-
Sapogel Q, USA Trade name?
Im very interested in using Sapogel Q in an anhydrous formulation. I cant seem to find an oil gelling agent similar to Sapogel Q. Its a product that I have only seen for sale outside the US. Can I use it in the states if I purchase it from elsewhere, or does it simply have a different trade name here in the states? Im wanting to make an oily gel that does not require a preservative, unless its still highly recommended….
-
17 Replies
-
The INCI name according to the manufacturer is…
Glycerin & Water & Quillaja Saponaria Wood Extract & SaponariaOfficinalis (Soapwort) ExtractYou should still use a preservative if you use this, it has water in it.
-
Thank you. Yes I looked up what is in it, but this is a blend yes?…is there a different trade name offered here in the states with the same blend, or can I use this one even if I have to purchase it outside the states?Perry said:
The INCI name according to the manufacturer is…Glycerin & Water & Quillaja Saponaria Wood Extract & SaponariaOfficinalis (Soapwort) ExtractYou should still use a preservative if you use this, it has water in it.
-
Glycerin content is greater than water content, the blend itself is self-preserved. By coincidence, I stumbled over some anhydrous oil gel formulations using Sapogel Q just yesterday. It’s by Skin Chakra and she’s also not preserving hers.
-
Pharma said:Glycerin content is greater than water content, the blend itself is self-preserved. By coincidence, I stumbled over some anhydrous oil gel formulations using Sapogel Q just yesterday. It’s by Skin Chakra and she’s also not preserving hers.
That’s good to hear. Im wanting to make an oil cleanser. I think having it in a gel form would be a nice sensory experience for the customer and maybe beginners to oil cleansing would feel more comfortable slabbing oils all over their face. It can be a strange experience at first. But I can only seem to find this ingredient on international websites. Im in America. Can I purchase this product and use it just fine or do I need to find an domestic trade version of it? I saw a tutorial on how to use it and it seems so simple and straightforward. It also turns milky when you add water which again is an awesome sensory experience.
-
I found an American supplier. Thank you
-
Could you share the name of the American supplier?
-
@Agate Kinetik Technologies Inc.
-
@Pharma slight tangent but what do you think of the Skin Chakra site/the formulations?Just found her last week and I didn’t see any immediate red flags
-
@EVchem - the word “Chakra” is a red flag for me. It says to me “not science based.”
-
She has some inspiring, rather simple and more or less natural formulations. Pretty basic stuff but nothing like @Perry’s suspicion. BTW, Perry, it’s just a name and, for what it’s worth, 99% of the cosmetics world is, though sometimes science based, not science at all. I did work on some ‘science based’ research projects (under others with herbal extracts and cone snail venoms) for cosmetics, I know what I’m talking about: As sound as the scientific basis may be, the final product is not science but just a galenic base (water, oil, and emulsifier) with some pixie dust, often a story, loaded with marketing, and tons of packaging.
-
@Pharma - I didn’t thoroughly review her website so have no basis for disagreeing with your assessment. I agree just because a brand claims it’s “science based” doesn’t really mean that it is.
I know it’s just a name but a term like Chakra sets off my skeptical alarms as it is the kind of thing that woo woo peddlers use. It encourages “magical” thinking and short circuits rationally based beliefs. At best marketing hype and at worst scammy.
This type of thing probably appeals to consumers but in my view, scientists should not encourage it.
-
@Pharma I did check her page for purchase but holy moly shipping was like 35 euro which is crazy if Im just getting one thing. It may end up being what I have to do though as alchemy only sends samples really and idk if they will approve my sample request. I did request a sample for the supplier here in the states but even after the sample Id be surprised if their sales are the amount Im looking to buy. I also agree, I mean Im kinda a hippie and science is NOT my thing. But now that Im actually trying to formulate properly because I want my business to be successful Im finding Im really enjoying the science and Im sure many of you scientist prob see my name “Peace Love Organics” and laugh, but thats okay, I admit im a bit hippie dippy so im doing the best i can to be true to myself in my products and name and have fun too
@Perry -
@Pharma and @Perry I do read their blog posts constantly and I have been inspired to try some ingredients. It does seems that they have a quite good grasp of chemistry and scientific basis, and yes, I also found the “Chakra” name a little confusing and upsetting first. They try to explain some basic formulation chemistry in occasional blog posts, with layman approach, which I find worth of praise.
