[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]

Tl:Dr: Yes, it is decent. You will get out of it, what you put into it. It’s great base I believe.

I know this is a month old. But like @Graillotion I started my journey on mummy blogs. I like learning, so that helps. But I also quickly realised that “the blogs” weren’t the way to go. However unlike @Graillotion I have had a step learning curve as I was a primary school educator. My knowledge of science stopped at primary school level. I have not done any science degree. I married a dr of mathematics so I didn’t have to do any maths. Which is laughable now. I’ve spent the past 3 years trying to learn as much as I can from textbooks (which aren’t always helpful) and by reading here and a couple of other places. But, because I go down rabbit holes, I needed something to focus on.

@Jasmine2 I started the diploma program March 27th with IPCS after first starting with another programme and switching to IPCS (which took months, and lots of drama, it’s easier just to redo units.)

I don’t like Belinda’s videos - at all. I’m hearing impaired, so never a fan of videos (you’d think live captioning was getting better, but it’s not), but the course content is decent and from what I’ve looked into, I believe other than other programs listed by IFSCC, IPCS are the way to go.

My only issue thus far has been language related which is funny considering someone mentioned that Belinda has autistic children? That’s my education background - special needs, specifically ASD. I have worked with 100s of kids with ASD. I have three children whom are all on the spectrum - I actually believe everyone is a little bit - it’s just a brain thing - a way of thinking. You could have 100 ASDs in the same room - everyone of them will be different. Some might have similar traits but everyone learns differently. My husband and my son are used as “case studies” by Pr Tony Attwood (have been so since 2007). One of the reasons I came home to Brisbane is due to Tony being in Brisbane, anyway I digress. All of that to say, I don’t think she has a special needs teaching method, she is softly spoken but I don’t know if I’d say she has a special needs type of teaching. She does understand that everyone learns differently and you should expect that from any educator. All educators should know this now and should be teaching in a way to support this. It’s been a big focus in the last 20-30 years. We know now.
ASDs would struggle with a lot of the language because it’s not concise. I honestly feel that the “text” has come from several sources and when it’s been written, it hasn’t been rewritten to “flow”. The text has no real flow to it, and as a reader that’s frustrating. For instance, @PhilGeis ‘s microbiological book (which I’m currently reading) flows well even though there are several contributors.

That said, the knowledge is there and if you want the knowledge you will get it. I agree with the comment about Belinda favouring certain suppliers but she’s not telling us to go buy them, in fact all the formulas from IPCS are usually basic and designed not for copying but for you to learn how to formulate. Like Doug said, that’s all about trial and error. I do think it’s a decent course - it better be with what I’m paying and I believe I will only get out of it, what I put in.

The other issue, I might have is, in Australia we can register with ASCC no issues, but getting an IFSCC membership - I believe the credentials you get from IPCS aren’t enough for full membership? I have to look into this more, I wasn’t thinking of applying until after I finish anyway. It’s just something I’ve seen mentioned on the student and graduate FB group, that might be worthwhile to mention. You would have to check your local SCC to see if they accept it or not.

I think with all education, it’s about what you put in. I do think it’s a good course. I am hoping it will give me a broader basic understanding and to gain work experience while doing the course. I think people often forget that any learning, in a classroom of any type, is only ever going to give you the basics. The knowledge comes from experience and continued learning. So if you look at it that way, you are golden!

[Juggsy]

<div>While they are both oatmeal, they are actually different and you can not replace one for the other usually,unless you want not the whole grain and you want lumpy oats in your product. </div>

It’s actually the whole grain that they process. So it includes the bran. It also goes through a different processing treatment than regular “finely ground oatmeal”.

And the bran part is where all the goodness is. You won’t have the same effect and it will be a rough texture. Colloidal Oatmeal doesn’t have issues with lumpiness.

Usually they going through one of two processing methods. I think the most popular being when the Colloidal Oats are grounded, boiled and steamed before being milled.

There is another method employed that is hard core milling.

Normal oatmeal is not the same.

