Toilet bars, an inferior version of Toilet Soaps, are sold more in India after 1993. Hindustan Unilever is the major seller. Do you pay to get the skin roughened up ?

 

If I were the Chief Justice of India, I would forthwith consider jailing the Executive Chairman of Hindustan Unilever and also canceling the manufacturing licenses and sales of their inferior toilet bars. They would be asked to release on TV and Print Media, twice the number of truthful advertisements for every 'wrong /suppressed / factually incorrect or misleading advertisements released in 2011. The Public can file a Class action against them for punitive damages.

Till I get that post, readers may study the charges below and review the use of Toilet Bars like Dove, Lux and such others At the moment, my pleasure is restricted to calling Hindustan Unilever, a Scoundrel. For a Summary, click question Lever

Law of the Land

MRTPC, now renamed as Competition Commission, quoted the below mentioned Ruling of the Supreme Court of India, while passing the verdict in the first case between Colgate and Hindustan Unilever

The Supreme Court had ruled that  "the object is to bring honesty and truth in the relationship between the manufacturer and the consumer". And "if the general impression conveyed is false, the most punctilious and scrupulous accuracy in immaterial minutiae will not render the representations true"  [a lie is a lie even if covered with irrelevant, decorative packing]

2. MRTPC: "if the claim of "102"% anti- bacterial superiority is ultimately not found to be true," consumers by and large can be said to have been duped by such advertisement campaign - if the advertised claim is ultimately not found to be true can be substituted for the earlier words within quotes. That is, the observation is not meant for one case but for all tall, dubious and unproven claims

3 Affected Party / Public: 'This injury caused to the public in general can hardly be compensated in terms of money, as the feeling of being duped cannot be evaluated in monetary terms'. This observation is against Hindustan Lever.

In my opinion, Hindustan Unilever, Colgate, Johnson & Johnson / Baby Oil, Parachute, Himalaya and many others have violated the spirit of the Law. They have duped the Public.

Your bathing bar is a perfumed scrubber. Duping means making dubious unproven claims, deliberate misguidance, distortion of facts, unfair means, misrepresentation and such acts of misdeed to mislead a buyer to pinch the purse.  For the topics and the links, refer to Site Map 2

Check Vaseline for poor, unscientific moisturiser

 

Background Note

a] India is a Nation of 120 Crores / 1200 Million people. Almost everyone takes bath. That is, soap is nearly a 100% penetrated market like match box. Additional demand does not come easy and available demand is fully met. Soap is helpful to wash off the dirt and sweat

b] Hindustan Unilever used to command over 40% market share in the Toilet Soaps category before 1993 as per my recollection. Their Lifebuoy and Lux were large selling brands in India. The share may have increased and not reduced as no new entrant has come in a big way. Tata Oil Mills got sold off. So Hamam Soap is now a product of Hindustan Unilever

c] If the above points under a and b are accepted / fairly acceptable and correct as of Dec 2, 2011, 40 Crores / 400 Millions use Lifebuoy, Lux, Hamam and Dove

These are Toilet Bars. Simply put, inferior soaps of questionable pedigree. The skins of the users can be affected on long term usage due to the Cheap and Despicable selling practices of Hindustan Unilever.

 Are the steps outlined at the top enough for this offense ? Read on and Decide for yourself

 

What is a Soap ?

Toilet Soap is the reaction product of a vegetable oil [glyceryl fatty acids] like palm, coconut oil, olive or other vegetable oils and caustic Potash - roughly 5 kgs of oil reacted with one kg of caustic Potash / alkali gives Soap, chemically known as the Potassium salt of a long chain Fatty Acid and Glycerin as a by product

Soap is a surfactant / emulsifying agent / anionic agent, making oil mix with water and make it water dispersible / washable. When we wash our face / cloth, dirt gets dispersed in water. The safe extender in Soap is water / moisture - about 10%. Other solid substitute / cheap / extenders in Soaps are clay, talc and such other cheap fillers to give body. Mutton Tallow was the cheap and convenient substitute for oils in earlier days. 

Glycerin is a by product in Soap manufacture. It is a moisturing agent / water holding chemical. It will lower the alkalinity of the soap and improve the transparency of the soap. Soap makers sell Glycerin separately

 

Difference between Soap and present day, Toilet Bar

TFM means Total Fatty Matter. Oil and Fat are one and the same thing chemically. What is solid at 20 degrees centigrade is called Fat. It is Oil / fat which keeps the skin, supple and soft.

