Microformulation
Forum Replies Created
-
Is this for a Facial Serum? If so, you may want to reconsider using Phenoxyethanol as a stand alone preservative.
-
Evonik has materials that will make a “Powder to Cream” product. See http://www.health-and-beauty.com/fileadmin/all/cossma/ES/COS1108ES_14_ScientEvoniPowdertoCream.pdf
However these materials have large Minimum order quantities and are probably out of the reach of any account short of a Commercial account. I used this technology in a bronzer where I incorporated DHA for self-tanning. It worked great. -
Getting closer, but still a bit off.
For help regarding your product it is best if you list your Formula (using wt/wt% notation) completely. Then describe the issues and areas you feel it needs improvement.
If you read the thread on asking for Formulation advice, they give some examples on how to best frame your question.
-
I worked on one of the top 10 Ethnic Curl products and we achieved great results with Fixate Plus polymer from Lubrizol (Polyacrylate-14). It was by far superior for hold over carbomer and the gums. Here is their starting Formulation which can be altered and customized. It is really just a starting point.
-
@belassi I think you will find that you are not alone in your experiences. There are some tricks such as mixing different gums (ex. Solagum AX) but in the end a Carbomer will blow them away. I think this is a case where you really need to decide if “natural” is more important than “god.”
-
I am not sure who told you that this naturally derived gum thickeners do not result in flaking or residue. I have experienced this result with both higher levels with Xanthan gum and Amaze XT (Dehydroxanthan gum).
Having been involved in Formulating for a bit, I can recall when the Carbomers came out and I was able to experience their evolution and improvement. As such I remember the issues with the gum based thickeners. I know people want to be “natural” (an undefined term) now a days, but this is an area where you will see some marked decreases in performance by using the gums.
-
As Perry stated, Aloe has a high water content. It in and of itself must be preserved and any product using Aloe Vera must have a broad spectrum preservative.
-
Thanks. I also share some of your frustrations. Personally when I first got into Cosmetic Science I found that getting a specific answer to such a broad question was detrimental. For me at least, when I research in these areas I learn far more than what I initially was searching for.
-
Remember most of us on the Forum do this for a living.
For the “Rules for Requesting Formulation Advice/Help” please read THIS thread.
To help find a Consultant read THIS thread.
In summary (unless you hire a consultant), the burden of research lies with you and this forum is here to assist in refining/improving the prototype. Full Formulations should not be requested.
-
I agree to a certain extent.
I see questions all the time that are worded in such a way that it is obvious it is a home crafter who has NOT done their due diligence and researched at least the basics. In many cases I see requests in broken English for complete formulations, for free. Oftentimes I see crafters asking about products they shouldn’t make (acne products, sunscreens, and my favorite “I am a beginner with no Chemistry experience and I want to make a water in oil in water emulsion with a PIT inversion.” (This is an actual question from 9 months ago). I myself do not answer these questions and ignore them. In this respect I agree.
However, in certain cases I believe that we should challenge these home crafters to do their own research. A quick answer will give the details but will not give them a foundation in the basics. Cosmetic Science is in many ways an academic pursuit and in that case these crafters should not be given a quick answer but rather be challenged to research on their own. This is not a new concept and in the end will better serve the questioner in the long run. My Professors challenged me and did not make my feelings an issue. Science is an Academic pursuit and facts will oftentimes triumph over feelings.
Lastly, this forum started as a Professional site. I am not advocating keeping it that way or being exclusionary. Rather I am throwing out the gauntlet and suggesting that we should raise their knowledge level to ours, not vice versa.
Alternatively perhaps a section could be set-up for questions from crafter and their questions posted there. There are also numerous Facebook pages where the neophyte can get more basic instruction.
-
I have to agree with Perry. I have rarely seen a vacuum system used in commercial manufacturing. We dealt with the aeration by controlling the mixing speed and limited any cavitation. It was always successful.
There was this one time someone accidentally ran a shampoo through the in-line homogenizer. It was pretty cool to see.
-
Try contacting Susan Raffy at Raffy Cosmetics.
-
I agree. I just think that the Regulatory focus makes it off topic.
-
-
I have to agree with Bob wholeheartedly. I may be wrong, but the primary focus of this forum is Cosmetic Science.
-
The Olive oil in shampoos generally isn’t an issue when designed correctly. As we all know, significant levels of oils in a shampoo are not the way to go. Even if any remains after the surfactant is rinsed out, this would lead to very negative aesthetics (greasy hair). That is generally why when the oils are used at a low level for “label claim.” I have heard this question addressed in seminars and the feeling is that with the short period of exposure and limited level of exposure that any negative effect would be greatly blunted. Honestly, I have heard little to no other sources report on significant irritation with the APG’s, but I am certainly keeping an ear out for additional adverse incidents.
-
This all arises from the topic that comes up over and over again, “What does “natural” mean?” This is a clear example of why you can’t throw out the term “natural” and then use inference to select raw materials. For consistency and validity you MUST address a natural standard (NSF, NPA, WF’s, USDA NOP, etc.) and then use their standard to vet raw materials. If you try to infer you will make these broad errors.
Basically a “natural standard” will allow a raw material if a. the feedstock (initial raw material) is plant based and b. It is only purified/isolated/extracted with processes that occur in nature. I think these are braod conditions upon which we should all agree. I know it doesn’t address some exceptions such as naturally occurring clays/minerals, beeswax and lanolin. As far as the beeswax/lanolin goes, these are left off some natural standards in order to meet a “vegan” requirement.
Now, knowing all this, I think you can go back and look at each material you suggested and see why they are “natural” (hate that term) or not. It greatly simplifies the process.
Lastly, it will make you re-examine your need to be “natural.” In my opinion this movement to natural is driven by marketing primarily and the Marketers sometimes over value the demand for “natural” products in the market as a whole. With this in mind, don’t let “natural” lure you into sacrificing performance.
-
These questions are far too broad, not really on topic (Cosmetic Science) and lastly questions that would be determined internally ny a Marketing person. No offense.
-
Is he referring to Euperlan, the BASF line of pearlizers? I know there is a Euperlan PK 2200 product although I haven’t seen it in years.
-
Here is an interesting article on using an anhydrous formulation (silicone base with the L-ascorbic acid in an internal phase) I have not used it with L-Ascorbic acid but I have used this concept with Hydroquinone and DHA with good results.
-
I think looking for a preservative that works in an aerated product is missing the point. For so many reasons you need to fix the manufacturing by changing up your mixing set-up, NOT by dealing with it after the fact. The aeration is the error, not a property to work around.
-
There is no mandated format. The Personal Care Products Council (formerly CTFA) has some guidance but generally the forms and procedures are developed locally using the guidelines.
Incidentally several months ago Perry did a webinar on this topic. I am unsure if a video transcript is available.
-
No. They are covered under the OTC monograph. Hydroquinone 2% creams are sold OTC. Higher levels are prescription.
“All of the over the counter “bleaching” products that contain hydroquinone are limited to a 2.0% concentration in the United States. Prescription creams are usually 4% and dermatologists will sometimes specially compound ones that are higher strength.”
-
There are a couple issues to address in this case. Some may be superfluous as I am unsure of your facility or background.
Firstly, Hydroquinone creams are OTC products and as such require Drug Facts labeling and an OTC Labeller. They are not and never should be something one would try outside of these regulatory controls.
Secondly hydroquinone is soluble in water and or Peg’s primarily. It is not soluble or very poorly soluble in lipids. AN anhydrous base would not work.
Here is a great article (excerpt only, requires registration for the full article) that you may fing helpful.