Natural non-preservative preservative.. active against Candida Albicans? - Cosmetic Science Talk

Natural non-preservative preservative.. active against Candida Albicans?

edited April 20 in Formulating
I got USP51 results back for a sunscreen formula and it failed (barely) against Candida Albicans. Any ideas of the gentlest ideally natural option that aren't sun sensitizing? 

It seems Lauric Acid could be an excellent choice here, showing great killing ability of C.Albicans at only 0.05% concentration in-vivo. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC90807/ - a few x more potent that Capric Acid which I'm already using.

Another option could be Glyceryl Caprylate Caprate.

Thoughts?



Comments

  • what's your formula, what's the pH, and what preservative(s) are you currently using?
    UK based formulation chemist. Strongest subjects: hair styling, hair bleaches, hair dyes (oxidative and non-oxidative) I know some stuff about: EU regulations, emulsions (O/W and W/O), toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoos, other toiletries
  • You may want to call Technical Services at Lincoln Fine Ingredients since the preservatives you are citing are right down their alley.

    http://www.lincolnfineingredients.com/


    markfuller@microformulation.com Microformulation.com Microformulation Cosmetic Consulting provides Custom Formulations for both large Commercial accounts as well as smaller entrepreneurs. We can provide Naturally compliant Formulations under the NSF, NPA, Whole Foods and USDA Organic Certifications.
  • @Bill_Toge Formula is basically a silane coated zinc oxide sunscreen with caprylic/capric triglycerides emulsified by olivem 1000, stabilized by xanthan gum and glyceryl stearate. Currently using no preservatives, will be packaged in airtight bottle, pH 7. 

    @Microformulation thanks will do, I'll let ya'll know what they say.
  • You may also want to look at the Inolex Spectrastat line. Of interest, on April 25th they are doing a webinar on the Hurdle Technique;

    https://vts.inxpo.com/scripts/Server.nxp?LASCmd=AI:4;F:QS!10100&ShowKey=39449

    I get a bit leary of the term preservative free when it is applied to non-standard preservatives that are in fact exerting a preservation function. Preservation is part of a well-designed Formulation and I dislike the temptation to try and make this claim behind a marketing bias. In my experience the bias against preservatives as a whole is minor and in fact, any bias is directed towards individual classes such as parabens and formaldehyde donors. If it is preserving, it is properly a preservative. Like the term Chemical, the term Preservative has a clear definition.

    markfuller@microformulation.com Microformulation.com Microformulation Cosmetic Consulting provides Custom Formulations for both large Commercial accounts as well as smaller entrepreneurs. We can provide Naturally compliant Formulations under the NSF, NPA, Whole Foods and USDA Organic Certifications.
  • @Microformulation I get what you're saying, but you can call it preservative free and still explain that it contains (natural) ingredients acting preservatives that are not classified as (synthetic) preservatives right under that claim, you could also include the lab name and log # of the challenge test. To me that's the best way to go about it.

    Talked to Lincoln and waiting for their docs, their MOQ is 40 lb BTW.

  • Well, I hate the word natural. I won't go into depth since I am sure I have covered it before ad nauseum.

    Remember "natural" versus "synthetic" is not an analogy of "safe" versus "dangerous."  I know the market urges us to endorse that, but I refuse as a hardcore pure "Scientist." Be a Scientist first, then let the marketing be written in such a way that doesn't compromise your integrity. That is just me on my soapbox. I will say that this stance has not limited any of my product lines. Several have grown to multi-million dollar accounts which are in larger retailers. One was recently bought out and that client has effectively "retired." DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU NEED TO PANDER AT THE EXPENSE OF THE SCIENCE.

    I probably wouldn't post the lab name (they may not approve of the publicity) and when you provide too many details it either goes over the head of the client or it invites way to many questions. Years ago I used to share my stability protocols with clients and believe me it lead to many naive questions that took up way too much time.

    I will put that out there. No need to respond as it is off topic. I think you will (as many have) evolve to this sort of view point over time independently.
    markfuller@microformulation.com Microformulation.com Microformulation Cosmetic Consulting provides Custom Formulations for both large Commercial accounts as well as smaller entrepreneurs. We can provide Naturally compliant Formulations under the NSF, NPA, Whole Foods and USDA Organic Certifications.
  • I have always had this point of view.

    Devil is in the details, synthetics can be safer than naturals and vice versa. But if you can use fewer additional ingredients that only function to preserve a product then that's good design and possibly good for long term safety as long as the preservation is robust.

    I'm all with you on retaining integrity in your marketing, which I think you can do whilst ticking off some marketing boxes. Most people don't care either, and just want something that either makes their skin feel nice or in the case of skin diseases makes the disease go away ASAP.

    Details such as lab name can be subtly shared for those who are looking if the lab is fine with it, really a question of good graphic design where you have your information hierarchy sorted out. Not something that would go on the front packaging. At the very least I'd say it's challenge tested; people are wisening up about the risks of naive preservative free formulas.
  • #zinc Why don't you raise concentration of preservative being used unless you are at maximum levels.Logarithmic report on growth should provide clue --had similar problem which doing the latter made it easy.
  • @DRBOB@VERDIENT.BIZ The lowest hanging fruit here is to add ~1% Lauric Acid and have that tested.

    If that doesn't work try adding 1% Glyceryl Caprylate Caprate instead. Increasing the amount of caprylic/capric acid could also work.


  • edited April 22
    personally, I've always taken the view that the term 'self-preserving' is more factually accurate, and less likely to land you in legal hot water than 'preservative free'

    also, I understand glyceryl laurate is equally effective as an antimicrobial, and less likely to make your product foam than lauric acid (that said, I've never used it personally, so take this with a pinch of salt)
    UK based formulation chemist. Strongest subjects: hair styling, hair bleaches, hair dyes (oxidative and non-oxidative) I know some stuff about: EU regulations, emulsions (O/W and W/O), toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoos, other toiletries
Sign In or Register to comment.