Are you familiar with Instructables.com? It’s a website where people share their methods for making different things. They have a number listings for different cosmetic products and most of the techniques that I found were not too good.

But I like this one for creating your own fragrance.

Make your own perfume

This moisturizer formula however…not so good.

How to make a basic moisturizer

Still, this is an interesting site and could provide you with some inspiration for making your next formulation.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Cosmeceuticals

I saw this interesting review study about cosmeceuticals. The article goes through and looks at the best scientific evidence available for various cosmeceuticals including…

1. Retinoids
2. Kinetin
3. Niacinamide
4. Soy phospholipids
5. Green tea polyphenols

Their conclusion, all 5 of these cosmeceuticals fall short of the proof standards for efficacy as proposed by Albert Kligman (<–famous skin researcher). Of the 5 examined, only Niacinamide was closest to meeting the Kligman standards.  But that’s not what I wanted to discuss.  More important is how cosmeceuticals should be vetted for figuring out whether they are worth including in your formulations or not.

Kligman standards

Albert Kligman was one of the most famous skin researchers in the United States. He was also the guy who coined the term ‘cosmeceuticals’.

He also posed three questions that you should ask about any cosmeceutical product that claims a beneficial physiological effect.

Skin penetration

1. Can the active ingredient penetrate the stratum corneum (SC) and be delivered in a high enough concentration to have an effect on the target in skin?

If enough of the ingredient can’t penetrate the skin then it is not going to have an effect. This is where most cosmeceutical ingredients fail.

Theoretical effect

2. Does the active ingredient have a known specific biochemical mechansim of action in human skin cells?

It’s not enough to penetrate the skin. There has to be some specific known target that the cosmeceutical is going to affect. If not, the ingredient probably won’t have a noticeable effect. Things like fruit stem cells or natural extracts fail in this area.

Clinical proof

3. Are there peer reviewed, double-blind, placebo-controlled, statistically siginficant clincial trials to substantiate efficacy claims?

And here is where almost all cosmeceutical ingredients fail. Practically no one publishes or even conducts studies of this nature and magnitude. It is probably too expensive or too risky (in case the ingredient doesn’t work) to do so.

Cosmetic chemists and cosmeceuticals

As a cosmetic chemist, you need to remain skeptical of efficacy claims of ingredients and require your suppliers to have answers to each of these three questions. They probably won’t have the answers you seek but if you start asking, they may start conducting the studies.

Another installment of our Dissecting the Label series. In these blog posts we dissect a lable and discuss what each of the ingredients do in the formula and ponder why they are added. Last time we did a skin self-tanning prodcut. This time we’ll look at a hair conditioner. Organix Conditioner

Organix LOI

Here’s the ingredient list.

Aqua/Water/Eau (Water), Cetyl Alcohol, Behentrimonium Methosulfate, Parfum, Cetearyl Alcohol, Cetearyl Glucoside, Glyceryl Stearate, Glycerin, Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethicone, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil (Jojoba), DMDM Hydantoin, Panthenol, Silk Amino Acids, Cocos Nucifera Extract (Coconut), Albumen, Cocos Nucifera Oil (Coconut), Hydrolyzed Milk Protein, Tocopheryl Acetate (Vitamin E) (Vitamin E), Tetrasodium EDTA, Methylchloroisothiazolinone, Methylisothiazolinone, Coumarin

The 1% Line

Our first challenge as a cosmetic chemist is to figure out where the 1% line might be. This can give us a clue as to what are the most important ingredients in the formula.

In this product there are two likely spots for the 1% line. Either right after the Behentrimonium Methosulfate or after the Dimethicone. My gut belief is that it is right after the Dimethicone. They certainly aren’t adding the jojoba oil at levels above 1%. I’m just a little surprised that the Parfum (Fragrance) would be used at a level above 1% but Cetearyl Alcohol most likely is so that’s what I’m going with.

You can see that figuring out this 1% line is not a precise science.

What the ingredients do

As always, we’ll group common ingredients and describe what they do.

