ketchito
Forum Replies Created
-
@Learntounlearn I don’t think yoo need all three thickeners and at those levels. Usually one gum at 0.2-0.5% will suffice. The thing is that you need to add it in the water phase, at the start of the process, so it becomes part of the emulsion.
-
@heavenly4u Just a thought, Cetrimonium chloride comes as a 30% solution, and considering a dosage of 2%, you’ll have 0.6% of the ingredient in your formula, while the maximum level permitted for leave-on products is 1.0%.
Now, Cetrimonium chloride has a synergistic effect when mixed with Behentrimonium (it has a better performance at neutralizing static charge, I believe due to its higher mobility in solution).
If your issue is the foam, you could use some dimethicone in your formula, and also reduce mixing speed gradually while you cool down so air can be removed before it’s completely cold.
-
DAS said:It’s safe, although you already have high asm. I wouldn’t want that near my eyes.
@Mayday yes, it’s safe. In fact major brands use HCl and NaOH to adjust pH.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=182.1057https://incidecoder.com/ingredients/hydrochloric-acid
Sometimes Cosing db is handy: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.simple
As @Mayday and @DAS mentioned, you could use a solution of HCl for cost saving. Now, consider that the lower you go with your pH, the less detergency you’ll have from your anionic surfactants (I don’t see a practical need for going so low in pH).
-
@GeorgeBenson if the layer at the bottom gets thicker over time, that might be the lamellar gel (top) separating from your water (bottom). As @chemicalmatt mentioned, electrolytes (eg. Sodium PCA) could be destabilizing the system.
-
@SlingerD First, I’d add the Lactic acid once the emulsion has been formed, in the cool down phase. Then, add some base (like NaOH solution) to bring the pH closer to neutral (that would help convert Stearic acid into Sodium stearate which is an emulsifier, and stabilize the SSL in your CreamMix). Also, 2% of essential oil could be too high to be added post emulsion.
-
I personally never used Symrise’s preservative blends for many reasons: 1) they are very very costly, 2) they don’t perform (in real life) as good as the more classical (and less less expensive) preservatives, 3) they have to be applied at very high doses compared to regular ones, 4) their unique bends make it impossible to have any control over shortage or price increase, 5) Symrise is not precisely a historical preservative manufacturer…although, they have a very good marketing team
-
@bahey I assume the rest of your formula is mainly water, rigth? If that’s the case, I’d prefer to increase the level of your alcohol rather than to increase the solubilizer. Increasing alcohol will let fragrance bloom, while increasing the solubilizer in a water-based system will make some of the fragrance be solubilized and not available for performing properly.
-
@Abdullah Free water is water that doesn’t form part of the emulsion itself (like the lamellar network).
-
@Hanson25 It actually depends. If you don’t need to suspend anything, then you can try with Crothix Liquid, Versathix, Novethix L-10 or Glucamate LT. But if you need to suspend something, you can combine one of those with a carbomer.
-
@karima The amount of Glycerin is fine (higher amounts can impair alcohol potency). For finding out the amount of TEA, you can check this guide from Lubrizol: https://www.lubrizol.com/-/media/Lubrizol/Health/TDS/TDS-237_Neutralizing_Carbopol_Pemulen_in_Aqueous_Hydroalcoholic_Systems-PH.pdf
-
@nelson That’s the best practice for these type of products (at moderate-high speed). Try some samples to see how it turns out.
-
@Abdullah There is always a phase dynamics when in comes to water until it reaches an equilibrium; in the case of a close system, water turns into gas until the surroundings are saturated, that’s when condensation happens. If you had an open system (like a gap between the lid and the container), then water would be constantly turning into gas, drying out the product overtime. Now, this is just the free water in your formula, different to the water within your emulsion or the bound water to your hydrophilic ingredients or polymers.
-
karima said:ketchito said:@karima I’d keep Glycerin to the minimum (not more than 0.5%), since it can potentially reduce the potency of ethanol. Also, use Carbopol 980 instead of 940, since 940 has some traces of benzene.
ok thanks for your advice, and what do you think about the percentage of the carbopol and the TEA ?
@karima The amount of Carbopol depends on how viscous you want your gel to be. For the amount of TEA, you might want to take a look at this info from the manufacturer of Carbopol: https://www.lubrizol.com/-/media/Lubrizol/Health/TDS/TDS-237_Neutralizing_Carbopol_Pemulen_in_Aqueous_Hydroalcoholic_Systems-PH.pdf.
