Can anyone suggest a name for this product line?
 

The line consists of body lotions, creams, facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

The products are anywhere from 97 to 99% natural. The contain no petroleum additives like mineral oil and petrolatum. They contain no harsh detergents like lauryl sulfates. They do not contain propylene glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze). Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline, which is highly allergenic.

This product line is comparable in price to what "Bath & Body" sells their products for, which of course do contain many of the ingredients listed above.

Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't found that "winner" of a name for the product line yet. I think words like "natural" are overused and I'm looking for something unique and striking.

Any thoughts?

Thank you,

Mike Winicki

Back To Basics (DNO)
 

DNO means Do Not Open because the headlines is the entire message.


Get The Great Ideas Letter

How about...Elementals (DNO)
 

Pure & Gentle (DNO) (DNO)
 

A new English line
 

is called Seeds because all the products
supposedly have wheat seeds from the
founder's gardens.

If there is a unifying ingredient that's in
all the bath and beauty products, that might
work. I like "Seeds." Maybe your client
could do something like that.




My dogs like Grass

"NATURE'S TOUCH"! (DNO) (DNO)
 

"It's Not In It!", others>>>>>
 

"Nothing Harmful"!, 'You could eat it!", "Always Safe", "Nothing's in it!", "Safe and Natural", "Naturally Safe", "You won't believe what's in it!", "Safe 'n Soft", "Safe for You", "Sun Made", "Sun Grown", "Visionary".

Some of the above are extremely weak but I figured you could look them all over and get your creative ideas flowing.

Good luck!

> The line consists of body lotions, creams,
> facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

> The products are anywhere from 97 to 99%
> natural. The contain no petroleum additives
> like mineral oil and petrolatum. They
> contain no harsh detergents like lauryl
> sulfates. They do not contain propylene
> glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze).
> Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or
> formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline,
> which is highly allergenic.

> This product line is comparable in price to
> what "Bath & Body" sells their
> products for, which of course do contain
> many of the ingredients listed above.

> Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't
> found that "winner" of a name for
> the product line yet. I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki




You deserve ... VisionaryBenefits.com !

Pure Organics(dno)
 

Pure Organics

Following on.... I can't believe it's not artificial :o) (DNO)
 

DNO means Do Not Open because the headline contains the entire message.


You subscribe to The Great Ideas Letter now

I just want to thank everyone for the terrific names you've given me...
 

I think there are some real gems there.

Take care,

Mike Winicki

"PURE" - Simple, yet powerful name!
 

Better yet...."NATURE'S CHOICE"! (DNO) (DNO)
 

SpringPure SkinCare...
 

Hi Michael

Not sure if you have determined the "spirit" i.e. what is it that breathes life into the product... it sounds like its based on wholesome, natural, organic, pure, skincare.

a babbling brook, stream or spring comes to mind as they are cleansing and pure.

so what about something along those lines
SpringPure
SpringNature
SkinOxygen
FaceSpring
SkinGen
SkinO2
Flo2

Hope these help or spark some ideas

all the best
Ross

> The line consists of body lotions, creams,
> facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

> The products are anywhere from 97 to 99%
> natural. The contain no petroleum additives
> like mineral oil and petrolatum. They
> contain no harsh detergents like lauryl
> sulfates. They do not contain propylene
> glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze).
> Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or
> formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline,
> which is highly allergenic.

> This product line is comparable in price to
> what "Bath & Body" sells their
> products for, which of course do contain
> many of the ingredients listed above.

> Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't
> found that "winner" of a name for
> the product line yet. I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki




Business Name Generator

Re: Can anyone suggest a name for this product line?
 

Like you said, pure and natural is overused and even ones like basic and essentials might be taken. Better check trademarks.
To stand out, what about a somewhat unusual first name - probably feminine, like "Raphaela" or something like that. Or a made-up name like "selanna" or an unusual place name like "Laurelbrook" or... well, you get the idea.

