[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Cafe33

You are welcome. I am not a chemist but I love sharing and probably love imposing what I know on other people as well. Hahahah! I am just a damn excited and curious individual working on many many things related to science and technology.

I learn new things every day! 80-82% CAPB exists!

Oh, you want syndet bar to stay solid and not runny when exposed to water.

I cannot say much about syndet because I do not have much experience with it. But I do know a little about soap. Yes, good old soap or ‘soap salt’ some people call it.

- I noticed that soap made with a lot of coconut oil is not only very hard but also pretty solid in the presence of water.

- Soap made with olive oil is mushy but not easily consumed in water.

- “Goat milk soap” tends to melt in water quickly.

Something to do with the fatty acids used. The length of carbon chain.

I think you want to replicate Dove syndet. Maybe THIS would assist you. 

As a general ‘rule’, if you want to make solid stuff it is best to use all stuff (ingredients) which stay solid at room temperature (Room temperature is a bit subjective depending on where you live. I live in a tropical climate where temperature is high, many waxes and oils are either soft or liquid). What I mean is remove CAPB and see the result. Salt is extremely hygroscopic. I do not know what else is in your formulation. Glycerin must also go away.

As for the salt, I do not know why many soap makers swear by Sodium Lactate “hardens” soap. From what I see, soap becomes more pliable with Sodium Lactate than soap without the salt. The same is true for high Glycerol soap. Perhaps the sure sign is soap is smooth-looking.

I do not think syndet needs extra any kinds of salts.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

I have been reading many books and running many tests, but sometimes answers to simple questions are difficult to find on my own.  

I agree with you on that! Sometimes one head is not better than two or more than two. Also, whatever we read can be very biased.

I think, what you are trying to achieve is to harden SCI bar.

I do not know whether or not the word ‘binding’ applies here because it looks like it is about ions, to me. Maybe is ionic bond.

Binding usually is used on thickeners. Such as all kinds of ‘cellulose’, ‘gums’, gelatin, natural or synthetic. You can find these in tablets and capsules.

The said 0.8% water in Sodium Lactate tends to evaporate from (some surfactants). This is the reason why most surfactant systems have humectants such as Glycerol to prevent pump nozzle from bring obstructed as the solution dries. You can see some shampoo/wash can end up like snot and ‘dries’ there.

Sodium Citrate is basically pH neutral. No matter how you add it in anything, that anything stays at the same pH.

I never make syndet bar but I used SCI, however I did not notice the effect of adding NaCl directly to CAPB. (Because I did not bother )

Only yesterday did I notice that SLES and CAPB combination is enough to thicken the mixture without NaCl. Very awesome! This phenomenon is vanished as soon as more water is added (to make the final product up to 100% or 100g).

I do not understand what you meant by “my formula also contains 5.60 % free water from CAPB”. Does that mean the CAPB you have is actually 94.4% purity? Is this high purity even possible?  ::open_mouth:

It could be similar to products that claim to have 20%, 60%, 80%, or more Sodium Hyaluronate/Hyaluronic Acid. Absolute nonsense. Fair enough they say the “nano” one has the lowest molecular weight, can penetrate the skin deeeeeeeep into the dermis. None of them dares to come up and prove how much SA they actually can mix with water, not even with the nano one. Oh sure, now they say SA is too expensive to merely prove. Excuses upon excuses. 

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@ngarayeva001
I do agree with you. I buy all my things from people who sell things in small quantities. But I have no problem relying only DMDM Hydantoin alone. As mentioned, I have reasonable amount of Urea and other stuff that act as ‘co-preservatives’ like co-emulsifier enhancing the main preservative.

DMDM Hydantoin alone, it works. I make things for myself so I am using them often and I monitor them daily as they are actually sitting right beside my laptop!

Even if I do not see what is growing, I have fail-safe built-in to know in the unlikely event that preservation fails.

In addition to that, I am a minimalist, this makes preservation even less of an issue!

Unfortunately, formaldehyde-releaser and Parabens seem to be the “best” preservatives. The world has been using either of them exclusively and proven safe time and again, so why suddenly the blend and worries of preservatives exist is beyond me. Of course I already know the answer to it. Thanks to scaremongers.

I, for one, am not bothered by “blends”. They make no sense to me financially and logically.

Understandably not all preservatives are perfect, however in a blend the imperfection is multiplied because only part of the blend works/compatible with certain ingredients while the other part is inactivated by certain ingredients. Depending on the blend, it may fail entirely. Money wasted.

I am not rich enough to pay for things only to be inactivated and I am very sure I have things that inactivate some preservatives. Some blends are with ‘acids’, one of them is Glucono delta Lactone+Sodium Benzoate (Geogard Ultra by Lonza). As you can see, the blend works well only at low pH. Not possible for me. Yes, I am speaking for myself and myself only. I need to keep my medium about pH 6.2 as I have Urea.

I do not want more acid than I need due to incompatibility issue again, or end up “too much” salt in my formulation destabilising the system (thickener, thickening). The concentration used as preservative may be too little to me but too much to some thickeners,  I am more than sure you are aware of this issue. And due to the complexity of a formulation, the effect could be amplified or nullified.

Blends are for the sake of convenience and for people who want to arrive destination without worrying much. Problem is they rely too much on blend that they do not know how to troubleshoot and do not know what is going on. Then they buy new blend, only to find out it fails. Buy new one, buy until they get it right, rinse and repeat. Viscous cycle. It is playing with money blindly.

Even if I can manually make my own blend of preservatives, my reason remains the same. Pointless to add things that I know that won’t work or not needed.

I hope I made sense.

I am a ‘synthetic’ person as well. I have no issue like you might be experiencing.

It’s quite upsetting for me because I am a ‘synthetic’ formulator and my formulas would last for much longer if they were made under proper conditions but I have to be real.

What are you comparing to? Last for much longer than….what?

Generally speaking, synthetic is it is way more stable and way purer than organic/right from a tree. Much easier to formulate too. This applies to perfumery. I like to think synthetic is inherently clean, inexpensive, makes life easy, cost-effective.
So, given the same constants, organic one spoils quicker than synthetic one.

