-
SugaNate 160NC - Antimicrobial Activity
On the SugaNate 160NC (INCI: Sodium Laurylglucosides Hydroxypropylsulfonate) technical data sheet I came across the following information.
Antimicrobial Performance for Detergency
Zone of Inhibition: A 16% solution was tested against a Gram-negative bacteria, Pseudomonas aeruginosa; a yeast, C. albicans; and a mold Aspergillus niger. Results showed very good microbial protection against all three microbes.
https://colonialchem.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/SugaNate-160NC-TDS.pdf
I am wondering if anyone has any practical experience with this raw material at a similar concentration and if this antimicrobial activity allowed you to reduce the amount of preservative used in your formulation.
Or is this more the type of activity that allows the concentrate to be preservative free but in reality has no noticeable effect on the preservation of the system.
I tend to err on the side of caution using the close to the highest recommended amount of preservative in a formulation but if I can reduce it slightly then this will be beneficial to the overall costs.
I will test the preservative efficacy of the formulation.
I am looking at using this product in a body wash and shampoo with a combination of Benzyl Alcohol (and) Ethylhexylglycerin, Sodium Benzoate and Phenethyl alcohol as the preservative.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
-
5 Replies
-
Doubt it’s anything special re. micro. More gee whiz - note they do not compare to other surfactants. Even marketing does not recommend preservative free.
Why phenethyl vs,. phenoxyethyl?
-
Thanks @PhilGeis
Phenoxyethanol is not liked by customers so I added the phenethyl to help cover gram negative bacteria.
-
-
OK - it’s not as good and fairly useless vs Gram positives and fungi
-
@drift boss That’s right.
-
The sales brochure offers preserved formulae @ pH’s inconsistent with expected range of effect. Think these folks know nothing of preservation. Consider it as a surfactant, not for any preservation potential.
Log in to reply.