If anything, I find their formulations too “baroque”, with very long lists (dozens of so) of oils and extracts, at very low percentages; but I am a minimalist. They recently jumped on the MyMicrobiome wagon, for which I have not read enough to comment upon. It could be the next thing, or the most recent fad… I’ll leave the judging to the professionals.@PeaceLoveOrganics, everyone has a hippie dippy in their family. I have 15+ year of research in chemistry (not cosmetics), yet this forum is a great resource where I learned and still learn new things every day, mostly lurking, seldom participating. For once professionals, to-be-professionals, veteran hobbyists, and beginners have the chance to ask, answer, and learn from people who have decades, if not hundreds of years of formulating experience combined. Science can be learned, and it’s only through experimentation and reproducing results that people learn the proper tool of the trade, and to make safe, reliable, and honest products. I only wish more like you would ask these questions on platforms like this.
-
@lmosca thanks so much. I have so many questions its embarrassing and Im hoping I dont become a bother honestly. I unfortunately have a bit of an obsessive behavior and when I get into something I have to learn and know all I can and its super exciting for me haha
-
Perry said:…
I know it’s just a name but a term like Chakra sets off my skeptical alarms as it is the kind of thing that woo woo peddlers use. It encourages “magical” thinking and short circuits rationally based beliefs. At best marketing hype and at worst scammy.This type of thing probably appeals to consumers but in my view, scientists should not encourage it.
Sure, when it comes to these things, one should be careful and sceptical because most are scammers or crazy people, but by far not all. Magical thinking does not exclude science and it can be as rational as science. The German term for science is ‘Wissenschaft’, it means ‘creating knowledge’ and a scientist is ‘someone who creates knowledge’, or figures out how to explain/calculate something which was always there but could not be explained so far. Knowledge in my case (my scientific career was in the field of ethnobotany and pharmacognosy), came from hundreds and thousands of years old wisdom and folklore, knowledge of shamans and ‘witches’ of traditional herbal remedies and we used that as a first guide to the isolation and characterisation of active constituents. One of my hypotheses regarding the antiinflammatory activities of ginger was based on use and wisdom of Ayurveda and it was a good lead! I define myself as ‘spiritually inspired mad agnostic scientist’ because I know that I don’t know until I observe it with my own senses and still then, we don’t know shit. There is so much more to everything than meets the eye. Life can be partially explained by science but to a good part still remains unknown and inexplicable i.e. magick (with a k) is everywhere (it’s just not the kind of magic most people think of when they hear the term ‘magic’).True, science should not encourage mumbo jumbo but science can learn a lot from it and by using things like ‘energy flows through our Chakras’, we can develop mentally/spiritually and this is in no way not scientific, it’s psychology and walking on the edge of the ever growing universe of science and knowledge. It’s just made non-scientific by too many neo-esoteric, hype people who don’t really get it and who also manage to turn science into mumbo jumbo.
-
Repackagers often give silly names to their websites to appeal to their customer base.
One of my favourite suppliers from the UK is called the soap kitchen (kitchen…). Sounds not very serious but they have good prices and a nice variety of not so “natural” ingredients, including hard to find materials like Crothix and a lot of other ethoxylated materials. Another one from Italy is called “glamour cosmetics”. Sounds like some cheap makeup but they sell Croda’s materials, Dow Corning’s materials, Clariant you name it! A lot of very advanced ingredients such as HIPE w/si emulsifiers, “scary” parabens, a variety of silicones and other materials you would never expect to find on the DIY market.
I don’t care how “glamour” or “chakra” they are, as long as they sell Abil EM 90, and Ariftoflex AVC rather than “e-wax” and “steric” acid, I will buy from them. -
There were a handful of Skin Chakra’s blog posts that I found really useful - particularly the ones where they tested out various natural gums and gum blends and showed the results and recommendations.. much more useful than anything I’ve seen from raw material manufacturers etc. They’ve moved to a subscription-only model now for their blog though. I’m not sure how that will work out, as I would have thought the blog posts were a good way of leading people to buy the ingredients via their online store.
Log in to reply.