You can read more here (Lisa’s explanation is decent and has links and references for further reading): https://www.lisaliseblog.com/2017/03/what-makes-colloidal-oatmeal-colloidal.html?m=1

[Juggsy]

Haha, I use all of those suppliers except my skin recipes   I’ve got a few things in a cart there - I just never ended up finishing my order. It’s good to know that they are okay to use. It was the paypal process that deterred me. I have had some bad experiences with PayPal in the past. time to look 😉

I had a great thing going with Aromatic Ingredients (AI) until they were aquisitioned/changed hands in June (they were cheapest for oils, had lubrizol products others didn’t) @Squinny thank you for your detailed response. 
Max Hancock has worked really hard over the past few years to increase the things sold at Escentials. Max is a bit of a legend, really nice dude. They are my favourite because for me it’s local and comes within two days whenever I order. I don’t mind paying a bit extra when it comes so quickly. NDA are okay but can be exxy for some things, but now that I can’t use AI for my extacts and EOs, they seem to sell the cheapest APB products (some are cheaper at SEOC, you really need to check) And they are decent for packaging. 

I agree about Trulux (and now they charge shipping for orders under 300 - boo!) I always use Gyceryl Stearate and P100S (GS+P100S) to show how crazy their prices are… Trulux around $70p/kg at NDA $30 p/kg and at NEssentials $25 p/kg. It’s a ridiculous price for such a basic ingredient. 
NEssentials used to be okay for clays, oils etc and around 2011, I think they were really quite cheap. I used to buy lots from them for salt products. I don’t recommend them to anyone now except for GS+P100S.  

[Juggsy]

@Pharma I do understand that and did read all the threads here. That was the whole reason I was interested as, per my understanding (feel free to correct me) when the pH goes above a certain point, it converts into citric acid and then brings the pH down again. I was a bit confused about dilution of it though. I assumed it had to be diluted to be added to buffer the pH. 

@Squinny I am in Australia. Because I am only studying, I swear most places don’t want a bar of me because I do not want 20kg plus for small business and certainly not 200kg+ - The Thailand place - what is their MOQ? I would love to know more details. Trulux is very expensive. 
I’m allergic to lanolin - I’m terified of working with it for that reason. I can’t test creams with it myself. I have got several verisons of that basic formula. One with a “vegan” lanolin alternative and one with small % of beeswax. I have been documenting the hand cream - hope to use it as my main assessment product. 

[Juggsy]

yes. I add everything in stages. didn’t think to add instructions. assumed it was self explanatory, but looking again, I understand the confusion (my inability to copy and paste on laptop)… everything from germall down in cooldown. expect allantoin - which on my spreadsheet is first just when I copied and pasted it missed the last line, so I added it. 

pH of originally of this (with only 5%) formula was 5.9 - currently at 14 weeks - it’s last reading was 6.2 - which I thought was okay, it’s cream. still in suitable range. It still stable. Looks the same. doesn’t smell like urine ???????? so my brain started thinking. oh maybe I can increase it. 

I read that before Somewhere I am sure it was you who mentioned using triethyl citrate (why did I write TET - I know it’s a C ????????‍♀️ not even a typo - idiot I am - my bottle even says TEC) as a solvent. Maybe I will experiment with it on it’s own. It is a hefty price I’m paying for 100g at the moment. 

I have only really used it for antibacterial properties so far and I was thinking of experimenting with how it compares to DPG for extending life of EOs. 
 
As for hydrovance, it didn’t even cross my mind. I had a small sample (used it) but it was really expensive here until Trulux brought it it. So, I hadn’t thought of using it again. I’ll add it to my August cart. 
 
Thank you very much for your assistance!! I do appreciate being pointed in the right direction. 

[Juggsy]

I am only learning myself so I am not versed enough to give a professional opinion but I know from using it myself is that Optiphen Plus is a blend of phenoxyethanol, sorbic acid and an emollient base; it is a broad spectrum preservative. It can be used as a stand-alone preservative but works well with other preservatives. 

I believe it needs to be used at .75-1.5% of the total weight of the formula (check manufacturer website) and must be used at temperatures lower 75°C. It also needs to be used in formulations under pH 6.0. It is suitable for water based products. Without seeing your formula it is hard to say if it can be swapped but I have swapped germsll plus for optiphen plus in another formula with success. 

I have not formulated with hyaluronic acid but I encourage you to learn about preservatives as one preservative doesn’t fit all. Also, because it’s not just about slapping on any preservative and hoping for the best; you need to think about ways to boost your preservative with processes like hurdle technology. Which is an in-depth topic and hard to explain in a short comment. . 

