Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 39   Go Down

Author Topic: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream  (Read 444010 times)

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #435 on: November 20, 2012, 07:21:34 PM »


Incidentally, just by coincidence, AE graduated from Hyde Park High School in 1916 while living in Chicago. Hyde Park is 7.3 miles from Dr. Berry's offices as listed in 1893.  The C.H. Berry Co. headquarters was later opened at 2975 Michigan Avenue, only a 4.6-mile walk from Hyde Park.

I do not take any of this to be more than a coincidence.  It wouldn't establish anything of substance; it's just curious.


Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR

And another coincidence, MY father also graduated from Hyde Park High School, in 1918, and I grew up just 1.2 miles from there! What should we make of that?

gl
Logged

Chris Austin

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #436 on: November 21, 2012, 04:56:40 AM »



 What should we make of that?

gl

Do you have freckles? ;)
Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #437 on: December 12, 2012, 09:11:05 PM »

However, Given that a 2 ounce skat bottle does match in size and markings and was produced in the millions in ww2 jungle kits, perhaps testing the chemicals of the artifact and skat would be smart.

The lab test results comparing Skat to the residual remnants found on artifact 2-8-s-2a (the Campana Italian Balm bottle fragment) and to Skat's ingredient list is attached. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #438 on: December 13, 2012, 04:17:11 AM »

Not wanting to re read the 34 pages, can someone (Joe?) please summerise why this analysis was carried out and to what purpose.

Thanks :)

Those who stated the Skat should be tested were correct.  I did not want to accept that at first because I believed myself to have been correct about my hypothesis and lab tests cost money.  Whether or not I was correct in the end made no difference.  The Skat is thus far, based on its likeness of base stamp to the artifact, the most reasonable alternative to Campana Italian Balm that has been proposed.  The research that proposed it was done in good faith and is a credit to this forum that produced it.  Because it is reasonable and done in good faith, until tested it would always be a spear to hurl into the heart of the hypothesis the bottle fragment was Campana Italian Balm, whether or not the artifact actually was, or was Skat, and whether or not my scientific rationales for dismissing Skat as skat were true.  In short, in the end the only justification I had for not testing it was my own fear - small but real - that those proposing it might be correct.  I owed it to this forum to own up to this and do the experiment that it urgently requested.  And so I have. 

Those who doubt a hypothesis or challenge an idea are many things.  They may be obnoxious at times in the methods that they choose to employ in argument.  This might mean they are boorish, but it doesn't make them necessarily bad scientists. 

Richard Feynman does a better job of summarizing:

"It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition."

The entire speech is here. I apologize if I've used too many words for what is really a very simple idea.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR






« Last Edit: December 14, 2012, 04:30:41 PM by Joe Cerniglia »
Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #439 on: December 13, 2012, 10:27:43 PM »

Jeff, thank you for the kind words. I would agree that Skat Insect Repellent, based on the report, can effectively be ruled out as the identity of 2-8-s-2a. 

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Another DES PAT 85925 bottle on ebay
« Reply #440 on: January 22, 2013, 11:35:51 AM »

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WW-II-Vintage-Bottle-of-Insect-Repellent-DES-PAT-85925-MINT-/321056894780
Either no dot, or dot by the number 21 - hard to tell.

Also, saw a familiar shape in a Ronsonol bottle advert on a vintage history website.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/bb01fb6f58df6a57ec0c4b9868cb4cac/tumblr_mh0em7G8f21qdmciqo1_1280.png

Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #441 on: January 23, 2013, 10:38:15 PM »

Nice job, Jeff, and I know these bottles aren't all that easy to locate. 

Still, the repellent bottle you've linked, so designated by the eBay seller, has no label, so we can only take his word for it. If tested, how would you know what you were trying to match?  Find a bottle with a label and we can continue that discussion.

The data thus far supports the notion that nearly all World War II insect repellents were made with dimethyl phthalate, either mixed or straight.  It's a durable substance and does show up with spectroscopy.  No dimethyl phthalate was found on 2-8-s-2a.  It doesn't add up to insect repellent, as the report from the lab shows.

The Ronsonol product looks from the ad to have been packaged in the right kind of bottle, but I see no surviving examples.  Lighter fluids are made of combustible fluid and do not correspond with Dr. Mass' finding of lanolin, linseed or rapeseed oil, and gum tragacanth.

The counter-argument that the Coast Guardsmen brought hand lotion is more probable than the one stating the artifact was lighter fluid or insect repellent, but I consider both arguments to have low probability in fact, and not well supported by Occam.

(By the way, for those who might just be tuning in, these latest posts refer to the lotion bottle, not Dr. Berry's Freckle Ointment.)

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR


« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 08:36:24 PM by Joe Cerniglia »
Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Campana Vanity Size
« Reply #442 on: January 24, 2013, 12:41:57 PM »

This seems to be an example of the vanity size bottle that Campana advertised starting in the mid 1930s.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1932-CAMPANAS-ITALIAN-LIP-BALM-/310572927303





Logged

Jeff Carter

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Campana Dreskin
« Reply #443 on: January 24, 2013, 12:59:35 PM »

A bottle of Campana Dreskin - The Original Skin Invigorator:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1934-CAMPANAS-DRESKIN-SKIN-INVIGORATOR-GOOD-H-KEEPING-/310572927304
with advertising materials showing how marketed.





Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: Campana Dreskin
« Reply #444 on: January 24, 2013, 01:32:40 PM »

A bottle of Campana Dreskin - The Original Skin Invigorator:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-BOX-BOTTLE-1934-CAMPANAS-DRESKIN-SKIN-INVIGORATOR-GOOD-H-KEEPING-/310572927304
with advertising materials showing how marketed.

Campana Dreskin was one of my first guesses for the identity of the lotion bottle in late 2010.  The product does not seem to me to have sold in as much quantity as Campana Italian Balm, which is often billed as the company's number one selling item. Dreskin seems to have been an astringent, similar to witch hazel, which dries the skin.  You'll notice the label on the bottle in the eBay listing says it is 50% alcohol.  I don't think the artifact bottle is Campana Dreskin because lanolin, a skin moisturizer and not an astringent, was found on the artifact bottle.   Gum tragacanth, which was also found on the artifact bottle, also seems an unlikely ingredient for a "skin refreshant," which is not meant to adhere to skin, as gum tragacanth does, but rather to evaporate quickly. Even if the bottle was Dreskin, this was a product aimed primarily at women, as the stylized nude silhouette in the background of the ad on page 125 of the illustrated history of Batavia would suggest.  It's an unlikely selection for Coast Guardsmen, British overseers, Tuvaluan and i-Kiribati colonists.

The Campana Dreskin bottle does seem about the right size, though.  Thanks for the balanced view.

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
« Last Edit: January 25, 2013, 11:25:20 AM by Joe Cerniglia »
Logged

Randy Conrad

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 314
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #445 on: January 24, 2013, 05:19:35 PM »

While were on the subject of bottles, I thought I'd bring up the freckle cream artifact jar with a possible find. Depending upon how you look at it compared to how I looked at it. Anyway, several nites ago I was messing around with this new software Fast Capture and having alot of fun. I wanted to see actually what the newer freckle cream jar looked like under negative color. As it turns out I saw more than I thought I would. As I went further, I placed it then into grayscale color and it enhanced it a bit more. In the pictures below, hopefully most of you will see what I am seeing. As I've looked at this numerous times, I've somewhat drawn my own conclusion that this indeed is a unique jar, and yes according to studies done there was traces of mercury inside the jar. This jar has markings on the front and inside the jar. Some of those markings may indicate the symbol RX Mug (which you will see on the front of the jar). This jar was found at a campsite, which may have belonged to a castaway and possibly Earhart herself. This jar may be that of a RX Mug used by a doctor or pharmacist in the early 1900's to mix freckle cream ointment (possibly by Dr. Berry himself). Which later was used by Hazel Atlas for future milkglass jar sales of its kind. Anyway, most of you will agree that this is a unique find and is not a final conclusion that this is a jar used by Earhart. But, does make you take notice that its kinda of odd that a jar of its caliber would end up on an island so many thousand miles from the U.S. on a tiny remote atoll of Niku. Anyway, would love to hear your feedback on these pictures...thanks@
Logged

Randy Conrad

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 314
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #446 on: January 24, 2013, 05:35:17 PM »

In the freckle2.jpg you will see what appears as follows:

(1). Shield or possible Rx Mug
(2). Face of a character
(3). The number 5.
(4). Heading or title of the product
(5). Possible compund instrument or microscope

In the freckle3.jpg you will see what appears as follows

Note: This appears on the inside of the jar from a top view of the jar.

(1). Lettering (A E N)
(2). Other letters or words above.


In speaking with my girlfriend (who is an lpn nurse), she told me that its a possibility that Amelia may have made her own freckle cream ointment or drugs in this "flying laboratory". She told me that the compound instrument is what they use to ground up the drugs or whatever. Remember, Amelia at one time earlier in her teens did work for a pharmacist.
Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Lotion poll
« Reply #447 on: January 25, 2013, 12:19:51 PM »

I have a question.  I'm curious to know whether male forum members own a personal bottle of hand lotion.  You may have used such a product at some point in the past but be hesitant to admit it.  Personally, my moisturizing products start and end with a little Chapstik and I do not use aftershave. If I did use aftershave, a product billed as a hand lotion wouldn't be my first choice.  There is a bottle of hand lotion on the locker room sink at the gym where I work out, but I've never seen any men using it.  Just curious.  If there are no replies to this post, that might also be a data point in itself.  I know there are still honest doubts among some that 2-8-s-2a was hand lotion, but putting that aside, the question is valid for exploration. Do you own hand lotion?

Joe Cerniglia
TIGHAR #3078 ECR
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 347
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #448 on: January 25, 2013, 12:55:44 PM »

I have been known to use a little hand lotion after working with water or having to do a serious washing of my hands with gas or something, but I use the one my wife keeps by the sink.  But I do a little bottle I threw in my glove box from a hotel room (free), but I can't remember the last time I used it.   And that probably doesn't count as a purchase.....does it?   
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
Logged

John B. Shattuck

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Dr. Berry's Freckle Cream
« Reply #449 on: January 25, 2013, 02:14:12 PM »

Don't own one and can't remember last time I used any...

Just call me "rough hands" I guess.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 39   Go Up
 

Copyright 2018 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP