I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago because both mess up
the kids.

On 02/03/2015 7:26 am, Tim Watts wrote:
On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago because both mess up
the kids.


A lot more than 0.1%. I don't have a figure, but I'd be surprised if it
were not in excess of 10%. A survey amongst home helps in Nottingham
when Ariel first appeared showed a very high incidence of dermatitis.
Nothing I've seen over the last 40 years in pharmacy convinced me of
anything different. Our first recommendation for folks with unexplained
dermatitis was to get rid of any "bio" washing powders, and it often did
the trick.

--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

No, I haven't got a personality disorder - all three of us are just fine!

Bob Henson wrote:
On 02/03/2015 7:26 am, Tim Watts wrote:
On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago because both mess up
the kids.


A lot more than 0.1%. I don't have a figure, but I'd be surprised if it
were not in excess of 10%. A survey amongst home helps in Nottingham
when Ariel first appeared showed a very high incidence of dermatitis.
Nothing I've seen over the last 40 years in pharmacy convinced me of
anything different. Our first recommendation for folks with unexplained
dermatitis was to get rid of any "bio" washing powders, and it often did
the trick.


How do we know that it's not going to turn out like peanut allergy? Seems
we've been getting it all wrong hence the soaring incidence of peanut
allergy.

Tim

On 02/03/2015 9:17 am, Tim+ wrote:
Bob Henson wrote:
On 02/03/2015 7:26 am, Tim Watts wrote:
On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago because both mess up
the kids.


A lot more than 0.1%. I don't have a figure, but I'd be surprised if it
were not in excess of 10%. A survey amongst home helps in Nottingham
when Ariel first appeared showed a very high incidence of dermatitis.
Nothing I've seen over the last 40 years in pharmacy convinced me of
anything different. Our first recommendation for folks with unexplained
dermatitis was to get rid of any "bio" washing powders, and it often did
the trick.


How do we know that it's not going to turn out like peanut allergy? Seems
we've been getting it all wrong hence the soaring incidence of peanut
allergy.


I take your point, but see a difference. Peanut allergy is slightly
difficult to be precise about, because like all "food allergies" the
statistical waters are muddied by the number of gullible nutters who are
being conned by the increasing numbers of quack practitioners. However,
the recently proposed theory to which you allude that much of the real
peanut allergy is caused by avoiding peanuts it almost certainly
correct. I have been shot down in flames for suggesting that many times
over the years - but there is no pleasure in knowing I was correct all
along, as it would now appear. We already know that excessive
cleanliness and living in semi-sterile boxes is causing the huge
increase in asthma that we have been seeing (even allowing for the high
rate of over-diagnosis) over the last couple of decades, so the peanut
allergy theory should come as no surprise at all - it certainly didn't
to me.

Enzyme washing powders may be different because they are not a natural
substance to which we should be routinely exposed to presumably give us
immunity - they are a chemical pollutant. I wouldn't say positively that
the same might not apply, but I would think it most unlikely. As we have
been exposed to more and more of the bio powders over the years, one
would have expected there to be a lower incidence of allergy if the
exposure theory were true - but it is increasing if anything. The other
big difference is that much of the dermatitis is not allergic in nature
anyway - it is plain straightforward physical damage to the skin - so
the same theory could not apply.


--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

Sign on a Maternity Ward Door: Push. PUSH! PUUUUUUSH!

Bob Henson wrote:
On 02/03/2015 9:17 am, Tim+ wrote:
Bob Henson wrote:
On 02/03/2015 7:26 am, Tim Watts wrote:
On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago because both mess up
the kids.


A lot more than 0.1%. I don't have a figure, but I'd be surprised if it
were not in excess of 10%. A survey amongst home helps in Nottingham
when Ariel first appeared showed a very high incidence of dermatitis.
Nothing I've seen over the last 40 years in pharmacy convinced me of
anything different. Our first recommendation for folks with unexplained
dermatitis was to get rid of any "bio" washing powders, and it often did
the trick.


How do we know that it's not going to turn out like peanut allergy? Seems
we've been getting it all wrong hence the soaring incidence of peanut
allergy.