I have my own preservative chart (it was an assessment) but Humblebeeandme has a chart with some commonly used preservatives that you can use.  

I would also encourage you to have a look at Susan Barclay Nichols’s site, point of interest - she has an ebook on preservatives which is in-depth and informative. 

[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. ????

[Juggsy]

I have the same trainer. My observation is that they do not read answers fully or they are using a marking guide like we would use for multiple choice exams in education. I have only have one revisit but it wasn’t really a revisit, it was because they didn’t read correctly. Until I saw one of those Q&As, I thought they were an ESL speaker. ????
Are you working in industry now @Paprik ?

[Juggsy]

this is what I’ve been told by former students who can formulate too. Actually, one said to me “don’t send any more emails challenging their text, just do what they say, get the piece of paper and learn on the job”

I really don’t think my trainer likes me because of the challenges but I also know they aren’t responding because, I don’t think they have the knowledge. Which as you pointed out to me yesterday would be quite limited considering no science degrees.

[Juggsy]

I think I have a non-IPCS mentor. They have been assigning me work and have been encouraging me to think more “industry-like” - which has been a huge help. I would wager, I’ve learnt more from their teaching, and the resources they have linked me to than from IPCS at this stage. I don’t think IPCS is bad, I just don’t think they are the “be all and end all” - I have mentality that we are continually learning, no matter at what point we are in life. I also think that if you take any book, research, information or whatever at face value without checking sources then you shouldn’t be doing anything that requires critical thinking.

[Juggsy]

I don’t think they have updated the text any time recently and no mention of Burkholderia cepacia - the only think I know about cepacia has come from your book. And I’m only on page 55 but I used your PET testing procedure in my answer (I’m expecting to have to resumbit though as not based on IPCS text and that seems to explode their heads).

[Juggsy]

Basically, they teach to ensure preservative is broad spectrum (B, F, Y, M), taking into consideration synergism of preservatives (or blend) used, pH drift, chemical nature, disperability/solubility, regulatory considerations, cost/availability, product form and marketing concerns. To ensure that it can </font>theoretically can handle microbial load then to conduct PET testing.  

However, she is correct that they include it in their packs, and they do use it in a few formulation builds (I treat all their builds, like you would a ULP formula) - however, the builds have been around pH 5.5. So maybe they can get away with it? You wouldn't know without testing. Oh she does encourage us all to get PET testing done to BP pharmacopoeia rather than USP as they have stricter testing. 

However, she is correct that they include it in their packs, and they do use it in a few formulation builds (I treat all their builds, like you would a ULP formula) - however, the builds have been around pH 5.5. So maybe they can get away with it? You wouldn’t know without testing. Oh she does encourage us all to get PET testing done to BP pharmacopoeia rather than USP as they have stricter testing.

[Juggsy]

this is what I am finding too. It’s kinda shocking. It feels a little more like formula botanica in terms of the fact that they are just trying to make money? and they seem to have some die-hard followers? I know money is what drives them but I had higher expectations and have spoken to a couple of people who come from chemistry and biology backgrounds who were disappointed too. I am trying to look at it as “basics” and getting my foot in the door, but I had expected it to be more in-depth than what it is.
My only other option is down in Melbourne (monash) as even the programme at Cincinnati isn’t accredited here. The only one that seems to be accredited is IPCS and the Monash programme. This would have been helpful if I had decided to change careers 15 years ago ???? when I lived there.

[Juggsy]

You didn’t read the whole thing?

I understand that fatty alcohols act as bar hardeners and personally use them as such.

My issue isn’t them using it as a bar hardener. Have no issue with them using as hardener in a surfactant bar but they aren’t doing that. My issue is them using oils (which they say they are using) and not replacing the BTMS50 with another cationic emulsifier. It was suggested to the OP to change the BTMS50 to a cheaper cationic emulsifier (it was even suggested how to use BTMS with cetyl alcohol) or to remove the oil phase and replace it completely with other conditioning agents (humectants, quats etc).

I don’t see how a fatty alcohol can act as a stand alone in this case. My understanding is (please correct, if I’m wrong) that fatty alcohols are not surfactants as they have different molecular structure, different interfacial activity, different way of interacting with surfactants. How can something with no charge replace something with charge and still be effective?