Comments

• Agate Member

  April 8

  Easy solution: Follow the WHO formula (https://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/Guide_to_Local_Production.pdf) which doesn't include or require a gelling agent in the first place. It's simple, it's cheap, ingredients are available, and most importantly it's proven to be effective. The only drawback is that some users must be educated that liquid formulations work and should be used exactly like gel formulations (e.g. not spraying it or otherwise using too little).
  
• Shams Member

  April 8

  @Agate thanks for taking time to reply back.
  We have already done the spray according to WHO guidelines. But now, i am requested to formulate the gel with the above mentioned criteria
• Shams Member

  April 8

  @Perry have you got any suggestions , please
• Agate Member

  April 9

  The WHO formula should not be in a spray. It's a dangerous way of application as you are guaranteed to achieve incomplete disinfection.
  

  If you use google to search this forum (query: site:chemistscorner.com hand sanitizer), you'll find answers to your question.
  
• EVchem Member

  April 9

  Chempoint has made a page promoting their thickeners for sanitizers , maybe something in here would work
• klangridge Member

  April 14

  You have mentioned NaOH and TEA, but are you able to use aminomethylpropanol?
  
• Shams Member

  April 15

  @klangridge that's what i reached out to. Aminomethyl propanol . i requested a sample and waiting for it to try it. Thanks
• Shams Member

  April 15

  Thanks evryone for taking time to comment and share your knowledge and experience
  
  
• em88 Member

  April 15

  Agate said:

  The WHO formula should not be in a spray. It's a dangerous way of application as you are guaranteed to achieve incomplete disinfection.

  Why and how did you come up with this conclusion? 
• Agate Member

  April 15 edited April 15

  We've already discussed this in the other thread, no? The issue that I see is that most spray bottles that consumer hand sanitizer is sold in do not dispense enough to achieve full coverage and sufficient contact time, within a reasonable amount of pumps.

  What I'm arguing against is the misconception that liquid formulas automatically mean that it should be in a spray bottle, which is false. I've seen this perpetuated about a dozen times over the past month, and I'm getting a bit frustrated repeating myself.

  (If anyone wants me to stop saying that sprays aren't recommended, show me where the WHO says that spray bottles are appropriate for dispensing hand sanitizer, I couldn't find it. If you can find such information I'll apologize for my mistake and won't mention it again. Until then, you'll have to put up with me. )
  
• klangridge Member

  April 15

  @Agate You've got me interested, too! I have found a WHO guide to locally producing effective hand rubs: https://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/Guide_to_Local_Production.pdf
  
  According to this document, the formulas were deemed appropriate when tested to EN standards (EN 1500). Unfortunately I can't seem to read EN 1500 without purchasing, so even if someone here did have access we shouldn't be making our findings publicly accessible. It might not confirm that spray application is less effective, but we can state that the form of application used in EN 1500 is effective and is the method endorsed by the WHO.
  
• em88 Member

  April 15 edited April 15

  Agate said:

  We've already discussed this in the other thread, no? The issue that I see is that most spray bottles that consumer hand sanitizer is sold in do not dispense enough to achieve full coverage and sufficient contact time, within a reasonable amount of pumps.

  What I'm arguing against is the misconception that liquid formulas automatically mean that it should be in a spray bottle, which is false. I've seen this perpetuated about a dozen times over the past month, and I'm getting a bit frustrated repeating myself.

  (If anyone wants me to stop saying that sprays aren't recommended, show me where the WHO says that spray bottles are appropriate for dispensing hand sanitizer, I couldn't find it. If you can find such information I'll apologize for my mistake and won't mention it again. Until then, you'll have to put up with me. )
  

  My intention of asking was to see if you have any reliable source for that statement. I am open for new information and if the source is reliable I'll take them in consideration.
  Now, look at what I have found regarding this problem. 
  "This policy does not apply to hand sanitizer gel or foam products because different or additional ingredients may impact the quality and potency of the product. This policy does not apply to aerosol sprays because aerosol sprays with propellent added to the formulation can result in altered potency of the finished hand sanitizer. Aerosol sprays with propellent outside of the formulation (bag on valve) may have safety and potency concerns due to the increased flammability risks of ethanol in an aerosol, risk of overspraying, variability of delivery of the product, rapid evaporation of alcohol, and inhalational toxicities." source:FDA document Policy  for  Temporary Compounding  of  Certain Alcohol-Based  Hand Sanitizer Products  During  the Public  Health Emergency Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry 
  
• Agate Member

  April 15 edited April 15

  I see, thanks for explaining. I do not have an explicit source and instead based that statement on the absence of a reliable source recommending sprays.
  

  Very interesting statement you found in the FDA policy, it raises a few potential issues I hadn't thought about.

  From a wider perspective I'm trying to raise awareness for the fact that hand sanitizer is an OTC drug for a reason, and it can't be treated like a normal cosmetic formulation project. The vast majority of people on this forum (myself included) can't alter the formulation or delivery form and reliably assess the safety of those changes, however simple they may seem. That's also a sentiment that I see expressed in the narrow range of allowed formulations in the FDA policy.
  

  Now that you've made me think about it I see that my argument would have been more congruent if I didn't add my own speculations as to why sprays may be less appropriate.
  
• amitvedakar Member

  April 16

  Anyone has used Triisoethanolamine as neutralizer of carbomer?  
  
• EVchem Member

  April 16

  @amitvedakar ; I've seen use of Triisopropanolamine, it's recommended for neutralizing especially when there is high (like 80-90%) alcohol content
  
• amitvedakar Member

  April 17

  thank you @EVchem.
  
• Pharma Member, Pharmacist

  April 17

  The reason why sprays aren't suitable is evident and does not require any investigation, publication, or regulation: About 3 ml liquid/gel are required to keep two hands moist enough for at least 30 seconds. A good dispenser delivers 0.75 to 1.5 ml per pump, a spray puff delivers about 0.05 to 0.2 ml. There is no law prohibiting someone from selling a product where you get blisters from all the pumping but obviously it would be very stupid to do so. Multiply that with the intelligence of an average panicking consumer and you get squared stupidity.

  Here in Switzerland you'd get a hefty fine if you tried to sell an untested and unregistered hand sanitiser no matter what. Only certain businesses such as pharmacies are allowed to produce a low-glycerol version of the formulation recommended by WHO but are not allowed to add, remove, or replace anything in it.

  Apart from that, if you sold your self-invented derivative and even did so in an inadequate spray bottle, you should be flogged for playing with peoples lives and for greedily profiting from a dreadful situation! Unfortunately, the only one responsible for that punishment is karma.