[Abdullah]

ngarayeva001 said:

Dimethicone 5 isn’t volatile. It can be heated and I always add it to heated oil phase. You can’t heat cyclomethicones (D5, D6), phenyl trimethicone, and anything that’s volatile (cetiol ultimate, isododecane etc). If you do, you will notice it starts steaming. It’s pretty obvious when it happens.

Thanks, that is very good to hear.

[Abdullah]

abierose said:

ngarayeva001 said:

@abierose, I don’t think they are right re dimethicone 500. It’s not too sensitive.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they are not right about that…I’ve came across a few weird/incorrect pieces of information on their site in the past ???? And when I do, I come here and ask the experts! ????

Yeah, i was surprised when i saw in there website that SLS is milder than SLES.

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

If it doesn’t contain a volatile component, normally i add it into the heated oil phase if applicable. Sometimes they would have recommendations on processing guidelines on the tech sheet if any. 

Thanks 
I currently use dimethicone 5 cst at cool down phase and it work well. As adding it to oil phase would be easier i wanted to make sure that nonvolatile silicones are not heat sensitive. 

[Abdullah]

Pharma said:

As an example: Eucerin in the EU can sell a product called ‘AtopiControl’ which is derived from and resembles the word ‘atopic dermatitis’, a condition for which this line has been designed. However, in Switzerland, that name is already too close to a disease’s name and hence, the name had to be truncated to ‘AtoControl’.

Mind, that product range isn’t intended as drugs to treat atopic dermatitis but as supplemental care for that and related skin conditions. Depending on regulations/country, this alone is already a tabu for cosmetics.

Thanks

[Abdullah]

MarkBroussard said:

@Abdullah

I understand your motivation, but the regulations are clear in this regard.  If your product is not an OTC, then you can’t use the dissease name associated with your product in any way.  Some companies take the chance hoping that the FDA will not become aware of the violation and fly under the radar until they get a violation notice.

The DermaHarmony product you are referencing above is indeed an OTC-registered product.  They list Active Ingredient: 2% Salicylic Acid, so they are in compliance.

I got the point.
Thanks

[Abdullah]

MarkBroussard said:

Why would you be putting the name of a skin condition (ie: disease) as part of the name of your product if not with intent to deceive consumers?

Reminds me … I need to dust that formula for Covid Cola off the shelf!

Because my product actually works for that skin condition (eczema) but as a startup company i don’t want the complications of being a drug manufacturer. 

It is the same reason as Paula’s choice that doesn’t claim acne treatment with %2 salicylic acid liquid at pH 3.5 but another company claim’s that in a soap with %2 salicylic acid at whatever pH that soap is.

[Abdullah]

MarkBroussard said:

@Graillotion

I have no idea and did not really investigate regarding specific ingredients.  I noticed that my hands started peeling quite badly and thought that perhaps Tresemme was the issue.  Switched to Dove Creamy Sensitive Skin Body wash and the peeling went away.  Tried Tresemme again and the peeling came back.  Switched back to Dove and the peeling stopped.  I did not notice any irritation on my scalp, interestingly enough.

I am very interested to see the ingredients list of these two products. Can you share them please.

[Abdullah]

I will go for A. 

When we apply a cream to our skin we want it to do something. When we touch it and feel it on our skin after two hours we think that cream is still there and doing it’s job. If we don’t feel it’s existence we would think its not there anymore and not doing anything anymore. 

[Abdullah]

RedCoast said:

TEWL reduction: it depends.

Mainly, it depends whether there’s a wound involved, bodily location (hands, feet, face, etc), and environmental factors, like the moisturizer being washed off.

@Abdullah, what location were you thinking of specifically? Face? Feet? Or a “general” or “all-over” moisturizer?

For face i think an occlusive agent capable of reducing TEWL by %30 or %40 would be enough. But for hand and foot i don’t know how much TEWL reduction should we aim. 
I have a lotion with %5 petrolatum. Works very good for hand and foot. But for face the same lotion without petrolatum feels better. 

[Abdullah]

Valentyna said:

Abdullah said:

At what percentage have you used geogard ECT and how old is your son? 

I also don’t like benzyl alcohol on my skin. 

You can use a blend of phenoxyethanol with other preservatives.

Hi @Abdullah, I have used it at its max percentage recommended by a supplier which is 1%. It is terrible. my son is 3.5 y/o and he absolutely hated the cream preserved with Geogard. It would make him cry. What other preservatives would you recommend? I have not worked with phenoxyethanol before. Is it a preservative itself or more like a booster?

Geogard ECT has salicylic acid and in EU it is not allowed in leave on products for children of 3 years old and below. Maybe that is irritating your child. 

