johnb
Forum Replies Created
-
Originally Nivea Creme corresponded to a perfumed version of Oily Cream BP which, in turn was an “official” interpretation of Hydrous Eucerin.
Hydrous Eucerin was composition comprising 50% Wool Alcohols Ointment, 0.5% magnesium sulphate, 1% phenoxyethanol and the remainder being water.
Wool Alcohols Ointment comprises 6% Wool Alcohols, 24% Paraffin Wax, 10% Petrolatum, 60% Mineral Oil. The ratios of the paraffin wax, petrolatum and mineral oil can be varied to suit the climate where the composition is to be used.
The emulsifier in Oily Cream i.e original Nivea was solely wool (lanolin) alcohol and the product stabilised with magnesium sulphate.
They may well use decyl oleate and metal stearates now but the prime emulsifier remains wool alcohols.
Eucerite is the Beiersdorf name for wool alcohol or lanolin alcohol hence Eucerin for the derivates.
-
How consistent are the batch to batch properties of the “brewed coffee”? Considering it makes up the major part (71.7%) of the product, I think this may well have a profound effect on the properties of your shampoo.
Do you have any quality control procedures on the coffee - before or after brewing? Assuming it is roasted coffee the degree of roasting could easily affect the amount of extractables, in turn affecting the composition and concentration of the brew. Are the coffee beans of the same strain of coffee plant each time? Are they from the same harvest? Are they from the same supplier?
With so many variables it is very feasible that one or other, or more, will affect the properties of the final product.
-
W/O emulsions are usually more stable when the oil makes up the major phase and the water the minor phase.
Is it truly a W/O emulsion? 14% oil (+4% wax) and 72% water do not seem to me to be indicators of high stability.
-
Well john sorry i saw this group name CHEMIST CORNER not COSMETIC CORNER.
If you check the fuller title of the group you will see
-
The key word in your latest reply is “treat”. By using this word, it puts the product out of the definition of cosmetic and into being a medicinal product which is outside the scope of this group.
Article 2 of the EU Cosmetics Regulation (Regulation (EC) No.
1223/2009) incorporates the following definition of a cosmetic product:A “cosmetic product” shall mean any substance or
mixture intended to be placed in contact with the various external
parts of the human body (epidermis, hair system, nails, lips and
external genital organs) or with the teeth and the mucous membranes of
the oral cavity with a view exclusively or mainly to cleaning them,
perfuming them, changing their appearance and/or correcting body odours
and/or protecting them or keeping them in good condition.Directive 2001/83/EEC defines a medicinal product as:
“(a) Any substance or combination of substances presented as having
properties for treating or preventing disease in human beings; or(b) Any substance or combination of substances which may be used in
or administered to human beings either with a view to restoring,
correcting or modifying physiological functions by exerting a
pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, or to making a
medical diagnosis.”Similar definitions apply in most jurisdictions.
-
You say you are not in the field of phenol peels but you are putting 10% resorcinol (a phenol) together with 20% azelaic acid into your projected product.
What is the function of the phytic acid in the mix?
-
Bill, the real point of my post was to clarify that there is nothing magic about borax as an emulsifier and that it can be readily replaced with other materials e.g NaOH, as Unilever have done.
Please don’t think I am championiing borax as a cosmetic material because I am not.
-
There is nothing magic about borax as an emulsifier.
It gets its reputation from being the emulsifier, together with beeswax, in the traditional cold cream which was supposedly invented by the Ancient Greeks, in particular, Galen - the “father” of medicine. Borax is found in natural deposits worldwide.
Borax has an alkaline reaction and will react with acids: thus the acids in beeswax react forming a soap which is the emulsifying agent, not the borax per se.
Since the controversy about the safety of borax (whether real or imagined) began, the large maufacturers of beeswax/borax products have been busy reformulating to remove borax e.g Unilever have reformulated Pond’s Cold Cream and replaced borax with sodium hydroxide.
-
Obviously @nhag77‘s needs aren’t as urgent as claimed!
-
Can you tell us something of your background and experience? The reason I ask is that chemical peels have the potential of causing much damage when wrongly used (and even when not wrongly used if they are badly formulated).
From the way I read your post, I don’t think I would be happy giving any advice or recommendations.
