about doubled, the increase in diabetes is about 10 times. e.. the average value of SAT scores started to decline in 1963 and is still declining today. f.. the number of children is special education classes -- representing the incidence of dyslexia/hyperactivity/ attention-deficit syndrome -- has risen from zero in the 1950s to about 1 million today. About 10 million US children are thought to be dyslexic. Other types of pathology in the United States show a similar pattern of rapid growth since the 1950s or 1960s.: g.. obesity h.. suicide (especially among children and adolescents) i.. sexual disorders (homosexualism, bisexuality, sexual crimes) j.. eating disorders (bulimia, anorexia) k.. sleep disorders l.. allergies and auto-immune diseases m.. mental retardation n.. alcoholism and drug use America is a rather sick society. This list of disorders represents a large part of the illness with which physicians and patients must cope today. They have largely replaced the infectious diseases of an earlier generataion. The question to be answered now is whether these conditions are discrete -- i.e., unrelated to one another, or, on the contrary, interrelated. One body of evidence demonstrating them to be interrelated is provided by criminology. Any criminologist will know that hard-core criminals -- those who keep committing crimes and keep returning to prison (recidivists) suffer from most of the conditions enumerated above. They have very high incidences (much higher than the population at large) of: seizure disorders, dyslexia and hyperactivity, low IQ and mental retardation, autistic features, allergies, tendencies to alcoholism and drug abuse, etc. Another body of evidence demonstrating them to be interrelated is provided by research connecting these variables together. One can find research associating virtually all of these variables with one another: autism with overweight, homosexuality with allergies, etc. etc. We are justified in viewing these traits as part of a syndrome, one which is more pronounced in the prison population and less pronounced in the population at large but a syndrome nonetheless. What could be the cause of this syndrome? Research indicates that all of these conditions are recognizable as the long-term effects of encephalitis. This has been brought out in Coulter and Fisher's DPT: A Shot in the Dark and, more especially, in Coulter's Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality. What could be the cause of so much encephalitis in the US population? The only possible cause is the childhood vaccination program. The pertussis and measles vaccines are particularly dangerous, but all the vaccines have made a certain contribution. This is not recognized by the US Public Health authorities, but the dispute between us is only quantitative. Even these authorities have been brought to recognize that the pertussis and measles vaccines can do a certain amount of damage. They recognized that vaccinations can, at times, cause encephalitis (which they call encephalopathy). And they have estimated that one child in 100,000 suffers long-term residual effects of childhood vaccinations, but they insist that all others escape without any damage at all. This idea runs counter to the normal medical/biological way of thinking according to which the application of a stress (such as a vaccine) to a large body of individuals will not yield an all-or-nothing response, but rather a graduated one. In other words, at one end of the spectrum you will find a group of seriously damaged children; at the other end there will be a group of children who are apparently not damaged at all. But in between you will find all the gradations of damage ranging from slight to serious. It is our contention that the varieties of social pathology listed above constitute this body of vaccine damage. "We have met the enemy and he is us!!" Three comments: 1. It is not surprising that the rise started in the 1950s and 1960s. Mass vaccination started after World War II, in the mid-1940s. Discussion of why "Johnny can't read" started in the mid-1950s, when this vaccinated generation started going to school, as did the rise in autoimmune diseases. But when this generation came to the age of 18 (1963) and entered the adult statistics, IQs started to decline, the crime rate started to rise, etc. etc. 2. The role of genetics: not everyone suffers equally from a vaccination. This tendency does run in families, however, and would seem to have a genetic component. 