I take your point, but see a difference. Peanut allergy is slightly
difficult to be precise about, because like all "food allergies" the
statistical waters are muddied by the number of gullible nutters who are
being conned by the increasing numbers of quack practitioners. However,
the recently proposed theory to which you allude that much of the real
peanut allergy is caused by avoiding peanuts it almost certainly
correct. I have been shot down in flames for suggesting that many times
over the years - but there is no pleasure in knowing I was correct all
along, as it would now appear. We already know that excessive
cleanliness and living in semi-sterile boxes is causing the huge
increase in asthma that we have been seeing (even allowing for the high
rate of over-diagnosis) over the last couple of decades, so the peanut
allergy theory should come as no surprise at all - it certainly didn't
to me.

Enzyme washing powders may be different because they are not a natural
substance to which we should be routinely exposed to presumably give us
immunity - they are a chemical pollutant. I wouldn't say positively that
the same might not apply, but I would think it most unlikely. As we have
been exposed to more and more of the bio powders over the years, one
would have expected there to be a lower incidence of allergy if the
exposure theory were true - but it is increasing if anything. The other
big difference is that much of the dermatitis is not allergic in nature
anyway - it is plain straightforward physical damage to the skin - so
the same theory could not apply.



My comment wasn't really a serious one as I appreciate that there are big
differences between allergies and dermatitis. Personally, we've used bio
powders in our household forever and no one in the household (2 adults, 2
kids) has ever been troubled with dermatitis or eczema. Doesn't prove
anything of course.

Tim

On 02/03/15 10:18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Bob Henson
wrote:

I take your point, but see a difference. Peanut allergy is slightly
difficult to be precise about, because like all "food allergies" the
statistical waters are muddied by the number of gullible nutters who are
being conned by the increasing numbers of quack practitioners. However,
the recently proposed theory to which you allude that much of the real
peanut allergy is caused by avoiding peanuts it almost certainly
correct. I have been shot down in flames for suggesting that many times
over the years - but there is no pleasure in knowing I was correct all
along, as it would now appear.

Actually this idea is not new. I read an article in New Scientist
several years ago on the subject. As they said, no one in West Africa
where peanuts are grown gets the allergy. No one used to get it here
before peanuts and peanut products were common in the UK. Nowadays, the
article said, there are going to be microgram amounts of peanut
proteins all over the place.

The allergy arises when a developing immune system (as in a small baby)
is exposed to the microgram quantities; it may "register" that as a
danger and when, older, the kid eats a larger quantity it's set off. If
the baby is exposed to huge amounts (as in West Africa) or none at all
(as here before about 1950), the protein is not "registered" as
dangerous and so eating peanuts is then not a problem.


That's an interesting theory.

My eldest when she was 2.5 ate a peanut. Spat most of it out saying it
burnt [her tongue].

30 minutes later[1], I was running into A&E with a kid losing
consciousness.

[1] After trying Piriton - at that stage we had no idea about anaphylaxis.


Now (since age 9 or so) she can eat peanuts and is encouraged to do so
after a food challenge test at the hospital. So it came and it went. Weird.

She is still dangerously allergic to the cashew family (pistacios,
cashews) and shellfish.

Son who grew up under the same conditions is allergic to animal milk[2]
but not nuts of any kind and probably not shellfish.

[2] He was tube fed formula milk when born as he was not feeding
properly. We think that triggered it - but who knows for sure. He is
gradually becoming more tolerant of milk proteins.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Bob Henson
wrote:

I take your point, but see a difference. Peanut allergy is slightly
difficult to be precise about, because like all "food allergies" the
statistical waters are muddied by the number of gullible nutters who are
being conned by the increasing numbers of quack practitioners. However,
the recently proposed theory to which you allude that much of the real
peanut allergy is caused by avoiding peanuts it almost certainly
correct. I have been shot down in flames for suggesting that many times
over the years - but there is no pleasure in knowing I was correct all
along, as it would now appear.

