Why denying the existence of anti-white racism proves its existence?

As always, while some universalists struggle to explain that all racisms are worth in horror, others struggle to prove that anti-white racism does not exist.

These others are the activists. According to their ideology, past colonization or slavery still has negative effects on the descendants of oppressed peoples. They call “racialized” (as opposed to white). Following this logic, they define racism as a system of domination that is part of history. Also, it inflicts concrete consequences on the racists who suffer it today (discrimination in housing or employment, police controls, etc.). This vision of racism as a system of domination is called “systemic racism” or “state racism.”

According to this definition, whites cannot be subjected to this type of systemic oppression today, because they have not historically been oppressed and colonized. On the contrary, they have historically been oppressors and settlers. Thus, the system of domination established in the days of colonization and slavery cannot be unfavorable to them today.

A racist definition of racism

The intellectual fraud of these activists goes even further, ignoring the very definition of racism, as it is widely accepted, and reinventing it to suit militant purposes.

Thus, racism is no longer defined by militants as the unfounded belief in the existence of human races and their hierarchy, but as a system of oppression resulting from a History, which has negative consequences for the racialized of today.

This redefinition of racism is carried out in such a way as to expressly exclude whites from it, by placing itself in the particular context of the West, and by obscuring historical facts that do not support this vision.

Facts ignored

For example, the fourteen centuries of the Arab-Muslim slave trade and the very high mortality rate during slave castrations are overlooked. (What Tidiane N’Diaye calls the “veiled genocide”). Also obscured the nine centuries of the intra-African slave trade.

These oppressions, although systemic, clearly do not interest activists. According to what logic would the Western slave trade generate a system of domination today, while the intra-African and Arab-Muslim slave trade would not? And what happens in the case of oppression between racialized people?

The colonization in Indochina, whose causes are supposed to be the same for oppressed peoples, but whose consequences in terms of discrimination seem very different, is also hidden. According to which logic do the same causes give different results?

As we can see, the allegedly historical approach of these activists takes a turn for the worse. But we think about all the historical facts that are deliberately ignored because they do not fit their theory.

Historical fine against Chevron canceled by an international private court

The Chevron oil company was ordered by the Ecuadorian courts in 2012 to pay compensation of 9.5 billion dollars for pollution generated by one of its subsidiaries in the Amazon.

A private commercial court has just overturned this court decision taken in favor of the inhabitants and communities affected by the pollution. A commercial court based in the Netherlands, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, merely voided this compensation.

The Court of Arbitration considers that the Ecuadorian fine – although confirmed a few weeks earlier by the country’s Constitutional Court – is tainted by corruption, and shows that signing a very partial compensation agreement released Chevron from any liability.

International commercial arbitration, a highly controversial system

These procedures are a way for multinationals to impose their will on recalcitrant governments.

It is the first time that a private arbitral tribunal has been used to overturn a court decision confirmed by all the judicial authorities of a country against a multinational company. The conclusion therefore openly reinforces the primacy of the commercial law of companies, and their private courts, over national courts.

Oil and toxic sludge discharged into the environment

Exploiting oil from the Amazon region of Ecuador since the 1960s, the oil company Texaco, since acquired by Chevron, had dumped crude oil and toxic sludge into the environment and contaminated several hundred thousand hectares of forest.

The legal proceedings, initiated by an association representing several thousand affected people, were launched in the 1990s. It has been marked by successes, which have seen the powerful multinational recognized as responsible in Ecuador for the environmental liabilities of its subsidiary Texaco and condemned to real compensation.

The fight was then carried out on other fronts, from Argentina to Canada, to enforce the sentence. Other legal avenues have been considered, such as referral to the International Criminal Court.

This battle also saw the oil major and her allies bypass national jurisdictions by taking its assets out of Ecuador and advocating legal separation between its various subsidiaries. Chevron also succeeded in convincing an American judge that the search for compensation by the affected Ecuadorians amounted to an attempt at extortion.

Rebalancing international law

The decision was taken when a UN working group is in charge of drafting a binding international treaty concerning the legal liability of multinationals. This working group is going to meet in October at the Palais des Nations in Geneva to begin its work.

Proponents of such a treaty believe it is necessary to counterbalance the excessive power given to multinationals by international trade law and arbitration tribunals and to rebalance the requirements of investment protection with those of human rights and the environment.

