Bill_Toge
Forum Replies Created
-
“ammonium salt” could also mean a polymeric quaternary ammonium salt (polyquaternium) of some kind, which would be the curl-enhancing ingredient
or it could mean something like behentrimonium chloride, which would act as an emulsifier
as far as critical details go, that list is completely vague and uninformative, and very likely incomplete too; I’d personally ignore it and formulate by comparison
-
if it’s hygroscopic you’ll have a hell of a job drying it out, even with a desiccator
you could try precipitating it with acetone or isopropyl alcohol then recrystallising it from hot alcohol; it’s a more fiddly method but it’s reliable and it doesn’t need expensive equipment
-
can you get hold of Stepan, Evonik or Kao products?
besides BASF, those three are the major suppliers of sodium cocoamphoacetate with a worldwide presence, and there are many smaller ones too; it’s a pretty generic product
-
also, the fact there is no rigorous or legally/scientifically agreed definition of ‘natural’ means they could be using almost anything
-
it’s simply because your L-6CA is more concentrated, so there’s less water to make the mixture go cloudy
-
@attapol it can cause headaches if you inhale it, in relatively large quantities; a highly acidic cream will not have enough volatile ammonia to have an effect
it sounds to me like headache is by caused a trapped nerve or something similar, that’s been triggered by the pressure of applying the cream; I agree with @Perry, the user needs to see a doctor about this
-
in principle the copper could act as a heterogeneous catalyst for oxidation/decomposition reactions, which could alter the composition of the essential oil; steel would be relatively unreactive
however, whether or not this actually occurs in practise is another matter
-
probably not; all the nitrogens are part of a conjugated biguanidine system (so they wouldn’t react like amines), and one is conjugated with the benzene ring, making it even less reactive
as ever, the best way to find out would be to try it and see!
-
I used to work for a major manufacturer of two-phase mouthwash; each phase was manufactured and filled separately, as it would have been hopelessly impractical to try and fill the mixed product
and, as @Bobzchemist pointed out, achieving a clean phase separation was nearly impossible after the product had been mixed
-
@Aisha that web page cites the EWG as a source, so it’s fair to say it’s nonsense
ceteareth-25 is harmless as long as you don’t get it in your eye
the ethylene oxide content in cosmetic grades is next to nothing, and definitely not enough to cause any health problems
-
yes, somebody probably does know the answer to this
-
@Zink probably not, ozokerite is a very different kind of wax to microcrystalline; it’s hard, brittle and more like beeswax
-
if you neutralise lye (or any other inorganic hydroxide), you get water; however, as you point out, soaps lose water rather than gain it as they cure
you also need an acid to neutralise it - it won’t happen spontaneously
in short: no, it doesn’t neutralise over time
-
try adding microcrystalline wax
it’ll make the product waxier and less slippy without radically altering the rheology
-
@palash1865 unfortunately, I can’t; everything I know about hot-fill styling products was learned at the bench, through blood, sweat and occasional tears
it’s a specialist area, and it’s not well documented, so most chemists venturing into it have to learn by trial and error - because of this, I’ve been witness to some shockingly bad formulation work from consultants and self-styled experts who really ought to know better
having said that, I am in the process of writing an R&D manual which covers this subject among many others; if I send you a relevant extract from it, you may find it helpful
-
+1 for Brookfields
if you want to measure creams and gels, you’ll want the heliapath and T-bar spindles too
-
the only thing that might do it is amodimethicone, which is a film former and substantive to hair - I wouldn’t call it a “colour shield” myself, but then again I’m not a marketing person
-
@Belassi it’s a category 1B (i.e. proven and serious) reproductive toxin; it’s treated in the same way as carcinogens and mutagens
-
@luiscuevasii what do you mean by “too near to form a w/o emulsion”?
your formula has PEG-100 stearate (HLB = 19) in it, it will never form a W/O emulsion!
-
@Kara90 from personal experience, I’ve found a 90% phenoxyethanol / 10% ethylhexylglycerin blend at 1% w/w is one of the most foolproof and reliable ways to preserve emulsions - the only time it’s not performed adequately on its own was in a formula that contained a large amount of clay
-
try adding propylene glycol to the water phase; it’s got a lower viscosity and better lubricity than glycerine
try increasing the mineral oil too, it’ll make your oil phase more spreadable
-
the only time I’ve ever seen this happen with emulsion-based hair waxes is when they contain a long-flow rheology modifier which shears the emulsion as it’s mixed, e.g. PEG-90M
apart from that, the only way a product of this type could potentially take on the appearance and consistency of a soft cream (in my experience) is if you fill it at a temperature below the set point of the emulsionif it’s been well formulated, the product will start thickening visibly before it reaches that point - and once it’s below the set point, it’s usually far too viscous to fill or pump with any efficiency
-
@PharmaSpain these are laws within individual member states; the European parliament itself has not yet passed any union-wide amendment
I recall this started to be flagged 1-2 years ago, and suppliers have slowly but surely been phasing them out of their catalogues since then
-
personally I’d contact the manufacturer of that raw material and ask if they can carry out similar tests using your finished product (which I assume contains that material)
unless you plan to offer testing services for other people, any equipment you buy to carry out this test will likely be used once and spend the rest of its life gathering dust
-
the first question in my mind was: how can UV filters get from the skin into the blood, and specifically affect the sperm?
even if you apply the substance neat, most UV filter molecules are too large to be absorbed effectively by the skin - and nobody eats sunscreen, injects it or puts it on their knackers