The line consists of body lotions, creams,
> facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

> The products are anywhere from 97 to 99%
> natural. The contain no petroleum additives
> like mineral oil and petrolatum. They
> contain no harsh detergents like lauryl
> sulfates. They do not contain propylene
> glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze).
> Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or
> formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline,
> which is highly allergenic.

> This product line is comparable in price to
> what "Bath & Body" sells their
> products for, which of course do contain
> many of the ingredients listed above.

> Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't
> found that "winner" of a name for
> the product line yet. I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki

Re: Can anyone suggest a name for this product line?
 

Kay,

That is very good advice. The line of products this company is working on is pretty extensive. Well over 25 individual products and over 150 once you figure in fragrances.

I think what I will suggest to them is to use several names, rather than just one name for the whole line. Then they can test and see what names sell the best... in other words a test. I like "Laurelbrook".

Take care,

Mike Winicki

> Like you said, pure and natural is overused
> and even ones like basic and essentials
> might be taken. Better check trademarks.
> To stand out, what about a somewhat unusual
> first name - probably feminine, like
> "Raphaela" or something like that.
> Or a made-up name like "selanna"
> or an unusual place name like
> "Laurelbrook" or... well, you get
> the idea.

Homeland's Own -or- Homeland Pure -or- Homeland Springs [DNO]
 

dno
> The line consists of body lotions, creams,
> facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

> The products are anywhere from 97 to 99%
> natural. The contain no petroleum additives
> like mineral oil and petrolatum. They
> contain no harsh detergents like lauryl
> sulfates. They do not contain propylene
> glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze).
> Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or
> formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline,
> which is highly allergenic.

> This product line is comparable in price to
> what "Bath & Body" sells their
> products for, which of course do contain
> many of the ingredients listed above.

> Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't
> found that "winner" of a name for
> the product line yet. I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki

Following that line of thought...
 

Even with "christening" each individual product you could still have one unifying name for the line as a whole, one which would relate all the products to itself and also each other.

When I read the suggestion about giving a *name* to each item (a terrific idea; wish I'd thought of it!), the first thing that came to my mind (as a unifying concept) was the Latin word for a feminine name: NOMINA.

To me the connotations of that word include the elements you were looking for (pure, natural, fundamental, unaltered, etc.). Plus, because the word sounds European, IMHO I think it adds the additional impression of worth, class & chic.

Further, since NOMINA itself serves as a root word in many languages (nom is part of the word for name in many if not most European languages) this would (again, IMHO) imply other desirable attributes: dependable, everlasting, traditional, a gift/secret handed down from the ancients or perhaps even the gods, etc.

When it comes to marketing, a model who "looks" like the name of the product could be used to promote it..."I am Laurelbrook, the smooth cool lotion of springtime renewal..." The models/names could represent varied ethnicities to broaden the appeal of the line. And if/when the manufacturer decided to expand to men's products, the name for the line waits in the wings to be used: NOMINUS, the Latin for a masculine name.

I hope you can find some use in these suggestions. The overall naming idea sparked my imagination this morning and sprouted all these follow-ups. If you'd like to hear more of 'em, I'd be glad to share.

Eve §:)

Re: Following that line of thought...
 

> Even with "christening" each
> individual product you could still have one
> unifying name for the line as a whole, one
> which would relate all the products to
> itself and also each other.

> When I read the suggestion about giving a
> *name* to each item (a terrific idea; wish
> I'd thought of it!), the first thing that
> came to my mind (as a unifying concept) was
> the Latin word for a feminine name: NOMINA.

> To me the connotations of that word include
> the elements you were looking for (pure,
> natural, fundamental, unaltered, etc.).
> Plus, because the word sounds European, IMHO
> I think it adds the additional impression of
> worth, class & chic.

> Further, since NOMINA itself serves as a
> root word in many languages (nom is part of
> the word for name in many if not most
> European languages) this would (again, IMHO)
> imply other desirable attributes:
> dependable, everlasting, traditional, a
> gift/secret handed down from the ancients or
> perhaps even the gods, etc.