Emulsion ingredients

These ingredients make the formula look and feel appealing.

Water – The solvent. Probably makes up 85-90% of this formula.
Cetyl Alcohol – Opacifying / emulsifier
Cetearyl Alcohol – Opacifying / emulsifier
Cetearyl Glucoside – Emulsifier
Glyceryl Stearate – Emulsifier

Conditioning ingredients

These are the things that make the formula work.  It’s why people use the product.

Behentrimonium Methosulfate – Hair conditioning. For anti-static, detangling. Makes hair easier to comb.
Dimethicone – Hair conditioning for shine & slickness
Cyclopentasiloxane – Hair conditioning
Glycerin – Some moisturizing effect but likely rinses down the drain.

Claims & Puffery ingredients

These ingredients are added to make the product sound more appealing.  If these raw materials were left out of the formula, it is unlikely that anyone would notice a difference in performance.

Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil
Panthenol – Some evidence this could effect hair but I remain skeptical
Silk Amino Acids
Cocos Nucifera Extract (Coconut)
Albumen
Cocos Nucifera Oil (Coconut)
Hydrolyzed Milk Protein
Tocopheryl Acetate (Vitamin E)
Coumarin

Preservative system

Since microbes can grow in the environment created in this formula, preservatives have to be added to ensure they don’t.  This conditioner uses two classic preservatives that have a broad spectrum of organisms that they will kill.

DMDM Hydantoin – Preservative
Tetrasodium EDTA – Helps to losen cell walls & make preservatives more effective.
Methylchloroisothiazolinone – Preservative
Methylisothiazolinone – Preservative

Fragrance

Parfum – In US this should be labeled Fragrance.

This is a pretty standard conditioner formula with lots of claims ingredients added to give the Marketing department something to talk about. Using both silicones and a cationic surfactant is a good idea as it provides a nice effect that the ingredients separately can’t achieve. Overall, a nice formula.

We received this question here at Chemists Corner central and thought it would be a good one to write an article about.

“Why do the raw material suppliers recommend the combination of presevatives versus using them alone…..for ex: why do the manufacturers recommend a combination of sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate rather than using them individually….

Why you put preservatives in cosmetics

With all the bad press about chemicals used to preserve cosmetics you might wonder why companies don’t just stop using preservatives.  Well, the reason is that cosmetics that contain preservatives are safer than ones that don’t contain preservatives.  This is because disease-causing microorganisms can multiply at exponential rates in cosmetics if there are no chemicals in there to stop them.

And if the consumer is putting a dollop of microbe laden skin lotion on their body, they are bound to contract a disease.  It is just not smart to use unpreserved cosmetics.

The other reason to include preservatives is that when microbes grow in your cosmetic product they can produce foul smelling odors and strange colors.  Consumers just aesthetically do not want to use bacterial contaminated products.  It’s a bit like the same reason people don’t want to eat moldy bread.

What do preservatives do

Cosmetic formulas have all the key factors needed for microbial growth including water, nutrients, and energy.  At a suitable pH and temperature, it will be like a microbial cocktail party.  Preservatives stop growth by killing cells and spores (usually by disrupting cell membranes) or by making the system hostile to growth.  See this article for more about cosmetic preservatives.

Why you need multiple preservatives

So that brings us to the question that started it all, why use multiple cosmetic preservatives?  Basically it’s because some single preservatives do not kill a big enough range of microorganisms.  As a cosmetic formulator you need to ensure that your preservative system will kill any bacterial, mold, or fungi that the formula might encounter.  Since you don’t know what will be encountered you have to plan for every possibility (or at least as many as you can).

There are some preservatives that are able to kill a wide range of microbes (e.g. Alcohol, Parabens, Formaldehyde donors).  That is why these ingredients are so popular with formulators.  Other ingredients like Sodium Benzoate or Potassium Sorbate are only effective against certain types of microbes.  They are more active against yeasts and molds but have a lower activity against bacteria.    One way to compensate for the ineffectiveness of one compound is to include another compound that has the ability to kill other organisms.  By combining preservatives, you increase the spectrum of microbes that your formula can withstand.

