[helenhelen]

I’ve been trying out cetyl alcohol, behenyl alcohol and cetyl palmitate as well. Behenyl alcohol was drying on my skin, even at 0.3% (my skin is very particular though). This was versus an otherwise identical formulation which is highly moisturising. I had high hopes for cetyl palmitate but the matte/dry residue it leaves is not very comforting. This is more psychological rather than physical though I think. Cetyl alcohol leaves a much more comforting, skin-like residue. So after all that, it was the non-fancy, common cetyl alcohol that won out.

I wondered if it’s the long chain length of behenyl alcohol that makes it so drying on me. Perhaps it adheres too well to the oils in my skin and thus rinses them off too much when I wash my hands…

[helenhelen]

I am not a chemist nor anyone who should have particular knowledge of this. But I am also interested in reducing soaping without using dimethicone, which seems like a common problem that no one really has solved.

My hunch is that dimethicone works due to its low surface tension, which breaks up foam. See here. It seems to be mostly lamellar-based emulsifiers that have the soaping issue. The soaping can be reduced somewhat by increasing slip as much as possible to reduce shear stress (which dimethicone can also do), but my hunch is that to eliminate soaping completely would also destabilise the lamellar structure, which eliminates the skin barrier regeneration and moisturisation properties of the lamellar system.

For example, adding less than 1% potassium cetyl phosphate (in addition to the soaping emulsifier) completely eliminated soaping in one experiment, but it also switched the cream from being moisturising to being drying, despite potassium cetyl phosphate being supposedly a gentle emulsifier.

(BTW I’m sure my hunches are complete rubbish and nothing I’ve said is scientifically correct.. as I said, I’m not a chemist!)

Let us know if you have any success reducing the soaping!

[helenhelen]

EVchem said:

DeoPlex® Natural Deodorant from Carrubba

 (INCI Saccharomyces Ferment) worked well for me at 1% and covered a nasty cheese-like smell from a probiotic

Thank you! That looks interesting. I will try to get hold of some to try.

“Neutralizes odors caused by perspiration, human waste, vomit, cigarette smoke, food, mildew, pets, and depilatories.” <- lovely!

[helenhelen]

Graillotion said:

helenhelen  I’ve had success with Hydrogenated Ethylhexyl Olivate and Hydrogenated Olive Oil Unsaponifiables, but it gets a bit too siliconey and greasy at too high a percentage.

Where is the sweet spot on this product….have some on the way…. What is too high?  

It will depend on the rest of your formula but 2% is a good place to start.

[helenhelen]

@Agate @ngarayeva001 Just a quick update on the OCIS - I used it today for the first time and it worked perfectly. The workmanship is amazing and the item is very satisfying to put together and use! I definitely recommend it. Thanks @Agate for providing me with the idea in the first place!

[helenhelen]

ngarayeva001 said: I bought double heat plate with magnetic stirrer that I didn’t need and who knows maybe I also get a homogenizer one day  

Hehe I stopped myself from buying a double heat plate magnetic stirrer, or even a single heat plate magnetic stirrer! I decided I would try to make do with my sous vide stick in a pan of water. I have yet to see whether the setup will work…

[helenhelen]

ngarayeva001 said:

@helenhelen, this isn’t a popular opinion but if it’s just for you, I don’t think you need to waste money on homogenizer. I am all for good lab equipment and own a couple of pieces myself but you can make almost everything with a stick blender. I make w/si Emulsions with bosch stick blender. I would say that an overhead stirrer is an essential piece. You can get high shear from a stick blender. Also depending on what you make you might not want wasting expensive materials. Homogenizer creates a lot of waste (you will need to make larger batch and half of it will stay on the homogenizer’s head).

@ngarayeva001 Yeah I saw a lot of comments on other threads saying the same.. but the naive, consumer side of me always wants a new toy to play with! It’s also such a drop in the ocean in terms of the costs I’ve racked up so far asking chemists to try this and that, that I’d really like to do a little bit of experimenting myself with somewhat appropriate equipment. I have a stick blender that is used for cooking, but it’s probably too big for the small samples I’d be making.

@Agate I’ve ordered the OCIS and Dremel 4000 so will let you know how I get on.