Following the wave of criticism of the draft Tafta Free Trade Agreement in Europe and the United States, as well as the growing reluctance of many countries towards investor-state dispute settlement procedures, timid proposals for reform of arbitration tribunals was put on the table, such as the Multilateral Court on Investment invented by the European Commission.

According to critics, these proposals only marginally modify the existing system, which is biased in favor of multinationals.

Emmanuel Macron – French liberalism versus freedoms

A liberal in economics, the French President, increased social control and attacked the possibility of becoming responsible for one’s own life. There is another path being taken lately by French politics: ending the jungle of free competition to foster wealth, power and knowledge.

Emmanuel Macron as a promoter of unbridled economic liberalism, the case was heard. By abolishing the wealth tax or by modifying the labor code, perhaps the President surprised by the brutality and radical nature of his bias, but this course was expected. Macron, on the other hand, now reveals the other side of his economic liberalism: an attack on individual and collective freedoms, a profound contempt for democracy, secondary attention for human rights.

With his smooth style, his “kindness” and his modernity on his shoulder, candidate Macron had threaded the pearls on the wind of freedom that he intended to blow on our great country of human rights. And we discover, Patatras, a proponent of ordinances instead of parliamentary debate, a defender of the permanent state of emergency, an attacker on the right of asylum, a saboteur of trade union law, a sympathetic international interlocutor of authoritarian and liberticidal regimes.

Emmanuel Macron does not content himself with a masterly propaganda session on France 2 (French state-owned television), an Elysian walk to the rhythm of the most courteous questions in the history of French journalism. He now wants the state to decide what is right and what is not. Welcome to democracy. What surprises me is the astonishment expressed today by Macron and the government at these discrepancies with freedoms. As if, sincerely, these astonished minds thought that it could be otherwise, that Macron ultraliberal would be a defender of liberties and human rights.

Political logic is stubborn

The result of economic liberalism is the strengthening of social control and the weakening of democracy. The fable that the freedom of capital goes hand in hand with justice is a tale for children of the 20th century. The United States teaches us a lesson in this area with Donald Trump: the country of economic liberalism par excellence is led by a liberticidal head of state, a paragon of machismo and racism, a global danger for human rights. In Europe, Margaret Thatcher set the tone for this formula. During his era, tax relief for the richest and the privatization of a chain of public services was accompanied by laws restricting trade union freedoms or a refusal to condemn the apartheid regime in South Africa. Let us not forget that Thatcher considered Mandela a terrorist and let Bobby Sands, the leader of the Irish cause, die.

Macron’s France follows in the footsteps of those recipes sadly tried in Europe during the last forty years, of this binomial economic liberalism – increased social control. On the one hand, the government is offering new freedoms to company captains to give them the possibility, with the collective severance agreement, to dismiss without economic reasons or to separate from an employee on permanent contracts to replace him in the aftermath by a fixed-term contract. On the other hand, it is preparing to increase the control of the unemployed by imposing a monthly activity report on them, by increasing the scoring obligations or by striking them off for refusal twice without “legitimate” reason of a “reasonable” job offer.

Could Bitcoin dethrone traditional banking?

From Bitcoin to local and regional non-cryptographic currencies, alternatives to traditional banking services are increasingly numerous. According to some experts, they would even be on the verge of ending the banks’ monopoly.

Five-point demonstration.

At a time when the Bitcoin’s price is collapsing to approach $200, its defenders do not admit defeat. For quite a few experts now, the transaction system in Bitcoin has the potential to compete with traditional banking services.

Many experts even insisted on the organic development of new payment systems that are simple, accessible and competitive. An offer that is increasingly successful on the platforms of traditional banks.

Catching up with the lag in banks’ presence in emerging countries

In 2011, 50% of the world’s adults did not have a bank account, according to the latest World Bank figures. In sub-Saharan Africa, 80% of adults are affected.

Open a low-cost deposit account.

That’s when the Bitcoin comes in handy. Transfer, payment, currency exchange.

Make transfers for free and instantly.

To avoid excessive bank charges when transferring money, several alternative systems to traditional bank transfers have also been developed. With the Bitcoin, users can make transfers all over the world. If these operations are irreversible, they are free and instantaneous. You will need to use a Bitcoin wallet in order to make payments. Read more on this post related to portemonnaies?hardware pour bitcoin!

Freeing oneself from interbank commissions.

