[Agate]

Thank you for clearing that up @MarkBroussard and @PhilGeis ! In that case I’ll stick with 2)

[Agate]

Thanks @MarkBroussard, I didn’t know the INCI name was common in the USA.

I did some searching and came across this: https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-labeling/cosmetic-ingredient-names

International “Harmonization” of Ingredient Names
Cosmetic companies sometimes ask FDA about identifying botanicals only by their Latin names, identifying color additives only by the “CI” numbers used in the European Union, or using terms from other languages, such as “Aqua” and “Parfum” instead of “Water” and “Fragrance.” Under the FPLA, however, ingredients must be listed by their “common or usual names,” and FDA does not accept these alternatives as substitutes. But FDA does not object to their use in parentheses following the common or usual name in English (or Spanish, in Puerto Rico). Here are some examples:

• Water (Aqua)

• Fragrance (Parfum)

• Honey (Mel)

• Sweet Almond (Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis) Oil

• FD&C Yellow No. 5 (CI 19140)

So this would suggest that 3) is preferable for the US, but 1) and 2) are also used in practice?

[Agate]

Disclaimer, I have no personal experience formulating sunscreens, so I hope that others will comment.

I decided not to bother for now because from what I read, the efficacy of sunscreen formulas is very hard to predict theoretically, and testing for UV protection is one of the most expensive tests in the cosmetic realm. (See here: The Trouble With Making Your Own Sunscreen | Realize Beauty (wordpress.com))

[Agate]

Just finishing up watching the event on replay as I couldn’t make it on the date. I wanted to say thank you to Perry for the entertaining hosting and all the speakers for the interesting content! I had a great time watching, learned a lot of new things that I wouldn’t have easily found elsewhere and took note of the relevant contact information.

To anyone who hasn’t seen it yet, I do recommend watching it on replay. I personally found the sections on thickeners, W/O emulsions and hair care particularly educational but would watch/listen to the whole thing if you can make time.

[Agate]

Can’t answer all the questions, but from my experience I haven’t noticed a difference between Coco Glucoside and Caprylyl/Capryl Glucoside in mildness or foam. The main difference that I’ve seen is that Coco Glucoside is cheaper but Capryl/Caprylyl Glucoside works better as a solubilizer.

[Agate]

Reminds me of the wonderfully weird stearic acid croissant diet: https://fireinabottle.net/introducing-the-croissant-diet/

[Agate]

Here’s the safety report on triethyl citrate: https://online.personalcarecouncil.org/ctfa-static/online/lists/cir-pdfs/PR590.pdf Generally described as non-irritating, though as always individual experiences may vary.

[Agate]

Thinly veiled link-building? A word of caution, the active in these eye drops was developed and is used as a medical treatment for glaucoma by lowering the pressure inside the eyeball. Definitely not a cosmetic.

[Agate]

If your product doesn’t contain water and there is no risk that water may enter it, then you don’t need a preservative.

As for why your product did or didn’t work, I don’t know.

[Agate]

What about triethyl citrate as an aluminium-free active? It’s in my go-to deodorant.

[Agate]

elemental.eu say they have it, according to their website they will ship to the USA for €19.99.

[Agate]

I just saw a mention of “dry” cocamidopropyl betaine, a quick search showed that it does seem to be available as a powder. No idea about formulating with it though.

[Agate]

Which xanthan gum did you use? Cosphaderm X34 shouldn’t create a snotty texture. Glucosides do get gummy when they dry out. As for your current batch, no idea what to do with that.

[Agate]

I’m partly curious about what I might not know about the benefits of eyebrow sprays, and partly disgusted by the more likely scenario that this is just another useless cosmetic gimmick, generating waste and cluttering people’s lives.

[Agate]

Why an eyebrow mist?… Yes you would need a solubilizer. Have a look over here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbgHvi_lqM Yes you need a preservative, I won’t figure out for you which is suitable for this unusual purpose, maybe someone else will.

[Agate]

I would also be interested in the difference between SLMI and SCMI. From the little information I’ve been able to find I believe they are fairly similar but don’t really know.

I don’t know about the slimy consistency, but what I do know is that the opaque opalescence of SLMI in water completely goes at a lower pH of around 5.

[Agate]

I’m confused, what are the remaining 83% of the formula? Do you mean that you add your powder to water before use so that water then equates 83%?