Actually this idea is not new. I read an article in New Scientist
several years ago on the subject. As they said, no one in West Africa
where peanuts are grown gets the allergy. No one used to get it here
before peanuts and peanut products were common in the UK. Nowadays, the
article said, there are going to be microgram amounts of peanut
proteins all over the place.

The allergy arises when a developing immune system (as in a small baby)
is exposed to the microgram quantities; it may "register" that as a
danger and when, older, the kid eats a larger quantity it's set off. If
the baby is exposed to huge amounts (as in West Africa) or none at all
(as here before about 1950), the protein is not "registered" as
dangerous and so eating peanuts is then not a problem.

If it was really as simple as that, the reason we see so
many more affected by allergies now than we used to
would have been resolved long ago.

And the problem isn't just seen with peanuts anyway,
there are plenty more allergies than just with peanuts.

On Monday, 2 March 2015 10:18:45 UTC, Tim Streater wrote:

As "They" said, no one in West Africa where peanuts are grown gets the
allergy. No one used to get it here before peanuts and peanut products
were common in the UK.

I am glad that the sale of peanuts has made west Africans rich enough to afford peanuts... I mean first class health treatment. Usually the grunts doing the actual work in places where allergies be or become endemic are the last to be able to afford treatment for said endemics.

So happy to find that can they not only afford treatment they can afford diagnosis. And not only can they afford diagnosis they can find honourable, unbribable and consistently careful doctors, something great Britain has only been able to afford since consumption of peanuts has taken off here.

Hell of a coincidence though.

But in a good way.

Really, really.

You ****wit.

On 02/03/15 09:37, Huge wrote:
On 2015-03-02, Tim Watts wrote:
On 02/03/15 07:15, wrote:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


You might find it's more that 0.1%.

We dumped bio in favour of Persil Non Bio years ago

Ditto, because the bio gave my wife eczma.


I grew up soaked in the stuff and I am mostly OK.

But in contrast, when we stayed at some log cabins before Xmas, the kids
were itchy and restless all night - and had telltale rashes. I nipped
down the launderette with their bed linen and gave it another wash with
non bio and machine set to extra rinses and they were fine.

wrote in message
...
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates get into the environment and are considered an extremely bad
thing. (Hard to remove back at the sewage works)

There is a theory afoot that some enzymes aganst you skin are a bad thing
(not proven).
Should not be used in hand wash as rinsing them out is ineffective
Each enzyme present is tailored to a specific stain, eg wine, egg, ****,
urine etc etc.


Perfumes make you smell like a poufter. Is that good or bad?

"harryagain" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates get into the environment and are considered an extremely bad
thing. (Hard to remove back at the sewage works)

There is a theory afoot that some enzymes aganst you skin are a bad thing
(not proven).
Should not be used in hand wash as rinsing them out is ineffective

Each enzyme present is tailored to a specific stain, eg wine, egg, ****,
urine etc etc.

Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

Perfumes make you smell like a poufter. Is that good or bad?

In your case, good, it might well see you kicked to death.

On 02/03/2015 7:52 am, harryagain wrote:
wrote in message
...
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates get into the environment and are considered an extremely bad
thing. (Hard to remove back at the sewage works)

There is a theory afoot that some enzymes aganst you skin are a bad thing
(not proven).

Many papers over many years would show the opposite - there is no real
doubt they do harm.

Perfumes make you smell like a poufter. Is that good or bad?

The smell, albeit often unpleasant to my nose, of washing powders and,
worse still, fabric softeners, is not the problem. The chemicals used
are. Fabric softeners produce as many, or maybe more, allergic reactions
than the enzymes. The problem may well be the perfumes.

My other half used to use a certain brand of depilatory lotion on her
legs. On one of those occasions her shins became so inflamed and
oedematous that they bled through the pores. It took steroids to calm it
down. I sent the offending lotion off for laboratory analysis,
suspecting an error in formulation. The actual active chemical
ingredient was there in exactly the correct proportions - nothing was
apparently wrong. We subsequently managed to prise the information out
of the manufacturers that they had changed the perfume agent in the
product - and the lurid reaction was down to that alone. We withdrew
them from sale in the Pharmacy anyway on the grounds that if they
affected one person that way they might affect many others. Perfumes can
be dangerous.


