The Bollocks Page: Books

12. Council of Europe: Plants in Cosmetics Vol. II Council of Europe Sept 1991 ISBN 92-871-4676-4.

A pre-requisite of defining precisely what we mean when we talk about the products of secondary plant metabolism such as Niaouli oil or Cajeput oil, is to be able clearly and correctly define the botanical source of the materials. It might not be reasonable to expect those fabulously paid advisors to our ruling Council of Europe to take the lead in this regard. Mais non! They seem to be busy making beginner’s mistakes!

For example on page 95 of Plants in Cosmetics Vol. II published by Council of Europe – a publication presented as prepared by the "experts" Prof. Robert Anton, Dr. Franco Patri and Prof. Vittorio placed Niaouli oil under Melaleuca viridiflora Soland. ex. Gaertn. True in former years we did call M. viridiflora Niaouli oil, but that accolade is now ascribed to M. quinquenervia). Quoting from my book Natural Aromatic Materials – Odours and Origins:

"Rasoanaivo and De La Gorce (1993) report that the Niaouli tree in Madagascar should be called Melaleuca quinquenervia (Cav.) S.T. Blake based on the Blake revision of the Melaleuca and from specimens deposited in the Museum National Histoire Naturelle in Paris. However it is likely that the essential oil trade will continue to make a distinction between Niaouli oil and M. quinquenervia, although, in practice, the same oil may be used interchangeably for both."

Considering the above comments, it is therefore surprising to see that this obsolete naming has been made. Even stranger the more correct name for Niaouli oil M. quinquinervia is quoted in the references for the same monograph on page 97, which reads: Ramanoelina ARP et al. (1994) "Occurrence of various Chemotypes in Naouli (Melaleuca quinquinervia) Essential Oils from Madagascar Using Multivarate Statistical Analysis, J.Agric. Food Chem 42, 1177-1182.

Thumbing through the data in the book it would appear to me that the whole thing has been scrappily thrown together from bits of data dredged up by search engines (the engines used are actually listed in the back!) without any real thought whatsoever.

You have only to go a couple of pages further to find more obsolete nomenclature! On page 91 Cajeput is entered under Melaleuca leucadendron L. var. minor Sm. instead of M. cajuputi Powell….flipping the pages again – I see there is no reference to IFRA limitations on Camellia sinensis in the toxicology section – the absolute after all was found to be an irritant at 0.001% concentration in guinea pigs …..although the book gives the impression of a clean bill of health….

…..But by now I've already thrown the book in the bin as I realise these guys just aren’t up to it ….

BACK NEXT BACK TO BOOKS INDEX