Note: The constants here is a product made under the same improper conditions. And use the same raw ingredients that are open and close, let air in, let dust in, let bacteria in at the resellers or repackagers.

Depending on the nature of synthetic and organic, I have acid, base, polysorbate, glycol, polyol, silicone, organic, inorganic, etc, etc. All are still fine long past their best before use date or expiry date. Some have been sitting there for 7 years and still fresh and strong! Citric Acid, Glyceryol, etc may be organic but they are at their very high concentration so they are self-preserving.

Polysorbate and Silicone don’t need additive/preservative as they are inherently long life and can be kept indefinitely. I think Glycerol, Sorbitol, and Propylene Glycol can also be kept indefinitely. It is said that they all will eventually degrade to their fundamental forms, they are treating my friends and I very well so far. No complaint about skin reaction, bad smell, bad taste.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Abdullah

You are welcome dear.

I did not fully understand your question. Are you referring to DMDM Hydantoin?

Short answer is…I DONT KNOW! I honestly do not know because it appears that you kind of insist on eco friendly, green, organic, natural, following EWG standards. I have zero trust in eco preservative. EWG is mighty rubbish. At the same time I understand that you have demand to comply, I assume you are doing a business.

Long answer is….Gosh I am going to tell a story!

About Propanediol….when I started making my own moisturiser I was stupidly sold by claims. I believed Propanediol was ‘THE BEST’ non-sticky humectact, superior to Glycerol, natural preservative, so on and so forth just because DuPont and Tate & Lyle says is true, they also showed me expensively printed brochure of theirs. Of course, only to find out that it is just a claim. However, it works as a preservative only if it is used at high concentration, so high that it may not be practical nor skin-friendly in your product. Same reason why most glycols, most polyols, most sugars do not really need preservative because they are self-preserved if undiluted.

High amount of Propanediol is needed due to what is called “water activity”. @Pharma explained long and broad on this in one of my long-winded comments. LOL! The link is here. I do not truly understand how it works other than it works by hydrogen bonding, but I know that it must be used at an impractical amount to be useful. I think it needs to be saturated enough in order to hydrogen bond with each free water molecule to decrease water activity. The more the merrier.

Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) is real!

Abdullah said:

We also try to use one preservative system with high pH range to be able to use it in all our products in pH range 4-7

I am confused about this part. High pH range? pH between 4 and 7 is not high! But I can understand it is high if comparing pH 4-7 with pH 1-3.

I am not sure if shampoo works well at pH 4. Personally, it didn’t work well for me. Due to my curiosity and ignorance, I made a sample of shampoo/wash of pH 2, 3, 4, 5. The lower pH it goes the worse the wash becomes, foam starts vanishing, detergency is slowly culled….just some weird slippery slimy something. I thought I was sleeping

According to what I read, ‘low’ pH tends to turn surfactants back to their acid (or fatty acid) form rendering them useless as surfactants/emulsifiers. I am very sure it is explained by @Pharma (You really seriously need to stalk on what he shares on this whole site. He is insanely technical and detailed, and willing to share extra data even if I/we never ask for. Pretty silly if we didn’t abuse his knowledge! LMAO! ).

I checked for Caprylhydroxamic Acid. Looks like it is a chelator like most organic acids are, including EDTA. From what I understood, those things work by binding ions so that yucky stuff won’t grow. This is often insufficient which is the reason why dedicated preservative is still needed, unfortunately. You can still grow microbes with deionised water or the most immaculate and the holiest water in all multiverses as long there is carbon and nitrogen (e.g., glucose) as energy source and for cell proliferation.

Similar to those substances (glycol, polyol, sugar, etc) mentioned earlier, if chelator works then it must exist in the system at high enough amount to work well as preservative, and this high amount is also impractical. pH would be very low and I am more than sure that you already know that low pH can be part of preservation. I can be wrong about this because there are always acids which are not acid even if the name is acid, just as Cetyl Alcohol is far from being the volatile type of alcohol which the entire world is most familiar with.

Sales people and advertisement always say ‘low usage’ and hopefully make people go WOW ECONOMY! THE CHEAPEST AND THE BEST! I BUY NOW!

My humble ‘advice’ is use formaldehyde-donor preservatives for all things if you/your customers are not organic natural snowflakes. My personal choice is DMDM Hydantoin because this one seems to be as pure as it is without other things mixed in other than water. DMDM Hydantoin is much cheaper than other forms of formaldehyde-donors perhaps they are a mixture or branded such as Germall Plus and Germaben II.

DMDM Hydantoin, in my experience, is a very very broad spectrum microbiocidal/microbiostatic agent. It is compatible with most substances. Cationic, anionic, nonionic, whatever pH (but with weak acid and base) and any temperatures (but not extremes; not beyond boiling water temperature and not let it boil for too long).

Just make sure that your product has no high organic load. I don’t understand why there are still people putting petals, milk, oat in their products and wonder why colourful fuzzy things grow. I doubt they are serious in staying safe and healthy. To say whatever they are doing is dangerous is an understatement. To preserve high organic load they will need good ole Formalin (true raw form of Formaldehyde. Freddy Kruger of cosmetics).

Formaldehyde-donors are usually used at maximum 0.5% or 0.6%. You can always mix in other types of preservatives (No. Not Propanediol. Not “organic/natural” ones like Grape Seed Extract, essential oils). The funny thing is if you mix a little of all preservatives, you can use far less of each preservative, thus it is possible that the finished product causes far less irritation or allergic reaction to snowflakes who possess snowflake skin. Sadly, I do not think anybody can tell you exactly how much ‘total preservative’ if it is in a mixture. Use enough of everything, you will get loads, more than enough preservation. “Enough” is subjective, but generally this is a number game if you want to mix preservatives.

With that said and no matter what I or we suggest and share, at the end of the day, you are playing with people’s life (your products are being or will be used by others whether you work for/under somebody or you are your own boss) you might want to seriously go for PET or Preservative Efficacy Test like @ngarayeva001  mentioned.