More than consumers, it is mainly merchants who can largely benefit from Bitcoin payments.

The adoption of the Bitcoin is therefore partly based on its use by merchants, particularly in countries where banking services are still favored by a large majority of inhabitants.

Reduce the risk of bank failure

But it is the lack of control of Bitcoin and its volatility that arouses mistrust. With the collapse of the Japanese platform MtGox in February 2014 and the August flash crash, currency prices fell by 56% over the year, according to Bloomberg. In January 2015, the piracy of the Bitstamp marketplace further contributed to the impairment of the Bitcoin.

Shale gas exploitation: what are the dangers?

The exploitation of shale gas, which is trapped in compact and impermeable clay, would greatly increase global energy supplies.

When used, this fuel would also have less impact on the climate than coal. However, its extraction would pose several environmental problems that would justify the challenges.

Disadvantages of Shale Gas Mining

Deep boreholes of 1,000 to 3,000 m and then injection of a fluid composed of water, sand and detergents under pressure (600 bar) are required to fracture the rock and release the gas. These operations have already caused contamination of groundwater in the United States, in particular following oil leaks along the pipes. In addition, between 2% and 8% of the extracted fuel would be released to the atmosphere at the well level.

However, the majority of it consists of methane (CH4), a greenhouse gas that is considerably more powerful than CO2.
Surface installations must rest on concrete or asphalt floors connected to the road network. A pipeline is also required to evacuate production. In total, each farm would occupy an average area of 3.6 ha. Gas deposits are relatively small.

About 50 wells would be needed to produce as much fuel as a single well in the North Sea! The exploitation of shale gas could, therefore, lead to fragmentation of the landscape. Finally, a borehole requires about 20 million litres of water, which is the daily consumption of about 100,000 inhabitants! This list is not exhaustive…

More about fracking

Endocrine Disruptors: Definition and Issues

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals of natural or artificial origin foreign to the body. They may interfere with the functioning of the endocrine system and cause adverse effects on the body or an individual’s descent.

These substances can interfere with “the production, secretion, transport, metabolism, binding, action or elimination of natural hormones.”

Endocrine disrupters can act in different ways:

Imitating the action of a natural hormone;

By binding to the receptors of natural hormones;
By hindering or blocking the mechanism of production or regulation of hormones or receptors, thus altering the levels of hormones present in the body.

Some endocrine disruptors are compounds that are soluble in fatty substances (lipophilic), that is to say, they bind to fat tissue and can quickly accumulate in the fats of different species and thus contaminate a large part of the food chain. Thus, it is possible to determine PE in blood, adipose tissue, breast milk, amniotic fluid, cord blood or urine.

In-vitro studies have helped to demonstrate the interaction between these compounds and hormone receptors and to understand some of their mechanisms of action.

The effects of endocrine disruptors on human health are controversial, including their low-dose effect. Nevertheless, some conditions are now suspected to be the consequence of exposure to endocrine disruptors: decreased sperm quality, increased frequency of anomalies in genital tract development, reproductive function. The role of PE is also suspected for cancers whose development is influenced by hormonal mechanisms (hormone-dependent cancers).

Endocrine disruptors in the environment

We can distinguish :

Substances produced intentionally for their hormonal effect (synthetic hormones). It is the case, for example, with contraceptives or molecules used in the treatment of infertility;
Synthetic chemicals manufactured with various objectives, without the effect on the hormonal system being sought. It applies to organochlorine pesticides, herbicides, certain plasticizers (bisphenol A, certain phthalates), dioxins or related compounds (polychlorinated biphenyls, PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), flame retardants and the like.
Natural compounds such as phytoestrogens present in a wide variety of plants (soybean genistein, mycotoxin present in cereal silos (zearalenone)…

Exposure to endocrine disruptors

In the general population, water and food (migration of substances from packaging, contamination of crop soils, hormonal residues in meat), but also air and cosmetics, are the primary sources of exposure to endocrine disruptors.

However, apart from accidents (explosion of a pesticide plant in Sevéso, for example), exposure to endocrine disruptors in the general population is low on a continuous basis.

5 Health Reasons Why People Should Reduce the Use of Harsh Chemicals for House Cleaning

Are you searching for the best house cleaning method? In this age where consumers tend to trust marketing messages that promise instant results, you need to be careful when looking the best products or services to clean your home. The reason is that some cleaning products, for example, chemical solutions can be harmful to your family’s health, cleaning company’s team members and to your pets.