Of course, if you used parabens and formaldehyde donors you could be more confident in the effectiveness of your preservative system.  However, for marketing reasons these compounds must be avoided.  It makes your job as a cosmetic formulator a bit harder.

This is a guest post by Gary Neudahl.

In personal care, there are cosmetics and there are toiletries. What’s the difference? In general, a cosmetic is intended to beautify the body; a toiletry is intended to care for the body. Among toiletries, let’s take a look at Antiperspirant Deodorants (APDOs in industry shorthand) sticks.

APDOs are made with an astringent substance (typically an acidic aluminum-based salt) that, when applied to the underarms, reduces perspiration and concurrently inhibits microbial growth for reduced malodor generation. Sticks, gels, soft solids, roll-ons, pads and sprays are typical product forms. They are usually scented for additional malodor protection.

APDO stick formula

Here’s the typical composition of an APDO stick:

Ingredients

The most commonly used volatile carrier is Cyclopentasiloxane, a cyclic silicone fluid that evaporates about one-sixth as rapidly as water, with virtually no cooling effect due to its low heat of vaporization.

The typical co-gellant is Stearyl Alcohol, with a specific chainlength distribution (mainly C18) that inhibits stick crystallinity.

A commonly employed active ingredient is Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly, which provides good efficacy.

Nonvolatile carriers, which contribute to product skin feel and also reduce or prevent a whitening effect on skin, may include mineral oil, vegetable oils, and/or esters.

The most commonly used gellant is Hydrogenated Castor Oil. It is not fully hydrogenated (to convert unsaturated Ricinoleic Acid moieties to saturated Hydroxystearic Acid moieties), both to control melt point and further inhibit crystallinity. Due to its residual unsaturated content, antioxidants may be added to extend shelf life.

An emulsifier and/or solubilizer may be used to help incorporate the fragrance and to extend shelf life. It also helps with removal of the product from skin during cleansing and from clothing during laundering. PEG-8 Distearate is such an emulsifier that is commonly used in APDO stick formulations.

Feel modifiers include particulates such as corn starches and talc, which are added to improve product aesthetics during and after application.

What about “label copy” ingredients? They are ingredients that are added for marketing- rather than performance- based purposes, to increase the likelihood of consumer trial and satisfaction. They are among the hooks that snare consumer interest, although product performance, and scent, are what determine repurchase intent.

Living in America, I was raised to wash my hair every day. In 2005, while developing a new shampoo and conditioner formula for the mass market brand, I took it to an extreme and actually believe that I had the “most shampooed head in America.” That year I lathered my locks over 1500 times.

It was a little surprising to me to learn that daily shampooing was not the norm when shampoos first came out. This shampoo story by NPR (I’m a proud card carrying member by the way) tells how shampoos used to be a once a month activity. In 1908, an article in the New Yorker suggested people could safely shampoo every two weeks. Over time marketers convinced consumers in America that daily shampooing was best. It was pushed really hard in the 70′s and became the norm by the 80′s. Nice going P&G.

Shampooing every day

Well, it turns out that shampooing every day is more than people actually need. Dermatologists recommend washing your hair 2 or 3 times a week. I don’t know how they come to that number as it’s really just a matter of personal preference as to how often you shampoo. There are no health reasons to wash you hair more than once a month. However, most people are not going to like the way once a month shampooing feels.

The cosmetic industry would rather people wash their hair more frequently because that means more product will be sold. However, from a sustainability standpoint this is excessive. I don’t see how companies dedicated to producing sustainable products can justify encouraging consumers to continue to use this amount of product. Will we see big companies start pushing for people to use less product? Maybe.

Sustainability Strategy

As a cosmetic formulator, you might consider trying to make formulas that can create effects that last longer. This could ultimately reduce the amount of product used and support the sustainability goals of your company. At the very least, this could create an interesting marketing position for a new company. Are you looking for your Purple Cow positioning? This could be it.