I will say humorously, from what I understood, @ngarayeva001
 and I are considered hobbyists so we can f*ck our own body and we are the ones responsible for our own stupidity, we can only sue ourselves! Hahahah!

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@ngarayeva001
Weird. I am not getting notification and I cannot tag people, sometimes.
I needed to come back here to give more hedge and disclaimer. LOL

In all seriousness, hedges and disclaimers are italicised.

Yes I know that, in general, no preservative is made for oil. I did not truly mean parabens are specifically for oil.

I also know that oil doesn’t rot, not ever, it merely goes rancid. Preservation is nearly always about the aqueous portion.

I phrased it lousily in my previous comment. I will rephrase. Perhaps I didn’t know any better. Ugh!

Parabens may be and generally excellent in water.
The appropriate word may be ‘migrate’ to oil phase and thus making them useless. There is an order of which particular paraben is prone to migrating to oil portion. Problem is I only read, I can’t test it. This probably gives me the false idea of “solubility” in oil.

Methylparaben seems to be the most water soluble. Ethylparaben seems to be less water soluble than Methyparaben. The rest (Propylparaben, Isobutylparaben, Butylparaben, Benzylparaben) each gets less and less water soluble and more and more oil soluble.

I do have parabens though! They are in a mix with Phenoxyethanol. I do not use it not due to the smell of Phenoxyethanol (I mentioned I had 1L of this but that is purely Phenoxyethanol. A different story). The main reason as to why I don’t use the mix nor parabens because I read that parabens are inactivated by nonionic surfactants. Not just any nonionic surfactants, mentioned extremely clearly is Polysorbates, strong binding. I coincidentally have Polysorbate-80 and Polysorbate-20. Also related to the lipophilic part of Polysorbates and/or parabens are ‘trapped’ in micelles.

I may not be incorrect because some sites and books mentioned about solubility in water. And the fact that parabens can be trapped in micelles. They may mean differently to what I actually understand by the word “solubility”, may be in a different context.

Phenoxyethanol is also inactivated by nonionic. Basically nonionic is the major nuisance. To remedy that maybe is to add more and more of those preservatives. Rather than adding more and more preservative until it has valid-and-strong-enough preservation effect, I might as well use preservative/s that are existentially stubborn in the presence of most substances and most hostile conditions so that I can keep their concentration very low and no new (potentially harmful) product is created from binding with other stuff (Polysorbate in my case) in the mix.

So…in summary….personally….my so-called “best” preservative is DMDM Hydantoin. It has no known inactivator. I could be wrong, again.

Hahahaah! About your horrid experience with Phenoxyethanol, we could do a digital high-five! To hell natrel!

Whoa, you really are bought by companies!  All branded stuff you use.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@ngarayeva001
Oh, I learn new word today! CHEMOPHOBIA! Hahaha!

I forgot to mention another advantage of DMDM Hydantoin, all formaldehyde-donor in general, is it can also permeate and preserve the headspace of a container. It is a preservative of in and out, whacking baddies left and right, checking top and bottom. Rather indiscriminate and thorough species. I do not think other categories of preservatives can do this feat.

I dislike Phenoxyethanol too. My reason is it has a nice but discomforting scent. The irony, but of course is only me. I don’t know about it’s efficacy, although I bought 1L of it. I used only few mL and ditch the entire bottle! I just don’t like the scent. The scent is very strong to the point a tiny amount of it can leave its trace. Probably just me or the Phenoxyethanol I had was not refined enough. But hey, its natrel! 

Wait a second….Sounds like Germaben II? No, no, no, no, no.
DMDM Hydantoin is just by its own. Not a mixture. Maybe mixed with water only as its active is only 50% to 55% (generally speaking because there are companies make different concentrations of it).

Germaben II (Propylene Glycol (and) Diazolidinyl Urea (and) Methylparaben (and) Propylparaben)

Germall Plus (Propylene Glycol (and) Diazolidinyl Urea (and) Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate)

To me, parabens are useless. Just to me. From my understanding, parabens are more suited for oily stuff. My product is totally water-base. Maybe not totally water-based, if surfactants are considered oily stuff due to the hydrophobic tail.

Propylene Glycol, I think, acts as a humectant to keep formaldehyde-donor liquid and not cake up like in most cosmetics products. Without it you might see powdery thing when it dries. I see it with my DMDM Hydantoin. Pretty awesome! So you see, DMDM Hydantoin works for me terribly well. No extra substance added so that I can have absolute control, fit for a control freak like my good self.

You are probably paid by many companies as I realised that you use and know countless of branded products. LOL! I can understand if your reason to using them is out of convenience. As you may already know that I have oil, humidity, heat, and tack issue (in my very first post that you engaged), therefore I need to be a purist and perfectionist as much as possible. After 2 years of hardcore DIY elixir of River Styx I eventually was enlightened by Greek Gods that single chemical is the best for me, no more convenience-in-a-bottle.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Aziz
Now that’s the spirit! 
Artificial, synthetic, man made, woman made, inorganic, or others are also part of chemistry. I find that synthetic stuff are way more stable than natural ones, and way easier to work with too compared to natural. Way safer and purer too!

I assume MPS stands for Methyl Paraben Sodium. I never use advanced chemicals like MPS. However, DMDM Hydantoin, generally, at least to my finite knowledge, is compatible with everything.

From my experience, DMDM Hydantoin alone has broad coverage and powerful.

May I interested you with these links?

https://chemistscorner.com/what-is-the-best-preservative-to-use/

https://chemistscorner.com/what-is-the-best-ingredient-to-use/

@ngarayeva001
Yes, DMDM Hydantoin is exceptionally easy to work with and is extremely effective! I use it at maximum allowed concentration which is 0.6%. Depending on what is in my formula, I sometimes use 0.5% or less. Most of the time 0.6% because I don’t trust myself! Hahahaha!