[helenhelen]

@Agate I was all ready to order the OCIS, but it seems they don’t deliver to the UK! I have emailed them to ask why.. it seems strange as they deliver to most other European countries.

If I can’t get hold of the OCIS head, I may just end up getting the cheap, “will probably break after one go”, homogenizer from Amazon/eBay…

I’m not sure if you’ve come across the BioSpec Tissue Tearor (https://biospec.com/product/tissue-tearor) which is apparently just a Dremel with a rotor stator head. I even saw a review somewhere where a disgruntled customer said the drive even had a Dremel logo on it!

I’m baffled as to why it’s so hard to find a homogenizer for small batch cosmetic creams that doesn’t cost £1500 upwards. There seems to be a market for it…

[helenhelen]

Agate said:

One more option I just came across, after thinking I’d already seen every possibility: https://www.usefulstuff.de/product-page/EmullgieraufsatzOcis (For the keyword search, it’s the OCIS homogenizing attachment for a Dremel motor). It’s manufactured in Luxembourg and is meant to last ten years according to the website.

@Agate Ooh that Dremel + OCIS attachment might be just what I need. Thanks! The people in this Facebook post seem pretty pleased with it - https://bit.ly/3bbT9x1

The length of the OCIS attachment is a bit short but might be ok for the very small batches I am looking to make.

If all fails, at least the Dremel is useful in itself.

I will be looking into the two recommended Dremel models tonight.. the cordless option is obviously more convenient, but how long can it run continuously before losing power?

Regarding your findings on continuous run time, while it’s true a long run time shouldn’t be required, it’s still disconcerting if the motor can get damaged so quickly/easily!

[helenhelen]

@Agate The other thing that put me off those homogenizers is that they can only be used for less than 5 minutes continuously to protect the motor.. ideally only for 2-3 minutes before resting before starting again. Sounds like the motor would fail in no time!

[helenhelen]

Agate said:

I can’t comment on that specific homogenizer, though if the 1000mPas maximum viscosity is true I would also be concerned.

I’ve been looking for a similar homogenizer myself, and am currently most interested in this one: https://www.amazon.de/Homogenisator-Hochgeschwindigkeits-Dispersions-justierbarer-intelligenter-Laborspender-Homogenisierungsmischer-Zelldispersion/dp/B07ZFT57CK/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=&linkCode=w00&linkId=&creativeASIN=B07ZFT57CK Several people in a German forum bought it this year and have had success with it. Some reported successfully homogenizing cosmetic creams and lotions up to 150ml, but it can start from as low as 5ml. One person did notice that theirs didn’t have the grounding wire soldered to anything, so you do get what you pay for. Another person recently had some sort of motor/electronic failure after a few uses, but the seller has offered to send a replacement free of charge.

Hi @Agate, thanks for your comment. I’ve seen that type of machine as well on eBay and Amazon for very low cost. But as you mention, you get what you pay for.. it looks like it wouldn’t last long before malfunctioning.. and it’s a big hunk of metal and plastic that would end up wastefully being discarded.

[helenhelen]

Pharma said:

I have the impression your mixing up fatty alcohols (e.g. cetyl alcohol) with fatty acid esters (e.g. cetyl palmitate), but anyway…

Myristyl myristate is softer and shinier, less of that dry silkiness cetyl palmitate has, but else is quite similar. I don’t like it that much because of the shine, I like the silicone velvet shimmer more.

I wouldn’t know of any fatty alcohol for your job (they are all very similar), but regarding esters: If you have a hard wax (carnauba or beeswax), about half as much 5-wise is fairly similar to cetyl palmitate in the jar and during application, just a tiny bit more sticky, draggy, and less spreading. The final feeling is more waxy (obvious), again stickier but with better occlusion and not too much shine. On the other hand, the softer candelilla wax comes close to myristyl myristate with the (dis-)advantage of being a wax.

One fatty alcohol which is different would octyldodecanol. It reduces viscosity in some preparations (i.e. true o/w emulsions, personal observation) whilst increasing it and hence stabilising laminar networks (i.e. most easy formulations). It’s oilier but not the kind of sticky oiliness like castor oil, more like a fast absorber. No occlusive effect but better emollience.

