Microformulation
Forum Replies Created
-
As far as items for a “sensitive skin”, you will have a difficult time scoring this factor regarding ingredients, It is quite variable. At best I would look at each raw material and see if any glaring issues arise.If “natural” (ugh) is mentioned as a factor, the second material is better.As far as a Personal Cleanser, I would be careful with the genital regions and the perineum. These are arguably a different product than a full body cleanser. It would likely use different surfactants. These are less effective in a full cleanser n my experience, but great for the personal cleansers. Look at some of the Ajinomoto products. -
Actually, @ngarayeva001 you are making a novice mistake in lumping the Sodium Coco-Sulfate in with the sulfates;
- Sulfate, in this case, refers to the presence of the SO4- group in the molecule. This is an extremely common group. This is the Scientific Definition under the IUPAC naming system. It is not a group of materials.
- When we refer to “sulfates” in Cosmetics, pragmatically these are SLS, SLES, ALS, and ALES for the most part. It becomes a “marketing” designation.
- “Sulfates” (SLS, SLES, ALS, and ALES) are not the “harsh” surfactants that they are said to be. In a balanced surfactant system, the irritation is minimal. True, SLS is used in Dermatology for patch testing, but honestly, most surfactants would serve this purpose.
If any compound gave me pause it might be the Coco-Glucoside, but again, with a properly designed surfactant system this is minimized.However, if I were going for a tear-free product, ONCE AGAIN, I would look at the Amphoteric surfactants and sample Formulations. -
Formulator Sample Shop (http://www.formulatorsampleshop.com/) has a starting beard oil formulation (contact them and ask for it) that is superior to what you have already.
-
This is from the Cosmetic Ingredient review ( https://www.cir-safety.org/). Each entry is rigidly documented and footnotes provided. This is a great source.
-
-
@BCBull First, “natural” is not a defined term in the US and as such to say something is “natural” without an added standard is bunk.Next K712 may be”nature identical” but it is not plant-derived. Even though we can propose a plant-derived connection, these compounds are synthesized in the lab.Now, are they worse since they were synthesized even though they are “nature identical?”
-
@Belassi I have a pdf of the manual on my work computer. I will try and post it on Monday.The company that they used was great about giving them initial training and technical support, but there was still a steep learning curve. I know at least 2 companies overheated the probe by running it all out for too long. They have also said sometimes the final products smelled “scorched.”The company was very secretive about the solubilizer bases. They provided those and reluctantly would reveal what they contained. After that, it was easy to knock off the base using a simple HLB equation. There are numerous articles that discuss the theory and practice behind the surfactants used.
-
@DtdangIt is a great topic to research. It has taken off in the CBD Industry. Many of the producers in CA, WA, and CO are using ultrasonic emulsifiers with solubilizers such as SPAN’s and Cremophor EL. I have had the opportunity to design Formulations for this Industry using this technology.
-
what are differences between emulsion & micro-emulsionIt took 20 seconds to find a credible source for your question. No offense, but doing your research will make you a better Formulator.
-
I have used them all. They are sources of citations, not citations in and of themselves.As I recall. there was a study testing a microemulsion of Babassu Oil for induced edema in the ears of mice by a Brazilian group back in 2017. It hasn’t gone into human testing.My overwhelming point is that if you are going to present a raw material as having wonderful and credible claims that are essentially drug claims (“anti-bacterial, anti-acne?”) you should qualify the studies.
-
I was leaning towards credible studies (credentialed, good design, large sample size) that show that Babussa oil has significant antibacterial and anti-acne properties.
-
Babassu oil has 45% lauric acid that has anti-bacterial, anti-acne?Provide citations.Both have comedogenic to be 1.You may want to read up on the protocols for determining comedogenicity. You will see that it is not as exact a rating system as some give it credit. It is more of a general guide.
-
They are oils. They will be occlusive and decrease TEWL. Any claims beyond that would likely have poor Science behind it, especially when you consider the topical administration.