I accidentally made tests by accidentally leaving alone few samples without preservative, all with Xantan Gum (Xanthan Gum and water, nothing else), all had black stuff that I presumed fungi. I do not heat the ingredients, the best chance to seeing things growing.

I do not know the percentage of the actual formaldehyde-donor in Germall Plus. DMDM Hydantoin is usually 50% to 55% as supplied.

I wager chemical structure counts. The type of formaldehyde-donor of Germall Plus is different to DMDM Hydantoin, just stating the obvious. So, probably that one (Diazolidinyl Urea) is weaker than DMDM Hydantoin even its usage rate is equal or higher than that of DMDM Hydantoin.

Another reason could be due to the concentration of Diazolidinyl Urea as supplied is already low. And because the presence of Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate has a serious limitation upon how much Diazolidinyl Urea can be used.

My Godly preservative is only DMDM Hydantoin. Its advantages are:

- Inexpensive.
- Does not affect colour, viscosity, scent, etc.
- Very very friendly to most, if not every, known cosmetics substances. I never come across people whining about incompatibility, other than one’s own personal private ultra sensitive incompatibly. :p 
- Insanely cost-effective.
- Significantly fewer scares and restrictions compared to Germall Plus (due to Iodopropynyl Butylcarbamate).
- Above all, guaranteed preservation and lasts for a long long time.
- Omnipotent. Omniscience. Omnipresent.
- I read somewhere that says DMDM Hydantoin is not affected by high temperatures (Within 100°C). Very convenient for me as my early formulations (when I was an absolute noob) needed heat. I am a lazy fcuk, my way is to dump all in and nuke with microwave. The finished products were fine, no funny growth.

Disclaimer: What is said may merely be my own thinking, experience, opinion, feeling.

There are people saying DMDM Hydantoin is a lousy biocide and biostatic agent against fungi and yeast. I don’t know what the heck they have in their product/s! They could have heavy amount of oats, milk, home brewed tea/coffee/infusion, flowery stuff in there only they know what. I personally saw few people actually put in petals of their favourite flowers. Simultaneously not have enough of that particular preservative. No amount of the best preservative in this galaxy will save them from pretty coloured toxins appearing.

In addition to that, I make usable samples of only 10g or 20g every time at any given time, and even so I never finish them up in days. I have an unconscious habit of scratching and digging my face if I am nervous. I should be dead or have massive skin infection a long time ago should DMDM Hydantoin fail as biocide and biostatic agent against all sorts of microorganisms. I made some for my friends, they would be blind or would have had skin infection as well.

There, free advertisement for all DMDM Hydantoin companies. They should sponsor/pay me! LMAO!

What is the best preservative to use?

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Ah. I had the same experience. I was given free sample of GMS-SE, it liquefies only in the presence of a little salt. Not low pH. Just salt. pH neutral.

I think another offending one might be Tween 80. My almighty Xanthan Gum suddenly became liquid as though nonexistence. 

Personally, I find steps of which goes in first matters not. In the past I was told like a broken record that I ought to make a gel with Carbomer first, add salts or cationic surfactant last. Ridiculous! Just my problem, of course. They probably able to jam in 20% Sodium Lactate without the slightest issue with the exact same Carbomer and at the same amount as I used. They either tell lie, or use supraphysiological and supernaturally high amount of Carbomer.

Hydrophobically-modified Carbomer would not exist if the order of which ingredient goes in first worked. And that type of Carbomer is naturally more costly than old school Carbomer.

@hernan1098
Have you tried HEC or Hydroxy Ethyl Cellulose? It is a nonionic thickener. It works wonders and may answer your question! I have it but I hate its smell, it has vinegar scent.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Zink
 

“Cold cream” technically is any cream that is refrigerated and the evaporation of water. Not necessary the ingredients.

I didn’t say it!    This is an excellent source of cosmetics history!

https://cosmeticsandskin.com/aba/cold-cream.php

I hope it is real and factual though.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

OMG! Tough one!

I say DMDM Hydantoin. But of course EWG says it is deadly. My only preservative is DMDM Hydantoin. I am too frightened to even try other eco, green, safe, organic, natural ones. I am waiting for my good self and others who use my DMDM Hydantoin-laden moisturiser die painfully!  >

pH between 4 and 5…This one is easy. You probably can use a mixture of Sodium Benzoate, Potassium Sorbate, Sodium Gluconate (or Glucono delta Lactone or Gluconic Acid). Add in Salicylic Acid if you feel adventurous.

Very natural. Very board spectrum. Very approved.

Erm…Sodium Benzoate and Potassium Sorbate as natural and as edible and as ubiquitous as they are, they have their own warnings and countless users’ complaints.

Even Glycerin/Glycerol whatever one believes, thinks, heard, seen ‘safe’ there is always warnings and complaints.

There is always somebody allergic to something. Likewise, there is always someone (politically correct crazy) sensitive about every single bloody dayum thang.

Sodium metal per se is lethal. Chlorine gas is deadly. Together they become Sodium Chloride, table salt, very safe to be touched and eaten. BUT….but it can be very bad if used concentrated. Glycerin is like that too. So does this mean EWG should also put table salt and Glycerin in the danger zone? I won’t be surprised if they already did!

Oh, Glycerin is also used as an anti-freeze! We’re gonna die! Table salt can be used as anti-freeze as well! Both of them are commonly used to reduce or totally eliminate crystallisation of sugar (in baking) and lower down freezing point. Hence, anti-freeze is born! We’re certainly gonna die!

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Gunther

Oops, too late for me to edit what I wrote! I meant fatty alcohols may have -OH group and generally believed that -OH is the magic to binding/attracting water, but in reality fatty alcohols are too weak to be considered as emulsifier and do not emulsify anything. Having -OH group also don’t make them behave like Glycerol. Too weak. They are “co-emulsifier” instead, kind of like stunt double or reserved player.

When you say BTMS do you mean purely BTMS and nothing else? Not BTMS-25, BTMS-50, BTMS something?

I have no experience with BTMS. As mentioned before I do not get pure BTMS.

