KMRCSMiami
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi, this is a loaded question.
Please share the following:
Formula type (i.e. shampoo, conditioner, SPF, etc etc)
Packaging: Many manufacturers have packaging fill restrictions. What kind of packaging do you currently use?
MOQ requirement: The majority of my connections have MOQ requirements starting at 2500 units.
Geographic Requirement: do you care to be near the manufacturer?? There’s thousands around the US.
-
Many gain experience while working in the industry. A great way to dip your toe into the regulatory field is to attend webinars, conferences, etc. that are interesting to you. I follow some great influencers ( is this what they are now?) on LinkedIn and they share commentary on things like cosmetic regulation, marketing claims, warning letters, and how to be great at spotting regulatory issues and general non-compliance.
Also, there are different fields in regulatory- cosmetics, medical devices, CBD /marijuana is a new & fast growing one now, etc. etc. So there’s lots to learn. ???? have fun
-
As a formulation chemist, I loathe clean beauty. I find them to be unsupported by science and largely unsafe/stable. Every time I accept a proposal to improve product stability or shelf-life issues, its one of these “CLEAN”, “NATURAL”, “PRESERVATIVE FREE” products. ????
BUT I do formulate the client’s specifications, with every client having their own definition of CLEAN and NATURAL. Some are crazy restrictions, others are more flexible.
-
This has too much going on. When it comes to actives, less is more. As a society we’ve become obsessed with throwing a whole bunch of things in a formula, driving up the cost, but not improving functionality. I would remove all the “marketing ingredients” and start with a simple base.
-
I think a better start is to define the scope of what you’re researching here, and sharing with us. This will define the recommendations we will then provide. I can help you with analytical or method development here, but I need to first know what the question you’re trying to answer is first.
-
If you’re able to splurge, I would recommend an IKA or Silverson homogenizer for two very important reasons. #1- RPM speed control. The speed/duration/temperature of homogenization affects the final outcome. I would prefer for you to have more control and know the exact RPM you’re using, etc. If you’re building a manufacturing protocol, knowing the exact RPM is important (i.e. mix phase A at 1500 RPM for 5 min at 65C). But for DIY or when you’re trying to be economical, this is OK. #2- Cleanliness. The IKA and Silverson instruments completely disassemble, so you’re able to clean every nook and crannie. Its amazing how much product is hiding inside my IKA when I think its clean. But if you do a good job with the reference you shared here, should be OK.
These are just my preferences. They in no way mean its better or cleaner, just a preference. What you have here is OK.
-
What’s the ferment?? what base??? I think you should share what the ingredients are so we can provide recommendations. For example, if I knew this was a Lactobacillus Ferment, I would recommend a material from BTS such as the BST-Ferment Olive Oil where you would not need an emulsifier or solubilizer.
-
SO.. I have a few suspicions and questions here but I am not 100% sure what the cause is.
#1- Is this is traditional honey? I would not recommend using at this percentage. They have other alternatives at the re-packagers. These may be more appropriate. Use at % recommended by manufacturers.
https://www.makingcosmetics.com/BOT-HONEY-02.html?lang=en_US
https://lotioncrafter.com/products/honeyquat-pf?_pos=2&_sid=275e0b4cd&_ss=r
https://lotioncrafter.com/products/honey-powder?_pos=1&_sid=275e0b4cd&_ss=r
#2 BTMS is rather high, and when used this high it can cause build up (as I’ve seen in hair tress tests). I recommend decreasing BTMS to 15% and switch the difference to the oils, maybe adding a thickening agent to the water phase like a gum.
What I also recommend is doing a knock-out study, remove honey (leave everything as it is) and assess effect. If still greasy, reduce BTMS by half. I truly think its a combination of both the real honey and BTMS. Also, I don’t think the surfactant is necessary here, unless its a really mild shampoo- conditioner? Not too sure why its here.
-
A simple google search listed these as options. I’ve never tried them so I cannot confirm nor deny if they will be OK or if compliant.
https://www.thesage.com/collections/lip-balm-colors-oil-soluble
https://www.rusticescentuals.com/lip-balm-supplies/lip-balm-colorants.aspx
-
You will notice this with other solutions around the home. Simple mixtures to fix common household problems that you can DIY because you’re a chemist.
The speed of the descaling depends on the concentration, acidity or pH of the solution. I have not descaled with my own solution, but if you end up running some tests let us know ????
-
I’ve developed a few “clean” vaginal lubricants for a brand. The preservative system of choice for these brands tends to be potassium sorbate/sodium benzoate. I have a preference for more robust systems, but this combo seems to be the standard for “clean”. Just make sure to pH the product correctly as these are pH sensitive.
-
How much?
-
From concept to commercial scale, including product testing etc., takes like ~1 year. So if you use Google trends to define your next product by the time you launch it may be dated or other things may be trending. This is the issue I have with heavily relying on Google Trends (or other) for development strategy. Its great to help with the selection of a few marketing ingredients, but there has to be more thought and work behind the development process otherwise you will blend in with the millions of brands using the same strategy to develop. This is the reason why every brand now has an HA serum, and now developing mineral sunscreens. They’re trending.
What I recommend as a formulator for my clients is to define product scope and direction around things they love in combination with issues they’ve noticed in the industry. We then use this to create a theme, direction and to formulate. A good example of this is Rare Beauty- Selena Gomez has a disability, noticed that the majority of cosmetics are difficult to use with disability. She then created a brand focused on “clean beauty” (for health reasons) and packaging that caters to communities that are typically ignored. Rihanna, noticed that not all skintones were catered to in the makeup industry, created an all-inclusive brand. Neither of these brand approaches could be developed using Google Trends. This is how you develop. (1) things you like + (2) things you need + (3) things missing.
-
To clarify my point- you shouldn’t only rely on Google Trends. You need data from multiple sources, and even then it may not make sense or may not give you the information you want. Sometimes the data isn’t clear, therefore you do have to be confident in what you’ve created. Not every product is for everyone, and not everything should be supported by Google Analytics.
-
-
Hi, as a formulator I develop products for others and therefore sell my formulas regularly. My excel sheets have the following:
-formula %
-ingredients with links to the exact product used from supplier. **this is super important. Stating “dimethicone” isn’t enough. Link the exact dimethicone used.
-manufacturing SOP, with RPM speeds, mixing times, heat temperatures, cool down times, In process QC checks, etc. Be super precise as you want the excel sheet to be all the information they’ll ever need.
- final product parameters with viscosity (make/model of meter), final pH, fragrance, appearance, etc.
If with all this information they still have issues duplicating the formula- I provide them with hourly consultations to assist them. In my experience, my excel sheet is super detailed and is essentially fool-proof. If they can’t duplicate what I provide them its likely a skillset issue, which requires consultations. Often times they do not have the equipment and need to be creative.
-
As a formulator these no-no lists are becoming kinda ridiculous however I understand that I formulate for others- not myself. My opinion is that brands are sacrificing safety, cost and stability due to fear or just simply nonsense. Depending on what their goals are, and the formula restrictions, I may or may not accept the proposal. Any proposal where the no-no list hinders on safety or stability- are an automatic no. Its just not worth the headache. The same applies to feasibility. If they want a MAC performance like lipstick, but zero chemicals and made of herbs- automatic no. Its just not realistic, and if its possible its expensive. But regardless of their no-no list, I will do my best to bring their idea to life, so long as its realistic and safe.
Most recent no-no lists have included:
- Ingredient number restriction (i.e. less than 5 or 6 with 4 marketing ingredients)
- Whole Foods lists approved preservatives only ????
- All natural, no chemicals. Anything that sounds remotely like a chemical- no.
- Color cosmetic made completely out of plants, but performs like MAC.
Ironically, my no-no lists only come from US clients. I formulate for clients in Canada, Australia and in the EU, and they are so much more reasonable with product restrictions. Allow traditional preservatives and chelating agents.
-
Water + glycerin (5-10%) + robust preservative system plus stabilizers + gelling agents (hyaluronic acid, whatever gum you want) + 1 active used at a working concentration + dimethicone for slip
If needed niacinimide @ 2%. Its always good to look up the systems your actives work best in to ensure stability and also functionality.
-
Self-made ferments are very dangerous. I would not consume or add this to a cosmetic product unless you 100% know what you’re doing. Its also a great way to lose control of stability.
-
I come from the world of drug development, therefore my experience includes in-vivo, ex-vivo and in-vitro drug testing. I agree with you when you state many of these assays that you list work best for ingredient specific assessment, not product (cream, lotion) assessment. Historically, products would be tested on animals, this is super duper rare right now in the cosmetic industry in the US as the majority of the ingredients have been around for quite some time and we have decades of data already- so no need to test on animals. Its also SUPER EXPENSIVE to conduct animal studies and the majority of the time, unnecessary.
So, its likely the data you’re looking for is somewhere on the internet.
-
Oh the supplier propaganda studies are my favorite ???? I love debating with sales representatives with no background in science or product development on why a leaf will outperform traditional preservatives when used at 35% at a billion dollars per kg.
Dont rely on supplier studies, they’re cheaply executed to market their ingredient. Go on PUBMED and look up how these studies are done. Conducting research of any kind is expensive, as an FYI.
-
Also, move your gums to the water phase as its water soluble. You may try sprinkling it, and using a homogenizer to get it into solution.
-
Thank you for that clarification. BTMS25 is cationic, it also provides slip + detangling so the honey can be removed. I think the honey may be what’s causing this. If the BTMS doesn’t provide the slip you’re looking for you may consider dimethicone or polyquaternium-10 or 7. Nothing “natural” will truly give you slip, these chemicals were developed to address these limitations.
As an FYI- the preservative here is only slightly soluble in water. You will require an additional step like mixing it with propylene
glycol. You may look at the manufacturer’s recommendations for this. I think a more robust preservative may be better in this system, but I am biased to a specific set of preservatives ???? -
I agree- traditional would be safer, cheaper and better but it seems to be an trend right now. Its unfortunate as a lot of times these are exponentially more expensive and still fail challenge testing. ???? “but the supplier’s marketing propaganda said this leaf would give 3 yr shelf life”
-
Absolutely. Happy to see others provide more than the minimum here. Its about customer experience, you want to make sure they have everything they need to move forward. If they’re constantly reaching out to you its (1) you’re not providing enough information to complete the work or (2) they require consultations as there is a skillset issue with the client. I do not provide CoA’s or allergen statements as I am not a manufacturer but rather an independent formulator and feel this would be more appropriate if done by the manufacturer releasing the product, but its great that you provide this. One less thing for the client to request.
-
awesome! thank you!!