--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future. - Niels Bohr

In article ,
writes:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
writes:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other countries,

That's because they are all feelthy foreigners, silly.

which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

I cannot use bio powders as my hands and feet get dreadful eczema. Non-bio powder washes fine for most things on quick wash. Stain remover or for dog towels a long eco wash does the trick. Some people smell of detergent

"Ernest Clark" wrote in message
...
I cannot use bio powders as my hands and feet get dreadful eczema. Non-bio
powder washes fine for most things on quick wash. Stain remover or for dog
towels a long eco wash does the trick. Some people smell of detergent

You should never handle any detergents. Or inhale the dust.

The stuff you buy is mixed with "bulking agents" but is still dangerous.

Liquid detergents are slightly safer as it's less likely to get to unwanted
places.

On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 22:21:53 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In article ,
writes:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.
The easy way for the manufacturers would be to stop making Bio products and
offer the enzymes as a separate additive, then there'd be the choice.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On 03/03/15 09:02, PeterC wrote:
I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.
The easy way for the manufacturers would be to stop making Bio products and
offer the enzymes as a separate additive, then there'd be the choice.

Rather like the bluing agent used to be available separately.

In message , Tim Watts
writes
On 03/03/15 09:02, PeterC wrote:
I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.
The easy way for the manufacturers would be to stop making Bio products and
offer the enzymes as a separate additive, then there'd be the choice.

Rather like the bluing agent used to be available separately.


But since you can easily get both bio and non bio powders anyway the
choice exists, so no need for extra products.

No one in our family seems to have any issues with bio powders, but I
hate the perfumes put in most powders - much to strong a smell.
--
Chris French

On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 10:48:25 +0000, Chris French wrote:

In message , Tim Watts
writes
On 03/03/15 09:02, PeterC wrote:
I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.
The easy way for the manufacturers would be to stop making Bio products and
offer the enzymes as a separate additive, then there'd be the choice.

Rather like the bluing agent used to be available separately.


But since you can easily get both bio and non bio powders anyway the
choice exists, so no need for extra products.

No one in our family seems to have any issues with bio powders, but I
hate the perfumes put in most powders - much to strong a smell.

Got it in two!
Yes, both are available, but all the bio have pink stinks in them and they
affect my eyes, nose and throat if too strong or long.
Having an additive with no extraneous 'extras' would give a bit more choice.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

"Chris French" wrote in message
...
In message , Tim Watts
writes
On 03/03/15 09:02, PeterC wrote:
I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.
The easy way for the manufacturers would be to stop making Bio products
and
offer the enzymes as a separate additive, then there'd be the choice.

Rather like the bluing agent used to be available separately.


But since you can easily get both bio and non bio powders anyway the
choice exists, so no need for extra products.

No one in our family seems to have any issues with bio powders, but I hate
the perfumes put in most powders - much to strong a smell.

Yeah, I deliberately use Pears Transparent soap in the shower because it
doesn't stink.

PeterC wrote:
I use non-bio as I have skin trouble and don't want to risk any more
possible causes. For 'whites' it's Ecover powder (oxygen bleach) and for
fluffy stuff it's BioD liquid. No optical brighteners or added pink
stenches.

When I changed from a proper washing machine to a single-fill machine
but continued with the same washing powder detergent+softener I started
getting rashes and skin irritation. I swapped to Fairy NonBio and that
reduced it. Connecting the hot water to the single-fill inlet removed
it entirely.

jgh

On 03/03/2015 09:02, PeterC wrote:
No optical brighteners

When I have worn clothes that have never had optical brighteners used on
them (neither in manufacture nor in laundry), I seem to be of far less
interest to small flying things. Anyone else noticed?

--
Rod

On 2015-03-03, polygonum wrote:

On 03/03/2015 09:02, PeterC wrote:
No optical brighteners

When I have worn clothes that have never had optical brighteners used on
them (neither in manufacture nor in laundry), I seem to be of far less
interest to small flying things. Anyone else noticed?

No, but I have a theory (or maybe an excuse) that eating garlic &
spicy food keeps em away. (A relative of mine used to say that cigars
were good insect repellents, & cheap cigars were more effective.)