I haven’t used your specific surfactants myself, but I have found that each surfactant has a distinct effect on hair, and it’s only testing that will give you a definitive answer on how different surfactants will work together.
Sodium Cocoyl Glycinate or Sodium Cocoyl Glutamate for instance both make my hair sticky when used alone for a test, and they are said to be quite conditioning. Perhaps in a mix with your “poofy” formula you might yield a more conditioned/weighed down end result. That being said I haven’t checked if they are compatible with the rest of your formula.
I wouldn’t bother with decyl glucoside myself, because it makes my hair distinctly dry, coarse and poofy, more than any other surfactant I’ve tried, so I can’t imagine it helping. But if you have it there there’s no harm in trying it and finding out for sure.

[Agate]

Do you really need to add water or aloe vera juice? A (possibly whipped) body butter would be much easier to make, no issues with preservation to figure out. If you really wanted to incorporate a water phase you’ll also need an emulsifier which is difficult to do very naturally.

[Agate]

The idea that gram-positive bacteria are good is questionable as a blanket statement. There are plenty of pathogenic gram-positive bacteria.

Seen as skin infections are most often caused by the gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus, I’d be weary of potentially smearing high concentrations of it on my skin, even though it is part of the normal human flora to a degree.

Furthermore it is one of the five organisms tested for in the standard preservative efficacy test, so I’m thinking you would automatically fail it if you failed to add any preservative effective against gram-positive bacteria. And I would guess that the product would still be very vulnerable to spoiling.

[Agate]

@ngarayeva001 Do you know of a supplier that sells the vegetable-oil-like fractionated coconut oil? I’ve been wanting to try it for a while, but haven’t been able to find a supplier.

[Agate]

@helenhelen Glad to hear you’re happy with it!

[Agate]

It’s true I can manage with my bamix and emulsifying attachment right now. However, I have seen that the consistency with a rotor/stator homogenizer can get quite a lot thicker, so I do think it makes sense to get a small homogenizer if the plan is to scale to a bigger one in future.

@helenhelen Looking forward to reading about your experience with it!

[Agate]

You may find this interesting: https://blog.euromonitor.com/redefining-the-lipstick-effect-examples-of-recession-proof-categories/ Basically, the thesis is that if people don’t have the money to treat themselves with big ticket items, they buy “affordable luxury” such as nice cosmetics as little treats. But this may not apply if this recession gets worse than the great depression and people have to pinch every single penny.

Also, at-home substitutes for salon treatments (boxed hair dye, nail products) could be expected to do well.

[Agate]

I see, thanks for explaining. I do not have an explicit source and instead based that statement on the absence of a reliable source recommending sprays.

Very interesting statement you found in the FDA policy, it raises a few potential issues I hadn’t thought about.

From a wider perspective I’m trying to raise awareness for the fact that hand sanitizer is an OTC drug for a reason, and it can’t be treated like a normal cosmetic formulation project. The vast majority of people on this forum (myself included) can’t alter the formulation or delivery form and reliably assess the safety of those changes, however simple they may seem. That’s also a sentiment that I see expressed in the narrow range of allowed formulations in the FDA policy.

Now that you’ve made me think about it I see that my argument would have
been more congruent if I didn’t add my own speculations as to why sprays may be less appropriate.

[Agate]

@helenhelen It does seem to be very well received! A modular, serviceable solution from a small manufacturer is right up my street as well.

As much as I like the idea of the cordless option, I’d personally go for corded. Short battery life (some say only 5-30 minutes) seems to be a common complaint in the 1 star reviews. https://www.dremel.com/en_US/products/-/show-product/tools/8220-12vmax-high-performance-cordless?bvroute=Review%2F73952217 In general I’ve had such bad experiences with rechargeable devices losing performance that I’ve sworn to buying the corded option when possible. At least the Dremel does have the option to replace the battery or even keep several charged ones on hand. In order to avoid messing around with the cable I’ll probably use a lab stand with one or two of those three-fingered clamps.

I have a Bamix blender here which also does around 20’000 RPM for a maximum of five minutes. It seemed short to me initially, until I found out that most kitchen blenders are only rated for 30 seconds at a time! No wonder I melted the plastic gears of the predecessor…. The Bamix on the other hand is known to last for 20+ years, so a five-minute run time in and of itself doesn’t need to be an indicator of poor quality, though I agree it is probably a bad sign with a lot of devices. I do wonder how they build high end devices to run continuously.

Does anyone know whether something like the OCIS/Dremel setup would scale to a Silverson down the road? Should it be okay because they both use a rotor/stator head, or could this setup lead to headaches when scaling? One potential issue I could see is that the Dremel doesn’t indicate the RPM, but then I’m not sure if the optimum RPM wouldn’t need to be found for the larger device anyway?