For your demands, I’d swap some of the liquid oils with a partially hydrogenated oil. Gotta run, dinner’s ready

Yes sorry, I am definitely mixing up fatty alcohols with fatty acid esters (and probably more)!

Yes, I would be put off by the shine of myristyl myristate. I like skin to look and feel like skin after applying a product, without any shine or glisten.

Good idea on the hydrogenated oils, thanks, I’ll have a look into them. I’ve had success with Hydrogenated Ethylhexyl Olivate and Hydrogenated Olive Oil Unsaponifiables, but it gets a bit too siliconey and greasy at too high a percentage.

[helenhelen]

Pharma said:

Cetyl alcohol and cetyl palmitate are complementary, they cover two different aspects.

Cetyl alcohol doesn’t ‘feel’ on the skin… well, sure it does but the effect is not very noticeable in a cream IMHO. Cetyl alcohol changes the cream itself which is mostly an effect on viscosity, stability, and optics. Obviously, viscosity is felt upon application but just when scooping the product out of the jar and then for the first seconds of application but then quickly fades away during rubbing in. That’s when cetyl palmitate starts showing and excels once the cream has absorbed into the skin, it’s the finishing touch that remains. My wife has very fine/sensitive skin and she can feel cetyl palmitate and similar (e.g. waxes) during application. She can’t quite put it into words but she complains about the ‘dryness’… for her, it probably feels like fine waxy grit, maybe like adding too much beeswax? And then she complains that there is not enough coverage/film remaining on the skin (although you can see that there is, it just doesn’t feel like being there). Perception but also expectation are very subjective and individual .

@Pharma, thank you, that is really interesting, exactly the kind of information I was looking for. Cetyl Alcohol definitely doesn’t sound like what I’m looking for then, as it’s more the final and lasting feel I’m interested in enhancing.

I think your wife is similar to me in terms of feeling every tiny aspect of a cream, and I can completely imagine what she means by the “dryness”. I have dry and sensitive skin and also need to feel coverage/film on the skin for a cream to feel comforting enough. I never understand when people rave about certain brands of products that feel completely insufficient and drying on my own skin (my hands in particular).

Is there an alternative fatty alcohol that gives the lasting film your wife looks for without adding an oily feel or too much of a silicone-like feel? I guess I’m looking for an ingredient that adds a slight boost of comfort and water repellency to an existing formulation that already moisturises well and has enough slip, but I’d like it to feel more velvety on application and have longer lasting emollience. I might still look into trying cetyl palmitate but I don’t want to put all my eggs in one basket!

Or would increasing the glycerin do what I need as well?

[helenhelen]

Pharma said:

I use it at about 1-2%. Hence, no real need to replace anything. I, for no particular reason, tend to subtract such additives from my fall guy water LoL. As a pharmacist, I works more often with older pharmaceutical formulations which often lack aesthetics/haptics of ‘modern’ cosmetics. Cetyl palmitate is a good starting point to try to render them smoother/softer if beeswax is proportionally swapped for it and less greasy/tacky if it’s used to replace some hydrogenated peanut oil (pretty common traditional ingredient here in Switzerland).

The effect is not super strong/evident, it just feels nicer/silkier somehow. I really appreciate that dry-ish silkiness whilst my wife doesn’t share the same opinion.

Can’t comment on soaping… I haven’t paid much heed to that.

Thank you so much @Pharma, that’s really
helpful. Is the “dry-ish silkiness” a similar effect to using isopropyl myristate?

And how different is the effect of cetyl palmitate to cetyl alcohol?

[helenhelen]

@Pharma I’ve seen you and another member recommending cetyl palmitate in the past and it sounds interesting. I wondered if you would be kind enough to answer some questions about it…

For the dry emollient effect (which is what it sounds like cetyl palmitate is known for), do you replace some oil with it, or do you simply add it while leaving the original level of oils unchanged? 

Also, how much is needed to make a difference? Would 1% cetyl palmitate in an emulsion with a high level of oil (around 20%) have any effect?

Is cetyl palmitate problematic in terms of increasing a draggy effect and whitening/soaping on rub-in?

Thanks so much, and sorry @Graillotion for hijacking this thread! 

