Search Forum
76 - 100 by 147

The end of a love affair-Scents that have lost their magic ?

9 years ago
I can't wait until Sherapop's book comes out. One of my favorite Sherapop Manifestos ever: The Turin Takedown.

salondeparfum-sherapop.blogspot.com/search?q=s kin+chemistry
9 years ago
Cruella:
For a chemical reaction to take place, the molecular and atomic composition of something must change, skin does not change the molecular structure of perfume and perfume does not change the skin either.

What happens when somebody gets a rash after spraying perfume on the skin?
9 years ago
Cryptic:
I can't wait until Sherapop's book comes out. One of my favorite Sherapop Manifestos ever: The Turin Takedown.

salondeparfum-sherapop.blogspot.com/search?q=s kin+chemistry

But... Science *is* literal. And allergies are an immune reaction. I could go on.

Still, no 'skin chemistry' which makes perfumes smell differently on different people. It's about scent/olfactory receptors which are located, not on your skin, but in your nose. Sorry!

I think we in the science camp will have to agree to disagree with you.
9 years ago
Dear all:

If you really want to get answers from the scientific literature, you have to use proper terms for your queries. "Skin chemistry" is not a formal scientific term but a type of jargon used by perfumistas, it will not give you useful hits.

A lot of research has been done on how fragrance reacts with human skin. Unfortunately, many of the papers are put by their publishers behind the paywall and/or (predictably) in French. But here's a couple of examples that have free previews of some pages.

This one introduces skin thickness, age, the amount of hair follicles as some variable factors (yes, it is the amount of skin hair, and the oils it retains - or loses when washed by cleaning products - that changes the odorant profile!)
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3 -642-80340-6_17#page-1
Click on "Look inside" to read the first couple of pages.

An example of another study here:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1 467-2494.1995.tb00110.x/abstract
A notable passage: We also present results describing the characterization of skin types using a panel comprised of 80 people (40 females and 40 males); amount of sebum, hydration and pH were systematically measured on different parts of the face, the neck as well as the outer and inner faces of the forearm. The panelists were then classified into different sub-groups taking into account these parameters. It should be noted that the foregoing results were obtained on an ‘average’skin type.

A perfumista writing in her blog obviously puts much more meaning into "skin chemistry" than a scientist does. Nevertheless, a researcher in a lab can measure skin differences in the absorption and retention of different fragrant molecules.
9 years ago
If the label "skin chemistry" is a misnomer,

then we need a new label that emcompasses behavior as far as development or process.

Further, there were large discussions on the German site where the debate ranged about behavior of the skin = interaction with a perfume vs. the approach of the person who sniffs = perception. All that is in German and much to the point of what we are discussing here.

Dannyboy/Louce/Ronin - are you reading?
9 years ago
Epimedes:
Dear all:

If you really want to get answers from the scientific literature, you have to use proper terms for your queries. "Skin chemistry" is not a formal scientific term but a type of jargon used by perfumistas, it will not give you useful hits.

A lot of research has been done on how fragrance reacts with human skin. Unfortunately, many of the papers are put by their publishers behind the paywall and/or (predictably) in French. But here's a couple of examples that have free previews of some pages.


Amen. I pointed out the same thing pages ago. Thanks for reclaiming science, as it was in danger of extinction.
9 years ago
Thanks for these. They support what we've been saying which is that certain qualities of skin change how quickly perfumes evaporate or how long they are retained but they don't alter the perfume's molecular structure to create markedly different outcomes on different people. The difference in perception of odours is rooted in the olfactory, not integumentary, system. When I read a review on a perfume and someone describes specific scent impressions that I don't get on my skin that's my olfactory receptors. These also change over time. Even minor changes can make a huge difference to the way you perceive scents. Hence why we can be repelled by perfumes we once loved etc.

Any insistence on the existence of 'skin chemistry' flies in the face of science.
9 years ago
Cryptic:
Epimedes:
Dear all:

If you really want to get answers from the scientific literature, you have to use proper terms for your queries. "Skin chemistry" is not a formal scientific term but a type of jargon used by perfumistas, it will not give you useful hits.

A lot of research has been done on how fragrance reacts with human skin. Unfortunately, many of the papers are put by their publishers behind the paywall and/or (predictably) in French. But here's a couple of examples that have free previews of some pages.


Amen. I pointed out the same thing pages ago. Thanks for reclaiming science, as it was in danger of extinction.

Did you read them? The reference is to 'diffusion rates' and possible absorption (as the skin is a barrier note the reference to damage etc). They don't actually support what you have been trying to assert.
Last edited by Perfumecrazy on 16.12.2013, 14:02; edited 2 times in total
9 years ago
Pipette:
If the label "skin chemistry" is a misnomer,

then we need a new label that emcompasses behavior as far as development or process.

Further, there were large discussions on the German site where the debate ranged about behavior of the skin = interaction with a perfume vs. the approach of the person who sniffs = perception. All that is in German and much to the point of what we are discussing here.

Dannyboy/Louce/Ronin - are you reading?

That would have been interesting to read Pipette. I wish I could read German. If any German members who were involved could post here in English it would be good.
9 years ago
Perfumecrazy:
Cryptic:
Epimedes:
Dear all:

If you really want to get answers from the scientific literature, you have to use proper terms for your queries. "Skin chemistry" is not a formal scientific term but a type of jargon used by perfumistas, it will not give you useful hits.

A lot of research has been done on how fragrance reacts with human skin. Unfortunately, many of the papers are put by their publishers behind the paywall and/or (predictably) in French. But here's a couple of examples that have free previews of some pages.


Amen. I pointed out the same thing pages ago. Thanks for reclaiming science, as it was in danger of extinction.

