THE CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS - IFEAT

Nevertheless, it’s the SCCS, so DG Sanco, which is the health authorities of Europe, cannot simplytake this Opinion and shelve it because it does not like this Opinion. DG Sanco actually asked for theOpinion and it has to do something with it. Because it has to do something, it is looking at it from arisk management point of view. What do we do with this Opinion is the question it is asking rightnow. Should we simply take it and implement what is in the Opinion. To make a long story short, asyou are all aware, the Opinion has three components. It has a banned component, and it says weshould ban these two ingredients. It has a restriction component, and says we should restrict thesetwelve ingredients to 100 ppm, and it has a labelling component because labelling is part of theregulation in Europe. Should it do that? When you speak to DG Sanco, they tell you at the end of theday, this is not really a matter of life and death, and we all agree this and I know this and you can readthis in a lot of women’s magazines, and perfumers like to repeat this ad nauseum, that fragrances havenever killed anyone. We all know this. But the point is not about killing or not killing, the point isabout the intrinsic safety of the ingredients.“If the current SCCS opinion were to beimplemented, implications for naturals wouldbe severe”22227