< PREVIOUS ]   [ 1993 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >


MACE ponders clean-air strategies?

Published 14-Feb-1993 in the Denver Post
Copyright ©1993 by Ed Quillen. All rights reserved.

Seldom do I encounter a cause which seems worthy of my support, but then I learned of an activist group which apparently started on the West Coast: MACE, an acronym for Make our Atmosphere a Chemical-free Environment.

I wondered whether MACE was responsible for last year's seating arrangements for hearings in Marin County -- perfume-wearers on one side of the room, segregated from the unscented across the aisle. More recently, San Francisco Mayor Frank Jordan ordered city employees not to wear perfume to public meetings, for the sake of those with environmental illness or chemical sensitivity.

Perhaps I am among them, because whenever I sniff certain commercial aromas that are alleged to make people more attractive, my eyes well up, my nose runs, my head throbs, and I launch a dozen sneezes.

In the hope of finding a way to make Colorado at least as progressive and enlightened as California, I finally tracked down one Zenith Killjoy, ad-hoc rotating chairperson of MACE, and congratulated him.

We just started last week, he confessed, so we really can't take credit. Actually, we're still networking to implement an operating environment conducive to the creation of a strategic vision.

Undaunted, I pressed for details.

The most promising suggestion is to go after it the same way they went after smoking. There are a lot of similarities -- perfume and cigarettes are both promoted as ways to make you feel more attractive and confident. Why should anyone, merely for personal vanity, have the right to befoul the air with useless, sickening chemicals?

We might also point out that a soldier at the front is safer than a citizen in an elevator. The Geneva Convention protects the soldier from chemical warfare, but there's nothing to protect regular citizens from these walking chemical arsenals who flout international law.

But there was medical evidence on smoking, such as the surgeon general's report in 1964 and the recent EPA ruling that even second-hand tobacco smoke is a carcinogen.

We don't have that for perfume, he conceded. In time, though, we will buy some science. If there's money in it, some researcher will find known or suspected aerosol carcinogens in some perfumes.

But what about the present?

We've considered the anti-fur tactics. We could picket cosmetic counters and harass Avon ladies. And when we sniff someone wearing perfume in public, we'll confront them, ask them loudly just what odors they're trying to cover up with their noxious fumes. That should embarrass them.

Wouldn't that invite a backlash?

That possibility did come up at our last discussion. We've also talked about a boycott against all products from all jurisdictions which do not offer full rights to the aroma-sensitive. We could also boycott all movies whose performers are superstars with their own perfume lines.

I'd manage fine without ever seeing another Liz Taylor movie, but life would get tricky if I could buy only San Francisco-Marin County products.

That's true, Killjoy said, so we're pressing President Clinton to go public and come out in support -- I've heard that his well-known hay fever allergic reaction gets activated just as much by perfume as by pollen.

It's long past time that he turned his attention to something vital, instead of wasting time on defense and the economy. We believe that this is the only hope he has of salvaging the Failed Clinton Administration.


< PREVIOUS ]   [ 1993 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >