-
Can someone help me with these Preservatives
I’ve got these Preservatives that I’d love to know about and therefore, I’d love to hear from someone who’s knowledgeable about Preservatives and their optimal pH range.
The ones I have are Geogard 221, Geogard ECT, Exyul k712, Exyul PE 9010, Verstatil TBO, Microcare DB (which is the same as Geogard 221). I’d love to know what’s their optimal pH range. My understanding of Exyul k712 is that Sodium Benzoate pH range is 2.5-4 and Potassium sorbate is under 6.5 according to NCBI. However, I couldn’t find more information about the others.
I’m planning on making a body lotion for myself with the pH ranging between 4-5, and I’m thinking of using these Preservatives: Geogard ECT, Exyul k712 & PE 9010 for optimal protection. I’d like to know the optimal pH range for this purpose as well as for future reference.
-
36 Replies
-
Please drop the commercial names and address the specific chemical preservatives. Decide what actives you want The ones you propose are prob more than you need.
-
Oh…I see there are more listed:
Geo 221 = Dehydroacetic Acid (and) Benzyl Alcohol
Verstatil® TBO = Triethyl Citrate (and) Caprylyl Glycol (and) Benzoic Acid
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by Graillotion.
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by
-
Would Benzyl Alcohol (and) Salicylic Acid (and) Glycerin (and) Sorbic acid & Phenoxy + EHG be broad enough to use in a lotion with a pH range of 4-5?
-
-
@PhilGeis the INCI’s are as follows:
Geogard ECT = Benzyl Alcohol (and) Salicylic Acid (and) Glycerin (and) Sorbic Acid
Euxyl™ k 712 = Sodium Benzoate (and) Potassium Sorbate (and) Aqua
PE 9010 = Phenoxy + EHG
As I am guessing you will mention the weakness on Gram Negative on the first two…and sensitivity to pH…. What would you recommend as a patch…. to cover the gram - on them?
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by Graillotion.
-
Dr @PhilGeis On the PE 9010 …. what would your patch to cover YMF with? Chlorphenesin? Other good options?
-
Thank you @Graillotion for mentioning the INCI for these preservatives. I hope @PhilGeis answers the question?
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by
-
Euxyl™ k 712 = Sodium Benzoate (and) Potassium Sorbate (and) Aqua; PE 9010 = Phenoxy + EHG
pH 4-5.
Should be ok. Please confirm with challenge testing as made and in stability.
-
@Heath0o7 as Dr Geis is sometimes a minimalist with words….and not that I have his intellect… but let me fill in a few words for you. So Phenoxy is good on the bacteria set…and weak on the YMF. So what he has done….is paired two together…which covers each others weaknesses. The First will get your YMF…and latter will make sure your HUGE concern with gram negative bacteria is covered.
As I work with beginners…. Here is how I explain what they need in a preservative You need to find a piece of your preservative as you ask these questions…that will unequivocally address each category.
1) Do I confidently kill Gram Positive bacteria? If so….who does this job, and at what pH?
2) Do I confidently kill Gram Negative bacteria? If so… who does this job, and at what pH?
3) Do I prevent Yeast, Mold and Fungi…. If so….who does this job, and at what pH?
Now the tough part is…. You CANNOT use ANY mommy blogger sites….and you CANNOT use ANY marketing material. You need to find scientific reference tools….that confirm these activities.
Good Luck 😂
(OR …. You can ask Dr Geis. Always helps to ask the guy….that wrote the book. 🙂 )
-
Thank you for that
-
@Heath0o7 I could see your reply in my e-mail…but cannot see it on the forum? I send you a message…answering most of your questions. This forum….has a message box… so look for that…and you will find my responses.
-
Thanks a lot @PhilGeis
@Graillotion so I want to know if there is contradiction between references
How to know the truest?
For example according to this discussion phenoxyethanol is not board spectrum same according to humble me and makingskincare however in ulprospector it is described as board spectrum. Same thing about sensicare c1090 it is described as board spectrum however some professionals said that is not.
Really as professional that is soo confusing.
Any help
-
Ahhhh….the classic “Broad Spectrum”….
Actually …. have you ever seen a product that was not advertised as ‘Broad Spectrum’? Answer is NO…in case you are pondering.
Like much of cosmetic preservation….there was no system….so they looked across the fence at the medical system…and borrowed bits and pieces.
So to a beginner (I work with them extensively), the term means…. ‘It covers what needs to be covered, to make safe cosmetics’. In reality….nothing could be further from the truth!!! In the medical field….example drugs….you have targeted products…that hopefully kill a single or very focused thing. The other end of the spectrum is broad spectrum, where something may kill multiple pathogens….or at least more than one.
So, the people selling something titled ‘broad spectrum’ are not lying….as their product more than likely kills more than one thing….and it might even be….just multiple strains of gram +…etc…etc….. Start to see the picture? They are not lying…calling their product a broad spectrum, if it controls two or more things. Problem with that….is in cosmetics….we need a lot of things killed/ controlled.
Don’t even get me started on the borrowed concept of MIC….where inhibition is pedaled as protection. As one of my favorite PhD’s likes to say…. “Things that survive….learn to thrive!” (That may or may not be a Dr Geisism.) So on the medicine side…. if we can inhibit something…..the immune system…even possibly a compromised immune system, can generally finish it off. In cosmetics….we really don’t have an immune system to come along…and finish things off. We need KILL.
So all boils down to a very vague term….that is utilized to manipulate those that don’t know how the term is being used. Bottom Line: Broad spectrum is essentially a meaningless combination of two words. The onus is on you…to confirm if those ingredients meet the criteria…of killing G + , G -, YMF.
-
The let’s give you according to me as professional what i mean by board spectrum that : preservative cover gram+, gram - , yeast, mold, so it did not need to combine with other preservative.<div>
So can I have answer depending on this definition because there is no answer in last comment according to my definition.
Then it is not true that always preservative described as board spectrum as example phenoxyethanol in humble and me is described as not board spectrum and the same for other preservatives.
</div>
-
If you are asking how I look them up? I use material like those posted below. I also use the search bar…..and I have two world class mentors. Between those 4…I can get any information I need.
Oh…and of course….NO MARKETING MATERIAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EVER…………
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by Graillotion.
-
Thanks for share
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by
-
-
-
Look for the source that who is telling you. If it is a chemist whose profession is making and testing a lot of products, then you can trust that he knows something. If it is from a YouTuber or shopkeeper then be sure they are not chemists, they haven’t made or tested any product.
-
Thanks @Abdullah for sure as professional I will not take information for who/what ever. I’am learning from supposed reference sush ul prospector, technical sheet of supplier and professional, books the problem for me when I find contradiction between all this. So I find the truest way asking @PhilGeis and books.
-
-
-
As always excellent comments from my colleague graillotion
-
My question is approach one if I find a contradictory description of the field of activity of preservative (one says that the preservative is effective only for gram+,- and the other says that it is effective even with yeast and mold) how to know the correct description? so here we are talking about a specific thing and not a vague term.
-
You can not trust preservative supplier marketing data - for efficacy (nothing is broad spectrum) or stability (esp. effective pH range)
There are good books on the subject but pretty expensive. Look at ingredient labels of major manufacturers for preservative combinations.
-
I’am already don’t trust preservative supplier marketing because it will just try to make his products perfect. the contradiction i found in trusted references as example ulprospector says that phenoxyethanol effecient for gram+, -, yeat and mold however makingskincare and humble and me says that it is not efficient for fungi(yeast and mold) so how can I know the correct generally if I can not buy the book(the of it please) ?<div>
Then according to you phenoxyethanol and sensicare c1090 are they efficients for gram+, -, YMF or efficients only for gram+, -?
</div>
-
Phenoxyethanol targets Gram negative bacteria - limited vs Gram positive bacteria and poor to nothing vs fungi (yeast and mold). Sensicare 1090 adds ethyl hexyl glycerine (EHG) that helps again versus Gram negative bacteria (seen no data re. Gram positives and do not believe anything vs fungi). Claiming “natural” is pure horse hockey - EHG is synthetic made from glycerine.
Start with the assumption - suppliers are liars. No quite right as claims are made by marketing folks who conveniently know nothing but claim everything.
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by PhilGeis.
-
” Start with the assumption - suppliers are liars. Not quite right as claims are made by marketing folks who conveniently know nothing but claim everything.”