> When it comes to marketing, a model who
> "looks" like the name of the
> product could be used to promote
> it..."I am Laurelbrook, the smooth cool
> lotion of springtime renewal..." The
> models/names could represent varied
> ethnicities to broaden the appeal of the
> line. And if/when the manufacturer decided
> to expand to men's products, the name for
> the line waits in the wings to be used:
> NOMINUS, the Latin for a masculine name.

> I hope you can find some use in these
> suggestions. The overall naming idea sparked
> my imagination this morning and sprouted all
> these follow-ups. If you'd like to hear more
> of 'em, I'd be glad to share.

> Eve §:)

Eve,

Some outstanding thoughts there...

I find the whole skincare/haircare category to be very interesting not too mention very competitive.

Honestly I'm not sure how well these "mostly-natural" products are going to sell. I think the most important competitor probably is "Bath & Body". The goal is to offer products that are of superior ingredients to B&B but at B&B prices (for the most part). There are a lot of companies out there selling "mostly-natural" products but for the most part that end of the industry is pretty fragmented and my guess is that if someone can get out there and establish themselves as the number #1 they could get a good chunk of the market.

I like your thoughts if you have any more you would like to share (either good or bad) please keep them coming.

Thank you,

Mike Winicki

Mike, check your email. (DNO)
 

Mike, There's a good reason....
 

> I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki

Mike,

I have been involved with natural preventative health and the organic food industry for 20+ years.
IMHO: The reason "natural" is used so much is that it works. I know it seems overdone, but if it didn't sell product, they wouldn't keep using it.

I have seen people in the organic business, try and come up with a "new & catchy" sales term, but the consumers didn't know what they meant, so it was a big, expensive flop. Natural is something most people know or think they know, so it is a safe bet. "Bio-Pure" or some such would go right over their heads, unless you have millions to spend on education and brand recognition.

Remember what all the marketers tell us: You need to sell them what they want, NOT what we think or know they need. The consumer's "wants" control the success of a product.

How many of us could name a really great thing that people should have bought, because they needed it, but it flopped because they didn't want it, or know they needed it.

Personally, that's one aspect of marketing that I don't care for. I think you should be able to put out a really great product that they need, and of course, they should want it right? It doesn't seem to work that way.

I would like other people's opinions on that.

Natural does work, even if it's "overdone". I would put the new, exciting terms in the sub-heading or byline.

That 2 cents being said: "Purely Natural", "Naturally Pure", "Simply Pure", Purely Simple", "Naturally Pure & Simple"

It's hard to get away from natural because consumers relate to it so well. Not to use it would be like trying a search with the main keyword missing: some results, but not the majority that you're looking for.

After 20 years of trying to educate people about health, chemicals, additives, pesticides, household cleaners, and all the other garbage that industry has cooked up for our "good", I can tell you that it's an uphill battle. Even with the huge trend in that direction, there is still a tremendous need for more education.

Good reason to KISS it: keep it simple, so the most people understand it. Use a term that everyone knows and is comfortable with.

Sounds like a wonderful product, where can we get some? :-)
I wish you the best with it.

Sincerely, Dave Horn

PS: FYI - Do you know why they genetically modify soybeans? So they can spray the whole field with Roundup weed killer, and it kills everything but the soybean plants!! Just think; if you don't buy organic soy products, then you are eating soybeans that may have soaked up herbicide several times, but the plant's DNA is changed so that it doesn't kill them. Roundup is a systemic killer, it is taken into the plants cells and translocated to every part of the plant. That's why it can go down and kill the roots of stubborn, difficult weeds. Do yo think it doesn't go into the beans as well?

And in spite of the fact that the majority surveyed would like mandatory labeling, they still don't have to.

How about mouse DNA in your tomatoes for longer shelf life? Etc, etc, etc...

None for me, thanks.
If you're not eating organic, what are you eating? Do you know?

