[Juggsy]

the smell was there before the oxprotect, yes? I’ve not had a smell from oXprotect (I have all of that range from MSR). I would try formulating without zinc ricinoleate to see if the smell dissipates. Maybe also consider switching from Germall Plus to a non-formaldehyde-releasing preservative.

the amount of oxprotect you are using seems high? the use rate is 0.1-1.0 isn’t it?

[Juggsy]

because it acts as both an emollient and a solvent. so it helps the deodorant go on smoothly and feel soft, balancing out the drying effect of the aluminium. Plus, it gives a lightweight, non-greasy feel, which reduces irritation and makes the deodorant comfortable to wear, especially for sensitive skin. basically, it makes the deodorant work better and feel better, What’s your issue with it? Oh, it might help a bit with stability too?

[Juggsy]

Without formula and process, it’s hard to know what has happened, but in general benzoyl peroxide (BPO) BPO is not very soluble in water. When you dissolve it in ethyl alcohol, it may not be completely mixed into the water-based part of your face wash, potentially creating a suspension. This could cause it to look creamy or opaque (I think it’s bc the crystals would scatter light? that’s my understand but could be wrong).

But for viscosity loss, alcohol is a solvent and can always affect the performance of the surfactants in a system, so this could easily be the cause of the viscosity loss.

I would try using a solubiliser to help incorporate the BPO, like PEG-40 hydrogenated castor oil. I would also look at the concentration % of alcohol in the formula as it could be causing the viscosity loss. Is your rheology modifier compatible with alcohol? not all are.

As said, without formula and process, this is just guessing but might help you to work through what is happening.

[Juggsy]

I’m thinking that the phrase “doesn’t require both the presence of oil and water” in this context is a bit misleading. Glyceryl stearate S/E is a self-emulsifying version of glyceryl stearate, meaning that it can form an emulsion (blend oil and water) more easily because it contains additional emulsifying agents, like sodium and potassium stearate.

What it’s likely trying to say is that, unlike regular glyceryl stearate, which needs a separate emulsifier or both oil and water to create an emulsion, glyceryl stearate S/E has the ability to emulsify on its own due to the presence of those extra agents. However, it still needs oil and water to create an emulsion—it just doesn’t need extra emulsifiers to do the job. ??

[Juggsy]

For some reason my reply isn’t showing, but, yes, tromethamine usually comes as a powder, and yes, it’s normally hydrated before use. You just dissolve it in water to make pH adjustments easier. A 10% solution (10g Tromethamine in 90g water) is pretty standard, but you can adjust it depending on your needs. Water is best for dissolving Tromethamine—just make sure it’s RO/distilled to avoid any impurities affecting the pH.

[Juggsy]

Tromethamine usually comes as a powder, and yes, it’s normally hydrated before use. You just dissolve it in water to make pH adjustments easier. A 10% solution (10g Tromethamine in 90g water) is pretty standard, but you can adjust it depending on your needs. Water is best for dissolving Tromethamine—just make sure it’s RO/distilled to avoid any impurities affecting the pH.

[Juggsy]

You will need a PIF, Evidence of GMP Certification (compliance with ISO 22716), A safety assessment, Free Sale Certificate (TGA), Evidence of stability testing. Labels must be in both Arabic and English.

In regards to your question about the percentages, you list the percentage of the raw material, not just the actives. This is standard for both Dubai and EU regulations. For example, a surfactant blend used at 10% in your formula should be listed as 10%, even if it’s only partially active. For blends include the percentage of the entire raw material in the formula. In the EU, you need the exact percentages for ingredients, but for trade secrets or proprietary blends, it’s often acceptable to provide percentage ranges (e.g., “1-5%”) as long as the regulatory authority accepts it. You might need to check if Dubai allows for similar practices.

Dubai follows the guidelines set by the Dubai Municipality and its regulatory body is the Consumer Products Safety Section (CPSS). They do have guidelines on their website.

• This reply was modified 2 months ago by  Juggsy.

[Juggsy]

I think you are breaking the gel with the shear.