Ok, @PhilGeis that is one awesome ‘Geisism’…..and going into my collection. 🙂
-
This reply was modified 1 month ago by
-
-
-
-
-
This is awesome answer from the expert @PhilGeis finally a trusted answer, then according to my vocabulary phenoxyethanol and sensicarec1090 are not board spectrum.
Just disappointment from ul prospector supposed reference. The most trusted site according to your comment is makingskincare. (the screenshot from it)
-
@PhilGeis @Graillotion @Perry44
I’d like to understand the pictures I have attached below,
If phenoxy is effective against gram negative bacteria and limited against gram positive bacteria and poor against YMF, then how come in the picture as seen when Caprylyl Glycol is blended with phenoxy it makes it now effective against gram positive bacteria? I thought Caprylyl Glycol isn’t a preservative?
Also, in the first picture, as you can see that phenoxy is blended with Benzyl Alcohol, EHG and Tocopherol which claims to be not only effective against gram positive & negative bacteria but also effective against YMF. I get how it will be effective against gram positive & negative bacteria because of the BA and phenoxy, but how is it effective against YMF? I’m confused about how EHG, Caprylyl Glycol and Tocopherol play a role in preservatives.
-
Caprylyl Glycol and EHG are somewhat interchangeable ‘penetration enhancers’. These are the part of the preservative, that allows the germ ‘killer’ to enter (penetrate cell membrane) the pathogen.
If you study hurdle technology….you will usually see ingredients (often glycols) that enhance penetration of the preservative. It creates a synergy….or makes the actual preservative….work better.
-
…… As you should know…there is no definition of ‘natural’ in cosmetics….not by omission….but by intent.
So …. NATURAL… is pretty much whatever you can persuade (or purchase for a large fee) someone to believe is natural. 😂
Hence, I consider there to be NO natural preservatives…..only lab produced chemicals. Not to say there is not a whole fake industry….whom for a hefty bribe will not certify your lab produced chemical as…. ‘Natural’. 😂
If the natural folks ….. were true to form…they would stick with parabens…and especially formaldehyde…as I consider it the most natural of all the preservatives. But……… since it is all agenda and politics….anything goes. 😢
However….once you grasp that they are all lab produced chemicals….it makes formulation much easier….because you focus on what works, and what is SAFE, …. vs someone else’s agenda!!!
-
I wasn’t talking about “natural”, so im not sure why you thought i cared about natural preservatives or asked if they are natural. Quite frankly, I don’t care about natural preservatives. I think you and phil saw the screenshot i took from makingskincare that claimed natural and assumed i was asking if these Preservatives were natural 😂. My question was regarding how EHG, Tocopherol and Caprylyl Glycol play a role in preservative which you answered by saying they enhance the actual Preservatives like phenoxy and BA to enter the cell membrane to preform better.
What if one were to use Phenoxyethanol, Benzyl Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin and Tocopherol as Preservatives, would they still need to add Sodium benzoate/Potassium Sorbate to cover most of the YMF? If so, what if the formula you’re making is above pH 6. Would you then opt for a preservative like Propylene Glycol, Diazolidinyl Urea and Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate?
-
Sorry hehehhe….we might be quite conditioned….to think every newbie is chasing the magical pipe dream….of fresh squeezed herb = stellar preservative. 😅
So here is what you have:
Phenoxy…strong on Gram -
Benz … good on Gram + ….especially around pH of 5
EHG …. penetration enhancer.
What do you don’t have….is strong YMF….yet. So first of all…you have done more than most….not saying rest on your laurels….but I think you can cover YMF….with one add-on…vs two.
However…if you want your pH as high as 6…. might as well just jump over to LG+ ?
-
What’s LG+ stands for? I’m making a Clarifying shampoo and want the pH to be 7.5. At the moment, the preservatives I thought of adding are phenoxyethanol and Ethylhexylglycerin as well as PG, Diazolidinyl Urea and Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate. I’m not sure if the later would cover gram + and YMF?
-
The latter is much better
-
LG+ stands for Liquid Germall Plus
-
-
-
-
-
-
Trust folks who call it “natural”? Benzyl has some efficacy versus fungi
-
So you find sensicare c 1060 not fungicide?
-
Would not expect enough
-
-
Log in to reply.