-
@Roopal I’d choose a cationic guar for clear systems, like N-Hance CCG 45. You could also make a sample without cationic guar, to rule out any other possible source of turbidity.
-
@Abdullah I believe they meant the mixture of MCI/MIT has a concentration of 1.5% (which is the usual amount of that mixture in commercial solutions). It’s a bit odd to put it that way though, but local authorities can sometimes require a bit odd things.
-
Thank you @PhilGeis, I always appreciate your comments! (I’ve seen terrible thing when workers were manipulating enzymes indeed). Just in case, by safer alternatives I meant that formaldehyde releasers are safer alternatives than formaldehyde
-
@PhilGeis I agree that formaldehyde in solution has a different behavior and inherent risk compared to the gas. Actually, the mixture formaldehyde-MIT/MCIT-EDTA is the best system I’ve ever tried.
In my experience visiting some plants here in Latin America, I found that both the person who weights the ingredients and the manufacturer were constantly exposed to some amounts of formaldehyde gas when manipulating large amounts of formalin (not that the ingredient itself is to blame for this), and since we have well performing and safer alternatives (formaldehyde-releasers), and especially in places where there’s low survailance over manufacturing sites and practices, wouldn’t the decission from Europe especifically about formaldehyde make some sense?
-
MurtazaHakim said:We are experiencing recurring issue of phase separation in our fabric softener. The formulation is
1. Fentacare TEP 90
2. Hydroxyethyl Cellulose
3. Preservative
4. Colorant
5. FragranceIs it due to Hydroxyethyl Cellulose ???
The other components appear to be compatible with each other.@MurtazaHakim I never had good experiences using HEC. I’d either increase the amount of your esterquar, or add a stabilizer (like Jaypol 213 or Rheolux 812), which work at very low doses.
-
@Abdullah The CIR report you mentioned focuses mainly on the use of formaldehyde in nail-hardening and hair smoothing products. Also, it seems to be outdated (it was published in 2013) since it mentions that Formaldehyde is approved for use in Europe (the ban in Europe started in 2019). I believe this will be ammended anytime by the FDA (unfortunately, the agency has some limitations compared to its european counterpart, plus, they were very busy with pandemic related affairs).
-
@suswang8 My bet. It’s indeed the mixture of tocopherols the one more suitable for protection of the formula. I haven’t seen the study where the addition of ascorbyl phosphate increased photoprotection of tocopherols, but it makes sense. Thanks for sharing.
-
@Abdullah Formaldehyde (which is the main constituent of formalin) is prohibited in cosmetics: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.details_v2&id=97916
-
@Graillotion Perhaps the safety issue with long term exposure to silver compounds is what limits its use. I’d very cautious about these type of molecules accumulate on the skin during repetitive use. Silver compounds are prohibited in oral care products, and products in contact with lip and eye. You might want to check this document: https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_004.pdf.
“The critical aspect in the safety evaluation of silver containing compounds, like citric acid
(and) silver citrate, is possible long-term effects of the silver released, in particular in
relation to argyria.The available toxicity data in relation to silver, on which various regulatory limits (RfD by
US-EPA, lifetime NOAEL by WHO and group restriction limit for food contact material by
EFSA) are based, are very limited and old. The SCCS is aware that additional silver toxicity
information has been generated to address other regulatory needs and recommends a
review of these data once they become accessible, should they be relevant for the safety of
silver-containing cosmetic ingredients.This opinion is limited to the evaluation of the potential exposure and risks associated with
the use of citric acid (and) silver citrate in cosmetic products at the proposed use
concentration. It does not consider uses of other silver containing cosmetic ingredients or
exposure to silver from other non-cosmetic sources. Evidence in the public domain suggests
an increase in the exposure of consumers to silver from sources other than cosmetics (e.g.
textiles, cleaning products, medical products). Therefore, the SCCS strongly recommends to
the Commission services that there should be an assessment on aggregate exposure to
silver and its compounds.”A safer choice could be Triethyl citrate; although, I was never able to find a notorious benefit from its use.
-
I thought it was me not knowing what fabcon is, hehe. @nelson, as @Perry mentioned, you need to be more specific regarding your issue. It’s hard to tell you what to fix with so little information.
