Microformulation
Forum Replies Created
-
Because golf gives me Tourettes.
-
My input from a precursury search; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF0HPuLeOd8
-
@Bobzchemist is correct. While many will chime in on aspects of raw materials and any number of related subjects, we will not give finished Formulas. Keep in mind many of us pay the bills with these exact services. The onus will fall upon you to do the research, contact the Technical reps and get your hands dirty in the lab. Barring this, you can utilize this forum to network with many consultants who could provide this information at a cost of course.
If it were otherwise, I would simply post all my pending jobs on here, ask for finished Formulations and then hit the beach.
-
I strongly agree.
-
So the product would only be used with like skinned and freckled Europeans? That is the only really appropriate client for such a Formula.
-
Your SPF/Spectrum Testing alone is going to be in the range of about $5K plus. I received one estimate this week for $6500 for the full service.
-
True.
-
@markbroussard Then you most likely are a somewhat different scenario. I am inferring that the original poster is Fitzpatrick VI and is looking for more of a full facial whitening. Much more aggressive case. Pragmatically you are probably looking at some sort of Kojic acid derivative and managing any inflamation.
-
@markbroussard What Fitzpatrick scale are you? For lightening spots you can get some effect with the botanicals in Fitzpatrick I,II or III. Scales IV, V and VI usually seek more dramatic full facial whitening and this won’t work with just the botanicals.
-
That sort of reinforces my position. Pragmatically I have always seen these botanical additives as something that might work but realistically are there so the LOI looks cool.
-
Many combinations of blends of botanicals with Licorice Root Extract as well.
-
Great interview.
-
Arbutin is gaining some ground in the EU; here.
Kojic acid itself is very unstable and is generally used as the fat soluble dipalmitate salt. It can be irritating and requires care. With the bias against Hydroquinone it is being used more often with Fitzpatrick IV pigmentation types.
SAP/MAP can provide whitening but they are arguably not organic.
As for all the other botanical actives, I have tried them for clients as a sole entity at client’s request. Without exception these prototypes were eventually evaluated as being not nearly effective enough and other more accepted actives had to be added to the product.
Skin whitening is inherently irritating. A sunscreen should be used at the same time and treatment regimens should designed to maximize the efficacy as well as to direct the client to discontinue if marked adverse events occurred.
-
I have done a lot of these products and realistically you are not going to be able to do much with just plant derived actives for customers in the Fitzpatrick scale (pigmentation rating system used by dermatologists) who are a IV,V or IV. You will need to use a synthetic active. Many are avoiding hydroquinone due to fears of toxicity, but many other products use actives such as Kojic acid derivatives or Arbutin.
There is a wide variety of botanical additives as well (Bearberry, Mulberry, Licorice, and so forth). Many of these are weak tyrosine inhibitors but in my experience they are secondary and offer marketing claims more than anything.
@AuroraBorealis is right to point out that you can’t clearly tie toxicity or carcinogenicity to the source of the raw material be it naturally derives or synthetic. There is no clear correlation.
-
BTMS is a whole different animal and in my experience used mainly by Crafters at least now for the most part. For more info on BTMS I would refer to Croda.
Xanthan gum can stabilize a Formula by increasing the viscosity of the continuous phase. However as Mark pointed out your failures are immediate, not over time.
You have some very general questions so (no offense) I think some reading and research on emulsification and emulsifiers could be in order.
-
All the info about Olivemulse is available on the vendors page. It answers almost every one of your question; http://www.ingredientstodiefor.com/item.php?item_id=1223
Also Olivem 1000 is very process dependent. I wouldn’t try making it with a whisk or any less sophisticated mixing equipment. I have to agree I think it is linked to your technique and available equipment.
-
It isn’t the use of the word “chemicals” in quotes, it is more a reaction to how marketers (especially in the “natural” market) have co opted this word and given it a negative connotation. We are constantly bombarded with lines crowing they are “chemical free” and we see people advocating that they won’t use cosmetics with chemicals in them. As we all know chemicals are ubiquitous and it is naive on their part to make these claims.
So I think the issue was the use of the word chemicals in a manner where many inferred you were assigning a negative connotation to the term. The term chemical has no bias be it negative or positive. They just “are.”
That said I could see some benefit in severing the assessment of common cosmetic raw materials from marketing entirely and setting consistent and coherent protocols to assess safety. The bulk of the data available in this are has been hijacked by marketers with ulterior motives from the start. The last proposed Cosmetic Act would have outlined duties of the FDA to start this process.
This would be of benefit to persons in the Cosmetic Industry. However pragmatically unless you mirrored the preconceptions which have been fostered in many Cosmetic consumers, I believe that you would be considered a shill of the Chemical companies. This is unfortunately an area where pseudoscience rules.
-
Great article on general concepts of Lip Stick Formulation in this months Cosmetics and Toiletries. You may need to be registered to get the full text but that is pretty easy; http://www.cosmeticsandtoiletries.com/research/chemistry/premiumLipsticks-How-They-Have-Changed-and-Where-They-Are-Going-239944541.html
-
@AuroraBorealis Great explanation and spot on as to why the term chemicals drew my original comment.
-
It isn’t a thickener per se. I don’t know how to make it a thickener as such.
-
You would use it as an emulsifier with another co-emulsifier generally. It has an HLB of 8. I have used this and another Laureth emulsifier in combination.
-
My guess is it is also a difficult question to answer since as posed it interweaves the Science and the marketing (“best possible products for the skin”, “without making you dependent on the product”).
If I were looking to promote skin barrier function I would treat the emulsifier as secondary and perhaps focus on other modalities such as ceramides, etc.
Inflammation from the emulsifier is rare in my experience and in general is usually traced back to other constituents of the formulation.
-
Are we really bashing “chemicals” as a whole now?
-
The lower pH of a syndet bar is thought to be better for the skin mantle, although any disruption is minimal.
Syndet bars will perform better in hard water.
-
I have a contact that does this. I have priced it out and it is affordable;
color:#1F497D”> Business Development Manager – Cosmetics & Personal Caremmack@nsf.org