MarkBroussard
Forum Replies Created
-
@Dazed:
PE9010 + Sodium Benzoate + Pentylene Glycol + pH < 5.5 should do the trick for you.
-
You are confusing Hydrogen Peroxide and Benzoyl Peroxide … Benzoyl Peroxide would be used in an acne product.
-
Anca_Formulator said:@jemolian: thank you!! The lanolin replacement suggestion really helped. I can’t find it from my suppliers, but maybe orange peel wax would work too.
I read that isononyl is rich and creamy, though I’ve never seen it. Is coco caprylate/caprate also rich and creamy? I thought it was light/medium.
Are you also trying to stay Vegan? If so, you might want to consider this: Most all synthetic ingredients are Vegan, so it’s kind of a nonsensical term in the context of cosmetic products. And, I laugh when I see ads for Vegan eyeshadow and mascara!
I look at it this way: The bees are not hurt at all by you using beeswax … they will make the beeswax regardless of whether or not it is used in a cosmetic product. The sheep will be shorn regardless and they are not harmed in the process, so nothing wrong with Lanolin. Beeswax and lanolin are great natural ingredients that outperform most other ingredients in certain applications. So, I might suggest you open up your mind to ignoring Vegan as a qualifier in your product development.
-
The level of precision your seem to be inquiring about would require some sophisticated analytical laboratory analysis of the reference product, which could be quite expensive.
You would probably get information relevant to your needs from a typical deformulate with a good chemist guesstimating ingredient percentages from the LOI. It will not be accurate, but the inaccuracies would probably not make a difference in terms of a consumer noticing any major differences.
-
That would all depend on how much surfactant you have, the pH of the surfactant and how much SA you’re adding?
-
Van der Waals forces … the intermolecular forces between the solvent (surfactant) and solute (SA) are stronger than the intermolecular forces between solute-solute and solvent-solvent, so the SA dissolves in the surfactant.
As for pH … the reduction in the pH of the solution is dependent on the pH of the surfactant.
-
No, that should not be necessary. Just premix the Euxyl in 3% propanediol and add that to you water phase with rapid stirring should do the trick.
-
You’ll probably want to keep a glycol to help solubilize the Euxyl K940 which will have limited solubility in a water-based product. Does not need to be Pentylene Glycol, you can use 1,3-Propanediol to reduce the cost.
-
Mikrokill COS + EDTA would probably work for you at pH between 6 and 7
-
Yes, SA is soluble in some surfactants.
-
There are some categories where you simply will not find a natural alternative that will give you acceptable performance or skin sensorial. This is one of them. For this type of product, Ugly Betty is about as pretty as natural gets. If you are open to it, try Sepinov WEO, Sepimax Zen or a combination of the two.
-
@dazed:
There is no solubilizer. The Argan Oil and Tocopherol are almost certainly added at less than 0.5% each, so they just jammed them together.
@Gaillotion: I don’t think the Honeysuckle included in this formula is intended as a preservative, but rather simply as a plant extract and they are relying on a very high load of salt to provide the preservation.
The honeysuckle extract that is sold as a preservative is comprised of two different species of honeysuckle extract: Lonicera Caprifolium (honeysuckle) flower extract, Lonicera Japonica (honeysuckle) flower extract
-
I would suggest that you survey the market looking at the top-rated Eye Creams by consumers and dermatologists and see if peptides are a necessary ingredient for marketing purposes. I think you will find that they are not really necessary.
-
chemicalmatt said:You guys are off by a factor of 10. Its $2000 monthly for a 6-month starter, even less for an annual subscription. The Clean Beauty peeps should find it most useful as it conveys and checks against all those greenie-groups’ sanctions. Wouldn’t want to piss off Gwynn Paltrow with your emulsifier now would you?
My Bad … I had read $20,000 per month in an article recently.
-
@Waterbliss
Why does a 5 / 5 star rated product have a “very thin profit margin” … I would address that issue first.
-
You could use either. Cetearyl Alcohol also comes in different % of Cetyl:Stearyl ratio … you can get 25:75, 50:50, 75:25
-
Yes, between the Castor Oil and Mango Butter you’re good. You just don’t have enough BTMS … if you want it to be thicker you’ll have to increase the Cetearyl Alcohol also
-
You are not adding enough BTMS … increase that to 4% or so and it should solve your probelm
-
Azelaic Acid is only sparingly soluble, only 0.002% in water.
-
The GoodFace Project can be quite expensive … on the order of $20,000 per month.
-
Perry said:@MarkBroussard - True. But I think as someone else pointed out, it does have the effect of (minimally) protecting IP. It’s quite possible that at the time the rules were written, a compromise had to be made. I don’t really know.
Similarly, it makes zero sense that soap is not classified as a cosmetic. But to get the FD&C Act passed, they needed to work out a deal with the well-organized soap guilds.
Yes, regulations are generally negotiated between Regulators and Industry and this 1% Rule was probably pushed by Industry.
-
Perry said:But the bottom line is that ingredient lists are not meant for marketing.
Yes, but it is the 1% Rule that provides the opportunity to use ingredient lists for marketing. If every ingredient had to be listed in descending order of inclusion, there would be no opportunity to manipulate the LOI as you can with the 1% Rule.
-
@Perry
B-Corp is a certification organization for businesses that adhere to business practices that are geared towards social and environment business standards. Mostly around using sustainable ingredients, often free-trade sourced from poor countries, environmentally sound packaging, green energy powered manufacturing, etc.
-
Perry said:Ingredient lists are meant for one purpose, to inform people of the existence of an ingredient in the formula. That way if they are allergic to something they know to avoid it. The 1% line just helps guide people as to how much exposure they need to worry about in case they are allergic to an ingredient. The rationale of the 1% line is that 1% & below is a low enough level that the order doesn’t matter.
Its arbitrary but it makes some sense to me.
But the bottom line is that ingredient lists are not meant for marketing.Yes, but consumers do read labels. Let’s say I have a mild sensitivity to Sodium Benzoate. I look at the label of a product and I see Sodium Benzoate listed as the very last ingredient. But, if Sodium Benzoate were listed in proper descending order it would be the fifth to last ingredient. As a consumer, I would be better served by the proper descending order listing as opposed to the 1% rule order listing putting Sodium Benzoate as the last ingredient.
-
PhilGeis said:Mark - why don’t you ask the FDA. Think this obscure point, even if intended to deceive (and this is the 1st time I’ve heard this suggestion in my 40 years), is much less deceptive than calling synthetic preservatives ?natural.”
BUT - whisper it to an associate brand manager and it’ll be an accomplishment at their 6 month review.
I find this a quite intriguing carve-out in the labeling rules because (1) it is unnecessary and I can’t see that it serves any useful purpose; (2) it would have been more logical and provide better consumer information if all ingredients were simply listed in descending order.