If the Oil Content / TFM of a Soap is low, contain excess abrasives / scrubbing agents like clay, talc et cetera, to lessen cost, contain Detergents, whereas it should not, it is a low standard soap

Bathing Bars contain less TFM and more of these skin harming materials. Naturally they should be deemed inferior in Quality.  Dove is a bathing bar. check the label

Toilet Soaps should not contain detergent. SLS is the detergent in many shampoos

 

Some want to know testing procedure to check the TFM of Dove, Lux or Hamam. Shocking ! Do we have to know all these to buy. Throw it out if it is a Toilet Bar

 

Detergents: " When the Bureau of Indian Standards decided that detergents should carry a cautionary label mentioning that extended contact can cause skin irritation, industry representatives refused saying, that they weren't required to do so by law," says Wagle. 

He says that Camay soap sold abroad carry detailed information regarding its make-up, while the Indian product does not. Wagle points out that many Western Countries don't have laws determining product labeling or disclosure, but companies make disclosure out of self regulation......"

source: Page 162 of Business India, dated  July 28 to August 10, 1997

Refer ' Shun Shampoo' to know the difference between Soap and detergent

 

Desirable Toilet Soap Standard  - ........ Source Business World, July 13, 1993

 

"Even today, Soaps exported to Russia must have at least 80% Total Fatty matter"...[ Russia was nearly bankrupt after the collapse of the USSR. While India owed nothing at 1993 prices in Dollar Terms, Russia was our only ally before 1960 and for many more decades. Keeping the spirit of the agreement signed in early days, Indian Government agreed to pay as per earlier terms, but in kind - keeping a separate account in RBI and exporting goods to Russia. There were plenty of orders and all sorts of Goods including detergents were exported from Kandla port. Reference to Russia has to judged in that context.]

"Girish Mehta, director [ Management Services] of Nirma Soaps feels that Synthetic detergents should not be used in Soap. The ideal TFM level, he adds, should be around 76%." [ Nirma's lower priced  bath Soap has TFM content of 60% { as per the contents in their website on 6th December, 2005. } And Nirma talked about 76% TFM level to Business World in 1993 - and what they practised ? ]

Hindustan Unilever  -  the major culprit   -  The unethical, Cheap, Trust Breakers

charge

 

What a fall in TFM of these Soaps. Are not the buyers, who trusted these brands / company, were short changed ? Lever should know that it can affect the skins of the Users. If yes, it is cheating in a way. If not, why not convey the reduction?

Further down this page, from Godrej, you will get to know that high TFM is desirable

 

Repeat and 2 new offenses

 progress from 1993 to 1997 ?

source: Page 162 of Business India, dated  July 28 to August 10, 1997 - The Small Print.

"Despite those encouraging signs, the consumer is certainly not king as yet. When you walk into your local kirana store, you might have a wide choice of 20 odd brands of soaps. Rexona, perhaps? or Hamam? Not so fast.

Rexona is a toilet soap, but the small print on Hamam's packaging proclaims that it is a "Bathing Bar". Hindustan Lever, which makes both brands, uses vegetable oils to make Rexona" 

offense 2: Synthetic oils are not permitted in the manufacture of bathing soaps, according to the Drugs & Cosmetics Act. In Hamam, however synthetic oils (which de-grease the skin) are used. As they have used Synthetic Oils, it is an offense. Be it Soap or bars, it is used for bathing needs and safety regulation cannot differ from one to another. It is simple common sense

'The category does not exit under the Act, so there is no question of regulating it' says N.G Wagle, a technologist and chemist who is the chairman of the Consumer Guidance Society of India [CGSI].

Offense 3: The above statement does not amuse me. If a category does not exist, how can soap makers create one on their own ? The Drugs and Cosmetics department of various states / the State where these bars were made, looked the other way.

Repeat 3  - offense 4 - Liars

 

Business World     19-5-93    to     1-6-93:        page 57       'Cleaning up the Competition'

"DOVE  is  being  marketed  as an Alkaline Substance Free Soap  with  one fourth   Moisturiser for  highly sensitive skin.  Levers  even   arranged  a  live  pH test  to  demonstrate its Non alkaline nature. The  test showed  that  Soaps  like Camay, Godrej's Evita, Johnson & Johnson's and even Lever's own  Pears had high  alkaline  content". 

