Banned fragrance found by IFRA in consumer product
IFRA test fifty products each year to check whether they comply with the IFRA code of practice and this is the first time in the three years the tests have been running that a banned fragrance ingredient has been found.
“For us this is a big deal. We have had two cycles and these have been clear, this is the first time we have found anything banned,” said Stephen Weller, director of communications at IFRA.
No details of the banned substance, the product it was found in, or the company could be given as it might jeopardise the ensuing investigation, according to Weller.
IFRA will now investigate the company and the fragrance manufacturer behind the product to find out why the banned substance was included.
As it has only recently been banned there is a chance that the product is just running through the retail pipeline, said head of IFRA Jean-Pierre Houri.
Company should remove this fragrance
Once details of the case are known IFRA will work with the company to remove this banned substance. If the company agrees to remove the substance, IFRA’s role will be to monitor the situation to make sure this occurs, explained Weller.
However, if the company refuses to comply with IFRA’s code of practice then it shall be ‘named and shamed’.
About 90 percent of fragrances in the global marketplace are manufactured by IFRA members who are obliged to comply with the code, so although the association has no legal standing its influence is wide reaching.
For Weller the presence of a banned substance does not weaken the system of self regulation for the fragrance industry.
“One product does not discredit the whole self regulation system. In fact it will reinforce our compliance programme. This sends the message to consumers, regulators and industry that we are serious about the programme. If there is a transgression we will find and act upon it,” he said.
Last year, when two cycles of 100 percent compliance had been reported, IFRA said self regulation had two advantages: compliance was high and standards were stricter than wider regulation.
“We ban more then the EU. On receiving new science about the safety of an ingredient we can move within a year, much faster than government,” Weller added.
