-
28 Replies
-
As far as hard surface disinfectants, you will find many formulations with only hydrogen peroxide as the active substance:
-
Fekher said:Hi professionals, I found in many sites that hydrogen peroxide can be effective for Coronavirus with just 1 minute needed contact time.
Have anyone idea about it?
@Pharma @Perry @Agate @Cafe33 @ozgirl @lmosca @GuntherDepending on concentration, even 1 second might be enough but your going to have a loooot of pain too :smiley: . H2O2 for surfaces = great, for skin not so much because it kills skin cells (nearly) as good as it kills microbes.
-
@Cafe33 really interesting link appriciate a lot your share but the table miss one important thing which is needed contact time.
@Pharma for sure scientifics don’t search for product which make a lot of pain. The product must have short needed time of contact ( seconds to few minutes it will be better just 1 minute which is a looked for one ) and also no or low irritant product for skin.
What about 3% hydrogen peroxide product I readed that it is effective for Coronavirus and it needs short needed time contact, any add about that? -
3% is too harsh for repeated use.
-
it turns your skin white (temporarily), and stings/numbs the area of application - not good qualities for a hand sanitiseralso, in Europe at least, hydrogen peroxide is restricted to specific types of product, and hand sanitisers are not one of those types -
@Bill_Toge thanks for your share.
-
Bill_Toge said:it turns your skin white (temporarily), and stings/numbs the area of application - not good qualities for a hand sanitiseralso, in Europe at least, hydrogen peroxide is restricted to specific types of product, and hand sanitisers are not one of those types
So instead of H₂O₂ what should be used to neutralized spores or should a lower percent of H₂O₂ , like 1% should be used ?
-
You can read the study:
Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and their inactivation with biocidal agents
-
@Gunther thanks for link.
-
Pharma said:Fekher said:Hi professionals, I found in many sites that hydrogen peroxide can be effective for Coronavirus with just 1 minute needed contact time.
Have anyone idea about it?
@Pharma @Perry @Agate @Cafe33 @ozgirl @lmosca @GuntherDepending on concentration, even 1 second might be enough but your going to have a loooot of pain too :smiley: . H2O2 for surfaces = great, for skin not so much because it kills skin cells (nearly) as good as it kills microbes.
I can not find the data that H2O2 kill the skin cells. Can you share the scientific claim for that?
when h2o2 contact to skin , it will degrade very rapidly by enzyme catalase. The common side effect of H2O2 is skin blanching (temporaly whitening).
There was the irritation test on human data of H2O2, 10% H2O2 was not caused dermal irritation after application but 35 % hydrogen peroxide caused slight to moderate reversible erythema and edema in a skin.
Please see more study in the report below.
Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products; Assessment report Hydrogen Peroxide. -
@Fekher,
This hand sanitizer prototype formula from Clariant only contains a wee bit of hydrogen peroxide (0.52% of 30% H202).Besides, isn’t H202 too unstable to be used in dermatics?
-
No, I’ve made teeth whitening gels with 12% H2O2 … the H2O2 contains stabilizers that are quite effective and are designed for the professional market, not the consumer market.
The common hydrogen peroxide solutions you buy at the pharmacy contain 3% H2O2.
Granted, a solution with 12% H2O2 doesn’t feel particularly good when applied to the skin, it is tolerable.
-
attapol said:…I can not find the data that H2O2 kill the skin cells. Can you share the scientific claim for that?…The scientific ‘claim’ (we in science do not use the word ‘claim’, cosmetics and marketing does) is simple, H2O2 is a strong oxidant which does not distinguish between ‘bad’ microbes and ‘good’ skin cells. Hydrogen peroxide and other reactive oxygen species are also used by the immune system to fight ‘foes’ but are known to hit ‘friend’ as badly. A good part of convalescence after an infection is your body cleaning up the mess it made on itself. You’ll going to find thousands of scientific publication regarding that topic on pubmed and sciencedirect.Furthermore, H2O2 is known to hamper wound healing and granulation; that and the ‘stinging’ is the reason why many countries do no longer use H2O2 as disinfectant and only in certain cases for wound debridement (Italy still uses it widely but they also overuse antibiotics and cortisones and administer a bunch of pharmaceuticals in the gluteus maximus using the pink needle although there are as effective pills available). Low concentrations may however be beneficial if not used repeatedly (example HERE).It’s also a common phenomenon that wrongly applied or overly used bleaching products for teeth lead to a damaged buccal mucosa, canker, and/or inflammatory reactions and can even damage your teeth. Ask your dentist.
-
MarkBroussard said:@Doreen:
No, I’ve made teeth whitening gels with 12% H2O2 … the H2O2 contains stabilizers that are quite effective and are designed for the professional market, not the consumer market.
The common hydrogen peroxide solutions you buy at the pharmacy contain 3% H2O2.
Granted, a solution with 12% H2O2 doesn’t feel particularly good when applied to the skin, it is tolerable.
Ok. With stabilizers you mean carbamide peroxide or something?
Pharma said:(…)
It’s also a common phenomenon that wrongly applied or overly used bleaching products for teeth lead to a damaged buccal mucosa, canker, and/or inflammatory reactions and can even damage your teeth. Ask your dentist.I’ve had a homeset for teeth bleaching from my dentist. The dentist makes a special bleaching spoon after he prints the teeth, so the spoon fits perfectly.
But… I grind my teeth. Thought it wouldn’t pose much of a problem, but the gel did leak and quite a bit apparently. And it wasn’t even so much the irritation of the oral mucosa that bothered me, but my poor intestines. I’ve had violent colic pains. Never again for me! -
The stabilizers are generally tin-based compounds
-
What I could find out is, regarding Europe (for example ECHA), that sodium stannate is allowed (or used?) at up to 0.03% for pure H2O2 or up to 0.5% in hair care products (IKW). Depending on application and pH, different acids (e.g. carboxylic or phosphoric acids), inorganic salts (e.g. nitrates, pyrophosphates, phosphates, sulphates), and some organic substances (e.g. silicates, acetanilide, 8-hydroxyquiloline) are used. Several of these only work in diluted H2O2, become inactive if diluted or pH is adjusted, are inactivated when mixed with cosmetics, and/or are not suitable additives for cosmetics. At least in Europe, tin (i.e. sodium stannate) is more and more replaced with less problematic stabilisers (often at the cost of stability and/or product flexibility) although it is not forbidden from use for example in tooth whitening products.Regarding H2O2 in cosmetics: THAT‘s one document I found regarding cosmetics (interesting pages: 22 & 23).
-
@Doreen thanks for the link, however i’am looking for product where hydrogen peroxide is the active ingredient without using any other active ingredient as alcohol in the proposed formula.
-
Fekher said:@Doreen thanks for the link, however i’am looking for product where hydrogen peroxide is the active ingredient without using any other active ingredient as alcohol in the proposed formula.
But I’m still not sure if you’re looking for hand sanitizers or a product for surfaces? Just like @Cafe33 writes, if it’s for surfaces, you’ll find a lot based on hydrogen peroxide alone.
A good working and skin friendly hand sanitizer with hydrogen peroxide as sole disinfecting agent seems unlikely to me. -
Pretty sure this inquiry was indicated for surfaces, not skin. Standard use level is 1.2 - 1.5% active hydrogen peroxide, and I’d stabilize with good old tetrasodium pyrophosphate (what the bigs use) or sodium phytate/phytic acid buffer to pH 4.8 if you can afford it. Right now only the quats are validated as virucidal for human coronavirus on contact (10 minutes!) by the US EPA, but peroxide will work nearly as well in my opinion and is allowable for non-registry disinfectant sprays temporarily.
-
@Doreen actually the most important thing is to know information between the concentration of hydrogen peroxide and needed contact time even for surface. But i really want to have hand sanitizer based on hydrogen peroxide.
@chemicalmatt thanks for share so do you think that 1,5 % hydrogen peroxide can be used for hand desinfection and what is the needed time contact for such concentration? -
@chemicalmatt- side question: i keep seeing tetrasodium pyrophosphate pop up, what is it’s most common use? Is it used with the hydrogen peroxide to act as a buffer?
-
tetrasodium pyrophosphate acts as a chelator stable toward oxidation.
Pyrophosphate likes to complex things like zinc, chromium, manganese, and iron ions, the latter are the most problematic for the stability of hydrogen peroxide, and virtually ubiquitous. They also bring the pH up a little bit, which is perfect to increase the lifetime of H2O2. As the pH lowers, H2O2 becomes a more powerful oxidant, and thus it can react with more things. -
@lmosca hey thanks! One more question- so why is it EDTA seems like the big name chelator for lots of skin care? Seems to complex the same things, does the pyrophosphate have the same environmental issues?
-
@EVchem, sure! EDTA is the gold standard of chelators. Not only is the most easily accessible chelator out there, but it’s behavior has been well characterized over almost a century.
You can find virtually any kind of speciation diagram as a function of pH for any couple H4EDTA + M+ to form the respective complex.
The chemistry of it is very simple, because all complexes of EDTA have a 1:1 stoichiometry with a metal ion.
Pyrophosphate (PP) behaves in the same way as EDTA, as it exists in its tetra-anionic through “acid” form (pyrophosphoric acid). The pKa of EDTA and PP are not that much different when we consider the tri-anion and di-anion states.
The main problem is that at pH=6 EDTA has still a massive driving force to form complexes with ions, while pyrophosphate’s ability to complex diminishes steeply by decreasing the pH.At pH= 10, PP has a logK for Calcium of 4.6, while EDTA has a logK of 11.
The fact that PP can form complexes with different stoichiometries makes it more difficult to model.
Yet another difficulty is given by the solubility of some complexes of PP, some are fairly insoluble (copper, nickel, barium) while some phosphates (calcium, iron) are insoluble and will drive the hydrolysis of PP to P.All complexes of EDTA are soluble in water, so there is no selective precipitation of the ligand.
Another factor to consider, is that to achieve the same “sequestration” effect, you will need to use PP at much higher levels than you would use EDTA. At that point you will start destabilizing emulsions, shifting the pH toward alkaline, or completely throwing off the rheology of the product due to the large amount of electrolyte introduced.Nevertheless, it is still more convenient and cheaper to use Na2PP or Na4PP in alkaline detergents, because it is dirt cheap, non hygroscopic, and can be compounded as a dry powder. By keeping the mixture alkaline (laundry detergents, industrial cleaners, etc…) you work in the pH region of maximum efficacy for PP.
EDTA has its own problems, mind. It is not “natural” whatever the term means and it’s quite persistent in the environment; however, PP is responsible for eutrophication when used massively. I didn’t see much on it’s chelating properties as a preservative booster. I think that the formation constants we see in the near-neutral pH zone are not enough to sequester essential ions from microorganisms and inhibit their cellular processes like EDTA does.
Log in to reply.