If BTAC or Behentrimonium Chrloride, even at 15% is still pretty watery. The sample I made was BTAC and water, nothing else. I am a purist and I do not really do knockout experiment. More like I am extremely curious to know how each one behave individually, by doing this I am directly busting myths and see through marketing rubbish on my own.

I don’t know whether or not it is all right to have that much of any Behentrimonium in leave-on product. The BTAC I tried at 15% was just for hair, it sucks big time by the way. It cannot be used alone like that, bad spreading, end up using more than necessary (my educated guess is since it is cationic it ‘sticks’ to the slightly negatively charged hair and seeming gets ‘consumed’. Anionic tends to be smooth and provides more slip/spread due to same charge repels).

However, BTMS-25 or BTMS-50 is said to be able to be used as it is, mix it with water only, as hair conditioner may be due to the addition of fatty alcohol. I have BTMS-50 but I am not bothered enough to try it out because I am nearly bald. LOL! As for the skin…not good for me in this tropical climate, too rich, too sweaty, too uncomfortable even at very very low concentration. BTAC without fatty alcohol is also too rich, too bad for me.

You want to make a spray, eh. You need emulsifier that is liquid at room temperature. Sorbitan (Span) and Polysorbate (Tween). General rule is if you want sprayable emulsion then you use liquid emulsifier/s, at YOUR room temperature (wherever you reside). I don’t like spray stuff but I use Polysorbate because I use dropper bottle, it is almost impossible to impossible to squeeze anything out should I use emulsifiers such as Emulsifying Wax. If use less of it I might as well don’t use it at all because there is a minimum amount of emulsifier to properly emulsify something.

I do not know what silicone you use but you can use this site (https://www.wholesalesuppliesplus.com/calculators/HLBCalculator.aspx) as your assistant. Might not be accurate due to many variables, at least it reduces much headache and guesswork.

I can’t precisely answer you the ratio as to how much emulsifier to use. I was hunting for the calculation too but to no avail. I eventually understood the reason why. There are many variables.

Temperature could also be the deciding factor. For example the room temperature here is 30°C I don’t need to heat anything much and mixing lipids is rather easy because most things which are solid in room temperature in temperate climate (about 24°C) are liquid here, I never see solid coconut oil in my life except in shopping complex, shops, pharmacies, or places where it is air-conditioned.

Another thing is mixing. Because the temperature is high I do not truly need immersion blender nor homogeniser to make tiny tiny lipid droplets in order to make the most stable emulsion possible. All I use is a pathetic milk frother, nothing fancy and nothing exorbitant!  In order for me to sleep soundly I add Xanthan Gum as stabiliser/suspender.

My very early tests there was no emulsifier needed. If emulsifier is needed it will be way way less than most of us are ‘forced’ to using. The emulsions I made were with sonicator. That device is stupid magical! Never mind the temperature differences as those emulsions appeared to be insanely stable! I don’t know the scientific witchcraft but I do know that cavitation removes air surrounding lipids. Maybe I answered myself.   The exact same effect can be replicated in a vacuum chamber. The deceptive emulsion can then be bubbled, vigorously shaken, and no separation afterwards. Maybe there was separation, might be too small for my demi-blind eyes to see.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Oh my days!  😮

In my days people used to sunbathe because it eliminates acne, and so it did! It really works by sun burning the skin and peel. There is no need for TCA peel. There is absolutely no repercussion. Skin cancer is fake.

High salt level in sea water never irritates the already irritated and inflamed skin. The best is make a paste of Himalayan salt, it emits negative ions good for one’s overall well being and cures cancer.

Above all, the sun and sea are natural and free!

I am a spoilt child, you see. I unconsciously dig and touch my face especially when I am nervous as if OCD. But Tretinoin cream, basic personal hygiene, and simple technical know-how almost always zap my acne and exterminate inflammation with Hydrocortisone or Diclofenac or both emulsion gel, if I feel jolly I may swallow Diclofenac Potassium or Dexamethasone or both. Argh! I ought to leave my face alone and my skin will miraculously and naturally become impeccable!

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

This is why I love real people saying real thing and no BS!

I ‘feel’ the same about the claim of Panthenol. It is not only very expensive but also nothing special about it.

The only special thing I found about Panthenol is it is very sticky. Way more tacky than Glycerol at very low concentration. I do not know why this happens. Looking at its structure I think it is the extra naughty Nitrogen, the rest is pretty much Glycerol-esque with the 3 hydroxy groups. The 2 Methyl groups should make it oily but very weakly oily.

Actually, it depends on how much water is in the mix. High concentration of Glycerol is not sticky if the amount of water is kept constant. But of course we are talking about real-world application where water can evaporate and leave serious sticky residue.  :p

In all seriousness, that is the reason why Glycerol-based personal lubricant requires repeatedly application or spray water to retain its sliminess. It becomes sticky and rather draggy as soon it lacks water.

In my humble experience, polyols can be used to detack. Not necessarily glycols. My best cost-effective polyol, humectant, and detackifier is Sorbitol. The most natural, organic, and vegan too! LMAO!

I am trying to know whether Glycerol is superior than Sorbitol or not in certain ways. I might add a bit, extremely little Glycerol just to enhance moisturisation, speed up healing, turn back time, and all the wonderful claims of Glycerol. 

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Gunther
It is the fatty alcohol in BTMS-50 that does the trick. Bentrimonium Methosulfate/Chloride does thicken to some degree but not enough which is the reason why there is something else added to it.

Believe it or not it is viscosity (and yield stress) that counts.

Behentrimonium Methosulfate/Chloride per se is not a good emulsifier of silicones or any lipid for that matter. There is a valid reason why nonionic surfactants are the best solubiliser/emulsifier of lipids.

Nonionic > Anionic > Cationic

I can be wrong but in theory it is and most people use nonionic surfactants as primary emulsifiers. Anionic may be as strong or stronger than nonionic but most nonionic don’t foam so much and less harsh to skin, this is probably the main reason why nonionic is popular.

