Microformulation
Forum Replies Created
-
Protegin WX is highly process dependent to get a stable product. Read the product literature as Evonik provides great documentation. As I recall, you do need to homogenize it several time (2-3) for several minutes as the bulk cools or you will have this problem.
-
You will need to consider the different ways to go about this.
You can work with a Consultant (there is a post where their services are advertised “Need Formulating Services, Here are some Contacts.”). Working with a Consultant may offer you some increased input into the process and as a start-up, it will be helpful to own the Intellectual Property (IP). The downside of this process is that you will still need to source out packaging, graphics and manufacturing sources, but most Consultants can point you in the correct direction.
Alternatively you can work with the R&D Department of a Contract Manufacturer (CM). You may have less input as generally your interactions will be with the front office. However, if you are funded for this scenario, they will source out all the services. If owning the IP is important to you, ask the CM about this early on.
More important is doing a real inventory and evaluation of you Business model. I see far too many entrepreneurs who under estimate the cost and complexity of the R&D process. Also, if you are a Business person, your time is best spent in developing the Marketing, Sales infrastructure and Social media. You need to look at your strengths.
Also, get some real World costs in regards to the overall process. I see far too many people come in under funded. This will cause your business to fail or in a best case scenario move slowly until you have sufficient funding.
Good luck and I wish you all the luck. It can be a rewarding process.
-
Many of the detailed TDS’s list the ppm of 1,4 Dioxane, especially since California has established a permissible level. If not, this information can be obtained from the supplier.
-
If you are going to make an effective product, you will need to refine who your target client is.
When we covered this in school, the starting point was to discuss the Fitzpatrick Scale. This an objective scale Dermatologists use to gauge skin pigmentation; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzpatrick_scale
Generally (these are generalizations), Type VI is Western African or similar dark coloring. These clients respond better to Kojic acid and more stable derivatives. Kojic acid is unstable and generally the Dipalmitate salt is used.
Type V and IV is generally Pacific rim and Indian continent. In my experience these clients respond best to Arbutin.
In all these groups you will see naturally sourced botanicals added for additional or (arguably) primary effect. Bearberry and Licorice extracts are common. Licorice and some of the newer derivatives show some great promise.
Now, all this assumes you are looking for bleaching. If you are looking to treat age related discoloration, there are other modalities.
I would suggest reading a credible general overview of these treatments before continuing. Once you decide upon an active ingredient, there is a great deal of information from the distributors. Also, read the Technical data sheets from the distributors. Each active does have some specific factors to consider in the Formulation.
-
I can only speak to US standards, but in the US up to 2% Hydroquinone is an OTC. Above 2% is a prescription product.
I am familiar with the Formulating, but to be honest it has been years since I have been seriously approached. In our area, Cosmetics, there is a strong Market bias due to safety concerns. I see a great deal more requests for Arbutin, Kojic acid and numerous other botanical based tyrosine inhibitors.
-
I use water bathes myself. I was able to purchase 2 digital waterbaths off of Ebay and it really simplifies the process. I also have a pair of digitally controlled hot plates which work well although I feel that the water bathes heat more uniformly. I generally save the hot plates for when I am working with waxes.
-
You are welcome.
Returning to the Private Label conversation, I have always found that you need to look at your strengths. If you are a Technical person such as I, you would do 80% Technical and 20% Business. Much of that 20% Business I delegate to my Accountant. Conversely, if you are rightfully a Business person “dabbling” in the Technical side, you should reconcile that you will want to do 80% Business (Sales, Marketing, Promotion) and do 20% Technical at best. You can delegate these Technical Services to a Consultant or in the case of Private Label, a Contract Manufacturer.
With Color Cosmetics, the issue is that you aren’t making several different types of “widgets” but rather need to offer numerous colors of the same widget and give your clients a wide range of choices. In this case you can quickly flesh out a Color line, set-up your Business Infrastructure (Web Site, Social Media, etc.) and get into the market with a lower inventory and initial outlay of materials.
Another last advantage of Private Label is that you will be able to collect real World Sales data. Inevitably the product that you think is your big seller may tank while an under-estimated product might fly off the shelves. Later on as you grow, you can use this data to prioritize which products should be your first priorities as you start the R&D Formulation process.
Good Luck.
-
Just a quick note, this Formula would be much easier to critique if you converted it to wt/wt % notation. With you using weights at least, it is a simple conversion. Raw materials are generally discussed in percentage usage rates and as such the discussion is facilitated when we are all on the same page.
-
Try talking with Susan Raffy at Raffy Consulting. Last I spoke with her she had these services available. http://www.rockstarchemist.com/
One of the challenges with starting a Color Cosmetic line is the fact that you must have a “wide” product offering (my terminology) or that ideally you would have small runs of numerous colors. Contract manufacturers aren’t really set up this way as they are comfortable with a “deep” product offering (again my term) or many units of the same product. In this case the Manufacturers piece run sizes will make it difficult to obtain an effective product line and inventory for many start-ups.
