Perry44
Forum Replies Created
-
You know with ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini you too can make the impossible formula possible!!
-
Good question, but I think you’re overthinking it.
In an anhydrous glycol and oil system, pH doesn’t really apply. pH requires water. If you’re seeing a pH reading after 30 minutes on a strip, it’s likely due to trace moisture or slow absorption from the air, not because the system is truly acidic in a way that affects stability.
Ascorbic acid and retinol can both be unstable, but in this type of system, pH isn’t relevant. If there’s degradation, it’s more likely due to oxidation, not acidity.
So yes, they might interact over time, but not for the reasons you’re assuming. If stability is a concern, use stabilized forms, encapsulation, or just don’t combine them.
Hope that clears it up.
-
I believe the first picture shows you the composition of the material. 70% or more of the PEG-Dimethicone and then the 30% is made up of those residual materials. This is the same as the 3rd ingredient. The second ingredient (100% PEG-Dimethicone) may be the same thing too. I don’t know the manufacturing procedure to make it.
However, these ingredients come from different suppliers so even though they might have the same name they will not necessarily work the same in your formula. You have to conduct a stability test and performance test to ensure they can be swapped out.
-
Do these kinds of claims can be either misleading or federal law violation for cosmetic products:
1) Serum to promote hair growth - misleading / drug claim - not a suitable cosmetic claim
2) Ingredients perfectly together to provide healing - drug claim - not a suitable cosmetic claim
3) Ingredients are carefully formulated and targeted at fighting signs of aging and fine lines, BOOSTING COLLAGEN PRODUCTION and PROMOTING SKIN RENEWAL. - drug claim - not a suitable cosmetic claim
4) We do not USE comedogenic oils for any of our facial products - misleading but might be ok
-
I think someone has got some things mixed up. RI has nothing to do with comedogenicity or really any other type of product performance as far as I know. Matching RI was important in terms of trying to create a clear product when making an anhydrous mixture.
-
Yeah, my guess would be lack of abundant supply. Also, being longer chain than C16 and C18 it tends to have a stiffer feel so makes a heavier cream. C22 is interesting because even though it is longer chain than C20, the way it crystalizes just happens to result in a smoother, better feel.
-
Thanks guys! Hopefully, you get a chance to tune in.
I’m taking the “it’s great” side but that is not exactly how I feel about the topic. I do see the real problems with it.
I will add however, in my testing it has produced some surprisingly good starting formulas. But you do have to steer it away from it’s terrible suggestions for preservation.
-
Well, for some consumers ANY ingredient in your formula could cause sensitivity. It’s just that there are more ingredients in the fragrance that could cause the problem for more consumers. But it is generally true that the lower you go in fragrance, the less exposure people get, and the less chance that they will experience a problem.
-
Thank you for letting me know. So sorry for your loss.
Kevin was a frequent contributor to the forum about 10 years ago and I always appreciated his insights. -
Yes it is happening. Some of the stuff has already been implemented.
What’s in Effect (and has been actively happening):
-
Adverse Event Reporting: Companies have been required to report serious adverse events associated with their cosmetic products to the FDA since December 29, 2023.
-
Facility Registration and Product Listing: Cosmetic manufacturing facilities were generally required to register with the FDA by July 1, 2024. Companies also had to list their cosmetic products, including ingredients, with the FDA by December 29, 2023, for existing products. The FDA has reported a significant increase in registrations and listings compared to the previous voluntary program, indicating widespread industry compliance with these mandatory requirements.
-
Safety Substantiation: Companies must have records to support the safety of their cosmetic products.
-
Mandatory Recall Authority: The FDA now has the authority to issue mandatory recalls for unsafe cosmetic products.
-
Professional Use Labeling: Specific labeling requirements for cosmetic products intended for professional use became effective.
And some of the stuff has been delayed…
Where There Are Delays (and the FDA is behind schedule):
-
Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs): The FDA is mandated to establish federal regulations for GMPs for cosmetic facilities. A proposed rule for GMPs is now anticipated by October 2025, which is later than originally envisioned.
-
Fragrance Allergen Labeling: Rules requiring the disclosure of certain fragrance allergens on cosmetic labels are still in development, with a proposed rule expected by January 2025 (a pushed-back timeline).
-
Talc Testing for Asbestos: The FDA is mandated to establish standardized testing methods for detecting asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products. A proposed rule for this is anticipated by December 2024, also a revised timeline.
In summary, MoCRA is very much happening, and companies are complying with the implemented requirements. However, the FDA is behind schedule on developing some of the more detailed new regulations mandated by the Act. The “DOGE cuts” and broader efforts to reduce federal staffing and regulations are likely contributing factors to these delays, as they impact the FDA’s capacity and prioritization of its many responsibilities.
-
-
This time they got the Big Guys involved.
Inevitable. Clean beauty / EcoBeauty / Natural…. None of this is an ownable position for a brand. If it gets popular, the big guys will just adopt it, adjust it so it fits with what they were already doing, and declare victory.
I just wonder what the small guys will vilify now?
-
I’m confused. What does this have to do with floor cleaners?
-
New name for a thing that has been around for decades. Any ingredient derived from a plant or animal can be called “biocosmetic”.
This reminds me of renaming surfactant solution as micellar water.
-
What are the ingredients?
You’ll likely get better/more responses if you include the list of ingredients. But yes, it’s possible to replicate any product on the market. Also, no you don’t have to include all 42 ingredients to do it.
-
In the US, there aren’t really bans on ingredients except things that have been proven to cause harm. I know this is true in the EU too but they also will ban ingredients that “might” cause harm.
-
You could certainly do QA/QC in any number of industries like food, beverage, paints & coatings, agriculture, etc. And just because some people think it’s boring, that doesn’t matter. What matters is whether you like it or not.
I worked with people at a factory where their whole job was to watch shampoo bottles go down a filling line and ensure that every bottle was properly labeled & filled. Many of these workers had this same job for over 40 years! I think they appreciated the consistency & lack of thinking the job required.
-
I agree that there isn’t a huge database of formulation to train on, however, there also isn’t a huge variety of formulas. Of the top 10 body washes, 8 of them use a blend of Sodium Laureth Sulfate and Cocamidopropyl Betaine. I think you’ll find similar results for most any category of personal care product. The ranges of use of all the ingredients is pretty easily obtained as every supplier posts a “use range” for every ingredient they use.
I agree AI isn’t going to give you a complete finished formula (yet) but it can get you a pretty good starting formula that you merely have to tweak.
-
The problem of research papers being AI generated is just starting. I’m not sure how to solve the problem.
-
This is a preview here.
-
I think it is pretty much impossible to clear the name of the Big Guys. Consumers are just really anti-big corporation.
-
You can tell these companies aren’t really sincere in their efforts. If they were, they could reduce their carbon footprint or environmental impact very easily.
Just stop selling so much and stop trying to sell more and more every year!
But sustainability and capitalism don’t really mesh.
-
Yeah, everyone “steals” from everyone else. If you are a small brand and are doing well, a big company wouldn’t hesitate to take your idea and try to make it bigger. Or if the idea is too hard to copy, they’ll just buy your company. This shouldn’t be surprising.
-
Yes
-
You have to be able to prove that your products are safe. If you do not have paperwork, how would you be able to verify safety? Even if you use food ingredients you’ll need proper documentation to prove your products are safe.
-
In California, some types of Aloe are listed on Prop 65 which means if you use them you have to put a cancer warning on your label.