Yesterday, I wrote about what makes a good scientific study and how you can prevent fooling yourself. The key was to remain skeptical and create studies that are blinded.

Here is a video which shows just how one can be done. Granted this video is not about selecting a cosmetic ingredient level. However, it does illustrate the proper way to do a scientific study.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-drpViV5LSw

Here’s what they do.

1. Start with a hypothesis. In the video, the hypothesis is that people with different immune systems will be more attractive to each other than people with similar immune systems.

2. Figure out a way to test the hypothesis. There are a number of implications of this hypothesis that can be tested. In this video, they look at the relationship between natural odor preference and genetic makeup.
In the video, the hypothesis is that a woman’s natural odor will be prefered by a man based on their mutual genetic composition. If the hypothesis is correct, the man should pick the woman who has the least common genetic immune system.

3. Do a blinded test. The evaluator is unaware of which sample is which so he is blinded and therefore, unbiased. Of course, this isn’t a perfectly blinded test because the evaluator does have some information about the study (like why he should pick a difference). A better study would have been to have evaluators that are completely unaware of the purpose of smelling the t-shirts.

However, in cosmetic formulating it’s rare that you could use unaware panelists to help in this way.

This study is a bit simplified and for real science you need to be more rigorous (e.g. have a lot more panelists) but overall, this type of study is a nice example of how you should create studies for evaluating new raw materials in your cosmetic formulas.

In yesterday’s post we talked about cosmetic claims ingredients and why they are used at low levels. In today’s post we’ll describe a process by which you can evaluate ingredients that might have some effectiveness.

How to not fool yourself

Everyone has things that they believe. Often these beliefs are not reached through rational means. You may have heard something from your mother when you were a child and you never questioned whether it was true or not. They don’t call them old-wives tales for nothing. You also might hold beliefs about things because you want them to be true. Many people want to believe that things that occur in nature are superior than those created from petroleum in the lab. But is it true? As a cosmetic chemist you are best served by focusing on what is actually true instead of what you want to be true.

So, how do you avoid fooling yourself about whether an ingredient should be used at a high level or not?  Try this approach.

Step 1 - Begin by being skeptical of any ingredient.  If you can’t prove that an ingredient should be in your formula or not, leave it out (or put it in at claims levels).  Forget about the proof given to you by raw material suppliers or what you’ve read in literature.  Begin with the assumption that the ingredient will not work in your formula.

Step 2 - Test the ingredient.  But don’t just stop there. If the story of an ingredient appeals to you, by all means test it. You can do a triangle test, a paired comparison, a simple with and without comparison, or any number of different types of product evaluation tests. Just be sure to begin them with the assumption that the ingredient will have no effect. Be genuinely surprised if it does. Also, be sure to do these tests in a blinded fashion and compare them to controls. Without these steps, the evaluations you do are subject to your own biases.

Step 3 – Repeat your test. Once you’ve tested an ingredient and are convinced that you notice a difference, give it to other people (ideally your consumers) and see if they can tell any difference. It does no good for you alone to sense differences. If your consumers can’t notice differences the ingredient may not be worth including.

Step 4 – Test different levels. If you continue to find differences noticed even by the consumers who are using your products, excellent.  You are on your way to a functional discovery.  The next step is to figure out the range of levels in which the ingredient works.  Try to double the level.  Do you get double the results?  Cut the level in half.  Do the effects drop?  If there really is an effect, you should notice a difference when you use different levels.

Step 5 – Remain skeptical.  Even after all your testing it is still possible that you could be wrong or you’ve somehow fooled yourself.  It is very difficult to discover something new so you need to always remain a little skeptical of your discoveries.  This is probably the most difficult of all the steps but it is critical.

As cosmetic chemists we should always strive to make the best products we can and to only include ingredients that actually show some demonstrable benefit. You will undoubtedly have to include non-functional ingredients for claims purposes but you should always know your formulas and what is really doing something.

Happy formulating!