3. The black population and urban violence. Black children suffer from a variety of disabilities which makes them much more vulnerable to the effects of vaccination: more than 50% are out-of-wedlock births, meaning no father, an uneducated mother, no funds, no pregnancy care etc. Also more than 50% (75% ?) are premature and low birthweight (under 4-5 pounds). This also renders them highly vulnerable to the effects of vaccination by Dr John Braithwaite The sordid behaviour of today's pharmaceutical corporations has been further demonstrated by Dr John Braithwaite, now a Trade Practices Commissioner, in his devastating exposé, CORPORATE CRIME IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY (1984). International bribery and corruption, fraud in the testing of drugs, criminal negligence in the unsafe manufacture of drugs - the pharmaceutical industry has a worse record of law-breaking than any other industry. Describing many examples of corporate crime, which shows the depth and seriousness of the crime problem in the pharmaceutical industry, Dr Braithwaite's revealing study is based on extensive international research, including interviews of 131 senior executives of pharmaceutical companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Guatemala. The book shows how pharmaceutical multinationals defy the intent of laws regulating safety of drugs by bribery, false advertising, fraud in the safety testing of drugs, unsafe manufacturing processes, smuggling and international law evasion strategies. At the time of researching the subject, Braithwaite was a Research Criminologist at the Australian Institute of Criminology and a Fulbright Fellow affiliated to the University of California, Irvine and the United Nations Center on Transnational Corporations. "Data fabrication is so widespread", says Dr Braithwaite, "that it is called 'making' in the Japanese pharmaceutical industry, 'graphiting' or 'dry labelling' in the United States." He further states: "Pharmaceutical companies face great temptations to mislead health authorities about the safety of their products. It is a make or break industry - many companies get virtually all their profits from just two or three therapeutic winners. Most of the data that the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee relies upon in deciding questions of safety and efficacy is data from other countries, particularly the US. Inquiries into scientific fraud in the US have shown there is a substantial problem of fraud in safety testing of drugs in the US, just as has been documented in Japan." The book reports that between 1977 and 1980 the United States Food and Drug Administration have discovered 62 doctors who had submitted manipulated or downright falsified clinical data. A study conducted by the FDA has revealed that one in five doctors investigated, who carry out field research of new drugs, had invented the data they sent to the drug companies, and pocketed the fees. Citing case examples, Dr Braithwaite states: "The problem is that most fraud in clinical trials is unlikely to even be detected. Most cases which do come to public attention only do so because of extraordinary carelessness by the criminal physician..." According to Dr Judith Jones, Director of the Division of Drug Experience at the FDA, if the data obtained by a clinician proves unsatisfactory towards the drug being investigated, it is quite in order for the company to continue trials elsewhere until satisfactory results and testimonials are achieved. Unfavourable results are very rarely published and clinicians are pressured into keeping quiet about such data. It is very easy for the drug company to arrange appropriate clinical trials by approaching a sympathetic clinician to produce the desired results that would assist the intended application of the drug. The incentive for clinical investigators to fabricate data is enormous. As much as $1000 per subject is paid by American companies, which enables some doctors to earn up to $1 million a year from drug research, and investigating clinicians know all too well that if they don't produce the desired data, the loss of future work is inevitable. The fragrance industry is big business, very big business. It includes much more than retail sales of fragrances. Related industries such as chemical companies supply the chemicals the fragrances are made from. Most fragrance chemicals are synthesized from petroleum products. Some companies formulate fragrances and flavors for other companies. Marketing and advertising are used to create and promote the image of a fragrance. Add related industries such as companies that add fragrance to personal care, personal hygiene, and household products and the impact is even greater. The food industry is also a large user of fragrance chemicals known as flavors or aroma chemicals when used in foods. Flavor / fragrance chemicals are also in heavy use by the tobacco industry as additives to cigarettes to enhance flavor, especially the lower tar and nicotine brands. Virtually every aspect of our lives is impacted by the Fragrance Industry. In the past many products had generic scents that identified their use, rather than brand. All soaps had an odor that was identified as "soap". Most laundry detergents had the basic same odor and most cleaners either had a pine or lemon scent. This is no longer the case. Laundry smells fresh for days. Advertising campaigns are based on the odor rather than the performance of products. Entire industries are built around the perception of odor. The sense of smell is the least understood of the senses and often considered the less important of the senses. Yet it is the basis of multi-billion dollar industries. "Why is fragrance so important to the buying public? The key is a mixture of biological response, psychology, and memory. The limbic system is the most primitive part of our brain and the seat of immediate emotions." (Scent of a Market American Demographics