I believe that excessive shear can potentially degrade HA molecules, leading to reduced effectiveness or even instability in the formulation.

Try adding HMW HA to the cool-down phase after emulsification is complete and the mixture has cooled down to around 40–45 °C. This might help improve stability as it reduces the exposure of HMW HA to high temperatures and shear forces during the emulsification process. Or only use low shear once you’ve added the HA like you’d do with carbomer.

[Juggsy]

Atomic Pom? I would say they might be able to help, they are in Canada. Can’t hurt to send a message and ask. https://www.atomicpomlabs.com/

atomicpomlabs.com

Canadian Cosmetic Lab for Entrepreneurs

A full service cosmetic lab dedicated to small brands making a big impact. We offer expert and innovative formulations, customizable private label products as well as small batch production. Expand, start or complete your skincare line with us.

[Juggsy]

You didn’t formulate the IPCS formula @Rhys you altered a formula and any changes made, especially ones where you are changing the main materials you will change the outcome. it even says of the formulation sheet that testing should be done. You should not really have been testing on inner forearm before even thinking about putting it under your arms.

 

But you cannot say you made an IPCS formula when you didn’t. You altered an IPCS formula and had a fail.
IPCS formula:

 

[Juggsy]

According to this: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/shea-butter-market-size-statistics-comprehensive-outlook-sxfef/
The shea butter market is experiencing growth driven by several key factors: a rising demand for natural and organic skincare products, with shea butter’s natural benefits drawing health-conscious consumers; its expanding use across various cosmetic products; increased consumer awareness and market accessibility; the positive socio-economic impact on African communities involved in its production, appealing to ethically minded consumers; and technological advancements in extraction and processing that enhance its quality and appeal. These elements collectively contribute to the broader adoption and market success of shea butter.

linkedin.com

Shea Butter Market Size And Statistics: A Comprehensive Outlook And Forecast For 2032

Our recent report predicts that the Shea Butter Market size is expected to be worth around USD 4.5 Bn by 2032 from USD 2.

[Juggsy]

Not sure where you are @RKB but “free from” claims have some strict guidelines in the EU and there’s hope that this will turn into law rather than just guidance and push to stop companies using “free from” claims especially if all ingredients are used within regulatory limits (and thus seen as safe). In the EU if there are allergens in the fragrance used (components of fragrance), they may need to be listed on labels as well. (ref: https://food.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2018-07/codex_ccfl_cl-2018-24_ann-02.pdf )

A couple of articles:
https://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Article/2019/09/06/Cosmetics-free-from-claims-guidance-EU-explained
https://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Article/2019/09/09/Free-from-claims-cosmetics-EU-requires-honesty-fairness-and-safety-says-expert

https://bespokelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Bespoke-Free-from-and-hypoallergenic-claims.pdf

[Juggsy]

It’s not new. The SCCS updated their opinion on retinol in 2016.

When you search CosIng - for retinol - you can clearly see that there’s an SCCS opinion - which needs to be checked when researching.

https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/revision-scientific-opinion-sccs157616-vitamin-retinol-retinyl-acetate-retinyl-palmitate_en

health.ec.europa.eu

Revision of the scientific Opinion (SCCS/1576/16) on Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate)

Revision of the scientific Opinion (SCCS/1576/16) on Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate)

[Juggsy]

haha, but I know that Dr Phil is going back to work in August, so semi-retirement. Although, I wouldn’t mind your retirement - not sure if I’d call it a retirement since you are always working with the flowers or the formulas. lol

[Juggsy]

i might seem stupid (right now, don’t care)…. thinking about stearic acid more…. it really is not anionic by itself is it?. it has a carboxyl group (-COOH) at one end which would be polar and would dissolve in water. However, the rest of the stearic acid molecule is nonpolar correct? does this make stearic acid an amphipathic molecule? it has both polar and nonpolar properties. So the carboxyl heads dissolve in water but the non polar hydrocarbon chain forms micelles. When stearic acid is mixed with water, the polar carboxyl am I correct in thinking to make stearic acid anionic, it must be converted to a salt?

