Search This Blog

Wednesday, 17 March 2010

Lynx & Mephedrone - Power To The Pong

There has been a huge fuss in the media in the last few days over the substance Mephedrone that is alleged to be directly implicated in the deaths of two young men. According to web sources it can have a number of unpleasant and potentially dangerous side effects on users arising from its impact on the brain, the respiratory system and consequential behavioural effects.

Senior ministers of the Crown appear on TV and giving media releases to the effect that they are taking immediate action and will seek reviews of its use that may have the substance listed as a restricted drug with a range of controls, potential legal restraints and action against traders and others, and thorough control over its use and potential for addiction.

Lynx (or Axe abroad) is a product manufactured and sold by Unilever, a major chemical company whose shares are traded in the stock market and may be held in the blind trusts of senior politicians and in their general portfolios. Lynx has been implicated in the deaths of young persons.

These have been put down to user error because they were supposed to have read and acted on the instructions printed in micro lettering on the tin that suggest limited use in confined spaces, like bathrooms, as opposed to taking notice of the advertising on TV and elsewhere.

Lynx is a deodorant of complex chemistry designed to impact on the brain and to act as a major stimulant. Additionally, it is endowed with carrying and adherence powers to impact on others over a wide area. Once contaminated it may last on skin, clothing, and contact surfaces for a long time.

For those vulnerable and this numbers all those with asthma or long term breathing problems this can have a serious and in some cases a potentially catastrophic effect on respiratory systems. It is arguable that for many people it can lead to a range of medical issues, notably in skin and fatigue.

Lynx is advertised as having “pulling power” that is to reduce personal resistance and to encourage indiscriminate sexual encounters. This at a time when there is disquiet over the rapid increase of health problems arising from casual sex and of the rise in the numbers of child pregnancies.

Lynx suggests to user males that it increases their sexual capacity. Is there any substantial scientific research to support this claim? Such evidence on chemical reactions that is known suggests increased risks of damage to endocrine function and reduced sperm counts.

No senior minister or politician or celebrity etc. has yet to comment on the adverse properties of Lynx nor to suggest any of the following.

Firstly, that the full ingredients and sourcing should be specified.

Secondly, that the risk of side effects should be made evident.

Thirdly, that Unilever should be required to undertake an extensive programme of research monitored by an independent agencies to determine both the short and long term effects of sustained use.

Fourthly, that all the raw data and relevant scientific information should be made available for public scrutiny.

Fifthly, the argument that the information is “commercially sensitive” should be secondary to that of public health.

Why should Lynx be treated so differently from Mephedrone?

Declarations of interest:

The above is a purely personal opinion and is not intended to exercise any influence over any individual or body, public or private. Additionally, I accept entirely that no individual either in the employ of Unilever or connected to its operations has any personal blame of any kind in relation to anyone who has died or has been damaged.

My mother-in-law’s maiden name was Lever and her family were of Lancashire origin from the same district of Bolton and vicinity as that of William Hesketh Lever, the founder of the Unilever company. He was a firm believer in and campaigner for fresh air and its benefits for all.

1 comment:

  1. And there was I, ignorantly thinking all beauty products had the medical and moral benefit of being tested through a multitude of prolonged and excruciating animal deaths prior to release for human use. Is this not the case?