If you can write your whole formula we would know what else is in there. geogard ECT is not very effective at pH 6. So maybe it is contaminated.

Skin pH is 4.7. the skin pH of people with eczema is higher than that. You should aim to bring the pH of his skin down by applying low pH products. Why would you want to have a product with pH 7 and increase the pH of his skin even more? 

I make leave on products at pH 4-4.5 and they work better than same product at pH 5-5.5.

Even a cream with pH 2.8 which is very acidic is better than a cream with pH 7.4 according to This Data. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4470210/#:~:text=Normal%20pH%20for%20non%2Dneonatal,the%20phenotype%20of%20atopic%20dermatitis.

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352647518300133

Just some relevance for the table, but personally i think the TEWL percentage is mainly theoretical unless you have in vivo testing done. The main thing is that the TEWL reduction with occlusives should be designed based on the type of product you are formulating for the intended customer demographic. If the intended demographic don’t need a highly occlusive product, then there’s no particular need to really think too much about it. It’s more important to get the end user feedback.    

Yes TEWL reduction should be designed differently according to consumer need but how much TEWL reduction do people need? 

For example i saw in a study that a healthy skin loses 500ml water via TEWL daily. It means TEWL for healthy skin is natural and may be important. So is %100 TEWL reduction necessary?

Isn’t it even harmful long-term? 

[Abdullah]

abierose said:

@Abdullah you really do ask the best questions! I have wondered this very same thing for quite some time.

I found a lot of interesting articles and publications on TEWL but nothing that specifically answers your question. However I did find a publication about Stratum Corneum Hydration as it relates to TEWL…below is a link to that as well as a screenshot of some of the article…I don’t know if any of this will be helpful but I am hoping someone can answer your question because I am interested in knowing this as well.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/srt.12711

Thanks for the link

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

@Abdullah
the table is from the book called “Handbook of cosmetic science and technology”. You can find the PDF online or if you only want to see the chapter, it’s on google books here -> 

https://books.google.com.sg/books?id=RIvOBQAAQBAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&lpg=PP1&pg=PA93#v=onepage&q&f=false

I love such books 
Thanks

[Abdullah]

ngarayeva001 said:

Butylene Glycol is more versatile because it can be used as a solvent and less tacky than glycerin. It also a preservative booster. Sodium Lactate has a downside of being a strong electrolyte, so acrylic acid based polymeric thickeners and emulsifiers aren’t an option.

Thanks 
As i don’t use any ingredient thas is not soluble in water or oil i may not need solvent for now. Maybe in the future.

[Abdullah]

In India you don’t have to write the full list of ingredients on label. Most of the companies don’t do. Those who do will also write the fancy names only. For example in a Shampoo label they would write aloe Vera extract, vitamin e and shampoo base. That’s it. 

You would never know what is in it. So don’t waist your time trying to find it out. 

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

Butylene glycol for short term hydration is also less than glycerin. Isn’t it? 

Yes, so normally for a higher short term humectancy, the combination can be used, but if your humidity is average of 52%, then butylene glycol won’t really make sense. You can take a look at the reference below, which is the normal table when you search for “humectant humidity” on google. 

In terms of the 50+% humidity range, you can consider about 3% to 5% of glycerin. In my test, in an air conditioned room, at about 50% humidity, 2% glycerin USP isn’t that tacky. 

Regarding the pH, it depends on your overall formulation, but there’s no issues with pH being at 4.5 - 5.5 to be honest. My preference is pH 5 - 5.5. 

• Natural skin surface pH is on average below 5, which is beneficial for its resident flora

In this paper, The role of epidermal lipids in cutaneous permeability
barrier homeostasis:

For example, the activities of both b-glucocerebrosidase and acidic sphingomyelinase are optimal at or below pH 5.5, which is very similar to the pH of the stratum corneum. Conversely, many of the proteases in the stratum corneum have a pH optimum of 7 or higher;
therefore, their activities are decreased at the usual stratum
corneum pH of 5.5. If the pH of the stratum corneum is
increased, the activities of b-glucocerebrosidase and acidic
sphingomyelinase are reduced and the extracellular processing of glucosylceramides and sphingomyelins to ceramides
is impaired, leading to abnormalities in the structure of the
extracellular lipid membranes and decreased permeability
barrier function (4, 41–43). Furthermore, increases in stratum corneum pH stimulate protease activity, resulting in increased corneocyte desquamation (4, 41, 42).

Though, ultimately it’s up to you and your formulations requirements really. 

Very helpful information.
Thanks
This chart, is this just this picture or you have the complete file? 

