Perry44
Forum Replies Created
-
Yes, anti microbial claims are not allowed for cosmetics in the US.
Microbiome claims are not likely to be considered drug claims. But I could envision a lawsuit in the future against microbiome claims, so if you’re going to make the claim you should have some way to prove what you’re saying is true. I don’t think these would be considered “puffery”.
-
It’s a difficult question to get useful answers to because I don’t think people actually know why they prefer one odor over another. Sure, they’ll come up with explanations, but those probably aren’t true.
People have been told that fragrance is bad for skin & should be avoided so that belief gets put into their head. But the body generates positive feelings when encountering certain odors & beliefs are thrown out the window.
Any brand can launch fragrance free products. If the majority of consumers wanted them, that would be the standard way products are made & sold.
That most products have fragrance says a lot.
-
People may say they want “fragrance free” but they still buy products that have fragrance in them. If you have a niche market and looking to only appeal to a specific group of consumers that actually do buy fragrance free, then it’s fine.
If you want to sell a lot more product and build a brand, use fragrance.
-
Well, Polysorbate 80 might work to solubilize castor oil. Then you would need water and your fragrance materials to make the formula. And a preservative too.
-
Sure, there are lots of instances when Polysorbate 80 doesn’t solve a separation issue. Why formulas separate and the solution to that problem depends on many factors. The HLB of the oils for one. You can certainly try it but it may not work. Some sort of polymeric associative thickener/emulsifier may be more reliable if the system is appropriate for it.
-
Yes, where you apply matters. Some areas of the body have a higher density of nerve endings and will experience a greater sensation.
-
To add to what others have said, it does seem high. Reading between the lines what it really means is that they don’t really want your business. A small run is not worth it to a contract manufacturer when they know more than 90% of brands will never do a second run. Now they have all this packaging and ingredients that they may (or may not) use again. From their standpoint, it makes business sense to charge a very high amount to customers who want only small runs.
-
You’ve asked a lot of questions. Some easy ones.
1. You don’t need a substitute. Just don’t use it. Cationic surfactants generally shouldn’t be in shampoos.
2. Don’t use squalane in a shampoo. Oils do not belong in shampoos
3. For thickenings options, search the forum for sulfate free thickening discussions
As to the other questions you’ll need to be more specific.
What specifically do you want to improve about the formula.
In truth, if you want to make a superior shampoo the first step is to use sulfates. By choosing to make a sulfate free formula, you are choosing to make something that is inferior in performance & more expensive.
-
Were you able to edit them before yesterday?
-
I think people do not realize that raw material suppliers are marketers first & science is second. So, if they want to sell a “broad spectrum” preservative, they are going to set up their test to ensure it makes any claim they want to make, not false.
They don’t try to set up their material to fail which is what you would do if you cared about finding what’s true. That means there are lots of ingredients that the suppliers have proven to work under specific conditions but they probably won’t work under other conditions.
Raw material suppliers are marketers!
-
So what makes you think your assertion that preservatives are causing health problems? Without data, isn’t a more rational explanation is that the problems are more psychosomatic & not caused by preservatives?
It just doesn’t seem that you’ve come to your conclusions based on science. It’s also not something that the independent experts of the SCCS have identified either. The EU has no problem banning anything that’s even a suspected harm inducer. They don’t even require completed studies. Even they don’t support the concerns you are raising about parabens.
What evidence would convince you parabens are safe?
-
My advice. Find products that work for you & are at a price you can afford.
Don’t worry about anything else. -
First, you’d be surprised how little the average consumer thinks about this stuff. For most consumers, if it is sold at a store it’s fine. They really don’t look at the ingredient lists. In fact, paraben remain the most popular preservative used in cosmetics. They’ve dropped a lot in volume but most consumers don’t care.
But some consumers do care and from a marketing standpoint it’s generally better to cater to consumers that care about a topic because the ones who don’t will just buy whatever is on sale. So, marketers & retailers care more about what you put in than the average consumer.
In reality, the cosmetic industry is controlled by Marketing departments. The R&D folks make what they are asked to make (if possible). We’ll grumble about being hamstrung & creating products that aren’t as good as they could be, but ultimately, Marketing & Sales can override any R&D complaints. Consumers also don’t really care either.
There really is little benefit to a company to educate consumers about what is true in the beauty business. Nearly the entire industry is built on fantasy and story telling. Safety, sustainability, natural, active ingredients, antiaging…they’re all just stories needed to convince people to buy products they probably don’t really need. “Truth-telling” also becomes a marketing story that can work for some brands but not others. Chemical fear mongering is just another story telling technique for getting consumers to buy your product rather than your competitor’s.
