Perry44
Forum Replies Created
-
I’d say when in doubt, do a stability test.
For these specific questions.
1. I’m not sure what you mean but yes you need to test every new formulation. You should also test when you have new packaging.
2. Yes, every new production setup should be tested. But you don’t have to test every batch if you are using the same equipment each time.
3. No, but if you change suppliers than you should do a stability test.
4. Whenever there is a change in manufacturing, packaging, raw material supplier you should do stability testing.
-
If you want a useful answer you should list out all the ingredients in your formula.
-
Glucoside based and other non-ionic surfactants do not thicken with salt. You’ll need something else like maybe a Cellulose thickener. If you have salt in your system a Carbomer thickener will not work either.
-
Here is the ingredient list.
AQUA, GLYCERIN, STEARIC ACID, HYDROGENATED CASTOR OIL, CYCLOMETHICONE, MICROCRYSTALLINE WAX, CYCLOTETRASILOXANE, CANDELILLA CERA, VP/VA COPOLYMER, PVP, POLYACRYLAMIDE, C13-14 ISOPARAFFIN, LAURETH-7, PHENOXYETHANOL, CAPRYLYL GLYCOL, SODIUM STEAROYL GLUTAMATE, PARFUM (AROMA), SODIUM HYDROXIDE, TETRASODIUM EDTA, CARAMEL.
I’m afraid you are missing significant ingredients.
You have nothing in your product to give hold. That is VP/VA COPOLYMER & PVP in the original formula. Also the waxes will help with “movable” hold.
Additionally, you have no silicones in your version so the application and feel will be completely different.
At the very least, you’ll have to add PVP to your formula to give it some hold. -
Yes, product contamination is the concern, not mold on peoples faces.
But it’s still not a good idea to use them.
-
If it’s clear, likely the smallest particle size. SME253 goes down to 20 nm particle size, although it’s a blend so they don’t use that specific ingredient in this formula.
-
Yes, it’s safe
-
Sure.
-
Silicones should work, but without sharing a list of ingredients you’re already using we can’t give much more helpful advice. There isn’t a single “increase glow” ingredient.
-
If it stops sweat, then it becomes an OTC.
-
Sounds like a challenging project. You’ll need someone with access to some analytical equipment if you don’t already know the composition of the polymer. @chemicalmatt any thoughts?
-
Not a significant amount. The way SLS works it just does not form insoluble salts the same way soap does. The SLS micelles are just much more stable.
-
Raw material suppliers are not under the same regulatory scrutiny as finished goods makers. Essentially they can market their ingredients however they want with the flimsiest of evidence. They know they are not the ones ultimately responsible for claims made to consumers. I take what raw material suppliers say (even big corporations) with a grain of salt.
And winning awards at in cosmetics or another trade show is not impressive either. These awards are given out every year but the reality is that very little changes in our industry. There haven’t been significant innovations since the 1980’s in my opinion. But still they have to give an award for something. Sadly that something typically comes down to the best marketing story.
-
This may be the way forward for some innovation in the cosmetic industry (there hasn’t been any real consumer perceptible innovation in years).
However, consider me skeptical that this could make much difference. In my experience people are just terrible at noticing subtle differences in cosmetic products. You can make the greatest formula in the world and if you put the wrong fragrance in it, no one is going to want to use it. Conversely, you can make a lame formula that everyone loves just because it has a well-loved fragrance and a good marketing story.
This is also ignoring the legality of creating products that you know specifically impact the biochemistry of people. This would make them drugs.
-
Since there is no proof of any thing being Supernatural, isn’t everything natural?
-
As to how much of a ratio you use between surfactants, that is just a matter of experimentation. You want to balance performance with gentleness and cost. The ratio / amount is different with different formulas.
-
Typically, the containers you get from the packaging supplier are already cleaned and washed so you don’t need to do anything to them. At least that is the case for large scale producers.
-
They’re probably the same. You’d have to look at the specification sheet.
Most extracts are sold in Glycerin or Propylene Glycol. -
I’m confused.
Do they not think the cosmetic industry has already tried those compounds?
What do you see as the major problems with their study?
Also, to be fair, there are plenty of non-government, academic types who have published equally bad “research”
-
It really depends on the formula / emulsification system. 10% might be fine for some systems.
In fact, we used to do what was called a “quench cooling” method with one of our hair conditioners. We would add 25% cold water after creating the emulsion. This rapidly cooled the system so instead of taking 8 hours to make a batch we could do it in 2 hours. And we didn’t have any stability problems in that formula. -
I agree that the Glycols are helping.
And with the Baby Daily Moisture cream, they also list 1.2% Dimethicone as the active ingredient. This is actually an OTC drug product ( https://www.aveeno.com/products/daily-moisture-baby-cream ) My guess is that it has a low enough water content that Water Activity is also helping with preservation. Also, it is in a pump which helps and produced in an OTC factory which is going to be cleaner than your typical Cosmetic manufacturing facility.
aveeno.com
Aveeno Baby Daily Moisturizing Cream | Aveeno®
Soothe & protect baby's delicate skin. This hypoallergenic baby body cream with coconut oil, shea butter, prebiotic oat moisturizes sensitive skin for 24 hours.
-
You’re almost right! You’ve calculated correctly the amount need for 100g. If you want to make a 250g batch then you’ll need to multiply those numbers by 250/100 = 2.5.
SCI: 9.41g x 2.5 = 23.53g
Disodium cocoamphoacetate: 13.33g x 2.5 = 33.33g
Or if you wanted to make a 500g batch you would multiply those numbers by 500/100 = 5.
-
I was trying to use this yesterday and keep getting a 404 error. Is the service coming back?
-
Yes, if they make that claim then it is an OTC. And if it is an OTC Antiperspirant, they have to use some form of Aluminium salt as the active & label it with a drug label.
-
This is an old discussion! But I say PQ-37 is better for leave in because you need to use less of it to get a reasonable effect. You could use 0.2% of PQ-37 that would give you the same effect as say 2% BTMS. So, this would result in hair that feels less weighed down.