chemicalmatt
Forum Replies Created
-
Thanks, David. I’ll contact Rowayton. I’ve got a few drums of a hair fixative polymer I want to move.
-
VInta, check out food ingredient suppliers in your area for both cocoa shell powder and salt. Their prices tend to be lower than the distributors peddling to the personal care industry. Salt can be had from any industrial chemical supplier also.
-
Before you get too far using that article linked from makingcosmetics.com, cherri, be advised there are glaring misrepresentations in that article about inverse-phase emulsions. Do not add polymeric thickeners to the internal (water) phase - ever - unless you really want to drive yourself crazy. I don’t know where they came up with that one, but it is categorically wrong. (Who writes this stuff?) Also, magnesium sulfate works better than NaCl in stabilizing W/O emulsions about 90% of the time, so start with epsom salt always. That article also fails to mention the best W/O emulsifiers in existence, the silicone-based ones. See Evonik, Siltech and Dow-Corning product guidelines for these. In case you haven’t deduced this yet: you have to begin from scratch here; you cannot simply “change” from O/W to W/O.
-
Maya, bentonite, laponite or good old Veegum (magnesium aluminum silicate) would solve your stability issue, even with the oils incorporated. Clays tend to deactivate formaldehyde donor preservatives, (and others I suspect), especially when added after incorporation. Always add your preservative first to the water, before adding the clays and colloids. Perhaps someone else in the Forum knows the best preservative to use with clays. I have to believe simpler molecules like benzyl alcohol, sodium benzoate, sodium dehydroacetate would do well; PCMX would be a slam-dunk.
-
Do not ever be embarrassed asking for advice on this forum,chicagogirl.That’s why Perry ( a Chicago boy like me) founded it. We studied chemistry and physics so you didn’t have to. FYI, the solvent concentration (water in this case) does affect penetration too. Less water, less penetration. Also, you may have a case here of less is more. I don’t think you need more than 1.0% dl-panthenol in a o/w lotion to be effective in softening the skin. Add a little urea and all the better. Cheers.
-
Kim, assuming there is no SDA (ethanol) in this toner, and the pH is in the 5.6 - 6.5 range, why not switch to Geogard 221 (benzyl alcohol & dehydroacetic acid)? Safety profile and regulatory status is the same.
-
It won’t.
-
I cannot think a beeswax-borax w/o emulsion would be stable without the borax. Those who claim stability likley had a very high level of lipid components and likely at least one other low HLB surfacatant without knowing it. I have a lot of experience with these formulas and its intriguing to think of them as a “nouveaux” natrural emulsifier, which of course they are. There is no other w/o emulsifier as natural as this, by the way. The glucosides are chemically modified. Beeswax is also useful as a stabilizer in w/o emulsions using other emulsifiers, which can also use microcrystalline wax for the same purpose. Beeswax is not cheap these days, like it was only ten years ago, but you may be onto something here in exploring its use. White beeswax with an Acid Value of 17 - 24 works best as I recall.
-
SPF testing is expensive, but here goes: in the Eastern U.S. try Essex Testing; in the Midwest try Advanced Testing Laboratory; in the Western U.S. try Bioscreen Testing Services.
One (1) cfu is absolutely nothing to worry about. Usually that would be annotated as <10 cfu/ml, which is well within acceptable control limits.
Perry & Making are correct in their assessment. Given the high profile given the naturals, this formulator conveniently left out the unnatural ingredients. This is a common scam within the “natural cosmetics” industry. And, they likely did process this at 35 - 40C by using an associative thickener to hold it all together, e.g. Seppigel 305 or what not. Listing all that neat almost-edible stuff would be undermined by also listing “Acrylamide” too. There oughta’ be a law! Oh wait, there already IS one.
-
Yup…..that’s the isosorbide thingy allright. Arlasolve DMI (dimethyl isosorbide)? Not an ester either, but a modified heterocycle. Another strangely expensive chemical too if I recall. Even more so now that Croda markets it, I suspect.
-
You need to know your nomenclature for fatty acid homologs: deceyl = C10, dodecyl = C12, Lauryl = C14, Palmitic = C16, Stearyl = C18, Behenyl = C22, all saturated carbon chains. Unsaturated ones (olefins) have different names. Perry ought to add a link someplace to study these. You cannot go wrong with coco glucosides, though building viscosity is a small hurdle to overcome, you are well advised to make it the base surfactant for your wash and begin from there. I do not have much experience with SMC Taurate, though I do know it was used early on in the “sulfate-free” game. The glucosides and sarcosinates are less expensive and foam better than the taurates, if memory serves. Those glutamates are superb - but wierdly expensive in my opinion. Glycerin is vastly over-rated in body washes, for the reasons mentioned earlier.
-
Though philosophically I’m with Bob Zonis on the subject, here are some cues I’ve experienced. Liposomes (phospholipid vesicles you can make with lecithin) are designed to penetrate the stratum corneum while carrying a “payload” of vitamin E or whatever lipid can fit within. Emu oil (kalaya oil in some parts) has pronounced penetrating properties and has even been known to cross the blood-brain barrier. Ethoxydiglycol has the property of enhancing penetration of the hair cuticle inot the cortex with small molecule components (e.g. NaOH, LiOH). Unfortunately, it also halps penetrate the scalp with those same alkali - ouch! Then there is that isosorbide ester ICI (now Croda) has that allows triglyceride oils to penetrate into the subcutaneous layer. I forgot its name.
(Hey Perry, now that the glaciers have receded from North Avenue here in Chicago, start joggling again, clear your brain with fresh air, and come up with an article about this topic.)
