OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
What do you mean by “working”? What do you hope drinking collagen will do?
-
There is nothing that makes VCO (virgin coconut oil) less comedogenic. Coconut oil is comedogenic.
And I don’t think anyone knows what is the comedogenic causing portion of coconut oil so you can’t simply remove X ingredient.
Natural materials are often not good to use in cosmetics.
-
And it is moderately comedogenic so it’s not typically used in leave-on skin products.
-
Because it is not. There are a number of errors.
1. The first ingredient should be Water. Aloe Vera Leaf juice is mostly water and you are supposed to list ingredients based on their composition not based on how much of the raw material you put in the formula.
2. Potassium Shea Butterate And Potassium Palm Kernelate (African Black Soap) is not a proper INCI name.
3. Sodium Cocoate (Saponified Coconut Oil) - the (saponified coconut oil) doesn’t belong in the name.
4. The asterisks do not belong in the ingredient list. That doesn’t follow the proper INCI listing.
Here are the rules that people are supposed to follow.
http://webdictionary.personalcarecouncil.org/ctfa-static/online/FrontMatter_Vol1%20Edited%20for%20Websites.pdfThis ingredient list is just wrong.
-
@em88 - there is little scientific evidence that alcohol dries the skin.
-
“Notable effects” is the gray area. Technically, water has a notable effect on skin. Overhydrate and you get skin pruning. Moisturizers certainly have a notable effect. But these things have been considered cosmetic effects.
Companies get in trouble when they go beyond simple moisturizing / appearance change claims. If they say that their formula stimulates collagen or lightens skin or removes wrinkles (instead of just improving the appearance) then they’ll get in trouble from the FDA.
The reality is that the vast majority of products have not been tested to determine the mechanism by which they work. Most effects are not different than simple moisturizing. And cosmetic companies are not inclined to do this kind of research. They don’t want to know if their products work like a drug.
Sure, there are tests done in the lab to give marketers some grist for their advertising stories. Raw material suppliers are happy to declare how ingredients work and explain biochemical mechanisms based on theory but the science of anti-aging products is soft and underfunded.
Aging is a complicated subject & I’m skeptical of most any research I see.
-
The number of extracts listed is no indication of how much is in there. You can ask a supplier to give you a blend of X number of extracts. You put a drop in your formula and you get to list all the ingredients.
But this isn’t a proper INCI ingredient list so you can’t really tell anything about the formula from it. They could simply just list names of ingredients they want and not even add it.
Companies with ingredient lists like this really annoy me.
-
@greensara - The L’Oreal copywriters and lawyers are clever when it comes to advertising claims.
“enriched with fortified Pro-Retinol A®, penetrates the skin’s surface to effectively fight wrinkles and reduce the appearance of neck creases.”
- enriched with - That just means they added some amount of the ingredient to the formula. It could be 1% or it could be 0.0001%.
- penetrates the skin’s surface - So does every other skin lotion that you can ‘rub in’ to your skin. This doesn’t mean it penetrates down to the dermis or into the body.
- effectively fights wrinkles - Standard skin moisturizers do this.
- reduce the appearance of - Yes, just like every other moisturizer.
There is nothing particularly ‘druggie’ about the claims they are making.
If there is a notable effect that is the result of an ingredient interacting with the skin metabolism, then the products would technically be drugs. If you make any claims to that effect then they are drugs. If you stick to the claims that L’Oreal makes above, then they are still cosmetics.
-
I’ll be looking for trends in raw materials.
-
This product isn’t NOP certified. At least there is nothing on their bottle or on their website claiming it.
They don’t follow proper INCI labeling so there is pretty much nothing you can learn from the ingredient list. The product could be preserved with parabens or formaldehyde donors and they just opted to leave it out. It could have some standard emulsifier and they just didn’t list it.
If a company isn’t following the rules, I just assume the ingredient list is completely fake.
