*ElleB
New Member
http://www.marketwaveinc.com/articles/spaghetti.asp
There are two ways to sell a product: Explain to your potential customer why they should by yours, or why they shouldn't buy someone else's. The tough part is trying to find something wrong with every competing product. In the case of cosmetics and personal care products the task has been simplified by the commonalities of the various formulations. Make a case for avoiding Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS), Propylene Glycol, Glycerin, Alcohol, or Mineral Oil and you've eliminated about 95% of your competition. That's exactly what a growing number of MLM companies are now attempting to do, and with success. However, there's a problem – there's no case.
This torrent of "Harmful Ingredients" propaganda is a phenomenon virtually exclusive to network marketing with the bulk of it traceable to one particular company, although several others have recently joined the battle to save us from the perils that lurk in our bathroom cabinet.1 The list of "dangerous" ingredients vary little from company to company. The primary targets are the aforementioned Propylene Glycol, Glycerin, Mineral Oil, Alcohol, SLS, and it's close cousin Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES).
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate suffers a guilt by association with "engine degreasers" as does Propylene Glycol with "industrial antifreeze," and other dirty, disgusting sounding applications. Yes, it's true that the antifreeze in your car's radiator is mostly Propylene Glycol, and the stuff the car wash uses to clean the grime from it contains SLS. But here's a question that needs to be asked that no one seems to be asking – so what? Why is the fact that a certain substance is used for some other totally non-human application make it harmful to humans? When someone first discovered that baking soda can also reduce unpleasant odors, did cakes baked with this substance suddenly become harmful? After all, those cakes were now being baked with a "litter box deodorizer." When you're at the movies and you buy your obligatory cola and popcorn are you not eating "industrial packaging material" flavored with a "compost catalyst" and washing it down with a "battery corrosion remover?" After all, those are alternative uses for popcorn, the primary substance in butter flavoring, and cola respectively.
What's more, most antifreezes used to be made with Ethylene Glycol. According to an article in the LA Times (1995), Ethylene Glycol that dripped from cars was found in the ground water below the streets of LA and was making the water toxic. A safer, non-toxic substitute needed to be found and that was Propylene Glycol. So, were shampoos that contained Propylene Glycol somehow more harmful right after some antifreeze manufacturers made the switch? Come on. Truth be told, the whole "industrial antifreeze" angle is nothing more that a psychological ploy. Think about it. Why is the word "industrial" even used here? Antifreeze is antifreeze whether you use it in a steamroller or your family car. Clearly, it's to make it sound dirtier. The propagandists want you to associate moisturizing your skin with a Propylene Glycol laced lotion with rubbing dirty, grimy, green antifreeze on your face. It's an illusion. It's a mind game designed to create the perception of danger and disgust – and people are buying into it by the thousands.
Let's follow this logic a bit further. Antifreeze isn't entirely made up of Propylene Glycol, nor is engine degreasers all SLS. There's certainly a lot of it in there, but not all. In fact, some antifreezes are about 99% Propylene Glycol. But, does that really make Propylene Glycol an "industrial antifreeze?" If you say Yes, then be aware the next time you take a shower that you're bathing in blood! After all, blood is 99% water. Right? (Sorry if that was a gross analogy -- hey, I could have used urine!). I'm not debating whether Propylene Glycol "is" antifreeze so much as I'm trying to point out that just because a vile substance that you'd never put on or in your body is mostly made up of another substance, that doesn't necessarily mean that other substance would be bad for you. In fact, no where is there even a shred of evidence that these other uses for SLS or Propylene Glycol make them any more harmful to humans. It's a scheme designed by the propagandists to make them seem more harmful. That's all.
Another common substance found in numerous personal care products that has received surprisingly little attention considering it's rap sheet is dihydrogen monoxide. Admittedly, this substance does seem to pose a legitimate danger. It's gas is a by-product in the creation of nuclear power, it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting, it is abundant in tumors of terminal cancer patients, it's also found in the tissues of vital organs of over 90% of all stroke victims, can kill an adult human in less than six minutes if inhaled, and is the primary component of acid rain. In fact, this substance is so lethal that it once killed over 900 people on a small island off the southern coast of Japan in less than 20 minutes! Should we be avoiding dihydrogen monoxide? That'd be pretty hard to do. It's only the most abundant substance on the face of the Earth. Yes, dihydrogen monoxide is (how many of you saw this coming?)... water.