Viscosity and yield stress are the key. Carbomer and Xanthan Gum are not emulsifiers but they have incredibly high yield stress.

Similarly, some people swear by beeswax and waxes.
likewise, there are still people believing and spreading misinformation of fatty acids/alcohols are emulsifiers. This has been debunked over and over. Fatty acids have that -OH group and hence “acid” but it is too weak to be an emulsifier or surfactant. Some myths simply never die.

Success of thickeners such as fatty alcohols and waxes depends on the cooling down, hence why the instruction is keep stirring and mixing. They rely on actual thickening. If a medium is thick enough you don’t need an actual emulsifier to suspend stuff.

Having said that, temperature is irrelevant if Carbomer is used! Of course there are people believing Carbomer is ALSO an emulsifier. Oh well. The easiest evidence is add water, as much as possible and you will soon see something floating. That is not true Scotsman (emulsion). LOL!

Emulsifier, on the other hand, it emulsifies then it emulsifies. It doesn’t rely on thickening to emulsify. Extreme temperatures may separate an emulsion but does not require constant babysitting like it is needed for fatty alcohols and waxes.

Suspend is NOT the same as emulsify. Just because lipids are not seen floating doesn’t at all mean they are emulsified.

Note: The said Carbomer is the good old Carbomer. Not HASE, HUER, Permulan.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Pharma

I forgot to add that the test did not test enough.

They basically added back Glycerol after the tape stripping rather than adding other substances as comparison and see if that aquaglycerolporin also responds to others.

That is probably the origin that makes Glycerol famous until this day and no body (the professionals and the experts) seems to test with other substances and get similar or same results.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Pharma

Thanks for confirming my confirmation bias. 

Cationic’s gluey characteristic due to the fact that the skin/hair slightly negatively charged, I presume.

Ah. Nonpolar. This is another thing that amazes me. The skin seems to have affinity for nonpolar substances. Weird no charge and still has very high affinity with skin! I do not get it! Makes no sense.

At first I thought must be sebum. But not possible because sebum is constantly ‘pushing’ things out. (I got this idea from HERE) I am talking on my behalf as I have oily/combination skin. Skin on the dry/drier side can be ‘sucking’ in things, advertisements call it ‘thirsty’. 

I suddenly remembered phospholipid bilayer. The skin is semi-permeable and it is selective to what goes in and out. The skin tends to have the hydrophobic tail sticking outside, and the hydrophilic head is inside cells keeping in water/moisture. So, this suddenly makes sense to me that the skin (at last the outer most part that I read about; stratum corneum) is hydrophobic. If hydrophilic we would swell big time and probably rot every time we shower.

That makes sense until….I deliberately confuse myself. I found THIS. Hydrophilic head is on the outside! Not possible for lipids to love skin so much! My guess because is cell membrane, already within the body, not exposed to air like the skin, exposed to different kinds of insults and therefore evolved having different morphology.

Come along glycoprotein and glycolipid might be the receptors for sugars and glycerol that you mentioned. I guess these ‘open’ up the channels and allow lipids to enter.

Somehow that doesn’t answer why skin/hair-lipid relationship takes precedence over skin/hair-water/moisture relationship.
My mere mortal educated guess is based on evolution and biology. The answer is that’s why we accumulate fat much easier than muscle. Yup, answered but still left unanswered as to why and how skin/hair and lipids are soulmates. LOL!

And then I found some more images and facts (or theory). They show/say that surrounding skin cells is lipids a.k.a mortar.

I do not know which one is the most accurate! All might be theories but I bet there is at least one that arrived scientific consensus. As my coolest and big balls (not many physicists dare to call a spade a spade and bother banishing pseudoscience and educating the public gratis) physics professor Donald Simanek once said:

Theory in science is a word reserved for unifying laws and principles that have universal scope and are well tested and trusted.  Unfortunately the media often uses the word colloquially to label any speculative hypothesis, even those with flimsy foundations.

Right now we have many competing speculations about all-embracing unifying principles, involving string theory, branes, multiple universes, black holes, white holes, wormholes in space, dark energy, dark matter, the MOND hypothesis, etc. etc. None of these deserve to be called anything more than elaborate speculative hypothesis. None of them have the universal acceptance to quality as established theories.

I don’t write about them for I take a “wait and see” attitude toward them. Maybe they will be resolved in 20 or 50 years. Some of them strain my credulity, but I readily admit that true physics does not have to be appealing, beautiful, intuitive or simple. It may well be ugly, messy and distasteful. Certainly physics does not have to conform to our naive common sense.

Also, I think some of the folks who write popular books on these subjects are living on cloud 9, basking in the mathematics they consider “beautiful” and caring little for the nitty gritty task of experimental verification. They forget that mathematics is only a tool of science. We can easily invent mathematics that can marvelously describe worlds that simply do not exist. They need to “come down to earth”. But that’s only my opinion.

Sorbitol’s molecular weight is 182.17 g/mol should not be any more difficult to be taken in by the skin as it is within the 500 Dalton rule as far as skin is concerned.

I feel Sorbitol is ‘oily’ very much like Propanediol and Propylene Glycol. I do not know the technicalities of it but looking at its structure it has 2 units of hydroxymethyl (CH2OH), and 4 units of I-dont-know-what-it-is, however it has 6 hydroxy groups.

Probably it is the 2 hydroxymethyl groups that are responsible for the oily part. Glycerol also has 2 of that.
Sorbitol and Glycerol are soluble in fat equally well, no one wins and no one loses. Yes?

I read somewhere, long time ago, it says there is a limit to stickiness. Sorbitol has twice the amount of hydroxyl group than Glycerol, this makes Sorbitol less to no stickiness compared to Glycerol.
Oddly, there will be a state when more hydroxy group the stickiness comes back.

A Few -OH = Very sticky.

More than a few -OH = Not very or not sticky.

More than more than a few -OH = Very sticky.

Bell curve came to my mind at that time.

