MarkBroussard
Forum Replies Created
-
I’ve seen write-ups describing the smell of Phenxoyethanol as “rose” … I have never used Phenoxyethanol that had any clearly distinct floral scent. Lots of misinformation on the internet.
Phenethyl Alcohol and Phenylpropanol both have a distinct rose scent.
-
@Perry
EWG Certification is inexpensive and unless the products are well formulated and perform, EWG certification in and of itself won’t really do much for you. Lots of people develop skin care products and fail because of ineffective marketing.
I would not underestimate the impact of EWG, Clean At Sephora, Leaping Bunny certifications, etc. on some consumer purchase decisions.
-
Value? Absolutely, my client would not necessarily have stood out and been noticed by either Walmart nor Amzaon had her products not gone through EWG and CleanCert certification. They came knocking on her door. Perhaps they perused the EWG & CleanCert websites for products that had been certified and hers caught their attention. So, yes, the certifications helped her cut through the clutter of the thousands of products available on the market.
The certifications can provide market segmentation. EWG made $500 … my client may make $ millions. So, yeah, it can be worth it.
-
Certification organizations … they do have their value. I have a start-up client that was recently picked up by Walmart and Amazon Preferred specifically because the products were CleanCert and EWG verified. The retailers sought out my client because they were specifically looking for products in her category with certifications. Not a bad investment of $500 and time spent going through the certification process.
-
The correct definition is “naturally-derived from renewable, sustainable feedstocks’ in the context of the certification organizations
-
I suspect that Sephora’s defense will be simply that Clean signals to consumers that the products do not contain any of the ingredients on the list; that they never claimed any benefit to the consumer from the Clean designation other than ensuring consumers that those ingredients on the list are not in Clean designated products; and they never claimed, nor implied, that Clean means no synthetic ingredients are in the products, but specifically the ones on the list are not in the products. That is exactly what Clean At Sephora means, nothing more.
“When you see our Clean seal, you can be assured that the product is formulated without specific ingredients that are known or suspected to be potentially harmful to human health and/or the environment.“
-
Yes, Rheodol 430 is simply the supplier’s trade name. The ingredinets INCI is Sorbeth 30 Tetraoleate
-
I don’t think so … it’s a relatively tiny amount
-
Heat the Menthol in a solubilizer (35C - 40C should do it) and add to your surfactant mixture. 0.1% Menthol is generally enough to get a cooling effect.
-
If you’re being hired as an indedpendent product developer, your job is to deliver the product the customer is requesting. If you have ideas that would make the product better, then offer those up to the client. However, at the end of the day, it’s the customer’s final decision as to what is/is not included in the product.
I formulate with No lists day-in, day-out and have never found that to be an impediment to formulating good products since most items on the No list are not ingredients I would use anyhow. If you can tell up front that the client is looking to develop a product that is not something you want to be associated with, just turn down the business.
I always cover myself contractually and in documentation that if I recommend against adding or not adding ingredients that I suspect/know will cause the product to fail either stability of PCT, that if the client insists against my recommendation, and the product does fail, that it is the client’s responsibility. If you send samples out to a third-party lab for PCT, always have the client pay the third-party lab directly, particularly if the client is insisting on an approach to preservation that you don’t believe is appropriate. Generally, once they have to pay for a second PCT test they’ll start listening to you.
-
I have not had any issues with the alternatives I mentioned. But, generally, prefer to start with Phenoxy/EHG + Gluconolactone + Sodium Benzoate if the client is open to it.
-
@Joy:
Yes, but the only retailer that was ever adamant about Phenoxyethanol is Natural Grocers. If Phenoxy/EHG is an “insurmontable obstacle” for the client, I usually go with:
Linatural Ultra-3 + Gluconolactone (and) Sodium Benzoate + Capryly Glycol
Linatural Ultra-3 + Chlorphenesin + Tetrasodium Glutamate Diacetate + Cap Glycol
And, if the product permits, get the pH down to 4.5
-
You are not going to run into any issues with any of the major cosmetic retailers accepting Phenoxyethanol as a preservative, even the Clean Beauty specialty retailers.
-
Your best bet of the options you have laid out is to couple Linatural Ultra-3 with Gluconolactone (and) Sodium Benzoate … assuming you are formulating below pH 6.0.
Or, Linatural Ultra-3 + Chlorphenesin
Linatural Ultra-3 on its own will not give you sufficient preservation and if you do use it, you’ll need to use it at 2%.
Q: Is the “pressure” against Phenoxyethanol coming from your customers or from the retail distribution channel? If it is from individual customers (general public) and not from retailers, I would stick with Phenoxyethanol.
Or, perhaps you’re a formulator developing products for clients? That’s a different situation.
-
Yes, I understand that aspect of it … that would be a “sports cream” that provides some pain relief. Think Menthol, CBD, etc.
The HA/GHK-Cu is more oriented towards cuts, burns, scrapes and would provide no pain relief to bruises, etc.
-
@CedarWind108
Generally, if the ingredient/molecule is patented by a cosmetics product manufacturer, then you won’t even be able to puchase the ingredient.
-
That blog is a marketing tool for the brands Carrot & Stick and Formulyst. What they do is product reviews of well-known brands like Drunk Elephant, Skinceuticals, etc. and then always include Carrot & Stick and Formulyst products in the mix as a way of trying to create the impression that Carrot & Stick and Formulyst are competitive with that class of products.
-
My pleasure. Glad to hear that you had a good experience with HA alone. I think you will be quite pleased with the HA/GHK-Cu combation.
-
An open wound (cut, scrape, etc.) is very different from a bruise or a torn ligament. Don’t think you’re going to find one formulation that will address all three issues.
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7950635/
Just hydrate 1% to 2% 200 kDa HA directly in the 1000 ppm GHK-Cu solution and you have a healing gel … add preservatives, of course.
-
There are grades of Hyaluronic Acid that are used in Wound Healing … about 200 kDa molecular weight. GHK-Cu is also useful to stimulate wound healing.
-
Things would be much simpler and much more transparent if the 1% rule were eliminated and you had to list all components of an INCI on your product label. But, I guess that won’t happen unless Sean Patrick Maloney is ever again elected to Congress.
-
I would first try blending the oils you have mentioned, but do not include the Castor Oil and see if you get a uniform, homogeneous mixture. Then add the Castor Oil and see if you get separation with the Castor Oil dropping to the bottom. Once you have oil miscibility resolved, then you can address how to increase the viscosity of your uniform concoction.
-
Getting back to @PhilGeis‘ point on the language in the labeling regulation:
21 CFR 701.3
(1) Substances that have no technical or functional effect in the cosmetic but are present by reason of having been incorporated into the cosmetic as an ingredient of another cosmetic ingredient.
In this case, there would not be enough BHT in the final product to have a functional effect as an antioxidant in the full product.It seems there is a disconnect between the ingredient components listed on the INCI and the labeling rule that seems to allow the end product manufacturer to declare a component in an INCI as an incidental in their product and not put it on the label.
-
@Perry:
Take this INCI: Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract (and) Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seed Oil (and) Ascorbyl Palmitate (and) BHT
Apparently, even though BHT is on the INCI of this ingredient, meaning it is a component of the ingredient, if I understand correctly, I could claim that BHT does not perform a function in my finished product and not list BHT on my product LOI since I consider it to be an incidental.
If this is the labeling rule, then it provides the opportunity for even less transparency to consumers on exactly what compounds are in a product. Granted, the concentration of BHT in the end product would be negligible, it’s still in there.