[Abdullah]

Graillotion said:

I am a poor resource for you…because I do not factor cost when I formulate… I only chase performance and texture.

First…. I am crazy for fast breaking, wet feeling products that dry quickly with a cooling sensation, and feel as close to weightless as possible.  Creams with a gel undertone.  I expect them to feel like products one might have tried that cost $200+.  So pentylene glycol brings an incredible ‘wet’ feel when added to a formula (more so than other glycols I have tried).  So automatically a ‘yes’ for me.  Compound this with other well known fast breaking components…and you can begin to imagine.  However, I also use Pentylene G as part of a larger preservative program, as jemolian mentioned.  I also use the afore mentioned 1,2-Hexanediol plus caprylyl glycol in everything I make.  I think pharma has an affinity for the glycols…and has really pushed me down that path (so I use use several in each project)…hehehe.

I think the point Jemolian makes about how humectants perform at different humidities…. is often overlooked.  I produce products in a rain forest…. So I need them to be comfortable here…as well as in a dry climate.  Based on feedback from personal and testers from around the globe, I have for the most part, hit the target I sought.  I don’t think that could have been achieved with a single humectant.  That being said….if you are selling into a single climate….than one could hypothetically test the humectants against the climate, and make a match.

I am not a huge fan/follower/believer in HA…but I use it in absolutely everything.  Partly for claim…and partly…when I take it out….I notice it.  I use a magical blend of wet and dry silicones….and I am suspecting a synergy in this area with HA.  The moisturizing aspects of some of my projects….are greater than the sum of the parts. 

I do not use BG or Propylene glycol…probably more for consumer perception than any other reason.  When I was evaluating PG against Propanediol… in my climate Propanediol clearly out performed it.  This again….results will vary with climate and other factors.  When I tested both BG and PG….they never really stood out in a formula….like Pentylene glycol…..that one will make you sit up and pay attention.  Sidebar…. lots of glycols…can cause issues in emulsions….so better be using something pretty stout with them.  I am typically starting with a core of 165, and flavoring it with a Montanov + GSC or a cationic (w/o GSC).

I guess my final point on humectants would be…. who cares…if you don’t support them with stellar barrier function.  They’re all short lived…if you don’t lock them in and down.

I break every project into the functional aspects….and build the supporting cast for each aspect, otherwise all is for naught.

Thanks a lot.
Appreciated
I am on the side of budget friendly products.
I like dry and powdery felling for my products. I use Polyglyceryl 6 distearate which has good powdery feel in non-ionic emulsifiers and pair it with Glyceryl stearate.

Pentylene glycol, caprylyl Glycol, 1,2-Hexanediol all are very expensive. 
Can i ask at what percentage do you use them in a moisturizer and how much does a moisturizer cost you per kg and how much you sell it?

I use phenoxyethanol and Piroctone Olamine.

The average annual percentage of humidity is: 52.0% where most of my customers are. How is glycerin for such climate? 

I am recently very fun of low pH leave on products. pH 4-4.5. my customers like the same formulas more than at pH 5-5.5. i even sometimes think why are not everyone making products at pH 4.5 instead of 5.5.

[Abdullah]

Pattsi said:

Performance wise Glycerin is the gold standard, Diglycerin is stickier and more expensive so you might not need it.
If your product has a huge end price margin sure you can use any humectant combo you like, but if not I would say glycerin alone would be enough.

Thanks for information about diglycerin. 
The profit margin is not so high. That is why i am avoiding expensive ingredients like HA. 

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

If you have to stick to one, then glycerin would be fine. Depending on the what you are trying to achieve and the suitability of the formulation, the choice can really be different. 

For example, butylene glycol can make sense if you are intending to give a short term / up front impression that your product is very hydrating but mainly the long term hydrating function is sustained by glycerin. This would deal more with the customer’s perception.

Alternatively, other humectants like sodium lactate would likely be a good choice but if your formulation is not electrolyte sensitive. Assuming that you are cost saving, then it may not work out since you likely will use carbomer as part of the formulation for stability purposes. 

The main issue with just using glycerin would be that it can be quite tacky depending on the percentage used and the humidity your intended users are at. In a high humidity climate, you don’t need that much glycerin, but at lower humidity, you can consider adding more. So a mixture of humectants can be used to create different skin feels as required. 

Butylene glycol for short term hydration is also less than glycerin. Isn’t it? 

Sodium lactate looks like a good option. 

I use xanthan and in near future will also add acacia gum to it. They both are not electrolyte sensitive. 

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

@Abdullah it depends on multiple factors really. If you don’t mind the natural/synthetic status, then the normal combination of butylene glycol + glycerin is fine enough in most cases, unless you want to use something more fanciful for specific purposes such as “natural derived” (eg, with propanediol or pentylene glycol), co-emulsification (eg, with pentylene glycol). 