[Juggsy]

@Graillotion @

@ngarayeva001 @Graillotion I’m so confused. I have been told this

“If you look at the chemical formula, indeed there is no charge but it is because it is the formula of the molecule when it is solid in the pack. When you put stearic acid in water, it will free a H+ ion in the water (this is what do all acids, including stearic acid) and because this H+ is released in water, the stearic molecule has a negative charge on the O that was attached to the H+ releasedSo in an emulsion there is water so stearic acid will become negatively charged when added to the formula”

okay, yes stearic acid is a weak acid, but I thought it only partially dissociates in water. so like when it is dissolved in water, it releases a hydrogen ion (H+) into the water. This leaves the stearic acid molecule with a negative charge. but it doesn’t make it anionic does it? because it’s so weak?

doesn’t the negative charge on the carboxylate ion just allow it to interact with water molecules

yes I understand that you can react it with an alkali to form an emulsifier. why the F are they saying it’s anionic. can someone please explain this to me. everything I have read suggests stearic acid is a fatry acid that is non ionic - I assumed because the formula is C18H36O2 and there being no +/- ions at the end of the formula meant it was nonionic? what am I undersnding wrong.??? right now I don’t care how stupid I look. I’m so confused.

[Juggsy]

Cosroma and DKSH both sell ascorbyl glucoside. I would contact your local supplier of these two companies. Ashland also have some AG in their perfectyl™ biofunctional (supplier blurb reads: perfectyl™ biofunctional is a high-tech chamomile extract, inspired by new aesthetic techniques, to clarify & smoothen skin flaws (such as pores & hyperpigmentation) for all ethnicities. Ashland uses fresh & living chamomile, Zeta Fraction™ technology and A.I to reveal the science of clear skin with a pure, patented extract naturally rich in GABA & flower acids.)

I’m with Mark on this though, I believe it’s better than SAP. I did struggle to find a supplier in Australia though. But, in general, I think ascorbyl glucoside coverts to AA quicker than SAP. It’s also more gentle (anecdotal). I also think it’s better for brightening formulations over SAP.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by  Juggsy.

[Juggsy]

@andy982183 So, so using your SLES example, you are correct, 28% becomes 0.28.

But you would then multiply it by the concentration/input% of surfactant you’re using. For instance, if your formula uses 10 % of SLeS, the calculation would be:

𝐴𝑆𝑀 = 10 × 0.28 = 2.8

You then add all of them up together. I will base on known averages, but you would need to refer to datasheets in general as it changes from supplier to supplier. But using some averages so SLES (typically 30% or 70% active); AOS Liquid (typically 40% active); CDEA (Around 85% active); SLS Needle (Typically 95% active.)

SLES 9% × 0.28 = 2.52%
AOS 1.5% × 0.40 = 0.6%
CDEA 1% × 0.85 = 0.85%
SLS 0.5% × 0.95 = 0.475%

So then you have 2.52% + 0.6% + 0.85% + 0.475% = 4.445%

The total ASM is 4.445% and as @Aniela said that is around the ASM of facewash. I don’t formulate for homecare, so you would be best to refer to someone else about how much surfactant to use. But if the average shampoo is between 10% and 15% ASM, I would wager it’s a lot higher.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by  Juggsy. Reason: formatting, didn't want to add bold

[Juggsy]

But you have both listed in your formula? What was the emulsifying wax you used? An INCI name would help, but a trade name would be better. As @ketchito said, make sure your emulsifier works well with the amount of oil you’re using (especially the paraffin oil). If you’ve got a lot of oil in there (like 10% paraffin oil), you might need extra stabilisers &/or thickeners to keep things thick after it cools. As @ngarayeva001 suggested, GS+GSPEG100 would work if you kept the formulation unchanged. Like her, I’ve used mineral oil with GS+GSPEG100 lots of times over the years without issue.

The observed viscosity drop at around 40°C might be related to phase separation or incomplete emulsification, particularly if the emulsion hasn’t been given enough time to stabilise during cooling. I’m basing this on [quote] u(75°C) > u(70°C) > u(49°C) > u(53°C) > u(60°C) [/quote] as I think this suggests that the conditioner’s viscosity is sensitive to temperature.