On 2015-03-02, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

AIUI, you can get some non-bio detergents in the rest of the EU,
because (possibly among other reasons) they're necessary for washing
silk & wool, but other countries don't sell bio & non-bio versions of
the same products in parallel.

In message , Andrew Gabriel
writes
In article ,
writes:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

So how do they wash materials such as Gortex in these other countries?
--
bert

bert wrote:
In message , Andrew Gabriel
writes
In article ,
writes:
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

So how do they wash materials such as Gortex in these other countries?

The USA has plenty of non bio washing powders.

In article ,
Capitol writes:

The USA has plenty of non bio washing powders.

US washing powers are completely different technolgy from European
ones, because of hot fill machines and (mainly) vertical axis agitators
for cleaning.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In articleu6Odne_jxMlbIWTJnZ2dnUVZ7vudnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk,
writes:

The USA has plenty of non bio washing powders.

US washing powers are completely different technolgy from European
ones, because of hot fill machines and (mainly) vertical axis agitators
for cleaning.


The US is rapidly moving to big dual fill, horizontal drum machines. If
only their dishwashers weren't crap. Various states have banned
phosphate based washing powders, so bio is available. Interesting that
some people in the US are making their own dishwasher powders using
borax and citric acid etc. I do wonder what the effect is in some glazes.

On 2015-03-04, bert wrote:

In message , Andrew Gabriel
writes

Phosphates are an environment polutent in streams, rivers, etc,
and too difficult/expensive to remove in sewage processing.

Many people don't want to wear perfumes (some are allergic).

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.
There is no market for non-Bio detergents in most other
countries, which is why they usually can't be found when you
are outside the UK. Manufacturers and distributors would love
to get rid of non-Bio because distributing twice the range of
products jacks up the costs here, and the EU would love to get
rid of non-Bio because it uses significantly more energy to
get things clean. The medical evidence is that there's no
justification for non-Bio, but in the UK, there is a lot of
misinformation about it which doesn't exist elsewhere.

So how do they wash materials such as Gortex in these other countries?

I wash Goretex & other "technical" clothes separately with Nikwax Tech
Wash (or soap flakes if I'm out of Tech Wash). I think you can use
normal liquid detergents on them, but it's better to use soap or
something specialized, & you definitely don't want to use fabric
softener. I'd expect the special products to be available in most of
the developed world now.

On 02/03/2015 22:21, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.

Most people use too much detergent in their wash which coupled with low
water machines means that the clothes are probably not rinsed enough.


--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

alan_m wrote:
On 02/03/2015 22:21, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.

Most people use too much detergent in their wash which coupled with low
water machines means that the clothes are probably not rinsed enough.



Yes, the Which tests showed that eco low water washing machines rinsed
very inadequately. It's simple enough to repeat the rinse cycle a few
times, even though it;s a pain.

On 06/03/15 20:30, Capitol wrote:
alan_m wrote:
On 02/03/2015 22:21, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In the UK, people are often told they're allergic to washing
enzymes, which generates a market for non-bio detergent.

Most people use too much detergent in their wash which coupled with low
water machines means that the clothes are probably not rinsed enough.



Yes, the Which tests showed that eco low water washing machines
rinsed very inadequately. It's simple enough to repeat the rinse cycle a
few times, even though it;s a pain.

And *strangely* enough, many modern machines have an "extra rinses"
button (mine included). Almost as if the manufacturers knew trying to
save that last bit of water was complete ********.

wrote in message
...
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


I don't know, but there's all kinds of ****e added to things that aren't
tested or tested incorrectly.
I can't use Lynx body spray or shower gel any more unless i want to look
like I've been through and industrial potato peeler, the spray burns like
acid and the body gel appears to be made from bleach and liquid fibreglass.
A dozen people i know say the same thing.

On a related note, several months ago I kept having heart palpitations, at
one point I thought I was dying, i don't know what a heart attack feels like
but i could have sworn i was having mini ones almost every day, this went on
for almost a year with increasing regularity and culminated about 4 weeks
back when i realsied that the worst time it happened was after eating my
evening meal and I would have a large glass of my favourite squash instead
of tea or coffee (about 8 months ago someone said it could be caffeine so I
stopped having a hot drink and just had squash).