I will soon be going online with this kind of info. I will have a newsletter if anyone is interested in organic farming, gardening, or natural health.


Unlimited Dial-up for $12.95 & great DSL too! No Brainer

Re: Mike, check your email.
 

Eve,

Did you send me something? Which email address did you use? You can email me at:

[email protected]

or

[email protected]

Take care,

Mike Winicki

Soy = Death
 

> After 20 years of trying to educate people
> about health, chemicals, additives,
> pesticides, household cleaners, and all the
> other garbage that industry has cooked up
> for our "good", I can tell you
> that it's an uphill battle. Even with the
> huge trend in that direction, there is still
> a tremendous need for more education.

Most people don't want to know. They will think you are a nut case. But you already know this, I bet.

> PS: FYI - Do you know why they genetically
> modify soybeans? So they can spray the whole
> field with Roundup weed killer, and it kills
> everything but the soybean plants!! Just
> think; if you don't buy organic soy
> products, then you are eating soybeans that
> may have soaked up herbicide several times,
> but the plant's DNA is changed so that it
> doesn't kill them. Roundup is a systemic
> killer, it is taken into the plants cells
> and translocated to every part of the plant.
> That's why it can go down and kill the roots
> of stubborn, difficult weeds. Do yo think it
> doesn't go into the beans as well?

Hey Dave!

Soy was/is one of the five sacred Chinese plants - BUT - it was NOT FOR EATING! They used it for fixing nitrogen back into the soil. It has too much bad stuff in it.

Only after fermenting was invented was soy okay to consume - soy sauce which has been made by fermenting. Everything else leaves the bad stuff in - tofu, soy milk, soy extract, soy flour, all bad.

Try and buy a loaf of bread without soy flour in it. Put in to help the flour retain moisture. Bulk up. Make you think you are getting more bread for your dollar.

By the way, if you don't want to eat wheat, you can't even have fermented soy sauce because they add wheat to it - check the label, see for yourself.

> If you're not eating organic, what are you
> eating? Do you know?

Hmmm. Lemme guess... pesticides, poisons, funny dna - wonder what kind of damage that will do to us after many years of eating it (Thanks Monsanto, you $%$##@%$$^ - trying to sue a farmer for using your GM crops without your permission because his field was contaminated by your GM pollen. Monsanto is the devil.)

> I will soon be going online with this kind
> of info. I will have a newsletter if anyone
> is interested in organic farming, gardening,
> or natural health.

Why wait. Do It Now! Even if it is only a blog at first... even if it's an email thing you send out only now and then in the beginning. Start it now. Iron the bugs out later. I'm in.

Michael Ross

Death..blog?..I'm in?..Say what???
 

Michael, I've been meaning to ask about your expertise in this area. And what was the remark about a doctor? Is it Dr Mike? :-)

> Most people don't want to know. They will
> think you are a nut case. But you already
> know this, I bet.

Yep, naturalhealthnut AT hotmail DOT com until I get my domain.

> Hey Dave!

> Soy was/is one of the five sacred Chinese
> plants - BUT - it was NOT FOR EATING! They
> used it for fixing nitrogen back into the
> soil. It has too much bad stuff in it.

Great for fixing N, some other legumes are even better. Almost "forgotten technology" in this age of chemicals.

Amazing Fact: Chemical nitrogen processing like they use for fertilizer was first invented to make explosives. Sounds like a great thing to spread on your fields to grow our food!

> Only after fermenting was invented was soy
> okay to consume - soy sauce which has been
> made by fermenting. Everything else leaves
> the bad stuff in - tofu, soy milk, soy
> extract, soy flour, all bad.

I have heard some negative stuff about soy isolates in other products, but nothing quite like this. Care to elaborate a bit?

> Try and buy a loaf of bread without soy
> flour in it. Put in to help the flour retain
> moisture. Bulk up. Make you think you are
> getting more bread for your dollar.