-
Gustavo, ozokerite is part of the petrochemical (mostly) linear alkyl homolog family of petrolatum/microcrystalline wax/ozokerite/paraffin. It is very useful in thickening and stabilizing mineral oil, petrolatum based emulsions, even the water-in-oil ones, and can harden those cyclomethicone-stearyl alcohol antiperspirant sticks like nothing else ( I’m talking 0.10%!). The others are natural waxes, more polar, complex and vary softeness and pliability in lipsticks, lipbalms, color make-up pencils. I never tried burning some to see what happens. Could be a renewable fuel! Perhaps another forum member more versed in color cosmetics can help here.
-
Makes sense, Mike. I thought Stepan made this creature, Even better might be the Pationic lactylate surfactants from R.I,T.A., which work well as primary emulsifiers, though the R.I.T.A. literature strangely doesn’t mention that. Pationic SSL is what I remember using (stearoyl lactylate). I can also tell you I remember an article years ago noting that lactic acid and its salts actually stabilize urea from hydrolytic decomposition, so you are probably in good shape here. The old 10% Urea skin-care creams used that trick.
-
No experience necessary, love. As a rule, the higher carbon-chain analogs are milder. So, coco-glucoside will be milder than lauryl glucoside, milder than decyl glucoside, etc. Sodium Cocoamphoacetate is a good mild amphoteric used extensively in hair-care. Sodium cocoyl glutamate also very mild and a good foamer. You are better off, if you can, to purchase these separately and save some money. Not sure what “SMC Taurate paste” is, but sounds expensive if it is a taurate salt. Leave the glycerin out. It kills viscosity, hinders foam and doesn’t do anything in a system such as yours.
-
Actually, Bob, it appears Dave’s got Arlacel 165 in there too - the old PEG ester workhorse. That being said, you may want to convert this to an ether alcohol system and get away from the esters altogether. The Steareth-2/Steareeth-21 combo usually works. ( I just use Steaereth-12 and split the proverbial HLB difference.) Hydroquinone is far more electoryltic than folks remember, and that metabisulfite is a contributor too.
I’ll pose another issue for you here, or open another thread: have you tried assaying this on HPLC with a UV detector yet? I recall having to resolve the two enatiomeric forms of hydroquinone by varying the mobile phase polarity program. It was a bitch! Wish I still had that test method, I’d email it to you.
-
Mike, have you considered the use of sodium lactoyl lactate? This is an entriely different animal, so to speak, with entirely more powerful emulsifying properties than “sodium lactate”.
-
Yes to both of the above.
-
Perry, if your first point happens, and I’d have more than a little shadenfreude if it does, wouldn’t it be ironic if the public became alarmed over the LACK of preservation in cosmetics due to the continuing scares over alleged preservative toxicity? Might we finally see The Backlash?
Bob & Perry both have a point about the fate of Avon. That ship is going down, one way or another.
And,Mike, I can agree with Perry. Here in the Land of the Fee, we can still go bankrupt simply by getting ill.
-
Mike, not only silica, but good ‘ol pumice - the original exfoliant, if you will - is cheap and safe for the environment. The stuff comes out of volcanoes. The nut-shell flour abraders for scrubs are fine, but have always been inexcusably expensive too. No supplier has ever been able to convince me why scrub flours made from almond shells, apricot shells, walnut shells - all of which are food by-products unsuitable for consumption - need to cost so much just because the supplier milled them through a Fitzmill, then irradiated them, when their starting material was obviously cheap to begin with. In the past, I’ve been tempted to buy a cheap, used Fitzmill and make the stuff myself!
-
Naturalista, not all Polyquaterniums have styling ability. Most do not. There are so many, too. Ayla gave you a great first step, since ISP (now Ashland) came out with one of the first: Polyquaternum-11 (Gafquat). I’ll recommend Styleze W-17 terpolymer from that same manufacturer. By the way, here’s some trivia: the GAF in Gafquat is from GAF Corporation, more famous for their recording tape, which bought the technology from the Antar Corporation, then sold to ISP. All of which probably ocurred before you were born. THAT’S how long Polyquaternium-11 has been used in styling products.
-
Can anyone say “supersaturation”? Your product, settled, cooled crystallized. This is Physical Chemistry 101. You’ll need a co-solvent, dude. I advise ethoxtdiglycol or propylene glycol. Check the Merck Index for solubitlity parameters.
-
Merit, there’s absolutely no good reason to have ethanol in that formula, assuming SDA is what they are referring to. Unless you smell it in there, sonsider it one of the many typos we see in INCI abel listings. I would disregard it.
-
Copy that, Mike. Just today I read this week’s issue of C&E News (17-FEB-14) and learned about the nefarious WERCS program being commanded by the likes of Walmart and Target stores. This was curated by the Environmental Defense Fund. When will they stop with the fear mongering?
F.Y.I., my favorite danger chemical (HEALTH:3, FLAMMABILITY:3) is a dry gin martini!
-
Simona, most bar soaps are mildly alkaline, as you’ve noted. These do not raise the “acid mantle” of the dermis all that much. No need for strongly acidic post-treatment. Most standard skin-care lotions have a pH in the 6.0 - 7.0 range, and should suffice. Also, those “people claiming” this condition are not chemists. Most syndet bar soaps are much milder on the skin than the old harsh coco-alkali ones, and lots of glycerin and olive oil (“Castille”)soapers are in business today as well. As always, use empirical knowledge: billions of people have used bar soaps for over a hundred years. Have the complaints registered in the thousands? millions? I rest my case.