If you read the first line above, they are guilty of having let down Pears Soap users. They advertise on TV about pH tests / neutral soaps but they did not practice it themselves in 1993. [ Vim has a pH of 8.5 when I tested it in 2008 or so. The skin on the face is different from the skin on the head is illogical as it is unscientific ]

 

Repeat 3  - Dove - offense 5

Cheating / misguidance: Dove used to be advertised on TV in 1996 and 1997 as a high quality soap. Dove used to be imported from Dubai also. Bombay Customs stopped one consignment and demanded 'higher duty applicable to Cosmetics items'. Lever confessed to the Customs department that Dove is a Toilet bar, Convinced them and paid lesser duty to clear the consignment.

Are they not guilty of lying to the Public ?  Duty case details will be with Bombay customs and not relevant now / here

 

Hindustan Unilever, Food & Drugs Administration Department and others are guilty to varying degrees. The emphasis is more on Lever in this page because they misguide over 400 Million Indians with their Toilet Bars

1. If we accept Supreme Court's ruling, the above acts of Hindustan Unilever are against Public Interest

Contradictory statements to Public and Customs Department about Dove, abusing the public trust by lowering the quality of the soap, advising public about safety of near neutral [ neither acidic nor alkaline ] soap yet selling alkaline Pears, use of prohibited synthetic / petroleum oil in Hamam are all deliberate acts of misdeed.

2. Suppression of relevant fact is an offense is my feeling. The Cigarette Companies in US knew, with Research and Surveys, that Smoking can lead to / increases the chances of Cancer. They did not tell the Public. In a Class action suit, a US Court ordered the Cigarette Companies to pay / set aside 140 Billion US Dollars for treatment and other needs

I cannot even imagine that inferior Toilet Bars will not harm the skin. As stated above, Russians standard is above 80% TFM

3. The FDA should check the TFM level of Soaps sold by Lever in United States.

4. Mercenary approach: Toilet bars, with abrasives, will remove traces of Body oil / Sebum. With loss of the screening coat of oil, in India / tropical climates, people will sweat more to keep the body temperature constant. And they are brainwashed on TV, that Moisturisers are needed. With inferior bathing soap, one may buy one more product - Moisturiser

Again, with loss of oil and consequent deficit of stored heat energy, combined with the slavish ape the West, dry hair style and excess hair cleaning / shampooing, an artificial unwanted demand is loud mouthed in the name of Cold Cream / synthetic petroleum oil or wax

Moisturisers as well as Cold Creams are highly drummed up fancy products with limited functional value. With Toilet bars, some people may perceive the need for these 2 products - instead of one Toilet Soap, one buys 3 products. Lever's Sales can go up. [ Godrej's sales of dyes goes up by over 20% compounded annual growth - side effect of shampoo is premature greying]

5. Lever is an habitual offender. They are liars - lie to the public for pecuniary benefits. refer Unfair practices

Lever used 'violation of law', misrepresentation and unsubstantiated claim against Colgate before MRTPC. The same points can be used against Lever to nail them.

6. In 1993, for promoting Clinic Plus, the model used was a School going girl with Oily head. She was called, Chimpoo - the Cheapness. Around 1997, they changed the tune and said that their shampoo contains Coconut oil also - deliberate misguidance and contradiction

 

Additional Proof:  Are they guilty of fooling the Public ?   Yes 

 

1. "if the  Bureau of  Indian  Standards  (BIS)  implements its norms, nearly  80% of  the  Soaps  produced  in  the  country  each  year  [3.8 lakhs tonnes in 1992] would  be  declared Substandard and fail to qualify as Toilet Soap."....[ Business World, July 1993]

What is BIS, ISI or other standards, if it is not enforced / ensured for the benefit of the public ?

2. 'Godrej Soaps has always believed in providing its consumers with high quality products. The company has taken a conscious decision to manufacture & market only high TFM (total fatty matter) toilet soaps as against low TFM bathing bars which are being marketed by many FMCG companies in the Indian market. Godrej No.1 Sandal is, therefore, the only Sandal toilet soap in this price segment.'  [Godrej's website  News release dated 16-9-1999]

[ Dr. Godrej was the chairman of the Association in 1993 when Business World printed the sordid details. They were part of the association / toilet bar brigade in 1992. Dr. Godrej of Godrej Soaps, I recollect, is a doctorate in Chemistry and holds a patent for the manufacture one detergent. I think it is Linear Alkyl Benzene / LAB

3. I think Lever prevented Dettol Soap from using Red colour in their wrapper. Their argument before the Court was Lifebuoy has immense appeal amongst the Public and Red is associated with Lifebuoy. Court accepted the argument. Read it again.

