OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
You’ll have to tell us all the other ingredients in your formula to get a useful answer.
-
@ngarayeva001 - great point. Silicones are so diverse that the question is just too broad to have a useful answer. It’s like asking “Animals - pros and cons”
-
For a leave-in product it doesn’t matter as much that the ingredient is cationic or not. Plus Cetrimonium Chloride has been deemed not safe in leave-in products above 0.25%.
Polyquat 7 may help, but for leave-in, detangling products Silicones are where it’s at. Cyclomethicone, Amodimethicone, Dimethiconol, etc.
-
I don’t know a specific form although you could probably just write something with your own letterhead to the affect that you give up ownership then sign it.
However, a “pain relief gel” would be considered a drug, so I hope your client realizes this and that you followed FDA guidelines for developing OTC drugs.
https://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ResourcesForYou/Industry/ucm388736.htm
Most importantly… “If, however, your products are drugs, or both cosmetics and drugs, they must meet the requirements for drug registration. “
-
What labels are you talking about?
The terms “anti wrinkle” “anti dark spots” and “anti acne” would all violate FDA rules.
Firming, lifting and even skin tone are fine.
-
Pros - shine, slick feel, smoothness, light feel, moisturizing without tackiness
Cons - some consumers think silicones are bad and not natural
-
@ngarayeva001 - I’m still looking for a plugin for the forum to do that. We used to have a voting system but there were some problems with it.
-
“And we know that there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos“
This may be something that you believe, but this statement is not based on science. I think we can both agree that one molecule of exposure to asbestos does not cause issues.
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp61-c6.pdf
“The general population is exposed to low levels of asbestos primarily by inhalation. Small quantities of
asbestos fibers are ubiquitous in air.”By your assertion simply breathing air will cause cancer.
“Fibers in water arise mainly by erosion of natural deposits of asbestos or by corrosion of fibers from pipes
made with asbestos-containing cement. Asbestos concentrations in most water supplies are less than
1 million fibers per liter (MFL), but may exceed 100 MFL in some cases. For a human consuming
2 L/day, this would yield a dose of about 2–200 million fibers per day.”Again, with your assertion drinking water would cause cancer.
With all substances, the dose makes the poison. There is a safe level of asbestos exposure because we live with it every day.
I apologize for sounding aggressive, but this is just the kind of chemical fearmongering that scares consumers and leads to irrational regulations. I support chemical limit regulations but they should be based on scientific evidence, not fearmongering.
-
Probably but that depends on what else is in your formula.
-
@DAS the research is available and the conclusions are that talc (baby powder) does not cause cancer.
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/talcum-powder-and-cancer.html
The Dow Corning breast implant case is a perfect example of how companies can be ruined by junk science. Juries awarded plaintiffs millions and bankrupted the company. Years later the science exonerated silicone breast implants. https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/17/washington/17cnd-breast.html
Incidentally, I’m not defending J&J and any claimed shady practices they had of obscuring talc contamination. But the way they communicate findings has no bearing on whether baby powder has caused cancer.
-
@jeremien - Interesting article. I tend to agree that longer ingredient lists are not useful for consumers. But I’m not sure his example shortened label is much better.
@mikethair - at least in the US, authorities don’t really check labels prior to product launch.
-
Relevant - https://www.jnj.com/our-company/johnson-johnson-responds-to-recent-news-coverage-on-talc
The Reuters article is misleading in that they don’t provide any evidence of baby powder causing cancer.
@Christopher - are you suggesting big companies lie more than small companies?
-
It seems like you are asking different questions here.
If you are asking how many prototypes (different versions of the formula) to make then I guess that depends on how close you get with your first prototype. The procedure is….
1. Pick a benchmark (or benchmarks) for your performance target
2. Create a prototype to match the benchmark
3. Test the prototype against the benchmark, note differences.
4. Reformulate a new prototype and repeat step 3 until you get something you like.If you are asking how many samples (copies of the same formula) you need for testing then that will vary.
For performance testing usually one sample is enough as long as you have 500 - 1000 g
For stability testing, the protocol that I followed required ~40 samples or more if I was doing both glass and packaging.
The type of testing you need to do for performance will depend on what type of product you’re making and the claims you’re going to make.
-
I’m going :smiley:
-
Glycerin might help stop the product from becoming crusty in the delivery system if it is delivered from a pump.
-
That’s a question only you can answer because only you know what you are trying to achieve.
“They all can work. Dimethicone is generally the best but Cyclomethicone will evaporate so it won’t build up like the others can. Dimethiconol is water soluble so it can be more compatible with some systems. The answer depends on the formula.”
-
Yes, that is the idea. Increased temperature increases the speed of chemical reactions. But it is not an exact science and it’s possible that you won’t see those effects in the room temperature sample even after a year. However, you should assume you will.
-
Maybe they think the Silver will work as a preservative? I don’t see anything else. Probably just mislabeled.
-
@Gunther - right. I was referring to Dimethicone Copolyol
-
I see these as strictly marketing ingredients that shouldn’t be expected to have any noticeable effect on performance. What you use depends on the story that you want to tell.
The science behind the skin microbiome is not advanced nearly far enough for anyone to have any idea of what ingredients should be used or even what mix of microbes we would want on a person’s skin. Marketing is way ahead of the science here.
-
Since it’s a leave-in product you could use Dimethiconol. Try 1% to see if you get the level of shine you want.
-
They all can work. Dimethicone is generally the best but Cyclomethicone will evaporate so it won’t build up like the others can. Dimethiconol is water soluble so it can be more compatible with some systems. The answer depends on the formula.
-
The rules related to using colorants in cosmetics can be found here.
https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/ColorAdditives/ColorAdditivesinSpecificProducts/InCosmetics/ucm110032.htmYou can find a list of allowed color additives here.
https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/ColorAdditives/ColorAdditiveInventories/ucm115641.htmI don’t think Acid Blue 145 is legal in cosmetics.
-
Well, that depends on what else is in your formula. But DMDM is safe for use up to 1%.
Of course, you have to do a preservative efficacy test to determine whether your formula is safe when using only DMDM Hydantoin.