Another thing is phase inversion could indeed be the reason your cream is losing viscosity. Gradual cooling and reducing mixing speed at lower temperatures can help prevent this, along with adjusting the emulsifier ratio to better handle the oil phase. So, make sure the oil and water are properly mixed at 70°C and let the emulsion cool down gradually so you don’t end up with crystals forming or the structure breaking down. Keep stirring gently as it cools. It’s fine to keep mixing at 600 rpm when it’s hot, but once it starts thickening (around 50°C), drop the speed to about 300-400 rpm.

[Juggsy]

“According to Custom Market Insights (CMI), the Global Shea Butter Market was estimated at USD 2.5 billion in 2021 and is expected to reach USD 2.8 billion in 2022 and is anticipated to reach around USD 5.2 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of roughly 8% between 2022 and 2030.” https://www.custommarketinsights.com/report/shea-butter-market

[Juggsy]

@Paprik is that Ahhh, it’s all Good? If so have a look at the shampoo bar ingredients - they are worse:
Ingredients: Sodium Coco Sulphate (coconut derived), Water (infusion of lentils), Sweet Almond Oil, Citric acid, Cocomidylpropyl betaine, Manuka Honey, Natural (colourless) Henna, Glycerine, Honey Fragrance

Also note that this is being sold in NZ - they are supposed to do INCI labelling - as per Cosmetic Products Group Standard 2017. Some labels are just so shockingly bad.

[Juggsy]

I’m sure it’s been a while? Not arguing with you, please understand that. I’m just confused as my cousin gets my sister to send her retinol from here to the UK - she’s been doing for a while. I thought they revised it again last year?

Maybe they are just cracking down on it more? Where did the information for that weird IG dude come from? I’m not going to watch his IG - he frustrates me as most skinfluencers do.

I can’t see any updates on the site https://health.ec.europa.eu/scientific-committees/scientific-committee-consumer-safety-sccs_en that have happened this year? nor on https://cosmeticseurope.eu/news-events/
the only thing I saw that could be related was COSMILE was launched back in february - so people now might understand their ingredients better? I know you have been able to use CosIng but I don’t think the general public would understand this. I know they did the review thing last year but that’s still not new?

[Juggsy]

@David08848 it’s expensive AF - I purchased 50 sachets for 230 bucks (not including shipping) and will have to order more soon. I thought it was better buying the sachets as I’d not used it before. I wish I had gone for the 1.8kg pack at 198 bucks. Just be aware as I was absolutely mortified by the cost.

[Juggsy]

Well, that’s trippy, as I used Amanda’s realise beauty blog as reference when I said it’s not an emulsifier by itself! I was going to ask this in the monthly Q&A they hold, but I already know what they will say, as someone asked their trainer already. Which is how this all came about in the first place. Paying a shitload to be taught things incorrectly. grrr. lol

You know you make me feel so much better now for saying my favourite Australian Cosmetic Chemist is Michelle Wong. I was attacked recently because I didn’t include Belinda on my list of favourites. But, that’s because I can’t stand watching youtube videos. As a hearing impaired human, I dislike YT because subtitles are never accurate. It’s hilarious when watching an ecowell live for instance. And AI picks up Australian accents in a strange way, so often “cream” gets shown as “queen” - hilarious when it’s a hydrating queen.

[Juggsy]

Absolutely agree with this. I’m glad I’m not the only one who screams at “broad spectrum” - and I often wonder how many formulators are actually looking at the datasheets to see what they do cover. This was a big eye opener for me when I came back to this. Thankfully for me, at home, I’ve no issue with using DMDM or parabens. I’d much rather things be safe even if it’s a lab sample.
John Staton wrote an interesting article about this (online courses) on Linkedin a few weeks back. I asked this morning about his thoughts on IPCS - I’d be interested to know as he works for one of the bigger companies here and often writes for the ASCC magazine that comes out a few times a year - however he hasn’t responded yet, I’ll be surprised if he does. I believe he might work occasionally with the IPCS director. ????