[ngarayeva001]

Ghita37 said:

Hello everyone.I apologise for my late reply. 
To answer you ngarayeva001, i did some extensive research and found that Polysorbate 80 is irritating and thus since im targeting women who wear makeup aged 30-40, this information made me tell myself: ok dont use polysorbate 80 at all! I asked the manufacturing to use Polyglyceryl-3 Diisostearate. Is it okay if i mix it with the Polysorbate 80 for sensisive skin?
 
Also can it be used to remeove eye makeup such as eye shadow, mascara, and lipsttock/lip gloss? 

How many emulsifiers can we mix in one formula? 

Thank you Ketchito for your feedback.It also helped especially when you said 10 oils are too much !How many oils can i put in my formula? So 10 is too much How about 5 ? What can i do to make it a special/unique oil or formula?

Thank you for your support and insights:) 

Do you mind sharing your research on irritability of polysorbate 80? I couldn’t find much. Polysorbate 80 and alkyl benzoate is a perfect combination for many reasons: cheap, gentle, effective, materials are more or less consistent (even generics are more consistent than veg oils) and compatible in terms of polarity. Polysorbate dissolves and doesn’t sink. Add polyamide-3 to thicken. Nice and simple.

[ngarayeva001]

I guess Polysorbate is here as a surfactant and it reduces chance of recrystallization? I usually use CAPB and it causes no issues. I don’t use sodium citrate though just edta.

[ngarayeva001]

Trulux in Australia has ingredients directly from Dow Corning and similar large manufacturers. So if you formulate for clients you need to know it’s actually say Dow Corning Formulation aid 5225 not an equivalent. If scalability isn’t important then absolutely use myskinrecipes in Thailand. They have an incredible variety of rare ingredients. They do have some materials from large manufacturers like Clariant but many ‘generics’. Still my favorite supplier.

[ngarayeva001]

Depends on the formula and whether the product should be clean or can be cloudy. Could be a variety of ingredients from cetyl alcohol to polyamide 3

[ngarayeva001]

I don’t think it’s w/o. Especially with btms in it. As said above, stability issues. I would get rid of carbomer and use fatty alcohol thicker. And with presence of abrasive particles you want it thicker than a moisturizer because they would sink.

[ngarayeva001]

Is that your personal experience with Polysorbate 80? It is pretty gentle, and if that is irritating, most of the other would be worse.
So, have you actually tried Polysorbate 80 and determined it’s irritating, or have you read somewhere that it’s irritating?

[ngarayeva001]

BTMS-50 takes close to 90C to melt. BTMS-80 is around 100C, which is the reason I prefer BTMS-25 and adjust for cetyl alcohol.

[ngarayeva001]

Also, if you compare waterproof vs non-waterproof formulas in the book I mentioned above and in commercial products, you will notice that waterproof ones are always anhydrous. What I listed above is water-resistant (would tolerate rain but not a splash of water in the face). Waterproof are generally less popular as they are very difficult to remove.

[ngarayeva001]

Below is one of my more or less successful mascara experiments (having said that, I am not making makeup often because it’s too messy and easier to buy than dealing with clean up).
You need a glycol to keep the product from drying on lashes and causing fall out under the eyes. It also improves preservative efficacy by reducing water activity.

To isododecane question, as you can see, there is nothing liquid in this formula, and it came out as a typical mascara (not too thick). I used an example formula from f the Chemistry and Technology of the Cosmetics and Toiletries Industry as a starting point. What I would improve is a film former. The ones I used are not getting the result I wanted. And Carbon black instead of iron oxides, as I already mentioned.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18576695-chemistry-and-technology-of-the-cosmetics-and-toiletries-industry

INCI	%
Aqua	50.3%
VP / VA Copolymer	1.0%
TEA	1.0%
Butylene glycol	3.0%
Phenonip	1.0%
Xanthan gum	0.2%
VP/Eicosene Copolymer	4.0%
GMS	3.5%
Stearic Acid	5.0%
Cera Alba	6.0%
Ozokerite	3.0%
Polyxydroxystearic acid	1.0%
Ceteareth-20	1.0%
BHT	0.1%
Bis-diglyceryl polyacyladipate-2	2.0%
Black Iron oxides (CI77499), Sodium lauroyl glutamate, Lysine, Magnesium chloride	18.0%

[ngarayeva001]

It will be on the lower end, but I wouldn’t bother with the HLB system too much. All of your emollients have low HLB here. Is TEA part of the emulsification system intended to saponify beeswax, or is it neutralising carbomer? If it’s the first, you potentially need more.
- I also think you have too much oil, mascaras are mostly waxes.
- Too much Tocopherol.
- !!Your preservation system is not sufficient. Be careful with it. It’s a product that is used close to the eyes, and it must be very well preserved!!
 - If you can get hold of carbon black, use it instead of iron oxides.

[ngarayeva001]

I don’t like gums, but from a few that I tried siligel is not bad. 

https://www.ulprospector.com/en/eu/PersonalCare/Detail/4499/717198/Siligel

Xanthan gum also comes in a variety of types, and this one is okayish too

https://cosmetics.specialchem.com/product/i-cosphatec-cosphaderm-x-34

[ngarayeva001]

I would argue that a well-formulated SLS/SLES shampoo is colour safe. Why? Because it washes well enough to keep hair clean longer, and by doing it delays the next wash => less washing, more colour

[ngarayeva001]

Applying occlusive moisturizer after retinoids is only beneficial. Retinoids irritate skin and reduce sebum production (thus their anti acne effects). Regarding effectiveness of retinoids, it’s all about the formula not what is applied before or after (although using anything that compromises skin barrier wouldn’t be a good idea).