By lowering the TFM of Lifebuoy, are they not guilty of letting down the Users who trusted them, as they admitted in Court ?

4. Lever prevented Ariel from using the term 'based on Natural products'. It was a false claim by P & G. Lever said in Madras High Court that they are misleading the Public with these phrases

Should not Lever apply the same principle for its own products first ? Devil quotes the Scriptures

 

Regulating Authorities

Business World    30-6-93  to 13-7-93      page 82          'Froth  without  Substance'

Indeed,  if the  Bureau of  Indian  Standards  (BIS)  implements its norms, nearly  80% of  the  Soaps  produced  in  the  country  each  year  [3.8 lakhs tonnes in 1992] would  be  declared Substandard and fail to qualify as Toilet Soap."......

 

India is a Nation of Gandhians. Many worship the Currency notes because of his Photo.

Delhi must be one rare city with too many beggars in designer clothes and air conditioned offices.

The number of poor beggars on Delhi streets, with torn clothes, must be less.

 

Standard of Soaps in India

Business World    30-6-93  to 13-7-93      page 82          'Froth  without  Substance'

." Most brands of Toilet Soap contain less 'Soap' than  five years ago and instead use more Detergent and other substances like Clay and Talc.  [ not a single toilet soap maker offered any explanation or rebuttal. I was a regular reader then ]

 ....." If the colourful advertisements on Television are to be believed, the toilet soaps of today are better than ever before. They smell better, look better  and contain substances,  our grandparents had  never  even heard of. In fact however, the average  toilet soap of today  may be inferior compared  with the toilet  soap of even a few years ago."....

'Surprisingly  however   the  1800   Crores  Toilet  Soap  industry  is  not  worried.  The  reason  is  that the same  BIS Technical Committee which set the earlier norms  also provided manufacturers a loop-hole in September last year [1992] when it created a new category of Soap called  'bathing bars' [ wonderful, is it not ?]

Even then, Soaps made between April to September 1992 were substandard if we look at the quote in the first section. They were neither Soaps nor Bathing Bars

Ratification by Government: In March this year[ 1993],  the Health  Ministry issued a Gazette notification making the quality norms mandatory for Toilet Soap manufacturers under the Drugs & Cosmetics Act. A final notification is expected soon. confusing ?

Instead of hauling up the manufacturers, the Government ratifies their actions in March 1993. Still that leaves a 6 months gap in 92-93. I do not know the status before 1992. The rules are bent to leave them free ? Not a bad job by the Association.

Why thieves cannot set a new standard for their activities like these companies who faced no punishments ?  related page  awake

Semantics: When an individual gives money in Cash or kind to another person to get some undue favour, it is normally called 'Corruption'. When an Association attempts to get those undue favours or manipulates things for the benefit of their members at the cost of others, it is called LOBBYING. There is not much corruption now in India or America - only Lobbying

Sunlight Soap:     Hindustan Lever: 1958 - What a fall ? 

I used to buy Sunlight Soap in 1957-58 for 25 paise for washing my clothes. I think it used to be 100 gms.  There will be a clear message, on the back of the wrapper I think, which would say something like this " Sunlight Soap is made out of safe ingredients. Rs 5000/- reward will be given to anyone who finds something harmful in the soap "

Sunlight Soap was a washing soap. It would easily remove coffee and other stains from eatables. Now in 2010, I cannot remove the routine stains with the so called quality / high priced detergents of Lever and P&G. The stain do not vanish with an extra additive. Occasionally, when I have the inclination, I use 'special chemicals' for stain removal.

Contrast the present standard of Toilet Soap / bar with an old Washing Soap. The term 'bar' was used for Tata Oil Mills 501 washing soap. It really used to come as a bar [ say 10 soaps ] without any outside wrapper. Shop keeper would cut a piece with butter knife

End Note

The Times of India, wrote to Colgate to elicit their views about the complaint of Hindustan Lever Limited.  Did they bother to write to the Toilet Soap manufacturers ? No [ refer unfair practices  ]

There could be umpteen excuses. But it is clear that sub standard  toilet Soaps is not a News! And the newspapers / press, are the assumed safeguards to the Public in a democracy !

 

	Errors and Omissions exempted.  If there be any unwanted oversights, mistake in content or suggestions for improvements,  I will be thankful for your feedback
	Personal website of R. Ranganathan M.Sc., [ MBA - IIMA]    Main / original content: around 1997: last minor modification, Jan 12, 2012