> By the way, if you don't want to eat wheat,
> you can't even have fermented soy sauce
> because they add wheat to it - check the
> label, see for yourself.

Yes, it's amazing what you find when you start reading labels. Most of it you can't pronounce, need a degree in chemistry to know what the stuff is. Even lots of the "health" food & products have stuff that you may not want.

> Hmmm. Lemme guess... pesticides, poisons,
> funny dna - wonder what kind of damage that
> will do to us after many years of eating it
> (Thanks Monsanto, you $%$##@%$$^ - trying to
> sue a farmer for using your GM crops without
> your permission because his field was
> contaminated by your GM pollen. Monsanto is
> the devil.)

Yep, yep, and more yep! Hey, I'm sure that "they" have completely and exhaustedly tested the safety of the funny dna, otherwise they wouldn't expect us to eat it, right?

They must know it's safe, or why would they oppose mandatory labeling of all GMO products!

> Why wait. Do It Now! Even if it is only a
> blog at first... even if it's an email thing
> you send out only now and then in the
> beginning. Start it now. Iron the bugs out
> later. I'm in.

Blog? OK, I know bog, flog, log, dog, and a few others, but what the hey is a blog?

Seriously, I have heard the term thrown around, and presume it's some kind of discussion site.

Doesn't sound too appealing, sounds like something from the farm that I wish I hadn't stepped in!

> Michael Ross

I'm greatly honored that you would say "I'm in"

Thankyou for your encouragement to get started. That first step is always the hardest. I have considered a forum to start, maybe one on organics, one on natural health. I registered certifiedorganicinfo.com to use, the health url is a bit more of a challenge, that subject is so overloaded with bs and mlm hype.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Anyone else interested in organic food, farming, gardening, or anything in the organic industry
Or
Anyone with an interest in natural ways to improve your health with wise changes to your diet and lifestyle instead of pills, chemicals, and surgery. No "magic silver bullet" here, just common sense.
Welcome to email me:
purelyorganic AT hotmail DOT com
naturalhealthnut AT hotmail DOT com

Just remember to change AT to @ and change DOT to .

PS: Michael/Dien Would this be considered email solicitation? :-)




Unlimited Dial-Up for $12.95 or great DSL!

Soylent Green is especially nasty stuff [DNO]
 

dno
> Michael, I've been meaning to ask about your
> expertise in this area. And what was the
> remark about a doctor? Is it Dr Mike? :-)

> Yep, naturalhealthnut AT hotmail DOT com
> until I get my domain.

> Great for fixing N, some other legumes are
> even better. Almost "forgotten
> technology" in this age of chemicals.

> Amazing Fact: Chemical nitrogen processing
> like they use for fertilizer was first
> invented to make explosives. Sounds like a
> great thing to spread on your fields to grow
> our food!

> I have heard some negative stuff about soy
> isolates in other products, but nothing
> quite like this. Care to elaborate a bit?

> Yes, it's amazing what you find when you
> start reading labels. Most of it you can't
> pronounce, need a degree in chemistry to
> know what the stuff is. Even lots of the
> "health" food & products have
> stuff that you may not want.

> Yep, yep, and more yep! Hey, I'm sure that
> "they" have completely and
> exhaustedly tested the safety of the funny
> dna, otherwise they wouldn't expect us to
> eat it, right?

> They must know it's safe, or why would they
> oppose mandatory labeling of all GMO
> products!

> Blog? OK, I know bog, flog, log, dog, and a
> few others, but what the hey is a blog?

> Seriously, I have heard the term thrown
> around, and presume it's some kind of
> discussion site.

> Doesn't sound too appealing, sounds like
> something from the farm that I wish I hadn't
> stepped in!

> I'm greatly honored that you would say
> "I'm in"

> Thankyou for your encouragement to get
> started. That first step is always the
> hardest. I have considered a forum to start,
> maybe one on organics, one on natural
> health. I registered
> certifiedorganicinfo.com to use, the health
> url is a bit more of a challenge, that
> subject is so overloaded with bs and mlm
> hype.

> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

> Anyone else interested in organic food,
> farming, gardening, or anything in the
> organic industry
> Or
> Anyone with an interest in natural ways to
> improve your health with wise changes to
> your diet and lifestyle instead of pills,
> chemicals, and surgery. No "magic
> silver bullet" here, just common sense.
> Welcome to email me:
> purelyorganic AT hotmail DOT com
> naturalhealthnut AT hotmail DOT com

> Just remember to change AT to @ and change
> DOT to .

> PS: Michael/Dien Would this be considered
> email solicitation? :-)

I'll take "Death Blog" for $200, thanks Alex.
 

> I have heard some negative stuff about soy
> isolates in other products, but nothing
> quite like this. Care to elaborate a bit?

I'd need a book ;o)

Short answer: The only processing which can remove the good stuff from the bad stuff is fermenting.

All the techniques the companies use for their tofu, soy milk, etc., might get some bad stuff out, but not all. So you end up with a "mild" poison which has "some" good stuff in it...

Hey, care to drink a glass of cyanide... it's got vitamin C in it so it must be good for you? HA!

Seriously, for loads of info on the dangers of soy, click this link - it goes to a Google search.

> Yes, it's amazing what you find when you
> start reading labels. Most of it you can't
> pronounce, need a degree in chemistry to
> know what the stuff is. Even lots of the
> "health" food & products have
> stuff that you may not want.

Health food store.... HA! Almost a contradiction.

Try this - you maybe already do - buy and eat nothing if it contains a number. Just this little screening process will prevent your from eating most stuff from the center isles in the supermarket. And, if after a month, you go back and eat some numbers you will INSTANTLY notice it.

That "feeling" you are noticing is how your body reacts all the time. But your body just masks it.

> Yep, yep, and more yep! Hey, I'm sure that
> "they" have completely and
> exhaustedly tested the safety of the funny
> dna, otherwise they wouldn't expect us to
> eat it, right?

> They must know it's safe, or why would they
> oppose mandatory labeling of all GMO
> products!

Monsanto is the devil. I have not read one good thing about that company. While everyone complains about Microsoft's domination Monsanto is slowing owning all the food we eat - and altering it.

They have to be EVIL because a normal, ethical, moral, good person would not do any of the things that company does.

I can't believe the media is not all over them for the things they do. I find the media silence surrounding that company to be quite strange.

> Blog? OK, I know bog, flog, log, dog, and a
> few others, but what the hey is a blog?

A Blog is a Web log - blog.

There are a few Blog sites - sites with the blog software. You join them, tell the the url of the page you want to be your blog, give them the login code - the code that allows you to upload pages, then go to town. Write your updates then upload it using the blog - no html knowledge needed.

> I'm greatly honored that you would say
> "I'm in"

> Thankyou for your encouragement to get
> started. That first step is always the
> hardest. I have considered a forum to start,
> maybe one on organics, one on natural
> health. I registered
> certifiedorganicinfo.com to use, the health
> url is a bit more of a challenge, that
> subject is so overloaded with bs and mlm
> hype.

Don't need a website to start an email list. Specially if you use third party list servers.

So your "not having a website" excuse is now gone.

> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

> Anyone else interested in organic food,
> farming, gardening, or anything in the
> organic industry
> Or
> Anyone with an interest in natural ways to
> improve your health with wise changes to
> your diet and lifestyle instead of pills,
> chemicals, and surgery. No "magic
> silver bullet" here, just common sense.
> Welcome to email me:
> purelyorganic AT hotmail DOT com
> naturalhealthnut AT hotmail DOT com

> Just remember to change AT to @ and change
> DOT to .

In this case, email solicitation rules would be relaxed because it is in the context of the topic - and - you have pretty well been invited to post the email address because of the mention of starting an ezine related to the subject - and because we are trying to get you going.