[helenhelen]

Sucragel is designed for this https://www.alfa-chemicals.co.uk/en/personal-care/products/sucragel

[helenhelen]

There were a handful of Skin Chakra’s blog posts that I found really useful - particularly the ones where they tested out various natural gums and gum blends and showed the results and recommendations.. much more useful than anything I’ve seen from raw material manufacturers etc. They’ve moved to a subscription-only model now for their blog though. I’m not sure how that will work out, as I would have thought the blog posts were a good way of leading people to buy the ingredients via their online store.

[helenhelen]

Thank you both, that’s helpful.

[helenhelen]

I’ve had some minor lash lengthening results in the past from RapidLash which doesn’t contain Bimatoprost but contains some peptides, but nowhere near as noticeable as from Bimatoprost. The ingredients of RapidLash are:

Water (Aqua), Butylene Glycol, HydroxyethylcelIulose, Octapeptide-2, Copper Tripeptide-1, Biotin, Panthenol, sh-Polypeptide-1, Glycine Soja (Soybean) Oil, Cucurbita Pepo (Pumpkin) Seed Extract  Sodium Hyaluronate, Hydrolyzed, Glycosaminoglycans, Allantoin, Dipotassium Glycyrrhizate, Pantethine, Hydrogenated Lecithin, Sea Water (Maris Aqua), Glycerin, Rhizobian Gum, Disodium Phosphate, Polysorbate 60, Sodium Phosphate, Ethyl Acetate, Sodium Oleate, Sodium Hydroxide, Citric Acid, Alcohol Denat., lsopropyl Cloprostenate, Phenoxyethanol, Chlorphenesin, Sorbic Acid, Potassium, Sorbate, Disodium EDTA

[helenhelen]

alchemist01 said:

I was about to recommend bimatoprost too. It’s the only thing I’ve ever heard of being used for eyelashes, though I don’t think its effects constitute “hair growth,” rather than thickness and pronounced darkness.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3036812/

Your formula as it stands will probably do as well as nothing, unfortunately.

Bimatoprost does lengthen the lashes too, it makes my stumpy lashes about 50% longer. It also makes dark hair grow in strange places so you have to be careful to not apply it excessively!

[helenhelen]

As someone who has used a fair few lash serums, I can tell you the only ones that have any significant effect are the ones containing Bimatoprost. Athough even the ones containing Bimatoprost predominantly try to sell using mentions of other “natural-sounding” ingredients.

[helenhelen]

I’m also interested in this. How can we stop creams stiffening over time?

In my case, one of my recent cream samples from the chemist stiffened significantly after a few weeks, making it difficult to spread on larger areas. The minor changes from previous samples were reducing the oil content slightly (from around 21% to 19%) and swapping xanthan gum out for sclerotium. We have used sclerotium for other samples and didn’t get the same issue but this is the first time we’ve reduced the oil content at the same time (which was an improvement on the oiliness on application).

I was thinking to reduce the gum. It’s currently at 0.5%. Would this help? As I’m working with chemists and not formulating myself, I’m limited as to what I can test within the time and costs, so am trying to narrow the tests down to one or two… 

[helenhelen]

If you are going for the “advanced” skincare consumer with “minimalist, science-based formulas”, you probably already have something in mind about what the products do for the skin and how they do it? If so, you shouldn’t need to add claims ingredients like honey and aloe for the sake of adding them. You should work on selling on the “science” if that’s what you think is giving your products an edge.

I’m an advanced skincare consumer who reads ingredients lists, and I wouldn’t fall for any marketing based on honey and aloe. To me, it sounds like a Garnier Ultimate Blends sort of thing!

[helenhelen]

@Cst4Ms4Tmps4, I’m interested in your experience with Glucono Delta Lactone. Do you then ever use it in place of Citric Acid in skincare? Would it also improve the smoothness of an emulsion in the same way that it does for the bean curd?

In heating, do you heat the GdL in water separately before adding to the rest of the formula? How hot does it need to be heated to get the nearly instantaneous acidification that you mention?

Does the pH drift for some time after in a formulation?

Thank you!

[helenhelen]

@AleH My chemists tested Potassium Cetyl Phosphate in some of my samples and it eliminated the whitening but the formula was less moisturising afterwards.