[ngarayeva001]

This is totally anecdotal, but for some reason, I have much more success with w/si emulsions than w/o. I attributed it to the fact that in the case of w/si, I am not guessing which emollient to use but use the one compatible with the emulsifier (a non-polar one). Again, that’s completely anecdotal. I have several foundations that haven’t shown any signs of separation for almost 3 years (and droplets look ok under a microscope). I don’t have a single w/o that lasted this long. Again, as I am not a chemist, I just rely on suppliers’ information and countless trial and error. It would be great to understand the mechanism in deeper detail.

[ngarayeva001]

Sorry, the  link is not working.

[ngarayeva001]

Thank you @Pharma! Very helpful. Can you point me to explanation why higher polarity oils are better for w/o? I know the opposite it true for o/w and it would be great to understand the logic.

[ngarayeva001]

Mine is Varisoft BT 85 and according to Evonik it can be used up to 10% (which is overkill)

[ngarayeva001]

I had two, one has already been solved, and another is semi-solved.

1) I desperately wanted to reverse engineer my favourite make up removing balm, which is banila clean it zero:

https://incidecoder.com/products/banila-co-clean-it-zero-original 

many brands have similar products, but there is nothing like banila. My biggest challenge was the availability of the ingredients. After 4 years of trial and error (and definitely over 50 attempts), I finally found low melting point synthetic wax and PEG-10 isostearate. Once I had the right ingredients, it worked after a second attempt.

I did it over 50 times, so you don’t have to:

Ethylhexyl Palmitate	36.00%
Cetyl Ethylhexanoate	35.00%
PEG-20 Glyceryl Triisostearate	12.00%
PEG-10 Isostearate	10.00%
Synthetic Wax	7.00%

2) The second is the stability of my foundations (and W/Si, W/O in general). Here are a couple of tricks that I learned:
- use several emulsifiers
- oil phase stabiliser is not optional, it’s a must
- repeating common knowledge, the electrolyte in the water phase is a must
- the type of oil matters
- the process matters a lot! It depends on the emulsifier, but in most cases, water is to be added to the oil phase by drops under low-shear mixing, and then it should be exposed to high shear to reduce the size of droplets.
- professional chemists with access to a lab will throw rotten eggs at me, but I am saying it anyway: you don’t need a homogenizer to make a foundation (w/o, w/si). A 600W stick blender will do. An overhead stirrer is a must, though. 
- if you want to invest money in something related to w/o, buy a decent microscope to see the shape of droplets. That’s a good predictor of stability in the absence of a lab to run a proper stability test.
- do not add preservatives in the end! It makes no sense, as water is an internal phase!
- PEG-10 dimethicone and ABIL WE 09 MB are amazing
- Stearyl dimethicone (as a stabiliser) = improved aesthetics (IMHO)

[ngarayeva001]

Post your formula.  There is no other way to tell. 

[ngarayeva001]

Also, on caffeine, I am aware of the research saying that caffeine has a positive effect on hair growth, and it penetrates quickly enough to be used in the wash-off product. Although the latter is true, the study wasn’t conducted properly, and even if it was, conditioner is not supposed to be applied on the scalp, so your caffeine is just wasted. The same goes for all other active ingredients, including proteins.

I don’t hate hydrolysed proteins in hair care because they create a flexible, barely there film that, in my opinion, helps with styling. Having said that, it works in leave-in formulas.

[ngarayeva001]

here:

INCI	%
Aqua	82.8%
EDTA	0.2%
Phenonip	1.0%
BTMS-25	10.0%
Behentrimonium chloride	3.0%
Dimethicone	2.0%
Fragrance	0.3%

This is my formula, and it does a good job for my wavy and very coarse hair.
I don’t have any cationic gums because 2 emulsifiers are sufficient, in my opinion. Since I use BTMS 25, I don’t have any cetyl alcohol, but you need to adjust it if your version is 50%. Don’t add more than 0.1% of oils. Don’t expose it to too much high shear (overhead stirrer if you have it). Add polyquaternium 7 if you really want.

[ngarayeva001]

You have everything but the kitchen sink in that formula! It’s not working because the oils consumed all of your emulsifiers. Commercial conditioners that say “with argan oil” have like 0.01% of actual oil in them. 
Also, you literally have gums and polymers that require different pH! One needs to be acidified to hydrate, another needs a base.

[ngarayeva001]

Another EU supplier with rare ingredients:
 https://farmaciavernile.it/materie-prime
They have BHA and BHT, parabens (not in blends but separately), formaldehyde releasers, some PEGs that I haven’t seen in other places, antiperspirants (aluminium salts) and other rare stuff. A bit difficult to navigate. Check the functional substances section. I ordered from them several times.

[ngarayeva001]

Another small quantities supplier with a wide range of ingredients is https://www.glamourcosmetics.it/it/
Unfortunately, they don’t ship outside of Europe (and they imposed MOQ for the UK after Brexit). But for those who are in the EU, I highly recommend checking them. They sell many Lubrizol, Clariant, Seppic, Croda and other big brand ingredients. They also have The Innovation Company’s pigment blends. 

[ngarayeva001]

I ordered from myskinrecipes multiple times. It usually takes just one week to deliver to London. It’s cheaper to get ingredients from Thailand than Italy now (hello brexit). Ingredients are well packaged and they provide supporting documentation. The only thing I order from the US are preservatives (just to be safe).