From what i’ve seen, butylene glycol normally boosts the humectancy profile for the first 1 to 2 hours, which is similar to the Figure above. Good thing about the glycols, they would help boost preservation to a certain extent.  

Though just to mention, there’s also 1,2-Hexanediol. 

I haven’t used butylene glycol but according to this chart it is much less effective humectant compared to glycerin. Combining them also doesn’t make much difference but if i stick to only one of them for now i can save some money by purchasing in high quality. You know business is all about cutting the cost.
Fancy names and claims aren’t important to me. 
The first thing important is how strong humectant it is. 
If two products are the same or very small difference then what are the extra functions that they do?

[Abdullah]

I have too opinions about nature.

1. If natural mean from the earth then everything is natural because everyone is from the earth and within the earth. We are just playing with natural things by mixing them or unmixig them.

2. If natural mean the way the thing are in nature then milk is natural, crude oil is natural, poison is natural. 

Yogurt is not natural, pizza is not natural, any cosmetic product is not natural. 
Non of these exist in nature the way they are. All are made by people.

You can claim any cosmetic product completely natural or you can’t claim any of them natural. 

Tell me why i am wrong. 

[Abdullah]

As @abierose said chelating agent doesn’t look necessary because cationic emulsion is less likely to be contaminated by microbes than anionic and non-ionic emulsions. 
By the way what is your preservative and pH?

I like how BTMS feels on skin. For moisturization, i suggest remove pg7 and may be protein, panthenol and extract if you don’t know the details of your extract. Increase sodium lactate to %5, Reduce avocado oil to %5-10 and add % 10-20 glycerin. 

[Abdullah]

jemolian said:

It’s better to do a combination since they have been shown to work better combined. 

Here’s a screenshot from one of the test for a comparison done to  compare individually.

Link from my dropbox (since i can’t find the PDF online strangely, please save if require in case i move it) -> 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r009ugoq0k077a/Moisturizing%20Effects%20of%20Diglycerol%20combined%20with%20glycerol.pdf?dl=0

That is interesting. 
Glycerin is about 5 times better humectant compared to butylene glycol according to this study. 

As i purchase the humectant (glycerin) in bulk quantity 50kgs each time to reduce the cost, if i purchase three humectant that would need high investment for humectants and the result is also not much better compared to 1 humectant alone so i will stick to use only one humectant. 

I am looking for best performing humectant. Any suggestions? 
Performance is important. Consumer appeal isn’t important. 

[Abdullah]

Graillotion said:

I do not have the chemistry background to answer your question…but I will toss this out there.

Typically (not always) BG will be less sticky.  So some formulators will split the formula, as they feel things get too tacky with just glycerin.  However…as many of you know…I’ll buy the same ingredient from multiple suppliers …. just to compare.  I did this with BG (when I was using it….no long am)…. and when one of the repackers offered a non-petrol based version…I jumped all over it….and you guessed it….more gross than glycerin!

I use glycerin at low levels…but love to support it with propanediol, betaine, and my all time fav….pentylene glycol.  (I call that one…my secret weapon.)

That is interesting.
What about petrol based butylene glycol? 

And how does butylene glycol compare to propylene glycol?

What is so spacial about Pentylene glycol that you like as it is expensive too?

[Abdullah]

Graillotion said:

Abdullah said:

Graillotion said:

Abdullah said:

@Graillotion did you add %0.1 active GLDA or solution? 
If solution, how much GLDA is in the solution? 

The .1% GLDA goes into the beaker first….then all the water goes in second….and so on and so forth.  So all the water and the GLDA are in the beaker by themselves for a short amount of time…I guess I would consider that a solution.

……….Oh maybe I misunderstood your question…I use the liquid form, which is 50% active ingredient….so I guess in reality…I am using .05%.

Thanks 
What did you add next and next untel cationic? 

I put the Varisoft EQ 65 in the oil phase, so the GLDA and Varisoft do not meet until emulsification.  

The formula is now working magically…I am on version  #16.

So Keep in mind…this formula is still primarily 165 @ 3%, and Varisoft EQ 65 at 2%.  

Since my GLDA is liquid, it is only 50% active…therefore at my inclusion rate of .1%…it is more like .05%.

Pharma suggested (and was right as usual) that SepiGel 305 would work in this scenario, (I believe) due to the lower rate of the Varisoft EQ 65….and the inclusion post emulsion.  The different anionic gelling agents have varying levels of how they will interact with cationics, and it was his belief that 305 was one of the better possible candidates, based on it’s constituents.

Thanks