Did you read them? The reference is to 'diffusion rates' and possible absorption (as the skin is a barrier note the reference to damage etc). They don't actually support what you have been trying to assert.

I did. We don't speak the same English. One article noted that they factored in sebum and pH, as I said should be considered. I understand that you have a very narrow, limited definition of what constitutes a chemical. I do not. Salt is a compound of two chemicals and commonly found on the skin, for instance. I doubt anyone would dispute that. I saw no reference whatsoever to nasal receptors, moreover.

Edited for precision.
Last edited by Cryptic on 16.12.2013, 14:29; edited 1 time in total
9 years ago
Cryptic:
Perfumecrazy:
Cryptic:
Epimedes:
Dear all:

If you really want to get answers from the scientific literature, you have to use proper terms for your queries. "Skin chemistry" is not a formal scientific term but a type of jargon used by perfumistas, it will not give you useful hits.

A lot of research has been done on how fragrance reacts with human skin. Unfortunately, many of the papers are put by their publishers behind the paywall and/or (predictably) in French. But here's a couple of examples that have free previews of some pages.


Amen. I pointed out the same thing pages ago. Thanks for reclaiming science, as it was in danger of extinction.

Did you read them? The reference is to 'diffusion rates' and possible absorption (as the skin is a barrier note the reference to damage etc). They don't actually support what you have been trying to assert.

I did. We don't speak the same English. One article noted that they factored in sebum and pH, as I said should be considered. I understand that you have a very narrow, limited definition of what constitutes a chemical. I do not. Salt is a chemical commonly found on the skin, for instance. I doubt anyone would dispute that. I saw no reference whatsoever to nasal receptors, moreover.

You're quite right. My university education is not allowing me to accept your view or find the level at which I can help you to understand mine. I was about to explain that salt is not a chemical but I stopped myself.
Last edited by Perfumecrazy on 16.12.2013, 14:22; edited 1 time in total
9 years ago
Congrats on your university education! I never brag, so I'll leave it at that. Good day to you and good luck.

Salt, being a compound of two chemicals, obviously has nothing whatsoever to do with chemicals!
Last edited by Cryptic on 16.12.2013, 14:27; edited 1 time in total
9 years ago
Cryptic:
Congrats on your university education! I never brag, so I'll leave it at that. Good day to you and good luck.

Thanks! Smile
Random thoughts 9 years ago
The world of scents is a potpourri -

1. The perfumer's imagination and intent to create a work of art.

2. The hype of advertising.

3. The interaction of scent with the skin.

4. The perception of one's own scent after application of perfume.

5. The perception of other people's scent after application of the same perfume.

6. Nostalgic memories play a part how satisfying the perfume experience is.

Scientifically seen, perfume is nothing more than juice composed by a chemical formula.

Fantasies - that is another matter. Advertising plays into the need for fantasies.

The perfumer gets a brief: "Here, create this ... make it so that it sells to as many as possible."
The perfumer has a dilemma.

The consumer - ultimately - judges with how much money leaves the wallet.
Re: Random thoughts 9 years ago
Pipette:
The world of scents is a potpourri -

1. The perfumer's imagination and intent to create a work of art.

2. The hype of advertising.

3. The interaction of scent with the skin.

4. The perception of one's own scent after application of perfume.

5. The perception of other people's scent after application of the same perfume.

6. Nostalgic memories play a part how satisfying the perfume experience is.

Scientifically seen, perfume is nothing more than juice composed by a chemical formula.

Fantasies - that is another matter. Advertising plays into the need for fantasies.

The perfumer gets a brief: "Here, create this ... make it so that it sells to as many as possible."
The perfumer has a dilemma.

The consumer - ultimately - judges with how much money leaves the wallet.

That's beautifully written Pipette. You seem to have captured some of each perspective there and drawn them together. Nicely done.
9 years ago
Cruella:
Pipette:
If the label "skin chemistry" is a misnomer,

then we need a new label that emcompasses behavior as far as development or process.

Further, there were large discussions on the German site where the debate ranged about behavior of the skin = interaction with a perfume vs. the approach of the person who sniffs = perception. All that is in German and much to the point of what we are discussing here.

Dannyboy/Louce/Ronin - are you reading?

I don't think there is a need for a name to something that doesn't exist.

This isn't even up for debate. Perfumes can smell different on different people. That is a fact. It's something we've all experienced, it's non-debatable.

If the word "chemistry" is the problem, that's just semantics. Move on, please.

Everyone knows we each have a unique scent to our skin. Not only can dogs smell it, but any human being who has nuzzled our neck and taken a deep breath can smell it. Just ask anyone who's been in love. That is science, that is fact. Here is some science to explain what everyone already knows:
www.livescience.com/5188-odor-unique-fingerpri nt.html

To think that our unique skin scent doesn't mingle with our perfume and in effect customize it is absurd. The reason people refer to this phenomemon so frequently is because it happens all the time. End of story.
9 years ago
Thanks Dulce. You just clarified something for me. The issue seems to be the use of the misnomer, "skin chemistry." It's a term of art exclusive to the perfume and cosmetic industry that has been widely accepted to mean the variation in a particular perfume among different individuals that occurs for any number of different reasons. However, there seems to be a desire here to artificially impose a chemistry (forgive the redundancy) construct on it, thus equating "skin chemistry" with an actual chemical reaction. This, in spite of the fact that the field of scientific research has not adopted the term, although there seems to be ample research in support of its existence, assuming that you know how to conduct a proper search and don't insist upon conflating the term with a chemical reaction.

Thanks again for the insight. Smile
9 years ago
You don't seem to be able to differentiate between the literal and the figurative, do you? That's a shame.
Display posts from previous:
Forum Overview Miscellaneous The end of a love affair-Scents that have lost their magic ?
76 - 100 by 147
Jump to