OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
@Graillotion - On a molecular level, the shape of the molecule can affect the packing and structure of the micelle. So, multiple emulsifiers are able to give some stability. I’m not really certain about the system you are describing but that would be my guess as to why they have multiple emulsifiers.
-
It’s been said that using multiple different types of emulsifiers can lead to more stable emulsions. It can also help modify HLB of the whole system.
-
In case you haven’t figured it out by now, companies lie. You cannot rely on the accuracy of what beauty magazines say about a product nor what the companies say themselves. And even when they don’t directly lie, they say the truth in such a way that it is misleading.
Take this DEFI Exomega emollient cream for example.
Here is their ingredient list.
INGREDIENT
Water (Aqua). Mineral Oil (Paraffinum Liquidum). PEG-12. Glycerin. Cyclopentasiloxane. Glyceryl Stearate. PEG-100 Stearate. Oenothera Biennis (Evening Primrose) Oil (Oenothera Biennis Oil). Myreth-3 Myristate. Cyclohexasiloxane. Polyacrylamide. Niacinamide. 10-Hydroxydecenoic Acid. Avena Sativa (Oat) Leaf/Stem Extract (Avena Sativa Leaf/Stem Extract). BHT. C 13-14 Isoparaffin. Disodium EDTA. Laureth-7. Sodium Acetate. Tocopherol.
So, most of this is “aesthetic modifier” ingredients. If you want to call functional ingredients the “active” ingredients then it has Mineral Oil, Glycerin, and Cyclopentasiloxane.
They might argue that the Oils are active and the Niacinamide, leaf extract, Tocopherol, and 10-Hydroxydecenoic Acid are “active” but I don’t believe them. Any effect those might have are going to be overwhelmed by the first three ingredients I mentioned.
So, they don’t have just 7 ingredients. They also don’t have 7 active ingredients. Most of this formula is aesthetic modifiers for the Mineral Oil and the silicone.
You just can’t rely on what you read about products in beauty magazines!
-
Because it gives their marketing department the most flexibility in the stories they want to tell about a product. If you put 10 claims ingredients in a product, you have at least 10 different stories to tell.
Stories are much better at selling beauty products than formula performance. -
lol - I might need a new screen shot for that video. Or maybe just re-record it. I sound like a robot there.
-
Also, it might not be enough Xanthan gum to suspend the particles. Maybe try a slightly higher percentage.
-
@Microformulation - based on my experience, half of the questions will be “will this be recorded?” and “can I get a copy of the slides?” lol
-
Interesting. Unfortunately, my IFSCC webinar ran long so I didn’t get to see this one.
-
Thank you!!
-
For a simple formula, here’s a reasonable starting place.
One functional ingredient
As many aesthetic modifiers as needed
Zero claims ingredients
Consider the development of a shampoo.The starting formula would be
1. Functional - Sodium Lauryl Sulfate
2. Aesthetic - Water (solvent)
3. Aesthetic - Preservative systemYou make this and you decide it’s too thin and the foam isn’t good. So, now you add
4. Aesthetic - Cocamidopropyl Betaine (secondary surfactant)
5. Aesthetic - Salt
6. Aesthetic - Citric acid (to adjust pH)Now, you try this and it’s better but you don’t like the yellow color and it smells funny.
7. Aesthetic - Color
8. Aesthetic - Fragrance
9. Aesthetic - Polysorbate 20 (fragrance solubilizer)Ok, now you have a formula that works. But you want to be able to tell a story about it. You come up with a story about Aloe Vera and Honeydew melon
10. Claims - Aloe vera extract
11. Claims - Honeydew melon extractBoom, your formula is done.
-
Technically not a problem, but from a marketing standpoint it might be.
-
0.25% active.
So, if you have a 30% solution, 0.25/.3 = 0.83333 or 0.83% in your formula.
-
Before doing anything, Microbial testing.
Then rerun all of the Specification tests.
Probably should do a consumer panel taste test to see if it still performs. -
There is a safety limit to cetrimonium chloride for leave-in products of 0.25%. Twenty minutes of exposure seems like it would qualify as leave-on so don’t exceed that level.
-
Thanks Mark!
in the upcoming year we may do a donation drive so we can fund some needed / requested upgrades.
-
I’ll see what I can do. Send me your new email in a message
-
I think the problem is that there is no clear meaning for the term “filler ingredient.” People use the term in a negative way. They mean “ingredients added to the formula that don’t make the product work any better & just make the formula cheaper”.