August 1995) History: Initially perfumes and fragrance materials came from plant or animal sources. Fragrance played an important part in religious observations. It was thought to have powers to heal and protect from evil. The history of fragrances goes backs centuries. The Bible documents using balms, ointments, and scented oils. For the Egyptians it was part of the burial ritual and a symbol of status. The Greek believed fragrance could be used as a connection to the Gods. The Romans used perfumes for seduction and used herbs as aphrodisiacs. With the Middle Ages and the fall of the Roman Empire there was a decline in the use of perfumery. The main use of strong fragrances was to cover the stench of disease. During the Crusades, Europe was introduced to perfumery from the East. From the Arabs there was gained the knowledge of alchemy and distillation of essential oils. Venice became the center of the perfume trade. Gradually perfumery spread to other European countries. During the 14th Century perfumes were considered frivolous and abusive. During this time the main purpose of essential oils were medicinal. During the 15th and 16th centuries bathing was unpopular because it was thought to open the pores up and allow diseases in. Fragrances were used to cover up the odors from not bathing. Fragrances were used by the upper class from the 16th to 19th centuries. Only the wealthy could afford the luxury of perfumes. The art of perfumery flourished. France became the center of the perfume industry. In the late 1800's the first synthetic fragrance material was produced. This was the beginning of the modern age of perfumery. With the event of synthetics, perfumery would no longer be exclusively used by the wealthy. The average person would be able to afford fragrances. By the 19th century there were more than 300 manufactors of fragranced products employing more than 20,000 people. (For more detailed information on the ancient history of perfumes visit Internet Parfum) In 1868 Houbignat introduced the first perfume containing a synthetic material. That material was coumarine. In 1874, Vanillin was introduced. By the early 1900's synthetics were being used on a regular basis. The main materials were still of botanical or animal origin with synthetics used to complement and add new dimension to the naturals. In 1921 Chanel No. 5 was introduced. It was the first fragrance that was dominated by the use of synthetic aldehydes. It contained about 1% aliphatic aldehydes. It was the first of a class of perfumes called floral aldehydes. Even then the majority of the formula was made from naturals, softening the harshness of the aldehydes. The trend continued to be dominated with natural materials. Synthetics were used to expand the types of fragrances that could be created. After World War II there was an explosion of new synthetics. More and more were incorporated into perfumery. Naturals were used to soften synthetics. Synthetics were less expensive and supplies were more reliable. However, the synthetics were often harsh and lacked the softness lended by naturals. So naturals remained an important part of the formulas. Fragrance formulas were closely guarded secrets. The fragrance industry was a truly secretive one and only a few trusted individuals would have access to a formula. Developing perfumes was a time consuming process accomplished by skilled perfumers. It often took years of experience to attain the skill needed. Formulas could not be patented. The only way to prevent them from being copied was not to divulge the ingredients. Fragrance formulas came under "trade secret" laws. This meant the contents of the formulas did not have to be listed. Only the word "fragrance" had to be put on the label. In this way the secrecy of the formulas was more or less protected. Modern Trends Gas chromatography and Mass Spectrometry brought about tremendous change in the Fragrance Industry. No longer could the secrecy of formulas be maintained. A skilled fragrance chemist with GC/MS equipment could analyze a fragrance and pretty closely duplicate a fragrance. Copies of expensive, exclusive fragrances were now available at a fraction of the cost. Along with the ability to copy other perfumes, came the ability to analyze natural materials. Now closer matches could be made in duplicating natural materials. There was less need to purchase expensive natural materials. Synthetics could be blended to better imitate the naturals. Synthetic materials as a rule are less costly, the quality is easier to maintain, and the supply is more reliable. These changes made mass production of fragrances widespread. The market became even more competitive. Advertising and marketing campaigns now accounted for most of the cost of perfumes. Image became the all-important selling feature of a fragrance. Trickle down fragranced products became popular. Shampoos, lotions, and soaps were now available in the same scent as one's favorite perfume. In order to compete other brands now had to have distinctive scents. The generic scent for products no longer existed. Marketing became the most important aspect of whether a product was successful. And fragrance has become the basis of that marketing. Skilled advertising