See the difference between this and just lobbing in to a thread and posting an out and out "if you are interested" request?

Re: Soy = Death
 

Thanks Michael,

I read all the negative information about soy quite a few years ago, but I still have friends and acquaintances who want to believe that it is good for them to consume, in spite of a lot of information to the contrary.

Women who plan to have children really should stay away from the stuff, and I pity the poor kiddies who were raised on soy formulas.

With more and more baby boomers now turning to soy powder based protein drinks - hoping to recapture more youthful energy levels... spreading the word about the downside to soy is of utmost importance to so many being misled, imho.

Hope a lot of people read your post...it can possibly be life changing to many who use soy ~ and don't have a clue about the harm they may be inflicting on themselves by doing so.

Best Wishes, Amber

If Soy = Death, then are...
 

Soy candles healthier than their toxic, petroleum counterparts?

Is this another safe use for the venerable soybean, besides building N levels in your soil?

Or are the "bad" compounds in soy released into the air when the candle burns?

Just curious.

Just when we thought we had found a safe alternative to parrafin :-))

DaveH




Unlimited Dial-Up for $12.95 or great DSL! No Brainer of the Year

I'll let "logic" answer that one...
 

In it's natural state Soy is good for something - not eating, but putting nitrogen back into the soil.

When things burn they give off fumes - many things give off fumes even without burning (that "fog" on the inside of your windshield comes from the dashboard).

Logic says... if something burns and releases fumes, than burning soy candles would release the compounds within the soy candles.

But more than that... what of the oher substances used in the soy candle recipe? And, what's the wick made of?

Why not just use natural wax - bee's wax - if you really want a candle. You'll still have to figure out what to do about the wick. But hey, at least it's more natural.

Of course, the simple solution is to not burn candles in the first place.

Why burn candles anyway? I can't think of any good reason to burn candles. Even in a blackout I can use a torch if I really must have light. And there are "wind up" torches available so no need to buy batteries.

If you must have a candle, go with a bee's wax one.

Michael Ross

OK, But what about romance?
 

> But more than that... what of the oher
> substances used in the soy candle recipe?
> And, what's the wick made of?

Ah yes, burning and vaporizing lead. What genius came up with that one?

> Why not just use natural wax - bee's wax -
> if you really want a candle. You'll still
> have to figure out what to do about the
> wick. But hey, at least it's more natural.

Even if the bees have been visiting Monsanto plants? :-))

> Of course, the simple solution is to not
> burn candles in the first place.

> Why burn candles anyway? I can't think of
> any good reason to burn candles.

Say what??!! What about that romantic dinner for two on your anniversary?

> If you must have a candle, go with a bee's
> wax one.

Without the lead wick, thankyou.

> Michael Ross

Well, I'm off to find some good beeswax candles with natural cotton wicks before our anniversary next week.

Twenty years with the best lady in the world, and somehow I don't think a "torch" on the dinner table would be appreciated. :-))

DaveH

How 'bout this one...?
 

Thinking along the lines of purity and "unadulterated", how about "Nature's Kiss -- Virgin Body Lotions & Cleansers"? Or, something along those lines? Hey, it works for olive oil.

Chris

> The line consists of body lotions, creams,
> facial scrubs, shampoos and conditioners.

> The products are anywhere from 97 to 99%
> natural. The contain no petroleum additives
> like mineral oil and petrolatum. They
> contain no harsh detergents like lauryl
> sulfates. They do not contain propylene
> glycol (a main ingredient of anti-freeze).
> Nor do they contain Urea (animal urine) or
> formaldehyde. They contain no lanoline,
> which is highly allergenic.

> This product line is comparable in price to
> what "Bath & Body" sells their
> products for, which of course do contain
> many of the ingredients listed above.

> Anyhow I'm working with a client and haven't
> found that "winner" of a name for
> the product line yet. I think words like
> "natural" are overused and I'm
> looking for something unique and striking.

> Any thoughts?

> Thank you,

> Mike Winicki