One of the things that people find surprising when they first enter the cosmetic formulating business is that many of the feature ingredients have very little effect.  I distinctly remember the look on my colleague’s face when she first discovered that the expensive, salon-only brand of hair care products that she religiously spent extra money on used “puffery” ingredients to make the products sound more appealing.  A moment like this is something that nearly all cosmetic chemist and formulators will experience.

Claims Ingredients

We’ve previously talked about cosmetic claims ingredients.  Essentially, these are ingredients included in formulas to support the marketing story.  They are often natural sounding ingredients or a made-up scientific term that is supposed to connote superiority over standard products.  While they are not essential to the function of the product, they are essential to creating a product that sells.  Consumers would just rather buy a body wash that contains some natural moisturizer rather than a synthetic polymer.

Formulating with claims ingredients

So, what do formulators do?

They create the best working product that they can and then spike the formula with whatever ingredient will make a good marketing story.  Incidentally, the phrase “spike the formula” means…

to put enough of a material in the formula to be able to claim that it is in there without significantly affecting the price or stability of the product.

This means claims ingredients are put in formulas at 0.5%, 0.1%, or as low as 0.0001%.  As long as you legitimately add an ingredient to a formula, you can talk about it in your advertising and on your label.  Granted you have to stick to factual information, but if you add 0.0001% of an ingredient in your formula, it’s in there.  This means that any laboratory proven benefit of the ingredient probably won’t ever be realized in the formula.

Reasons for non-functional levels

There are a few reasons that cosmetic chemists do not put claims ingredients in formulas at high levels.

1. They are expensive.  These ingredients are so expensive that you can’t realistically make a mass market product that has a high level.  Consider an ingredient like Ribonucleic acid.  This ingredient can cost $90 a pound or more.  So, if you added it to your formula at a 1% level, you’ve added $0.90 per pound to the formula.  In an 8oz bottle of lotion, that is 45 cents per bottle just for this one ingredient.  Add to that the cost of the rest of the ingredients and the formula cost for your single bottle can get to over $3 per bottle.  Then add packaging costs, production costs, marketing, distribution costs and the price of your lotion with RNA is just too expensive to be competitive with mass market products.

So, it is highly unlikely that any mass market product will contain functional levels of these claims ingredients.

2. There is little evidence they work.  Some ingredients are known to have no functional effect but are included in formulas because they make compelling stories to consumers.  I’ll leave it to you to figure out which ingredients are like this.  But there are some ingredients that suppliers will bring to you with lots of studies demonstrating effectiveness.  Things like UV blockers for hair, collagen stimulators for skin, or anti-aging ingredient that are supposed to reverse aging.  Unfortunately, for most of these ingredients the studies that demonstrate effectiveness are poorly designed, not blinded, not tested against proper controls or done under unrealistic laboratory conditions.  There is little evidence that including ingredients like natural extracts, even at high levels, will lead to a formula to performs noticeably better.

This might sound cynical but I am certainly open to being shown to be wrong.  It simply requires a well designed double blind effectiveness study.  If an ingredient can be shown to provide superior results under these conditions, I’d happily recommend its use at higher levels.

3. Consumers don’t really notice.  Perhaps the most significant reason that ingredients like these are used at low levels is because almost no one notices if they are not.  It’s possible that you as the formulator will notice.  Over time, you should enhance your ability to differentiate between two formulas.  You should be highly sensitive to even minute differences.  But your consumer will not be trained as such.  Consumers barely notice the difference between formulas that are obviously different.  If your consumer doesn’t notice whether an ingredient is in the formula or not, it makes logical sense to reduce it to a low level.

Functional Levels?

When you learn that this is going on, it can be hard not to become cynical.  Indeed, many a cosmetic formulator becomes cynical about the technologies put into formulations.  However, I have always tried to refrain from being cynical.  Instead, I encourage all formulas to simply be skeptical of the feature ingredients used in products.  If there is some good evidence that you should use an ingredient at a high level, then you should do that.  However, you need to be certain that there is some noticeable benefit to your consumers.

