Home Cosmetic Science Talk Formulating Skin Skin Care Line Review of Preservatives

  • Skin Care Line Review of Preservatives

    Posted by Ocean on August 27, 2025 at 12:06 am

    Hi there,

    Creating an ayurvedic skincare line and would like a review of the preservatives used to ensure safety (from fungus, mold, gram negative bacteria etc). I want to ensure the products align with the companies ethos and my goal of creating a skincare line that is “clean”, as natural as possible, free of toxins and has skin benefits. Would be great if they could be EWG Verified and Sephora Clean one day. I have been working with a 3rd party and have been in R&D for 2 years.

    Please note I am new to the group and learning. Any and all feedback is welcome. I am passionate about creating a quality skincare line for consumers.

    I would also like to find alternatives for the following:
    TBHQ (Tert-butylhydroquinone)
    PEG derivatives such as PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil, and PEG-100 since the supplier can not verify the absence of impurities (1,4-dioxane/ethylene oxide).

    I’ve uploaded the PDF file of all 5 products.

    PhilGeis replied 2 weeks, 3 days ago 4 Members · 5 Replies
  • 5 Replies
  • ketchito

    Member
    August 27, 2025 at 7:47 am

    The first question would be if you’re formulating this product for a client of for yourself. If it’s for the latter, then it’s best to get the info from scientiffic sources (EWG and Sephora are far from being scientiffic let alone unbiased). For instance, if you want info about 1,4-dioxane, check the comment from the FDA website (https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/potential-contaminants-cosmetics/14-dioxane-cosmetics-manufacturing-byproduct#Is) or the document from the SCCP of the EU under the title <font color=”rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)” face=”inherit”>Considerations on Acceptable Trace Level of 1,4-Dioxane in Cosmetic. That’s a very small molecule that eavporates quickly when on skin so no signifficant penetration occurs. Also, it’s not a </font>significant<font color=”rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)” face=”inherit”> contaminant to water when rinsed, where there are other industries that contribute way more tobthe release of that chemical. For your formula, most of the ingredients are actually synthetic (which doesn’t mean that’s but, but they are for sure not natural). Now, using natural oils can actually promote the overpopulation of some microbes from your skin (the lipophilic ones) that loooove fat more than I do, hehe, with the risk of skin inflammation due to metabolites (check the asociación of dandruff severidad due to the release of oleic acid). </font>

  • Ocean

    Member
    August 27, 2025 at 9:40 am

    Thank you for this information and sharing the article, it is very helpful. It appears that EWG/Sephora clean list may be more of a marketing technique than anything else.

    1. Any suggestions on TBHQ alternatives?

    2. And based on the formulations do you think there is enough protection from gram negative bacteria?

    • Graillotion

      Member
      August 28, 2025 at 3:02 pm

      The lists you mention….are “Pay to play”. Never ever use pay to play for anything beyond stand-up comedy. You lose all credibility as a formulator when you start mentioning bogus science.

      Ask yourself….do EWG employees work for free? Safe to assume NO. So………….. here is where the rubber meets the road…. how do they generate income? 😂 You can laugh for the next three weeks now.

      A Case Against the EWG — The Eco Well

      • PhilGeis

        Member
        August 30, 2025 at 4:50 am

        Thanks graillotion - your comments are spot on. I’ll add the “pay for play” is a piece of the action. Not the cost of the effort but a percentage of the revenue.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    August 28, 2025 at 11:25 am

    Benzoic acid/Phenoxyethanol - what are pH targets? Phenoxy is too low - suggest 0.5% and add a chelator. You’ll need to qualify with challenge testing.

Log in to reply.