campaigns create the image and convince consumers that their product will make them happy, sexy, mysterious, alluring, etc. Your child's clothes have that fresh smell so everyone knows you have done a good job. While sweating is acceptable, smelling like sweat is not. Your hair must smell terrific, your soap must be fresh as spring, and your clothes smell mountain fresh. A good perfume has been traditionally formulated to last six to eight hours. There were three notes. The first note was the first impression of the fragrance immediately out of the bottle. The second note was the body of the fragrance and took a bit do develop after it was on the skin. The third note was the lingering quality of the fragrance. The key to a good perfume was for these three notes to flow into each other to produce a pleasing effect. Colognes and other products were less concentrated and the odor did not last as long. Now detergents are advertised make your clothes smell fresh for days. With most personal care, personal hygiene, and household products being scented there is a constant bombardment of fragrance. For a product to be distinctive, it must be able to be detected over this "background noise" of fragrance. The trend is for immediately powerful fragrances that are long lasting. Gone is the gradual development and gradual fading of a fragrance. The impact is immediate and long lasting. And of course, to keep up with the competition, all fragrances have to be immediate and long lasting. Over the past 20 years there has been a phenomenal increase in the use of fragranced products. Problems are emerging from this increase End of copied information Please note taht these essays are only part of bigger contexts. And if you don't add a link for this site, i'll be sumarizing information from there, putting it in a more apropriated style and passing to you. As well as I plan to get things from your site and pass to them. I think thats all for know, please don't mind after my poor english, i am Brazilian. Yes, Brazil the land foking samba, foking carnival , foking mulatas,( I really prefer blondy girls) and foking lazyness. Well, I got into your reality cracking page
looking for anonimity and I think it was the best mistake i've already did. I
think I am going to send you some essays from my own and while i don't do this,
I am only researching and i discovered a home-page that you may find great (See
I'm nothing from those guys). As i Know you aren't going to enter there sooner
i'll send you some essays from that page to see if you take a look at
there faster.
Something I must tell you, is that when you first visit the
site you'll see some misthycal boolshits, but skip that.
Copied from www.trufax.org
In trying to understand the reasons for the increase in violent crime, it is useful to note that this increase has been paralleled by an equivalent growth in other varieties of pathology -- both medical and social. Let me show you some figures:
Other types of pathology in the United States show a similar pattern of rapid growth since the 1950s or 1960s.: America is a rather sick society. This list of disorders represents a large part of the illness with which physicians and patients must cope today. They have largely replaced the infectious diseases of an earlier generataion. The question to be answered now is whether these conditions are discrete -- i.e., unrelated to one another, or, on the contrary, interrelated. One body of evidence demonstrating them to be interrelated is provided by criminology. Any criminologist will know that hard-core criminals -- those who keep committing crimes and keep returning to prison (recidivists) suffer from most of the conditions enumerated above. They have very high incidences (much higher than the population at large) of: seizure disorders, dyslexia and hyperactivity, low IQ and mental retardation, autistic features, allergies, tendencies to alcoholism and drug abuse, etc. Another body of evidence demonstrating them to be interrelated is provided by research connecting these variables together. One can find research associating virtually all of these variables with one another: autism with overweight, homosexuality with allergies, etc. etc. We are justified in viewing these traits as part of a syndrome, one which is more pronounced in the prison population and less pronounced in the population at large but a syndrome nonetheless. What could be the cause of this syndrome? Research indicates that all of these conditions are recognizable as the long-term effects of encephalitis. This has been brought out in Coulter and Fisher's DPT: A Shot in the Dark and, more especially, in Coulter's Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality. What could be the cause of so much encephalitis in the US population? The only possible cause is the childhood vaccination program. The pertussis and measles vaccines are particularly dangerous, but all the vaccines have made a certain contribution. This is not recognized by the US Public Health authorities, but the dispute between us is only quantitative. Even these authorities have been brought to recognize that the pertussis and measles vaccines can do a certain amount of damage. They recognized that vaccinations