Just because we want something to be true doesn’t mean it is true.

In tomorrow’s post, we’ll describe how you can ensure that you are not fooling yourself with your ingredient choices.

On one of my other blogs (The Beauty Brains) we do a series where we look at the ingredients on a cosmetic label and write about what they do. I don’t know why it never occurred to me to do the same on this blog about cosmetic science. So, here is a new series. We’ll take a look at labels of random cosmetics and dissect what each ingredient does and ponder why it was added.

Today’s product will be Jergens Natural Glow. I should note that I haven’t personally worked on this product or any of the future products that we will dissect here. This analysis is strictly based on my knowledge of cosmetic chemistry and formulation.

Jergens LOI

First, we list the LOI in the order presented.

Water, Glycerin, Cetearyl Alcohol, Ceteareth 20, Mineral Oil (Paraffinum Liquidum), Petrolatum, Dihydroxyacetone, Ethylhexyl Isononanoate, Tocopherol (Natural Vitamin E), Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Oil (Fruit), Avena Sativa (Oat) Kernel Extract, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Calendula (Calendula Officinalis) Flower Extract, Persea Gratissima (Avocado) Oil, Octyldodecyl Myristate, Stearic Acid, Acrylates/C10 30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Dimethicone, BHT, Citric Acid, Sodium Hydroxide, DMDM Hydantoin, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Fragrance, Erythrulose, Caramel, Titanium Dioxide, Mica

The 1% line

When looking at an LOI the first thing I always like to do is guess where the 1% line. This is the point in the LOI where the ingredients are no longer listed in order of concentration. According to labeling rules, all ingredients above 1% in the formula have to be listed in order. At 1% or below they can be listed in any order. This usually means that companies will put their “natural” sounding ingredients higher on the label to give the impression that there is more in the formula than there actually is.

In this product, the most likely point for the 1% line is after the Ethylhexyl Isononanoate. It is highly unlikely that Tocopherol is used in this product above 1%.

What the ingredients do

Rather then go through each ingredient in the order listed on the LOI, I thought it would be better to group them according to function. So, here you go.

Self tanning functional ingredients

Dihydroxyacetone – Responsible for changing color of skin
Erythrulose – Responsible for changing color of skin
Using a blend of these two ingredients gives a better result than DHA alone.

Emulsion ingredients

Water – The solvent. In an oil in water emulsion it’s almost always to most abundant ingredient.
Stearic Acid – Emulsifiers
Cetearyl Alcohol – Emulsifiers
Ceteareth 20 – Emulsifiers
Acrylates/C10 30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer – Thickener / emulsion stabilizer

Skin feel ingredients

Glycerin – For its humectant and moisturizing effect
Mineral Oil (Paraffinum Liquidum) – Moisturizer
Petrolatum – Occlusive agent and excellent moisturizer
Ethylhexyl Isononanoate – Emollient affecting skin feel
Octyldodecyl Myristate – Emollient
Dimethicone – Emollient that improves shine & slip

Claims & puffery ingredients

These make the product sound natural and allow for various marketing claims. They don’t have much impact on the performance of the formula but they do have an impact on whether it sells or not.

Tocopherol (Natural Vitamin E)
Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Oil (Fruit)
Avena Sativa (Oat) Kernel Extract
Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil
Calendula (Calendula Officinalis) Flower Extract
Persea Gratissima (Avocado) Oil

Production adjustment agents

These are added to improve stability and make adjustments after production.
BHT – Antioxidant added to improve stability
Citric Acid – pH adjusting compound
Sodium Hydroxide – pH adjusting compound

Preservatives

They are leaving nothing to chance here including both a formaldehyde donor and a couple of parabens. This is a nicely preserved product.
DMDM Hydantoin – Preservative
Methylparaben – Preservative
Propylparaben – Preservative

Colors

Caramel – Brown Colorant
Titanium Dioxide – Colorant
Mica – Colorant gives sparkles

Odor adjuster

Fragrance – Because the odor of DHA is awful

Overall, a nicely formulated product.