You see, anything can be made to sound like the most deadly substance ever discovered.
There are two ways to sell a product: Explain to your potential customer why they should by yours, or why they shouldn't buy someone else's. The tough part is trying to find something wrong with every competing product. In the case of cosmetics and personal care products the task has been simplified by the commonalities of the various formulations. Make a case for avoiding Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS), Propylene Glycol, Glycerin, Alcohol, or Mineral Oil and you've eliminated about 95% of your competition. That's exactly what a growing number of MLM companies are now attempting to do, and with success. However, there's a problem – there's no case.
This torrent of "Harmful Ingredients" propaganda is a phenomenon virtually exclusive to network marketing with the bulk of it traceable to one particular company, although several others have recently joined the battle to save us from the perils that lurk in our bathroom cabinet.1 The list of "dangerous" ingredients vary little from company to company. The primary targets are the aforementioned Propylene Glycol, Glycerin, Mineral Oil, Alcohol, SLS, and it's close cousin Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES).
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate suffers a guilt by association with "engine degreasers" as does Propylene Glycol with "industrial antifreeze," and other dirty, disgusting sounding applications. Yes, it's true that the antifreeze in your car's radiator is mostly Propylene Glycol, and the stuff the car wash uses to clean the grime from it contains SLS. But here's a question that needs to be asked that no one seems to be asking – so what? Why is the fact that a certain substance is used for some other totally non-human application make it harmful to humans? When someone first discovered that baking soda can also reduce unpleasant odors, did cakes baked with this substance suddenly become harmful? After all, those cakes were now being baked with a "litter box deodorizer." When you're at the movies and you buy your obligatory cola and popcorn are you not eating "industrial packaging material" flavored with a "compost catalyst" and washing it down with a "battery corrosion remover?" After all, those are alternative uses for popcorn, the primary substance in butter flavoring, and cola respectively.
What's more, most antifreezes used to be made with Ethylene Glycol. According to an article in the LA Times (1995), Ethylene Glycol that dripped from cars was found in the ground water below the streets of LA and was making the water toxic. A safer, non-toxic substitute needed to be found and that was Propylene Glycol. So, were shampoos that contained Propylene Glycol somehow more harmful right after some antifreeze manufacturers made the switch? Come on. Truth be told, the whole "industrial antifreeze" angle is nothing more that a psychological ploy. Think about it. Why is the word "industrial" even used here? Antifreeze is antifreeze whether you use it in a steamroller or your family car. Clearly, it's to make it sound dirtier. The propagandists want you to associate moisturizing your skin with a Propylene Glycol laced lotion with rubbing dirty, grimy, green antifreeze on your face. It's an illusion. It's a mind game designed to create the perception of danger and disgust – and people are buying into it by the thousands.
Let's follow this logic a bit further. Antifreeze isn't entirely made up of Propylene Glycol, nor is engine degreasers all SLS. There's certainly a lot of it in there, but not all. In fact, some antifreezes are about 99% Propylene Glycol. But, does that really make Propylene Glycol an "industrial antifreeze?" If you say Yes, then be aware the next time you take a shower that you're bathing in blood! After all, blood is 99% water. Right? (Sorry if that was a gross analogy -- hey, I could have used urine!). I'm not debating whether Propylene Glycol "is" antifreeze so much as I'm trying to point out that just because a vile substance that you'd never put on or in your body is mostly made up of another substance, that doesn't necessarily mean that other substance would be bad for you. In fact, no where is there even a shred of evidence that these other uses for SLS or Propylene Glycol make them any more harmful to humans. It's a scheme designed by the propagandists to make them seem more harmful. That's all.
Another common substance found in numerous personal care products that has received surprisingly little attention considering it's rap sheet is dihydrogen monoxide. Admittedly, this substance does seem to pose a legitimate danger. It's gas is a by-product in the creation of nuclear power, it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting, it is abundant in tumors of terminal cancer patients, it's also found in the tissues of vital organs of over 90% of all stroke victims, can kill an adult human in less than six minutes if inhaled, and is the primary component of acid rain. In fact, this substance is so lethal that it once killed over 900 people on a small island off the southern coast of Japan in less than 20 minutes! Should we be avoiding dihydrogen monoxide? That'd be pretty hard to do. It's only the most abundant substance on the face of the Earth. Yes, dihydrogen monoxide is (how many of you saw this coming?)... water.
You see, anything can be made to sound like the most deadly substance ever discovered.