As such, many Color Cosmetic lines will go with Private Label solutions. Here you will use a Formulation which the manufacturer has developed and which they will own. While many think this means that they can’t express themselves through the Product design, these are solid products in most cases and as anyone can tell you, effective Marketing is the secret. As I like to say, “If we were selling shoes, 20% of the value would be from the leather and 80% from the polish.”
If Private Label is an option, there are numerous providers. My clients have had some good results with Precious Cosmetics (POC Ivonne Ruggles); http://www.preciouscosmetics.com/
Good luck with the Project! I hope it all goes well.
-
This is a common scare tactic. Many have been indoctrinated to fear the presence of a component and not to address the acceptable levels. This is a common misnomer when chemophobia is the focus. In this case the items fufill the safety thresholds. We see this in the US as well. Clients will not use PEG’s or other ethoxylated compounds, even if the ppm of the 1,4 dioxane is below the threshold allowed in California. Many, if not all current materials are processed in a manner to meet these safety thresholds.
-
It is doubtful that you will get the opportunity to go into the lab and work side by side with a Chemist. That opportunity really doesn’t exist.
You may be able to tour a lab and see some of the facilities.
However, as I tell my clients, it is easy to put on a “dog and pony show” and unless you really know what to look for or what to ask, the site visit is of limited value. Look at the Chemists background and their abilities. Ask about their QA/QC and cGLP programs. If they operate under these programs and/or have acheived an ISO certification, that says a great deal more than a tour.
-
This questions are harder to answer with natural being an undefined term. It is usually helpful to address a natural standard (COSMOS, NSF) however, I think in this case you would be able to say plant based materials. Lastly, it is helpful to know where you are located to ensure the suppliers have a presence n your market.
I have had great results with BASF/Cognis’s Cetiol series. When selecting an emollient you need to be sure to select one which provides the same final skin-feel as the replaced item. BASF has some documentation that helps in this area.
Another option (BASF sometimes has some high minimums) is the Floresters line from Floratech.
Lastly, most of the Natural standards allow the use of Isopropyl Palmitate which is readily available.
-
I have used Colin Sander’s on numerous occasions.
-
To protect an anhydrous oil from oxidation, 5% Tocopherol is far too high.
-
Try Formulator Sample Shop. They offer smaller quantities at retail prices. If and when you grow, you will get the same product wholesale directly from the distributors. They add inventory often and if there is enough demand they will explore adding additional products. http://www.formulatorsampleshop.com/
-
That is a fine approach to doing the Product Development. It really falls short of the Full Formulation design process as it is not that simple at that point.
-
What is the absolute reason you need to use “salty water?” Keep in mind that many emulsifiers are unstable with levels of salts and it could be a source of instability.
-
No, you need an entirely new system. It is not the concentration but rather the suitability. The Sentient Cosmetics product, as well as a similar product or the Ressasol product (very similar from Res Pharma), are properly used to solubilize finite amounts of Essential oils, Fragrance ingredients, and similar type products into a water base by creating a microemulsion. I have never seen it used as a Primary emulsifier. I have not tried it, but it is likely you would need at least 24-32% of the solubilizer to create the microemulsion. At that level, it would be pricey, have a negative effect and would be easily replaced with a more appropriate emulsifier. I have not used either product in years so others may want to weigh in.
-
You probably need a different emulsification system. The system you are using is better suited for solubilizing oils in a micro emulsion and if this were the case, you would need a much higher level. It looks very similar to the Sorbisant system from Sensient. Even with a proper system, you will still want to vortex in the carbomer (ie use a continuous mixer with a propeller blade preferred). Feeling that 2% alcohol is going to increase skin penetration (what active are you trying to increase penetration of? It is not likely will the emollients or oils to be significant) is really a bit of marketing puffery.
Ask yourself: “What Cosmetic benefit is this product delivering to my end user? What actives are delivering this benefit in such a way that it is a credible claim?”
-
I agree 100%. I am a big proponent of this testing. However, sadly I have seen it treated as option far too often.
-
An open glass jar pretty much compromises her attempt at a hurdle strategy to a large extent. I would consider more secure packaging.
-
They do make a clear grade of Xanthan gum. RT Vanderbilt makes Vanzan NF-C for example.
-
Stability Testing is NOT required in Cosmetics, however, it is HIGHLY recommended. First, it will identify issues with your emulsion. I am sure everyone can relay stories where an emulsion was unstable in testing which predicted a real time issue. Secondly, many vendors as you grow your line will require proof of stability testing.
-
They aid in penetration across the cell wall. They also have some mild preservation on their own through their ability to disrupt the cell membrane.