MarkBroussard
Forum Replies Created
-
That is all subject to negotiation between you and your client …
-
I am currently working on a new cosmetic product line that are: Ingredient-Free
-
Thanks @Perry:
Yes, they were following the Cosmos standard. The problem is that the product is not sufficiently preserved … they covered yeast & mold, but not bacteria.
Agree @Sibech … they should have caught this issue at the product development stage. I suspect the issue here is that the company is not terribly experienced at formulating natural/organic products and were not diligent in preservative challenge testing. I think I recall reading that the bacterial contamination was from a strain that is not one of the standard bacteria tested for in PCT. Regardless, it still should caught early on.
Funny thing is … there is a growing trend of having LOI’s that do not have “chemical sounding names” … to the uninitiated if their labeling did not have Certified Organic on it, most consumers would think these products contain synthetics.
@Perry: I think the problem here is not primarily a marketing problem. Their marketing decision was: Let’s develop a certified organic, vegan skin care line with an Italian theme. That’s the marketing decision.
Given that challenge, R&D decided upon COSMOS as the organic certification standard they were going to follow.
Therein lies the problem … in order to get the Cosmos organic certification you are quite restricted in the ingredients that you can use to comply with the standard to get certified.
So, from my perspective, the safety issue is more driven by organic certification standards that do not allow for a sufficiently large option of acceptable ingredients to properly preserve a cosmetic product (although, there are … the company simply made a bad R&D decision by not including a bactericidal preservative ingredient). The issue us much more the organic standards than it is marketing.
-
I haven’t been able to locate the LOI on their products, but the recall clearly indicates that the problem was bacterial contamination. Should be an easy fix, but they should have known that from the get-go.
That’s the problem with having to follow Organic certification standards that were designed for food products and agriculture, not cosmetics, unless they were following ECOCert, but still, even within the ECOCert framework, there a a variety of other preservative options that are effective.
-
So the problem was that they apparently did not include a bacteriocide and may well not have used a hurdle technology approach to preservation. Pity, because there are a variety of ECOCert preservative options that they could have used to bolster their preservation.
If there are parabens or formaldehyde donors on the label they never would have gotten Organic certification which defeats the whole purpose of their product line.
-
What a blunder! … What preservative were they trying to use and did they follow a hurdle technology approach?
-
Solagum is not really any different to work with than Xanthan Gum. Although, I do find it easier to disperse in water phase.
-
Typically in the 5% to 10% range. You will have to adjust for your sensorials, but routinely make 5% glycerin moisturizing creams without any signficant stickiness.
-
Ditto on the Montanov line from Seppic … excellent emulsifiers with natural credentials.
-
@HOHCos:
That’s probably because you are contacting labs that do not work with color cosmetics. If you google specifically for color cosmetics, then you will find some labs appropriate to your type of product.
I personally do not work on color cosmetics and I advise so in my contact information, yet I still get numerous requests for color cosmetic products.
The reason you are not getting a response is that it’s a diversion of time to reply to someone just to tell them that you don’t work on color cosmetics. Also, as Belassi noted, many of the color cosmetic requests are from and pardon my language “teenage girls with no money”
-
There are different strains of hemp. So, it would make sense that perhaps there might be some differences in the specific components or different concentrations of components relative to each other of a one broad spectrum CDB isolate to another. But, fundamentally, there is probably not a noticeable difference.
-
Hello Janine:
Congratulations! I might recommend that you send an introductory e-mail to all of the professional development chemists on the site.
I, for one, have a couple of clients that I would like to introduce you to that are based in NYC and the Northeast. I will contact you separately to discuss.
-
These requests are best handled by interested chemists sending an e-mail directly to the original poster. What’s the point in posting a response in the thread except to use it as a marketing message which is not the point of the board.
-
The premise of the original question is based on a false assumption … that most Chemists are weak in Math. An overgeneralization based on a false assumption. It’s like asking “Why are all foreigners weaks in Englishs”?
What exactly does any of this have to do with cosmetic chemistry anyhow?
-
It’s bit more complicated than that and actually you’re seeing it play out again in our current politics.
Marijuana was introduced into the US by migrant workers from Mexico. Yes, Anslinger was the point man, but his backing was by not only Hearst, but Tobacco, Liquor, Paper and Fabrics industries who all did not want Hemp to compete with their products.
Anslinger used a variety of means to demonize both the migrant workers and marijuana … the film “Reefer Madness” was actually a government propoganda film. Remember, this is shortly after the Great Depression, so there is an undertone of railing against cheap immigrant labor in addition to demonizing hemp.
You can hear it from the likes of Steve King & Trump … the Mexicans are dangerous … the marijuana makes them violent and they’ll rape and pillage your women. Same tactic we’re seeing today.
-
It is ironic that the same industries that were behind the push to declare Marijuana and Hemp as illegal substances in the US are now looking to dominate the industry.
-
Yes, you need to use a Chaotropic Denaturant such as Urea or Sodium Bicarbonate that will cause the protein to unfold.
-
Chemists are weak in Maths for the same reason they are weak in Englishs
-
I am working on a couple of CBD projects at the moment. Unless you can get pure CBD that is not in a carrier, you’re going to have to use a CBD loaded at 1,500 mg per fluid ounce of hemp seed carrier oil … that’s roughly 1,500mg CBD in 30 grams of carrier oil.
To get a load of 250 mg CBD in 100 grams of product, you would have to use such a high load of CBD in carrier oil that … you’d have to make a cream with a 50% oil phse … see what I’m talking about Vern?
So, when they list 150 mg CBD, it’s generally the amount of CBD in the carrier oil base, not the load of CBD in the end product. But, again, if you can get pure CBD, then you can load at accurate level, if you can afford it.
-
There’s an established protocol for measuring the pH of solid soap. You make a 1% soap solution in hot water and then measure the pH. Just let the piece of soap sit in hot water until it completely dissolves.
-
The short answer is “Yes” you can claim cruelty-free and create your own badge. “Leaping Bunny” is a private certification organization, so their leaping bunny logo on your product only means that you have paid them money to use their bunny logo and they have confirmed that you don’t do any animal testing on your products. I wonder how they definitively prove that negative and it is any more valid than you yourself claiming that you don’t do animal testing.
Just make sure you don’t include any Sodium Crueltyate in your product and you’re good to go.
-
I would caution you against using Totarol as a solo preservative. The biggest issue would be very limited number of suppliers and cost relative to other preservatives that perform equally well. I personally view Totarol as more of an acne active ingredient than as a preservative. But, if you are formulating for acne, by all means.
-
LOL! … A Chemist IS a Scientist … SMH. You were actually lamenting the fact that no professionals would answer your question. As Bubbles pointed out, you should consider it a privilege that professionals bother to answer any of your questions on occasion. With that attitude, I doubt you’ll get much more free advice from any professionals on this forum.
-
Jdawgswife76 said:Is there a lack of professionals willing to provide there input lately? I would like to assume or atleast hope that someone would know about these ingredients and are secure enough to hopefully provide some feedback.
Are you serious? There is no absolutely obligation on the part of professional chemists to offer you any advice as you seem to assume. Realize, we get paid for offering advice and any commentary or answers provided by a professional chemist on this forum to an amateur are purely at our own discretion.