It means you need to consider safe methods of cleaning, for example, steam cleaning when it comes to taking care of your home’s cleanliness. However, it can be a challenge shifting from using harmful chemicals that give you instant cleaning results if you don’t know the consequences of using them.

This post looks at five reasons why you should consider safe methods of cleaning.

? Children
You may think that children are safe if they don’t ingest or swallow these chemicals. However, the methods of exposure of harsh chemicals to children are through breathing or skin contact.
The reason is that they may encounter chemical residues left behind on cleaned floors. For instance, toddlers and infants love putting fingers in their mouths and noses, which increase their exposure risks.

? Repeated Exposure

Another reason why you should reduce the use of harsh chemicals to clean is a result of repeated exposure. That’s because air fresheners, window cleaners, and floor polish are bio-accumulative, which means that you can’t remove them quickly from the body after repeated exposure.

The result is that they add up to toxic levels. Since they are used mostly in homes for maintaining cleanliness, you increase the chances of them accumulating in your body.

? Allergies and Asthma

Allergies and asthma conditions can increase because of using harmful chemicals to carry out house cleaning. The result is that you spend money treating these conditions. The best way to solve these problems is by using eco-friendly products to clean your home.

? Cancer

Your sink may contain active and inactive ingredients, which are harmful to your general health. It leads to you using chemical solutions to clean areas under your sink.

However, these chemicals may make your body experience cancer growth. For instance, Carcinogens, an essential ingredient of chemical cleaning products, causes or promotes cancer growth.

? Reproductive Development

Consider alternative methods of treatment since chemical cleaning products contain ingredients such as Endocrine disruptors, which mimic human hormones, confusing your body with false signals. The result is reproductive problems such as reduced fertility.

Why You Should Consider Steam Cleaning

Steam Cleaning is a house cleaning method that uses vaporized steam to clean, dry and sanitizes your home. It’s an effective method, which can even sterilize or disinfect surfaces in your house. Bear in mind that the ability to clean depends on its heat. It’s one way that is friendly to your health as it uses vaporized water as the cleaning agent.

The above informative article on the dangers of harsh chemicals for house cleaning should make you consider steam cleaning as a safe alternative. Plan your budget estimates and read online reviews of the best steam cleaners to ensure you buy the best models.

Liberalism – The Political Identity of Death

“The greatest threat to world peace is abortion”. What a profound statement made by Mother Teresa when she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize.

Why is it the greatest threat? If a woman has the authority to kill her child, than who is truly safe in this world? Who can honestly say that laws allowing a parent to kill their child are laws that are productive for a society?

Well, there is one group in America that makes that statement, liberals. They have embraced a culture of death that has cost us more lives than World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War combined. It has taken the lives of nearly 56 million little children since it had been legalized in 1973!

Who knows how many have been slaughtered before that?

culture of death

Yet, somehow, the liberals want to say it is the conservatives who are part of the culture of death.

The culture of death must stop…now!

There has been a decrease in human population now that abortion has been made legal.

These are people who could have been productive members of society, people who could have paid taxes to the state, and work on better the world we live in. We are at a place in our society now where we must choose, do we allow for the slow deterioration of our species and our morals, or do we stand up for what is true, what is right, and what is just?

It is time we stand up and boycott liberalism, and it’s agenda of death.

If we don’t, who will? The innocent children that are being killed every day?

They cannot defend themselves. They have no say in the matter of who gets elected, who gets killed, who gets to grow up and become something in this world. The only crime they have ever committed was the “crime” of being conceived in the womb.

Is that a crime? No! And now is our chance to stand up and say it.

Here is what you can do to help fight the culture of death.

First and foremost, know that the liberal agenda of death is wrong. It is wrong morally, socially, and logically. Do not be afraid to confront a liberal to their face about this. In fact, call the liberal out in front of others to make the experience more enjoyable.

life vs death

They will paint you out to be the wrong person, saying you do not care about the rights of women. The best thing to do in those situations is turned it right back on them and show how they do not care about the rights of little children. It is also important here, to make sure they know that what is inside the womb is fully human. Never concede to their point and always ask questions. That is the best way to expose their faulty logic and reasoning.

It is then important to contact your representative, your senator, and even the president. Get as many people as you can to join the fight. Boycott those elected officials and let them know if they continue to make laws that allow for the killing of innocent children, then your vote will go elsewhere, and mean it!