can, at times, cause encephalitis (which they call encephalopathy). And they have estimated that one child in 100,000 suffers long-term residual effects of childhood vaccinations, but they insist that all others escape without any damage at all. This idea runs counter to the normal medical/biological way of thinking according to which the application of a stress (such as a vaccine) to a large body of individuals will not yield an all-or-nothing response, but rather a graduated one. In other words, at one end of the spectrum you will find a group of seriously damaged children; at the other end there will be a group of children who are apparently not damaged at all. But in between you will find all the gradations of damage ranging from slight to serious. It is our contention that the varieties of social pathology listed above constitute this body of vaccine damage. "We have met the enemy and he is us!!"
2. The role of genetics: not everyone suffers equally from a vaccination. This tendency does run in families, however, and would seem to have a genetic component. 3. The black population and urban violence. Black children suffer from a variety of disabilities which makes them much more vulnerable to the effects of vaccination: more than 50% are out-of-wedlock births, meaning no father, an uneducated mother, no funds, no pregnancy care etc. Also more than 50% (75% ?) are premature and low birthweight (under 4-5 pounds). This also renders them highly vulnerable to the effects of vaccination
by Dr John Braithwaite The sordid behaviour of today's pharmaceutical corporations has been further demonstrated by Dr John Braithwaite, now a Trade Practices Commissioner, in his devastating exposé, CORPORATE CRIME IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY (1984). International bribery and corruption, fraud in the testing of drugs, criminal negligence in the unsafe manufacture of drugs - the pharmaceutical industry has a worse record of law-breaking than any other industry. Describing many examples of corporate crime, which shows the depth and seriousness of the crime problem in the pharmaceutical industry, Dr Braithwaite's revealing study is based on extensive international research, including interviews of 131 senior executives of pharmaceutical companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Guatemala. The book shows how pharmaceutical multinationals defy the intent of laws regulating safety of drugs by bribery, false advertising, fraud in the safety testing of drugs, unsafe manufacturing processes, smuggling and international law evasion strategies. At the time of researching the subject, Braithwaite was a Research Criminologist at the Australian Institute of Criminology and a Fulbright Fellow affiliated to the University of California, Irvine and the United Nations Center on Transnational Corporations. "Data fabrication is so widespread", says Dr Braithwaite, "that it is called 'making' in the Japanese pharmaceutical industry, 'graphiting' or 'dry labelling' in the United States." He further states: "Pharmaceutical companies face great temptations to mislead health authorities about the safety of their products. It is a make or break industry - many companies get virtually all their profits from just two or three therapeutic winners. Most of the data that the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee relies upon in deciding questions of safety and efficacy is data from other countries, particularly the US. Inquiries into scientific fraud in the US have shown there is a substantial problem of fraud in safety testing of drugs in the US, just as has been documented in Japan." The book reports that between 1977 and 1980 the United States Food and Drug Administration have discovered 62 doctors who had submitted manipulated or downright falsified clinical data. A study conducted by the FDA has revealed that one in five doctors investigated, who carry out field research of new drugs, had invented the data they sent to the drug companies, and pocketed the fees. Citing case examples, Dr Braithwaite states: "The problem is that most fraud in clinical trials is unlikely to even be detected. Most cases which do come to public attention only do so because of extraordinary carelessness by the criminal physician..." According to Dr Judith Jones, Director of the Division of Drug Experience at the FDA, if the data obtained by a clinician proves unsatisfactory towards the drug being investigated, it is quite in order for the company to continue trials elsewhere until satisfactory results and testimonials are achieved. Unfavourable results are very rarely published and clinicians are pressured into keeping quiet about such data. It is very easy for the drug company to arrange appropriate clinical trials by approaching a sympathetic clinician to produce the desired results that would assist the intended application of the drug. The incentive for clinical investigators to fabricate data is enormous. As much as $1000 per subject is paid by American companies, which enables some doctors to earn up to $1 million a year from drug research, and investigating clinicians know all too well that if they don't produce the desired data, the loss of future work is inevitable.