While this term might apply to food, it certainly doesn’t apply to cosmetics. Every ingredient is added for some purpose. Preservatives are not filler ingredients because if you remove them from the formula the product will become contaminated and unusable. Dyes & fragrances are not filler ingredients because they improve the experience of using the product. If you remove them people won’t like the product as much. -
@Ghita37 - Phils point is that products that market themselves as “clean” often use ineffective preservative systems. This means that the product will likely be contaminated with bacteria and other microbes and is not actually safe to use.
-
@Ghita37 - If there is a company that is trying to sell you a product, you can’t believe what they say about their product. They may or may not be lying but they are certainly spinning a story that best highlights their own product.
If someone claims there are “filler” ingredients in cosmetic products, they are lying. No one puts “filler” ingredients in formulas. Every ingredient (with the exception of claims ingredients) has a purpose in the formula.
If you see the word “filler” related to a cosmetic product or formula, you should quickly conclude that the author is not a good scientist, knows very little about cosmetic formulation, and the information is not worth reading.
-
To be fair, companies use the words “Clean Beauty” because it works to sell products. Fear mongering is detestable but it does work for marketing to some extent.
-
No, oils do not bind water or generally seal in your skin. Occlusive agents like petrolatum can help block water from escaping from your skin and thus keeping it moisturized. If you want a product that moisturizes your skin, use something with petrolatum in it. Oils do not create a film that significantly blocks moisture loss. That’s why your skin is dry hours later.
-
1. Because the law is like a speed limit law. People ignore it and the authorities selectively choose when to enforce the law. Also, the people who write the ad copy know how to do it in a way that isn’t technically illegal.
2. If it has water (from juice or extract or anywhere else) it is not waterless.
A company claiming that a 78.55% neroli hydrosol is lying. If you don’t mind lying, then replace your water with a juice and call it waterless.
3. More ingredients does not equal better performance. In fact, more ingredients typically means a poorly formulated products. The goal is to use the minimum amount of ingredients that still give you good performance.4. No one uses cheap & useless ingredients to “bulk up” a cosmetic formula. That’s ridiculous & makes no sense. Cosmetics are not food. There is nothing to “bulk up”.
5. Yes, I would but some might advise you don’t have to. No water = not much microbial growth. On the other hand, if water gets in the product you could have microbial growth. That’s why I would add a preservative even to a waterless formula.
6. The first example is the only one that will work. All of those extracts are just bogus marketing ingredients that won’t actually do anything. In a serum, Glycerin & Propanediol and Butylene Glycol are ingredients that actually have an effect on skin. Algea extract, Rice bran extract…pretty much anything that has the word “extract” in it, is completely a bogus, fake ingredient that won’t do anything. These are “story” ingredients that companies put in formulas to dupe consumers into buying their products. It’s a fairy tale spun by a cosmetic marketer.
If you want to make products that work, forget about the “natural” extracts. Put in actual functional ingredients like Glycerin, and surfactants, and all the other things that make products work. Plant extracts are not it.
-
I suppose it depends on the formula. Ours was a cationic surfactant / fatty alcohol based formula. When viscosity was low we would reheat to about 65C, run it through a homogenizer for a while then cool it back down. Sometimes that increased the viscosity.
-
See this post. What are active ingredients in cosmetics.
But basically, the classification of “active” and “non-active” in cosmetics is not correct. At least in the US, it would be illegal for a cosmetic to have an active ingredient. Having an active ingredient (the way it’s legally meant) would make a product a drug, not a cosmetic.
The better term to use is “functional” ingredient. These are the ingredients in the formula that provide a functional benefit. The things that you call “non-active” are really “Aesthetic Modifiers”. These are the ingredients that make it so the functional ingredients can be delivered to the body in a way that looks, smells, and feels good. They are also added to the formula to improve long-term stability.
There should be no ingredient added for no reason at all. All ingredients have some purpose in the formula. If any crucial ingredient is removed, the formula would not look, feel, or smell as good when the consumer uses the product.
Waterless mean “no water”. No, you cannot replace your water with a juice and call it waterless. Aloe vera juice is made up of >95% water. In fact, ALL juices are mostly water.
The texture of a product has little to do with the performance among different skin types. There is no truth to notion that gels perform better for acne prone skin. This is all just made-up marketing fluff. It’s not based on science.
-
In their defense, wasn’t the bill was stuffed into another bill covering a much wider range of topics? It seems a pretty challenging job to be a politician.