-
It is most likely the emulsion breaking and coagulating on the skin. The blackness is dirt collected during the emulsion breaking.
-
You might like to look at https://rosaceagroup.org/The_Rosacea_Forum/
This is a lively help forum for rosaceans and may be interesting for you.
I should point out that all three materials are heavily patented and one is not even launched yet. Galderma (makers of Mirvaso and Soolantra) are not shy of fighting to protect their interests. I imagine Allergan to be the same so it is probably not in your best interests to pursue this line of products.
For your information Brimonidine (note spelling) is called Mirvaso, Invermectin is Soolantra and Oxymetazoline is, or will be, Rhofade.
Mirvaso is not the blessing it was intended to be and lots of users suffer severe reactions to it. Whether Rhofade is as bad remains to be seen.
Note: I don’t see any of the materials in question on the Napp website.
-
There is no specific reason why you cannot use food ingredients in cosmetic formulations. In fact many many materials (e.g emulsifiers) are used equally in both markets.
The thing to watch out for is to ensure that the food ingredient you are buying is the same material as is used in cosmetic products and doesn’t just happen to have the same, or a similar, name. Check the specification sheet for the product to ensure compliance.
Regarding suppliers of cosmetic ingredients in small quantities, there are numerous firms set up purely to do this. Looking among the pages here, as you say you have, will identify them.
-
everything is fine apart from the fact it breaks down watery in the hands
This is exactly how the original Brylcreem would behave if rubbed into the hands - it would break the emulsion into its separate phases. There is an important point here that seems to be forgotten about. The idea of using this type of product is to apply it to the hair, it is not hand cream.
Brylcreem type hairdressing (applied to the hair!) would break down in the way described. The separated water would moisten and soften the hair and the oil phase would spread and form a coating on the hair ready to be styled with a comb.
Original Brylcreem was a w/o emulsion of mineral oil and water emulsified with calcium soap formed in situ from lime water (calcium hydroxide solution) as the aqueous phase and a fatty acid in the oil phase.
I am not suggesting you make a Brylcreem type product (it requires specific technique), just don’t get too hung up on things that may be unimportant.
BTW, what is the function of the vitamin E in the product? If it is to “nourish” the hair, remember that hair is dead tissue and no amount of nourishment will bring it back to life. If it is as an antioxidant, is it really necessary? There are other things you could use if you consider it so important.
BTW2, have you considered the costings of this complicated mixture of oils?
-
@nhag77 This needs to be a new thread. It is not remotely associated with the original.
-
I think the apparent absence of water is accounted for by the “Camellia sinensis (Green tea) extract”. I prepare extracts of this (and of fermented {brown} tea) several times a day, every day. I then drink it!
-
Regarding a preservative system, the leuconostoc/ radish root filtrate ferment (should be leuconostoc/radish root ferment filtrate) is supposed to be a “natural” preservative commercial name is Leucidal Liquid. I am not convinced of its action as a preservative.
It could be considered that the sodium salicylate/gluconolactone mix acts as a preservative in a similar way to sodium benzoate/gluconolactone combinations (Geogard Ultra).
-
Seems to me to be a thrown together mix of trendy ingredients.
I wonder how much rational thought went into formulating this concoction?
Edit: I’ve just looked at your link and seen the price $90 for 30ml! I’m going for a lie down.
-
What is the product in the illustration?
Is it a facewash (like you are trying to copy)? If it is, what is the list of ingredients - knowing that would give clues as to how to achieve your goal.
-
Is there a market product that you are trying to emulate?
I am extremely doubtful that you will achieve a solid product with the mix you are using.
-
Check your definitions of “monounsaturated and “polyunsaturated”.
Ricinoleic acid is unique in being a monounsaturated hydroxystearic acid.
-
Your understanding of the word “exfoliator” must be different to mine.
My (and the majority of others) understanding of exfoliator is “an item or cosmetic composition to be applied to, or rubbed on to, the suface of the skin with the intention of removing surplus skin tissue.”
I cannot see any way that a cationic detergent can, in itself, have this action.
-
I still do not believe it.
-
I don’t have the material.
-
Sorry, I just don’t believe it unless it is merely a minor ingredient in a polyacrylic acid “balling” exfoliator.
Does your Chinese principal explain anything about what they are trying to sell you?