This is so important. If you make empty threats, they will continue to do what they are doing because they are being allowed to by the people. Remember, we have the power to end this, and all it takes is a simple vote. Don’t be afraid to use it.

Final Thoughts

Do not get discouraged friends. We the people still have control of the government, if only we take a stand. Boycott the culture of death that is known as liberalism. Do not ever give up on the good fight. We can do this if we stand together.

Toxic products in our Clothing !

Toxic products used in agriculture were already pointed at in previous articles. Here are the toxic products in our clothing and accessories.

It all begins in Europe, where the chemical industry produces a variety of toxic chemicals that are more or less harmful to humans and the environment, and then exports them to low-cost countries. These products will be used to make jeans, T-shirts, underwear, shoes, toys … which we will find in our shops then in our homes.

Incidentally, toxic products handled without protection in countries such as India or Bangladesh have poisoned the workers and their families. And a lot of well known major brands are not exempt…

Dimethylfumarate

In the radius of the poisons commonly used, there is first dimethyl fumarate, which one finds in the small sachets put in the boxes of shoes for example. It is present at room temperature in the form of almost odorless white crystals and has antifungal (anti-mold) properties, ie it destroys and avoids the development of fungi.

It is mainly used to promote the preservation of seeds, textiles, leather goods and furniture, mainly during storage and transport operations.

In theory, the use of dimethyl fumarate for antifungal purposes is forbidden in Europe, within the framework of Directive 98/8 / EC, commonly known as the “biocides” directive. But the fact is that this product continues to be used in most items made in Asia such as shoes, sofas, chairs, leather goods …

The checks carried out on these goods are rather scarce and, above all, they serve little purpose, since there is no obligation to withdraw the products complained of or sanctions for the undertaking importing them. In France, it is thus several hundred cases of irritation, sometimes very important, following exposure to the DMFu which are listed each year.

Leather tanning

For some time now, China has been unable to satisfy the global demand for leather. So Bangladesh has become one of the most important exporters of leather. Cowhide leather is abundantly available, and labor is the cheapest in the world.

Most importantly, environmental protection and worker regulations are virtually non-existent.

While European tanneries, which are governed by strict Community regulations, bear high costs for the treatment of their waste and for the protection of their workers. So many good reasons, for Western brands, to go and get cheap leather in such a country.

The textile industry

Besides leather, textile is also a highly consuming sector of potentially hazardous chemicals. In the H & M central warehouse in the Port of Hamburg, 60% of employees complain of pains that can result from poisoning related to the products they handle.

Or the employee of the Esprit brand, whose job it was to iron the jeans just out of the containers, which today suffers from serious respiratory problems, probably linked to dichloromethane (one of the most irritating solvents that is), present In these jeans made in Asia.

Last small precision, do not look for the products used in their manufacture on your shoes, T-shirts or underwear Made in India, China or Bangladesh, nobody dared to do it! Chantelle prefers to put “Designed in Europe” on these black bras, gorged precisely of toxic products! It’s so much more chic.

Why change the way you consume products and switch to organic?

What is your daily hygiene product?

An excellent cosmetic is composed of:

1. 80% of an excipient. These are, for example, water and surfactant for shampoo, or for a cream of a mixture of water and oil, by adding an emulsifier to make it more creamy. This base is the base of your product, it must be of quality so that the active ingredients can be effective. Unfortunately, conventional manufacturers give a little detail on the elements that make it up.

2. agents or active ingredients: they are the ones that confer virtues on products

3. additives: preservatives, antioxidants, colorants, …

4. Perfumes to Attract the Consumer

Where is the danger?

Our skin absorbs an average of 2 kgs of chemicals a year! With its 2 m2 of a surface, it is composed of 3 layers: the epidermis, the dermis, and the hypodermis. Many substances of a cosmetic product pass the dermis: it is, therefore, essential to know the composition of our products used daily.

Professor Belpomme, an oncologist, blames the many additives. Some substances, usually toxic, overload the liver and in the long term can cause chronic intoxication which leads to allergies, dermatoses, cancers, …

It is necessary to understand that it is the daily exposure, (regular and repeated), Of an individual to its carcinogenic substances, which by associating with each other, can by “cocktail effect” trigger critical mutations that can lead to the development of cancer. Today, ? of cancers have an origin that remains in suspense. Cancer occurs when our cells undergo three to six mutations.