In truth, I think consumers should bother worrying about chemicals in their beauty products. Products are safe. Unless you have an interest in becoming a Toxicologist, learning about mutagens, EDs, carcinogens, etc. researching on your own is a waste of time. If you are not an expert, you will most likely be mislead by your personal beliefs. You will cherry pick studies that support what you want to believe & ignore the things that don’t support it.
-
The FDA has a classification called OTC (over the counter) Drugs. So, a product can be both a cosmetic and a drug. If you sell an antiperspirant, sunscreen, anti-dandruff product, toothpaste with fluoride, etc. These are all considered both drugs and cosmetics. You have to follow the FDA monograph for the specific product. It specifies the active ingredients you can use (and the amounts) plus the claims you can make. See this post for a full list. Cosmetics that are drugs
-
Here are the relevant reports. Lots to read.
CIR - original paraben opinion
https://www.dropbox.com/s/oyq0dw1grjxi60i/paraben-report-original.pdf?dl=0CIR - re-review of latest data
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5zwi9k5arwujzij/paraben-report-latest.pdf?dl=0SCCS - Opinion on parabens
https://www.dropbox.com/s/v7a6px5w7nuyx02/SCCS-opinion%20on%20parabens.pdf?dl=0While the CIR relies of the cosmetic industry for funding, the group is made up of independent scientists, the FDA, and consumer advocates. They also follow an open process where all meeting minutes, reports and supporting research are available for anyone to inspect.
But even if you remain skeptical of CIR, the SCCS performs the same service in the EU (reviewing ingredient safety data). They are NOT industry funded but rather supported by the government. They have no conflict of interest. Interestingly, they came to the same conclusions as the CIR. Parabens are safe as used in cosmetics.
-
Interesting. It must be related to the method of purifying the petrolatum in production.
However, this says nothing about whether petrolatum changes skin color. I haven’t seen direct evidence that it does.
-
While I can understand that if people are in the sun that their skin turns darker, I don’t think petrolatum has anything to do with it. At least there is no biochemical explanation for why that would happen with petrolatum vs mineral oil or any other oil for that matter.
-
Makes your skin darker? I had never heard the petrolatum had any impact on melanin production. Is that what you mean or something else?
-
I appreciate your response also.
Text is really an inefficient way to communicate as it’s easy to misunderstand. Just to clarify…
I don’t doubt the safety of your products (or Dr Bronner’s). I also don’t think companies are willfully trying to make unsafe products.
Products like Dr. Bronner’s are based on old technology & quite frankly don’t meet the performance expectations of the vast majority of consumers. While they are beloved by a niche consumer group, at about $200 million in yearly sales they are a tiny sliver of the market. https://www.sdbj.com/retail/dr-bronners-hits-188m-revenue-2020/
Most companies want to make products that appeal to the greatest number of consumers. You can’t do that with saponification technology. They just don’t perform as well.
And when a naive entrepreneur or marketer looks at brands that claim to avoid preservatives, they start demanding products that perform like modern technologies without preservatives.
I think we could both agree, in general, that can’t be done. Unfortunately, this hasn’t stopped some companies from making and selling unsafe products like these.
As the endocrine disruption goes, I’m not a doctor so won’t comment on anyone’s health conditions. But what I will point out is that Dr Bronner’s sells products with Tea Tree and Soy based ingredients both of which have been implicated in endocrine disruption. A strange thing to do for a company who markets themselves as safer-than-others.
-
I believe I moved it to formulating.
-
I can’t speak for @PhilGeis, but I think the objection would be that your experience would encourage other manufacturers to stop using proven preservatives & start using (normally inadequate) hurdle strategies instead. It also encourages preservative-phobia, validating unreasonable fears of ingredients that have been proven safe. Additionally, it undermines the message that formulas need to be preserved.
While your experience demonstrates that it is possible, for the vast majority of product makers, using a preservative is the safer option.
-
Congratulations!
-
Better would be HEC for a cationic system. Sorry I didn’t see the cetrimonium chloride in there.
-
The lips should be a good approximation but not quite.
-
There is a lot wrong with this formula but the main problem is that you are not using the appropriate emulsifier for the oil system you’ve chosen. (I don’t know what that oil is because you just wrote oil. They are not all the same).
You are also adding ions to a charged emulsification system which leads to instability. So, the best thing to do would be to use standard preservatives like Methylparaben which have no problems in emulsions. Using the preservatives you’ve suggested leads to the problems you’re experiencing. Salts and other ions + ionic emulsifiers don’t work well together.
You also should use a suspending agent like Carbomer (or Xanthan gum) to help with stabilization.