-
CIT/MIT AND DMDM-H COMBINATION
Sodium Peg-7 Olive Oil Carboxylate,
Liromid Mipa,
Olive Oil Peg-7 Esters,
Peg-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil,
Olea Europaea Olive Oil,
Dmdm-Hydantoin, Methylchloroisothiazolinone, Methylisothiazolinone
Hello, why do you think DMDMH and CIT / MIT were used together in this formulation?
While there are other alternatives with a wide pH range, the combination of limited use elsewhere (DMDM-H) and claimed to be dangerous (CIT / MIT) seemed strange to me and I could not understand why.Thanks for your ideas…
ps: ıt is a liquid hand soap
-
15 Replies
-
It’s difficult to say for sure but it may have nothing to do with the formula and more to do with their production facilities.
You see, sometimes a filling line can get contaminated with a “house bug” that forms a biofilm which is resistant to cleaning. Every batch you run through that filling line can potentially become contaminated with little spores that break off as product flows through. CIT / MI is very good at immediately killing off these types of microbes. So, some factories will just put CIT / MI in every formula because it is used at a tiny level, is effective, and rarely affects stability.
Now you might be wondering if CIT / MI is so good at killing why don’t they just clean their filling lines with it? Well, that’s because while it can kill of individual spores, it isn’t able to kill off the whole biofilm.
That’s my guess anyway.
-
How disgusting.
-
The world of contract manufacturing isn’t always pretty.
-
I view it this way. I’ve worked in a bar and cleaning out the pipe systems is something that has to be done regularly and done 100% properly. For the same reasons, possibility of a biofilm. Now imagine if I had to tell the customers, “There is a possibility of a biofilm in the pipes so we put a preservative in the beer to kill any nasty bits that might break off and get in your beer.”
How long do you think the bar would stay in business?
I don’t regard it as remotely acceptable that any kind of biofilm is present in pipes that are processing a consumer product. Not at all, not in any circumstances. -
Hi @Perry I’m starting production in my own company. that’s why I review many brands. As a result of my research, I found the Ethylhexylglycerin / Phenoxyethanol mixture suitable for my own prescriptions.
I plan to take the product from the mixer boiler to the waiting boiler with a vacuum hose and send it to the filling line.Do I need to take other precautions for products such as shower gel and liquid soap?I don’t want to use protectors like CIT / MIT and DMDMH.
Thank you… -
@Belassi thanks for your comment…
-
Usually when I see multiple preservatives when not all would be necessary I assume that some fraction of the unnecessary ones are pulled in by the preservation requirements of individual raw materials. The INCI declaration of the raw materials may have their preservative listing required (that is insufficient to preserve the entire formula) and that may be different then the standard preservatives the contract manufacture typically uses. Usually its more identifiable by botanicals and surfactant blends. I don’t see any stand out materials that would make it so in this case but figured I’d throw the idea out there to be considered.
-
@filiz My guess is that since some free amines that are present in amides (like your Liromid Mipa) can reduce the potency of Isothiazolinones, it’s common to add a formaldehyde releaser like DMM hydantoin to hinder free amines.
-
@RDchemist15 - Great point. That is also another reason you would see multiple preservatives listed.
@Belassi - I completely agree with you. I hope I did not give the impression that I thought it was acceptable behavior. I was quite surprised when I learned that this type of thing went on at some facilities.
-
afaik, concentration of CMIT/MIT in product (%) is 0.0015 is safe
and DMDMH maybe useful for fungicidal efficacy?
-
Ingredient preservatives are not usually listed.
It may have been as oldperry suggested or that this level of preservation was needed to pass their challenge test. Most major companies do not use USP 51 per se - it’s a pretty weak test. They add relevant manufacturing and consumer return bugs. On its face, there nothing wrong with this combination, esp. as we do not know the levels.
DMDM Hydantoin is not great vs fungi. Surfactant products are typically more resistant to fungi.
-
thank for your information. in my location, at least many manufacturers i know usually put 0.1% CMIT/ MIT in formula. while i read from NCBI.NLM.NIH.GOV recommended 0.0015% (15ppm)
is it reason for allergy users when using that product?
-
Model is Kathon CG- supplied as 1.5% active - the target in formula should be no more than 7.5 ppm active. 15 ppm active is too much. I use 5 ppm, and some claim synergy with formaldehyde releasers at less.
When 1st marketed, folks used too much - 15 ppm and more provoking a lot of sensitization. Still recognized as risk for sensitization. Now it’s used only in rinse off products.
-
sorry, what is mean of this
it’s used only in rinse off products.
So do you think 7.5ppm (0.00075%) is recommended for all personal care products (maybe for homecare products also)?
-
You should use only in shampoos, conditioners, hand soaps - products that you rinse off after use. Never use in creams, lotions, makeup - products that are applied and left on.
5 ppm is plenty
-
-
-
-
Log in to reply.