-
Come on. Your petulance is silly. What was said was that you would get more out of a comprehensive study of the materials instead of throwing out questions piecemeal. Do you know why many of us are not novices? Simply because 15-20-30 years ago, we engaged in the study of the raw materials.If someone suggests that you do your own research, they are doing you a favor. Giving out random bits of information is short-sighted as it avoids the fundamentals. What materials can this be used with? Would it work with an anionic surfactant? I could throw out 30 questions about the material, 29 of them from the manufacturer’s documentation.If you insist on just the surface trivial knowledge of the materials, it will hamper your growth of a line. You are producing a product with this material and YOU assume all the liability. Either use a trained Chemist or TRAIN yourself.All this may sound harsh, but it is the best advice anyone can give you at this point.
-
How much research have you done already?No offense and it is my opinion only, I am resisting just giving single pointed answers on Formulas, especially those which can be easily answered in the manufacturer’s documents. At a certain point, you are really asking questions that become paid work for most of us.“Feed a Man a fish…” and all that.Just one click brought me here to the same product from another manufacturer and links to 10’s of pages of guidance. https://www.ulprospector.com/en/na/PersonalCare/Detail/1483/52232/VARISOFT-BTMS-Pellets?st=1If this causes some agitation, keep this in mind. YOU are responsible for any adverse conditions or negative effects from your project. Usually Chemist would be used to mitigate the liability, but in this case, you are taking on 100% of this liability on your own. Should the worse case scenario occur (possible but not probable to be honest), the Attorney’s will ask you what you did to mitigate the liability. At least you should be able to say that you made yourself aware of the risks, benefits, and use of all your raw materials. Someone in your organization has to do this.
-
Also, I see some greenwashing and misapplied sources;
- While the oils you list as sources are used, they are really in the early stages of the synthesis as feedstock and the tie-in is tenuous if you are looking to be transparent.
- As discussed Decyl Glucoside is not a mild surfactant. “I believe” is not the way to go. “My credible and vetted research shows…” is a better avenue to explore.
- You have two (2) PEG’s (implying their strong plant-based source.” However, they are not “minimally processed” as they use ethoxylation and would not be allowed under any natural standard.
I would go back to the drawing board and look at amphoteric surfactants. I would also ask where I wanted to be positioned in the market. You are implying “natural” but then using arguably more effective “synthetic” ingredients. This approach if positioning you for greenwashing while simultaneously allowing you to use more mainstream ingredients. It is an area to consider clearing up your message. “Natural” is not always best and in this case, I would feel that surfactant selection as it relates to a “No Tears” Formula may over-ride the need to be rigidly “natural.” -
@Belassi I couldn’t agree more! If you are going to do an elegant chemical synthesis, why waste it on CAPB?I am more focused on creating the end product for the client, not synthesizing common ingredients. I could get on Prospector and have any number of samples of CAPB in varying forms. I can also purchase from any number of manufacturers.
-
Yes, but they have other errors in the INCI Deck.Advance Moisture Complex is not an approved designation.“Marine Collagen” is not the approved nomenclature.
-
What data are you using to qualify Decyl Glucoside as a “super mild surfactant?”
-
Always add a chelant as recommended by Schulke. When that is done and other aspects such as packaging and your cGMP are optimized, you should have no issue passing most PET with this combination.
-
No, I used that much alcohol since it was going to be used as the base of a fragrance. The initial standard was a Victoria standard fragranced shimmer spray.Why did I use the other materials? I won’t tell you simply because you will gain more reading up yourself.The final pH range was about 5.0I would never use alcohol as a primary preservative unless there was an over-riding reason, usually being solubility of some material or the presence of alcohol due to another ingredient.Research the materials. As I said, this was an easy project to find documentation and starting formulations.
-
@MarkBroussard “Save the Jojobas!” I would wear that t-shirt.
-
I have knocked off this entire product and it was easier than you may believe. I can’t of course share a Formula, but the INCI is “Alcohol SD40B, Water, Fragrance, Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Aminomethyl Propanolol, Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate, Silica, Blue 1 (CI 42090), Ext. Violet 2 (CI 60730), Yellow 6 (CI 15985), Mica, Titanium Oxide.”Abandon going “natural.” Research the INCI names and you should able to see what each ingredient does and with a study, reverse engineer it yourself. I am trained, but I recall the entire formulation process took me less than 10 hours to complete from start to finish with testing. It is surprisingly easy.