Truly weird how things can be. I cannot remember the reason (maybe there is no more explanation!), but I do know that it says nothing about the shielding effect (otherwise I won’t seek ancient souls and be startled when you provoked that phrase before me. ROFL!).

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Only just now I bother to creep this site and found this secret hiding place. I have ‘no life’ all of the sudden and I am doing this. LOL!

My name is Christopher and I am born and raised in Malaysia. My background is complicated, sophisticated, frustrating. Just another Asian in Asia, I think.

To cut the long story short, Malaysia is not one of those countries which are many many years ahead of Malaysia.    If I were to explained it would be a thesis heavily about racism and religious extremism.

In what I am most interested? In context of this site? To learn! The science of skin and stuff that go on skin, of course! At the same time this is my first time learning that men can love to be beautiful too. I think and think again, why should I be startled anyway as there are way more male chefs than female chefs worldwide!

Sharing will come naturally. I am well aware that some people are tight-lipped no matter how expert they already are in a subject matter. In this case is tight-penned and tight-fingered. Stingy.

I can understand that some people think that they best not share if they are not well versed in a particular subject lest they misinform people. Misinformation is destructive, and this I fully agree.

My career and life…ugh. Not much considering where I am and the people I am with. Sounds like an excuse. I can only say so much, one has to convince oneself by being one of us, not as ‘white person’ but yellow skinned, tanned, etc. Many Westerners either ignore the fact or ignorant that very many Asians actually worship white people. I never fail to have Westerners telling me Asians are soooooo polite, sooooo friendly, sooooo helpful, soooooo cultured. If they were black or non-white skinned they would see the true colours of Asians and then we will have level playing field.

Asians are obsessed with being white. They will do almost anything to have white skin. Whitening products are aplenty. Cancerous or not doesn’t matter as long as they can be white. K-Pop is famous not for their dance/singing but for their white and glossy skin. Korean fans were infuriated when their Korean idols real skin tone was revealed. Angry not with K-Pop lies, makeup, lighting, but infuriated by those people who reveal the truth. Whitewashing is real!

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

To save money and headache, use nonionic and amphoteric surfactants such as Polysorbates and Cocamidopropyl Betaine.

PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil is a foam killer but leaves feelable and noticeable ‘film’ but not sticky nor slippery. Just another ‘lipid’, kinda like so-called “oil cleanse”. Some call it ‘refattening’.

However, nonionic surfactants are known to f*ck up ionics (especially anionic surfactants). Anionic thickeners such as Xanthan Gum and Carboxy Methyl Cellulose (CMC) will not work well in the presence of nonionic surfactant. You may see everything is cool this second, the next second viscosity drops!

I have nonionic thickener (Hydroxy Ethyl Cellulose or HEC) but I have not tried it to see the effect as I stick to Xanthan Gum. I sort of idolise Xanthan Gum because it hardly has fish eye, need not hard mixing/blending, and not troublesome as to pre-mix it with oil, Propylene Glycol, and other no-water substances. Makes sense to me as the bacteria needs to be properly and uniformly hydrated, and efficiently and quickly. The final product has weird texture, odour, colour but are okay because I am not doing it commercially.

Nooooooo! Never use Sodium Hyaluronate or Silica as thickener! These are exorbitant materials! I once wanted to use Silica (Fumed Silica. Aerosil 200) as thickener, but Evonik says no one in their right mind actually uses Silica, either hydrophobic or hydrophilic, as thickener because it must be used a lot making formulation insanely expensive.

Similar to the nonionic-anionic surfactant conundrum, the interaction of other ingredients/substances makes things challenging, if not very challenging. Something to do with what is called ‘shielding effect’. This is the reason why some people in this community play the broken record about knockout test.

https://chemistscorner.com/do-you-know-the-fastest-way-to-become-an-expert-cosmetic-formulator/

I still ask questions here and obtain brilliant answers, but ultimately I still have to test things out on my own. Whatever the answers I get here can be very different to the answers I discovered by myself, as if I was conned by the people here! Hahahahaha! For example many people complain about Polysorbates, and some people said Glycerol/Glycerin leaves slippery residue even after being washed, it does not happen to me nor anyone over here (where I live). Might be due to temperature.

Perry is correct. Polyquaternium-7 is not useful. It may work for you if you use lots of it, just maybe. Cationic Guar and Polyquaternium-10 are most effective, these really work. However, these still do not actually moisturise the skin. A dedicated moisturiser (not 2-in-1) is still the winner!

Don’t fully believe what manufacturers say. They are doing business and they want your money. Speak to technical people perhaps as they are not into sales so much as proper salespeople. It is weird when you ask the ‘how’ they ask you to pay up and use their service instead. It is weird when you want to know the ‘why’ they tell you to use another of their product. They don’t know jack sh*t.

Knockout Experiments for Cosmetics - The Fastest Way to Become an Expert Formulator

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Benhentrimonium Methosulfate that I always found is with some fatty alcohols. This is the reason why BTMS-50 is believed to ’emulsify’ very very high percentage of silicone. It is an illusion and a trickery. 

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@raiyana
 
You are most welcome! Sharing is caring!
I am known to put my nose in people’s live and impose my ‘religion’ on others.

Beauty and fitness industries are full of rubbish. Instagram Gurus are the latest thing. Lots of dangerous information, supports, and guides. But it is the Internet, it must be right and never wrong.

Again, I do not know where you live, in where I live those ‘doctors’ be it government or private ones are not telling the truth. They tell half truth to speed things up and to avoid patients asking too many questions.

On the government side, this might be also the reason why patients have to be either end up in no-cure or serious condition only then doctors suddenly say they found this and found that and need to take action now. The only good thing is they are extremely strict at giving out medical leave slip and drugs.

On the private side, they are like car mechanics, they tell you that you need to fix things that do not need to be fixed. They LOVE prescribing antibiotics for every G*d d*mned thang! Understandably the private sector is not funded by taxpayers so they need to get money by hook or by crook. Sometimes also not addressing the actual root cause and patients can end up like how they are/will be treated by government doctors.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@raiyana
I see….I would then conclude that you were “joking”. LOL. You were perhaps shockingly joke or jokingly shocked as you want to have kids soon. Understandable.