-
Many of these people could help.
https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/137/need-formulating-services-here-are-some-contacts#latest -
@doctorbrenda - I think you have misunderstood what some of the responders were saying. Text is not always the best way to explain things.
For example, I didn’t read @johnb as suggesting your system had 3 ingredients. I took it to mean that your question would only have a simple answer if your system contained only 3 ingredients. But clearly your system contains more than that so there isn’t a simple formula / answer that would apply.
My answer to your original question is this, there is no simple solution to matching emulsifier concentration to oil (lipid) phase. All systems are different and the only way you can figure out how much emulsifier you should use is to conduct an experiment. So, here’s a reasonable protocol.
1. Start with some ratio of emulsifier to oil phase. This is a guess based on experience, supplier information and anything else. 1:10, 1:4, 1:5, 50:50. Whatever you want.
2. Make the batch and see how it comes out. Did it make an emulsion? Did the system look and feel they way you wanted?
3. If it doesn’t look & feel the way you want, try a different ratio. Increase or decrease the emulsifier, increase or decrease the level of oil phase & remake your batches.
4. If it looks good, then put up a stability test and see if it remains stable. If it’s stable after 3 months, congratulations your formula is stable.
5. Repeat this process until you’ve got your answer.
Note: if you change the level of anything else in your system or add a new ingredient, you will likely have to adjust your emulsifier / oil phase ratio.
Of course, this protocol also assumes you are using the same level of mixing and heating. Those factors can influence how much emulsifier you need too.
The bottom line is that the answer to your question is complicated.
-
Many people are concerned about alcohol too.
But to the “preservative free” claim. This claim makes more sense in the EU as they have a specific list of approved preservatives. If you don’t use any of those ingredients then by regulatory definition, you are preservative free.
I would consider it false if you made the claim in the US but in the EU, it seems to work with the regulatory system. Except of course, that rule that disallows any “free from” claims.
-
That’s really not enough information to provide you much direction. We would need the relative percentages and anything else that is in your formula.
But without any information I’d say you can improve things by using a lower molecular weight dimethicone or increasing the level of cyclomethicone.
-
Sounds like you should make a leave-in silicone spray using dimethicone or amodimethicone. Do you have a benchmark product you want to emulate or perform better than?
-
Very interesting changes.
-
Yes. I would say about 35 - 40% of the people who go through the class have no science background. It helps to have a science background but it’s not required.
-
@nabz87 - Your clarification of what you mean by chemical free doesn’t really clarify things because terms like “minimum chemicals” and least “chemical modifications” and in their “natural state” doesn’t really reflect what I think you mean.
Chemicals in their “natural state” are usually contaminated and have to be purified. In fact, an ingredient like Zinc Oxide can be found in nature but only the synthetic version is allowed for use in manufacture. That’s because the natural version is contaminated with heavy metals.
And the term “harmful chemicals” doesn’t clarify things much. All chemicals are harmful (enough water can kill you). And many chemicals that have a reputation of being harmful (e.g. propylene glycol) are not more harmful than water.
You have to be more specific about what you mean. I suspect you mean is “chemicals that consumers perceive as harmful”. Without knowing what your consumers believe, it would be difficult to give you any advice on what ingredients to use.
What specific chemicals do your consumers want to avoid?
-
Interestingly, this company has been making a big deal about selling live bacteria. This is in the US though where we’re a bit less restrictive than in the EU.
-
I suspect someone will report them for selling a misbranded drug.
-
I don’t know. It’s published by Marcell Dekker, perhaps they can tell you.
-
Following…
We used to work with this company for claims testing.
-
I was an author in a chapter for the first edition of this book. There are significant differences between this one and others.
There are no set rules on linking like this. I think it is ok for you to explain where you found the copy of the book, but I don’t think linking to it is appropriate.
-
The 4 level classification system above sounds like something made up by the marketing department.
-
Welcome to the program! Feel free to post questions and participate in discussions here.