The IFRA is possibly the largest and most sophisticated scam in the flavor and fragrance industry.
The IFRA (International Fragrance Association) is owned and operated by Givaudan. Its Chairman – Michael Carlos is also Senior Director of Givaudan. Any employees of IFRA are at the directive of Givaudan. However Givaudan hasn’t just created an institution for solely its devices alone, but also for the flavor and fragrance industry as a whole, of which it is a dominating party.
Put in summary the IFRA is a self-regulatory body made up of industry players with a focus on deceiving consumers with a facade of objectivity. It is of huge concern that these businesses that are concocting synthetic chemicals (to replace natural products) are also claiming to regulate them and declare them safe for consumption. It is a priority of any business to make a profit.
Having the fragrance industry regulate the safety standards of the synthetic chemicals that they create is like having the US gun manufacturers regulate US gun laws.
Until recent decades the flavor and fragrance industry relied on natural products. For example raspberry flavor came from raspberries. The drawback for the fragrance suppliers in using natural products was it involved a supply chain and consequently it involved people. Big businesses have never been enthusiastic about paying people, they prefer it the other way round. So the big supply companies expanded their laboratories and employed scientists to devise synthetic concoctions to substitute the natural fragrances. The result was that these flavor and fragrance companies eliminated the human factor in the supply chain and replaced it with cheap substitutes that could be manufactured in their laboratories.
Every successful perfume requires a fixative. This essential component extends the life of the perfume when worn on the body. As most commercial perfumes sold are EDP, EDT or cologne the amount of perfume base would mean those scents would disappear within minutes of application were it not for the fixative component. Until the end of last century most notable perfumers used a mammal based fixative for perfumes. The most common was ambergris. As with most natural ingredients ambergris moved through a supply chain to the large supply companies (Givaudan, Firmenich etc.). Therefore ambergris was one of the primary ingredients that the supply companies sought to replace with a synthetic concoction that they could produce in their laboratories. By about 2005 Givaudan and Firmenich had developed a concoction broadly called Ambroxide. From that point on ambergris became a competing substance and the supply companies interests were to damage the competition if not eliminate it.
Soon after Givaudan etc. had developed ambroxide other supply companies developed their own variants of it. They were producing much the same concoction but had different names for it, mainly for marketing purposes. Givaudan called theirs Ambrofix whereas Firmenich called theirs Ambrox. The industry soon realised that most flavors and fragrances were going to derive synthetic concoctions so with Givaudan ( the biggest player) at the helm they set up a an institution that they intended to use to deceive consumers in believing that there exists an independent and objective analysis of the concoctions that they are collectively developing and marketing. That institution is the IFRA.
The IFRA is funded by (presently) seven “regular” members. The largest corporation is BASF, a chemical supply company. Next is Givaudan followed by Firmenich and IFF (USA based International Flavors and Fragrances.). The other lesser regular members are in part owned by the big firms, for example Firmenich owns about 20% of Robertet. With the exception of perhaps BASF all regular members of IFRA manufacture and market a variant of ambroxide. And all are extensively involved in developing synthetic concoctions to replace natural fragrances.
Of course this leads us to the natural ingredients which these supply companies used to buy and sell of which ambergris is a significant example. Ambergris is now a competing product to ambroxide and every business takes an interest in reducing or eliminating their competition. The problem occurs when big businesses get together to focus on dealing with their collective competition and more importantly how they go about dealing with it. Such institutions sometimes see themselves as above or beyond the law or they think they are the law. Between them the regular members of the (Givaudan led) IFRA generate annual revenues of over 70 billion euros giving them vast resources to deal with competition.
We know that significant sized businesses will dedicate a considerable sum of revenue to advertising their products or service. The purpose of advertising is to encourage the consumer to think or do something beneficial to the advertiser. Clearly it works as advertising is employed everywhere. And businesses are prepared to spend large amounts of money on encouraging people to think or do something that they probably otherwise wouldn’t. It stands to reason therefore that businesses wanting to increase market-share would pay considerable sums of money to have consumers think or believe that a competing product is something they should avoid. For example they could fund and control an institution that in turn surreptitiously funds a campaign of denigration of the product that they are trying to convince consumers to avoid and then buy their products instead.
AmbergrisBeware know that the IFRA is involved in the campaign of chaos and denigration of the ambergris industry and is doing so on behalf of those members that manufacture and market ambroxide. The association speaks for itself:
The UK’s division of IFRA includes a member called Ambergris Connect, a scam shell company administrated by notorious con-artists Tony Wells and Jo Smith. This pair once administrated the now-defunct Facebook Ambergris Public Group page. Ambergris Connect is a non-trading entity and would not generate the $650 for full membership of the IFRA, but then its not required because Ambergris Connect is the IFRA and the IFRA is Ambergris Connect. Tony Wells and Jo Smith are simply names, two of many in a large network of scammers. It is not surprising to see Givaudan’s and Firmenich’s name next to Ambergris Connect’s in the IFRA membership list, the sponsors of a cynical campaign against the ambergris industry.
It is a huge concern that the IFRA is funded by scam companies. It calls to question the integrity of the IFRA. This lack of integrity should be a significant determining factor when considering accepting the IFRA’s standards. Businesses that set up their own industry governance and then writes their own code of practice should never be trusted. Self-interest comes first.
Ambroxide is a case in point. This toxin is considered “safe” by IFRA. Yet it gives many people adverse reactions such as headaches. A headache is often a warning signal of something poisonous. Alcohol is a poison that if taken in large enough dose will induce a headache famously known as a hangover. Some people have a better developed reaction time and will exhibit symptoms of poisoning quicker than others. Some people are more sensitive to certain substances and will notice or exhibit symptoms earlier. It is probable that those who get a headache after applying ambroxide are not just sensitive to that family of toxins but also have a quicker reaction to poisons. This enables them to avoid the toxin. It may be that many of the others who don’t detect any direct adverse reaction are used to feeling a ‘bit out of sorts” or attribute any reaction to a cold, hangover, pollution etc. It is possible for people to ingest or absorb toxins and not feel any noticeable effect, however this does not mean the toxin is not harming them in the short or long term.
One thing is for certain. The IFRA needs to be exposed as the monster it is.