After eventually realising that it never happened at work (one day in
January i dug out and barrowed 6 tonnes of clay and ****e to make way for a
new patio) no matter how hard I worked, my heart never skipped a beat or did
anything untoward until after my main meal.

I read the list of ingredients in the squash, only one had an allergy
warning, sodium metabishulphite, i googled this but there wasn't much info
WRT palpitations, so i googled another ingredient, potassium sorbate,
Bingo - well known for causing 'pseudo heart attacks', palpitations,
fluttering and all manner of heart related shenanigans, I've cut this poison
from my diet and my heartbeat has returned to normal, on a sad note, it
seems that almost all fruit cordials contain this and I used to enjoy them

In message , Phil L
writes

wrote in message
...
I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).
I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?


I don't know, but there's all kinds of ****e added to things that aren't
tested or tested incorrectly.
I can't use Lynx body spray or shower gel any more unless i want to look
like I've been through and industrial potato peeler, the spray burns like
acid and the body gel appears to be made from bleach and liquid fibreglass.
A dozen people i know say the same thing.


A friends of ours, who doesn't as a rule suffer from allergies or any
such things has a real problem with some face/hand products - can't
remember if cream or soap of some sort.

If she uses certain brands she gets dreadful rashes, puffiness around
the eyes.
--
Chris French

On 03/03/2015 00:57, Chris French wrote:
In message , Phil L
writes

wrote in message
...

I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).

Caustic works better.

I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming:
NO PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera
Have they been taken out because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

The main thing that causes trouble with enzyme washing powers is that
the solution is actually caustic and that may be sufficient to hurt
people with a sensitive skin - especially if they are careless and get
it on them without noticing or bothering to wash it off.

I don't know, but there's all kinds of ****e added to things that aren't
tested or tested incorrectly.

The problem is that there are always a few people who really are
allergic to anything. Neighbours include one violently allergic to
onions and another to shellfish though none to the most common peanuts.

I suspect the peanut allergy is largely down to the traces of peanut
found in almost all processed food these days from an early age. Eating
a decent quantity is safe enough but trace amounts can get mistaken by
an underworked immune system in these hyper clean environments.

I can't use Lynx body spray or shower gel any more unless i want to look
like I've been through and industrial potato peeler, the spray burns like
acid and the body gel appears to be made from bleach and liquid
fibreglass.
A dozen people i know say the same thing.


A friends of ours, who doesn't as a rule suffer from allergies or any
such things has a real problem with some face/hand products - can't
remember if cream or soap of some sort.

If she uses certain brands she gets dreadful rashes, puffiness around
the eyes.

That sounds like a lanolin allergy. My wife has to be very careful with
cosmetics as she became sensitised allergic to lanolin a long time ago.

The trick is to check the ingredients on all the products that cause
trouble and then deliberately provoke a small reaction to test the
causal hypothesis. Once you know the cause you can avoid it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article , Martin Brown
wrote:
On 03/03/2015 00:57, Chris French wrote:
In message , Phil L
writes

wrote in message
...

I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).

Caustic works better.

I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming: NO
PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera Have they been taken out
because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

The main thing that causes trouble with enzyme washing powers is that
the solution is actually caustic and that may be sufficient to hurt
people with a sensitive skin - especially if they are careless and get
it on them without noticing or bothering to wash it off.

I don't know, but there's all kinds of ****e added to things that
aren't tested or tested incorrectly.

The problem is that there are always a few people who really are
allergic to anything. Neighbours include one violently allergic to
onions and another to shellfish though none to the most common peanuts.

I suspect the peanut allergy is largely down to the traces of peanut
found in almost all processed food these days from an early age. Eating
a decent quantity is safe enough but trace amounts can get mistaken by
an underworked immune system in these hyper clean environments.

I can't use Lynx body spray or shower gel any more unless i want to
look like I've been through and industrial potato peeler, the spray
burns like acid and the body gel appears to be made from bleach and
liquid fibreglass. A dozen people i know say the same thing.