Currently, 100,000 molecules have not been controlled, 5,000 have been tested, and 100 of them are carcinogenic (University of the Earth, 19/11/05). The precautionary principle is essential to protect us.

How to choose by deciphering the labels?

Look carefully at the labels of your products; you will necessarily find the detail of the INCI list. You will be able to compare it with the list below of a part of the substances suspected of being dangerous, elaborated from different sources.
Today, nobody knows what happens on the skin of users. Precaution is probably the best ally of our health:
1. Mineral oils (petrolatum vaseline, paraffin liquid, paraffin oil, synthetic glycerine, microcrystalline, isohexadecane, isoparaffin, ceresin, etc.) which come from the distillation of petroleum. Very cheap, they do not provide any nutrients, accused of clogging the pores, creating acne and preventing the skin from breathing. They could be stored in the body and damage the liver or lead to inflammation of the heart valves. They are generally used in classical cosmetics because of their easy and stable use.

2. Silicones (Dimethicone, Cyclomethicone, cyclopentasiloxane, etc.), synthetic film-forming agents often of petrochemical origin, pollutants because they are not biodegradable and partially occlusive for the skin. Very used in conventional cosmetics, present in shampoos and after shampoos to coat the hair in particular.

3. Glycol (PEG polyethylene glycol, PPG polypropylene glycol, butylene Glycol, Laureth 7, teareth 20, …), which make the skin permeable and could penetrate foreign bodies. They would promote pimples and blackheads. They are often included in raw material components.

4. Phenoxyethanol, preservative, and bactericide of the class of glycol ethers. It works in synergy with parabens. Very controversial and regularly attacked by the Revue Que Choisir that would pass through the skin and be toxic on the reproductive tract.

5. Foaming agents: SLS sodium lauryl sulfate and SLES Sodium Laureth Sulfate, highly irritating to the skin, are obtained from very dangerous handling (Ethoxylation is a chemical technique using ethylene oxide, A highly toxic liquid that gave rise to a combat gas, which is very difficult to achieve and sometimes leads to the appearance of dioxanes.

They would quickly get absorbed and retained in the eyes especially, they could cause cataracts and prevent children’s eyes from developing normally.

6. Parabens (methylparaben, ethylparaben and especially propylparaben, butylparaben, isobutyl paraben), synthetic preservatives, allergenic, suspected of crossing the epidermis and being toxic to the endocrine system (Professor Darbre of the University of Reading detected Of parabens in tissues taken from breast tumors (Le Monde 10/01/06). Again, the risk is related to the accumulation of parabens, present today in 80% of the products of care and hygiene. There are no natural parabens. They are always of synthetic origin.

7. Formaldehyde, preservative classified as carcinogen and releases formaldehyde as DMDM Hydantoin (Dimethylol Dimethyl) preservative allergen which sometimes replaces the parabens

8. Dioxane, (or dioxin) a carcinogenic chemical, derived from petroleum that appears when burning natural or chemical materials. Also an undesirable byproduct of certain chemical reactions. According to the US EPA, more than half of baby soaps contain it.

9. EDTA (Ethylene-DiaminoTretra-Acetate) and its ersatz Etidronic Acid, present in soaps, toxicologically doubtful and difficult to degrade.

10.the aluminum salts present in antiperspirant deodorants, besides the allergic reactions they are increasingly suspected in certain neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer, …).

11. Phthalates (diethyl or DEP) alcohol-based alcohol solvents and denaturing agents for the prevention of fraud on potable alcohol.

Choose the following:

12. Natural products,

13. Vegetable oils or waxes (jojoba, argan, shea, olive, almond, hazelnut, avocado, etc.) obtained by first cold pressing of GMO-free seeds, fruits, plants

14. Excipients composed of floral water loaded with active ingredients (rather than water)

15. Vegetable and soft washing bases

16. Natural emulsifiers: copra (coconut), palm, glycine, …

17. Active ingredients based on natural extracts transformed by appropriate processes that preserve nutritive values (vitamins, minerals, etc.) (no extraction by solvent or hot pressing).

18. If possible natural preservatives (Ecocert and Cosmebio accept some synthetic)

19. Certified organic ingredients, guaranteeing not only an environmentally-friendly production method but also a complete traceability of the cultivated plot to the finished product.