The fragrance industry is big business, very big business. It includes much more than retail sales of fragrances. Related industries such as chemical companies supply the chemicals the fragrances are made from. Most fragrance chemicals are synthesized from petroleum products. Some companies formulate fragrances and flavors for other companies. Marketing and advertising are used to create and promote the image of a fragrance. Add related industries such as companies that add fragrance to personal care, personal hygiene, and household products and the impact is even greater. The food industry is also a large user of fragrance chemicals known as flavors or aroma chemicals when used in foods. Flavor / fragrance chemicals are also in heavy use by the tobacco industry as additives to cigarettes to enhance flavor, especially the lower tar and nicotine brands. Virtually every aspect of our lives is impacted by the Fragrance Industry. In the past many products had generic scents that identified their use, rather than brand. All soaps had an odor that was identified as "soap". Most laundry detergents had the basic same odor and most cleaners either had a pine or lemon scent. This is no longer the case. Laundry smells fresh for days. Advertising campaigns are based on the odor rather than the performance of products. Entire industries are built around the perception of odor. The sense of smell is the least understood of the senses and often considered the less important of the senses. Yet it is the basis of multi-billion dollar industries. "Why is fragrance so important to the buying public? The key is a mixture of biological response, psychology, and memory. The limbic system is the most primitive part of our brain and the seat of immediate emotions." (Scent of a Market American Demographics August 1995)
Initially perfumes and fragrance materials came from plant or animal sources. Fragrance played an important part in religious observations. It was thought to have powers to heal and protect from evil. The history of fragrances goes backs centuries. The Bible documents using balms, ointments, and scented oils. For the Egyptians it was part of the burial ritual and a symbol of status. The Greek believed fragrance could be used as a connection to the Gods. The Romans used perfumes for seduction and used herbs as aphrodisiacs. With the Middle Ages and the fall of the Roman Empire there was a decline in the use of perfumery. The main use of strong fragrances was to cover the stench of disease. During the Crusades, Europe was introduced to perfumery from the East. From the Arabs there was gained the knowledge of alchemy and distillation of essential oils. Venice became the center of the perfume trade. Gradually perfumery spread to other European countries.