Generally it is about 1 to few months of not getting pregnant after your last capsule. But according to @Pharma the effect is very long lasting. My personal experience (and others) we do not empirically measure the time but we know that the ‘beauty’ effect does last pretty long, some reported 1 year and more than 1 year. There are also some people reported to be acne-free for the rest of the life only after one treatment (of course with very high dosage), but does this mean the effect is permanent in specific individual or due to the high dosage…I don’t truly know. 

I do not know about the half life calculation. The staying power of Isotretinoin could be dose dependent. Seems like that. The after effect I experienced was between 6 and 12 months. I took 40mg, same dosage from start to finish (no change in dosage), the treatment lasted for 3 months.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Unbelievable! Panthenol too????

I speak from personal experience, after treating my skin with Tretinoin, I observed that it acts like any acids. Acids is said to stimulate ‘something’. I think anything that irritates the skin will stimulate collagen production. One well known thing is Derma Rolling, its predecessor (I forgot its name) is using a fat needle and poke in and out (ewww) destroying the bottom of the skin. Then, third and forth generations are lasers. Different methods but the goal is exactly the same, that is to cause some good old irritation and destruction.

It is weird that we do not often, maybe none, hear about the scares of accelerated cell differentiation and too much irritation. I assume, they (the negative and positive effects of Tretinoin) are pretty safe long term. I discount EWG and its cronies of course! LOL

However, CosIng has warning about Tretinoin (retinoic acid and its salts). Oddly no long-winded essay about the dangers like it has for DMDM Hydantoin! And it says “Functions : Not reported”!

Must be a joke. The world has been using known substance for known purposes for more than 40 years and acquired known results, but CosIng has no information on it.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

Just as I guessed! Yes, I am familiar with that part (telomere, senescence, apoptosis) of genetics. However I could not dig Google Scholar for anything about Tretinoin shortening telomere or Hayflick limit correlates to the use of Tretinoin.

Yes, I am focusing on topical one. Since internal route nearly almost has much more pronounced effect to the body than things on skin. Systemic, I would say.

According to what I found so far, the limit does not apply to the skin because the outer skin is already meant to be broken down, similar to Urea and acids only deals with dead part of the skin and not touch the live one. The logic is we are helping the skin to shed dead skin faster. This may be a false equivalence because Tretinoin is a different type of creature which truly messes with genetic information whereas Urea does not mess with genes.

Maybe Tretinoin is another thing that science cannot answer properly. Ugh!

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@raiyana
Now, I see that is a red herring, argumentum ad ignorantiam, and ad hominem.

How is “Isotretinoin in the system for 5 years” related to the blatant accusation “coz just like you said teenage girls are desperate to get acne free skin”? How is it a causation? These two are different arguments. 

Isotretnoin/Tretinoin inherently stays in the system; it is natural; naturally happens. It is not @Pharma saying teenage girls are desperate to get acne-free skin, not even jokingly. Although the burden of proof is on @Pharma , does not at all mean he truly meant teenage girls are desperate to get acne-free skin.

What he truly meant is girls who are/were on Isotretioin would get married within that said 5 years. Rather than desperate to be acne-free, they are desperate to getting married! You should be screaming GIRL! BAH! IMPATIENT GIRLS! THEY NEVER LEARN TO CONTROL THEIR SEX HORMONES! The girls don’t have to be desperate to have nice skin. It is the character of Isotretinoin/Tretinoin.

Those who got Tretinoin or Isotretinoin they will be warned about pregnant people and/or getting pregnant. There is a leaflet in every tube/capsule. The warning is clearly there.

I am not siding anyone but your argument is incongruent. Is like somebody told me drinking too much water too quickly will kill me, and then I yelled at that person YOU SAID IT LIKE YOU WANT ME DIE FAST OR YOU DESPERATELY WANT ME DEAD!!!! HOW VERY DARE YOU!! The sad fact is water kills whether I like it or not. World history is the evidence.

[Cst4Ms4Tmps4]

@Pharma
Hahahaha! I got your humour! Many Asians actually do have Brightening Complex that causes their Inferiority Complex!

Oh well. REALLY good, proven, inarguable stuff like Tretinoin has its own downsides.

Yes what did you mean by “look like 20 for the first 40 years and for the rest more like 200.”. LOL

Do you mean Hayflick Limit? I thought it is true only inside the body and false for skin.

THIS shows cultured cells. We know that most of the time what is tested in the laboratory does not always work the same outside of the laboratory.

THIS maybe selling things but the information is logical.

I would have accelerated aging soon if it was true! I can’t seem to stop using Tretinoin!

@raiyana
The oral form of Tretinoin is Isotretinoin. Trade name is “Accutane”. Thailand one is “Acnotin”.

If it is not 5 years it is loooooooong enough that the substance is in your system. I know because I was on Isotretinoin. I would not have said Tretinoin/Isotretnoin has lingering effect if it was not true.

You sound like a feminist or a person who ‘coincidentally’ has good genes for good skin. You never know the real struggle of people suffering from acne. Especially true for teenagers girls or boys. Why do you think South Koreans commit suicide and lost their life if they can’t afford to be beautiful? In Malaysia, we are not that critical killing ourselves but the fact and reality are similar if not the same as that of in South Korea. I was rejected countless of times due to my attire, skin colour, skin complexion, hair. And because I look significantly younger than my chronological age.

I don’t know where you live. In where I live people prejudge you on the outside. They don’t like what they see that is the end of you.

Likewise, being anorexic is beautiful. Don’t believe me? Ask fashion designers and compared the models in the past and see the changes.

And of late, morbidly obese is the new beauty. 

Why do you think beauty industry is a bloody rich industry? Why do you think people still willingly buy hopes and pipe dreams that they know is bullsh*t despite of all science and truth told?

Maybe you have horrid skin, you don’t care, you live in a community or country that doesn’t care about outwards appearances. Good on you then!