A friends of ours, who doesn't as a rule suffer from allergies or any
such things has a real problem with some face/hand products - can't
remember if cream or soap of some sort.

If she uses certain brands she gets dreadful rashes, puffiness around
the eyes.

That sounds like a lanolin allergy. My wife has to be very careful with
cosmetics as she became sensitised allergic to lanolin a long time ago.

The trick is to check the ingredients on all the products that cause
trouble and then deliberately provoke a small reaction to test the
causal hypothesis. Once you know the cause you can avoid it.

Sodium Laurate Sulphate - the standard foaming agent used in most shampoos
and handwashes - very difficult to avoid and very nasty.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In message , charles
writes
In article , Martin Brown
wrote:
On 03/03/2015 00:57, Chris French wrote:
In message , Phil L
writes

wrote in message
...

I used them in the past to unblock kitchen drains (liquid not powder
variety).

Caustic works better.

I was looking in the supermarket, and saw some proclaiming: NO
PHOSPHATES NO PERFUME NO ENZYMES et cetera Have they been taken out
because 0.1% of people are allergic to them?

The main thing that causes trouble with enzyme washing powers is that
the solution is actually caustic and that may be sufficient to hurt
people with a sensitive skin - especially if they are careless and get
it on them without noticing or bothering to wash it off.

I don't know, but there's all kinds of ****e added to things that
aren't tested or tested incorrectly.

The problem is that there are always a few people who really are
allergic to anything. Neighbours include one violently allergic to
onions and another to shellfish though none to the most common peanuts.

I suspect the peanut allergy is largely down to the traces of peanut
found in almost all processed food these days from an early age. Eating
a decent quantity is safe enough but trace amounts can get mistaken by
an underworked immune system in these hyper clean environments.

I can't use Lynx body spray or shower gel any more unless i want to
look like I've been through and industrial potato peeler, the spray
burns like acid and the body gel appears to be made from bleach and
liquid fibreglass. A dozen people i know say the same thing.


A friends of ours, who doesn't as a rule suffer from allergies or any
such things has a real problem with some face/hand products - can't
remember if cream or soap of some sort.

If she uses certain brands she gets dreadful rashes, puffiness around
the eyes.

That sounds like a lanolin allergy. My wife has to be very careful with
cosmetics as she became sensitised allergic to lanolin a long time ago.

The trick is to check the ingredients on all the products that cause
trouble and then deliberately provoke a small reaction to test the
causal hypothesis. Once you know the cause you can avoid it.

Sodium Laurate Sulphate - the standard foaming agent used in most shampoos
and handwashes - very difficult to avoid and very nasty.


not convinced by the claims for SLS.

Anyway re my friends issue, I can't remember if they have identified the
ingredients. It doesn't happen with most things, only certain ones so
probably not a common ingredient.
--
Chris French

On 03/03/2015 09:47, charles wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
wrote:
On 03/03/2015 00:57, Chris French wrote:

A friends of ours, who doesn't as a rule suffer from allergies or any
such things has a real problem with some face/hand products - can't
remember if cream or soap of some sort.

If she uses certain brands she gets dreadful rashes, puffiness around
the eyes.

That sounds like a lanolin allergy. My wife has to be very careful with
cosmetics as she became sensitised allergic to lanolin a long time ago.

The trick is to check the ingredients on all the products that cause
trouble and then deliberately provoke a small reaction to test the
causal hypothesis. Once you know the cause you can avoid it.

Sodium Laurate Sulphate - the standard foaming agent used in most shampoos
and handwashes - very difficult to avoid and very nasty.

It is common enough certainly but I'd be very surprised if it provoked
significant allergic reactions in any more people than the corresponding
traditional sodium or potassium fatty acid based soap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_dodecyl_sulfate

All of them will sting in the eyes though some more than others. They
are designed so that one end loves water and the other loves oil.

Wetting agents are very effective at emulsifying oils in water and don't
care where the oils come from. They will degrease your skin just as
easily as they work to clean the dishes of grease and food waste.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown