Microformulation
Forum Replies Created
-
I have never experienced it be very great at thickening or “absorbed in the first layer helping moisture.” Primarily I have seen this used to decrease the oiliness (minimal mattifying effect) and to give a less greasy feel. It is very common in “natural” deodorants. It is actually in shorter supply and the price has crept up. With the exception of the fact that it is a plant-based product (if that suits your marketing), there are legions of better products for this effect. Many are cellulose products or derivatives.
-
Honestly, under cGMP standards you should have a separate space for Cosmetic manufacturing, to start. I would recommend using a manufacturer and dedicating my time to brand management. A Cosmetic Manufacturing Facility and a Cosmetic Line are very different Business models and it is not sustainable to do both over time.
-
If you go to HAPPI (a Trade Journal), they have a searchable directory of manufacturers. https://www.happi.com/contract-manufacturing-private-label-directory/
-
Good Luck. I have had clients insist upon using these materials but they should (in my opinion under cGMP) be tested and standardized. Since this is expensive, in almost every case the determination was to buy a comparable material.
-
Not as a stand-alone raw material. I have used it as part of the Ashland Raw material, fiberHance bm. (INCI: Hydroxypropyl Gluconamide and Hydroxypropyl Ammonium Gluconate). Ashland has lots of guidance on how to use this raw material.
-
I would be more convinced with sources that have citations and credentialed authors. In our facility, a blog fails our internal reference standards.I think the blog citation is filled with false claims not supported by citations, and the author does not possess the qualifications to present themselves as an expert in this area. Lastly, she is selling products, a potential source of bias.This may sound inflexible, but it is important to practice good Scientific method. To wit, look at her claims for Aloe vera (from the citation);
-
Regardless of how many botanicals you cite, the advice given in another thread is what you need to take in. It is highly unlikely that any topical product will have any real effect on the dark circles whatsoever.
-
Bios said:
“The author is the Chief Medical Scientist of Cupron Inc., who uses copper oxide as its active ingredient.”
-
Glabradin is also available in the US from Cosphatech LLC iWhite Glabridin INCI Glabridin.
-
@Ghandi @Belassi was simply trying to point out that the efficacy of these products is sketchy, at best. He can’t “do it” because the Science simply doesn’t support the claims. I have made these products before on numerous occasions, but honestly, the claims were always pretty slick and the products ineffective. I would say, if there were a product that could do this, it would be pretty well known and it would dominate the market. No such product exists.
-
But could a customer make that leap?
-
Also, here is my rhetorical outlook; if you advertise yourself as a “Cosmetic Formulator” or “Formulator” in your marketing, is it reasonable to assume that the retail customer, exposed to your marketing, could, in turn, assume that there was some Professional Education behind that title?
-
There is a forum where it is more effective and/or appropriate to advertise your services;
-
Apples and Oranges. Inevitably in larger markets, it will come up.
-
Honestly, at the levels used, Euxyl PE9010 has little to no influence on the final fragrance in the finished product. Ensuring that a chelant is used and being aware that it can destabilize an emulsion are the biggest concerns.
-
A good portion of Formulating is learned on the job. However, I submit that the Fundamentals are still needed. There are often times when troubleshooting a Formulation or an interaction between ingredients that the Fundamentals provide the guidance needed. Also, many concepts we use are taught in an ordered manner in the classroom through a syllabus not piecemeal as encountered.I would submit that you can blur the lines and imply a separation of responsibility between a Chemist and a “Cosmetic Formulator.” Just in my opinion, you could be misleading the client of your background. When speaking to a Client and discussing the project as a “Cosmetic Formulator”, are you entirely transparent in your Education? In many cases would a client sign on for a project if they knew there was no University Education?I suppose under this definition, I had several Lab Techs who worked for me who were “Formulators” under this shadow definition, but they weren’t Chemists. They never approved batch records and documents (COA’s, MSDS’s, stability Testing results) or performed QA.In summary, I guess it is all depending upon where you want to be in the Market. Some larger and emerging wholesalers (Detox Market for one) will ask for a minimal educational background at some point.Lastly, for some of these lines, I would like to cite a phrase from the FDA CGMP Guidelines; https://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocuments/ucm2005190.htm Section 3, Subsection a. “The personnel supervising or performing the manufacture or control of cosmetics has the education, training and/or experience to perform the assigned functions.” While uncommon (but not unheard of), the FDA can inspect, address and even cite a line if a requirement is not met. I had a small line contact me after getting dinged for exactly this.So, on the job helpful and great to an extent.Credentialed Training will become addressed as you grow by lines and Supervising bodies.
-
I would discourage this unless you have clearly defined roles and understandings of the Business’s Chain of Command. I have heard of a few people doing this and getting chained to a Marketer who later on is not a good match. The constant banging of heads killed the enterprise.
-
Firstly, I am sure we all know that in the US this is an OTC Drug, not a Cosmetic. It must be produced, tested and labeled as an OTC Drug. It requires an OTC Registered Labeler (manufacturer).As has been pointed out, the fragrance comes incidentally from the counter-irritants in the product. If you want to know the levels used, simply look at the Drug Facts label. These materials and their levels are listed this they are considered the “actives” in the OTC Muscle Relief product.
-
Listed separately.
-
By skin type, he is referring to different skin pigmentations as classified under the Fitzpatrick scale.Alas, I highly doubt that the OP will find a single ingredient (or multiple even) that will affect a change in skin pigmentation in just 7 days. Even if it were possible, you would see marked inflammation as well. It isn’t a realistic marketing benchmark.
-
If I were looking for any bells or whistles in a hot plate, it would be digital temperature control. You would find that a magnetic stirring bead would simply bind-up in the thicker viscosities of creams and lotions. You will likely be using an overhead lab stirrer instead.
-
Nobody is going to give out free work.What has your research shown? Do you have a starting Formulation we can critique?If not, this link could be helpful; https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/137/need-formulating-services-here-are-some-contacts#latest
-
Define “natural.” (There is no legal definition in the US or EU).Using the term blithely as if it has objective meaning is an obstacle to the R&D process.
-
There are numerous moisturizing actives that can have some moisturization in the limited contact time. There are so many actives to mention (ex. higher glycols, Hyaluronic acid, Glucam, etc.). Again, the activity is blunted when compared to a leave-on product but the effect can be achieved.In this forum when we discuss cleansers, we are generally talking about surfactants, not saponified soaps. As such “superfatting” is not a factor.