During the 14th Century perfumes were considered frivolous and abusive. During this time the main purpose of essential oils were medicinal. During the 15th and 16th centuries bathing was unpopular because it was thought to open the pores up and allow diseases in. Fragrances were used to cover up the odors from not bathing. Fragrances were used by the upper class from the 16th to 19th centuries. Only the wealthy could afford the luxury of perfumes. The art of perfumery flourished. France became the center of the perfume industry. In the late 1800's the first synthetic fragrance material was produced. This was the beginning of the modern age of perfumery. With the event of synthetics, perfumery would no longer be exclusively used by the wealthy. The average person would be able to afford fragrances. By the 19th century there were more than 300 manufactors of fragranced products employing more than 20,000 people. (For more detailed information on the ancient history of perfumes visit Internet Parfum) In 1868 Houbignat introduced the first perfume containing a synthetic material. That material was coumarine. In 1874, Vanillin was introduced. By the early 1900's synthetics were being used on a regular basis. The main materials were still of botanical or animal origin with synthetics used to complement and add new dimension to the naturals. In 1921 Chanel No. 5 was introduced. It was the first fragrance that was dominated by the use of synthetic aldehydes. It contained about 1% aliphatic aldehydes. It was the first of a class of perfumes called floral aldehydes. Even then the majority of the formula was made from naturals, softening the harshness of the aldehydes. The trend continued to be dominated with natural materials. Synthetics were used to expand the types of fragrances that could be created. After World War II there was an explosion of new synthetics. More and more were incorporated into perfumery. Naturals were used to soften synthetics. Synthetics were less expensive and supplies were more reliable. However, the synthetics were often harsh and lacked the softness lended by naturals. So naturals remained an important part of the formulas. Fragrance formulas were closely guarded secrets. The fragrance industry was a truly secretive one and only a few trusted individuals would have access to a formula. Developing perfumes was a time consuming process accomplished by skilled perfumers. It often took years of experience to attain the skill needed. Formulas could not be patented. The only way to prevent them from being copied was not to divulge the ingredients. Fragrance formulas came under "trade secret" laws. This meant the contents of the formulas did not have to be listed. Only the word "fragrance" had to be put on the label. In this way the secrecy of the formulas was more or less protected.
Gas chromatography and Mass Spectrometry brought about tremendous change in the Fragrance Industry. No longer could the secrecy of formulas be maintained. A skilled fragrance chemist with GC/MS equipment could analyze a fragrance and pretty closely duplicate a fragrance. Copies of expensive, exclusive fragrances were now available at a fraction of the cost. Along with the ability to copy other perfumes, came the ability to analyze natural materials. Now closer matches could be made in duplicating natural materials. There was less need to purchase expensive natural materials. Synthetics could be blended to better imitate the naturals. Synthetic materials as a rule are less costly, the quality is easier to maintain, and the supply is more reliable. These changes made mass production of fragrances widespread. The market became even more competitive. Advertising and marketing campaigns now accounted for most of the cost of perfumes. Image became the all-important selling feature of a fragrance. Trickle down fragranced products became popular. Shampoos, lotions, and soaps were now available in the same scent as one's favorite perfume. In order to compete other brands now had to have distinctive scents. The generic scent for products no longer existed. Marketing became the most important aspect of whether a product was successful. And fragrance has become the basis of that marketing. Skilled advertising campaigns create the image and convince consumers that their product will make them happy, sexy, mysterious, alluring, etc. Your child's clothes have that fresh smell so everyone knows you have done a good job. While sweating is acceptable, smelling like sweat is not. Your hair must smell terrific, your soap must be fresh as spring, and your clothes smell mountain fresh. A good perfume has been traditionally formulated to last six to eight hours. There were three notes. The first note was the first impression of the fragrance immediately out of the bottle. The second note was the body of the fragrance and took a bit do develop after it was on the skin. The third note was the lingering quality of the fragrance. The key to a good perfume was for these three notes to flow into each other to produce a pleasing effect. Colognes and other products were less concentrated and the odor did not last as long. Now detergents are advertised make your clothes smell fresh for days. With most personal care, personal hygiene, and household products being scented there is a constant bombardment of fragrance. For a product to be distinctive, it must be able to be detected over this "background noise" of fragrance. The trend is for immediately powerful fragrances that are long lasting. Gone is the gradual development and gradual fading of a fragrance. The impact is immediate and long lasting. And of course, to keep up with the competition, all fragrances have to be immediate and long lasting. Over the past 20 years there has been a phenomenal increase in the use of fragranced products. Problems are emerging from this increase End of copied information
Please note taht these essays are only part of bigger contexts. And if you don't add a link for this site, i'll be sumarizing information from there, putting it in a more apropriated style and passing to you. As well as I plan to get things from your site and pass to them. I think thats all for know, please don't mind after my poor english, i am Brazilian. Yes, Brazil the land foking samba, foking carnival , foking mulatas,( I really prefer blondy girls) and foking lazyness. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||