OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
Sorry, I am not familiar with the product. It looks pretty interesting though.
For interest here is the Turbiscan website. -
Your question is a bit vague. But you can use this as a source of finding starting cosmetic formulas.
-
Yes, that range should be fine.
-
It really depends on what is in your formula. But petrolatum and mineral oil can also help aid with moisturization.
-
@Ruben - I guess I see hybridization as genetic modification, just a slower, less efficient version of it. All of the agricultural crops we use have been genetically modified from what exists in nature.
-
Right when you have SLES in a formula you use the % active as deciding where it should be listed in your LOI. You do not use the % of the ingredient as used. You also have to include the water in your %. So a 25% SLES solution used in a formula at 10% would list
WATERSODIUM LAURYL SULFATEThe SLES activity is 4% not 10% so that is what you use when creating your LOI. -
To their credit Whole Foods has taken some criticisms of their list to heart as they’ve made some changes recently. But there are still things about the list that make you scratch your head.
-
It’s probably a good thing. It would be better however if there were actual scientists involved in picking the standards.
The author who wrote the blog posts about the Whole Foods standard spoke with someone at Whole Foods about the standards and the many of the inconsistencies on the list. It turns out there were no scientists involved in creating the list. They made the list based on the ingredient list of products already on the market. This is the same problem I have with the Skin Deep database. Toxicologists were not involved in coming up with the ratings.I would much rather see a scientific organization put out some standards.Additionally, I think some of their restrictions actually lead to potentially less safe products. How many companies are out there who have made underpreserved products because they aren’t allowed to use traditional ones that have been proven to work? This well-known natural company had to recall children’s sunscreen because of bacterial contamination (http://www.badgerbalm.com/t-recalls.aspx) That’s a direct result of following standards like these. -
@Ruben - this was the marketing at an industry trade show and not for consumers. I doubt the FTC has time or money to pursue any action. I’m not even sure if their rules apply.
-
Yes, at 1% or less they can be listed however you like.
There are lots of companies who don’t follow the rules and get away with it. Especially in the US where you don’t need pre-market approval to sell a cosmetic. For a small company there is very little risk to ignoring FDA rules. They probably won’t get caught. But that doesn’t make it right.Incidentally, this fact about small companies is why I recommend to friends and family that they stick with products produced by big companies. There is just less of a chance of getting a low quality, less safe product. (e.g. Badger Sunscreen for kids that is improperly preserved due to an asinine stance on parabens) -
Ecocert is as good a guide as any (although isn’t every agricultural crop technically a GMO?). You won’t go wrong following this standard but if it means nothing to your consumer it doesn’t help you much. If your consumer is perfectly happy with a greenwashed product, I see no reason not to sell it to them.
Also, as far as I know Ecocert doesn’t actually sell any cosmetic products and few if any cosmetic consumers have ever heard of Ecocert.
-
You are supposed to list the ingredients in order of concentration so you aren’t supposed to list ingredients as suggested here…
INCI: Vegetable Glycerin (and) Purified Water (and) Camelia Sinensis (Green Tea) Leaf Extract (and) Gluconolactone (and) Sodium BenzoateThe proper way to list this is in order of concentration and in order of concentration in your formula. So, if you have water somewhere else in your formula you would add the mass of this water to the mass of all the water and list it in that order.
If you are selling cosmetics you must use the INCI nomenclature for naming ingredients. Unless there is no name for the plant extract you shouldn’t use the FDA Substance Registration System.@pma - you should list water first. You know that the ingredient contains water so it should be listed. You raise a good point but that’s just not how it is done in the cosmetic industry (and for good reason).The LOI is not supposed to be used for marketing purposes. -
I think the definition of natural depends on your consumer. It is up to you as a company to tell people what is natural and if they believe you or not, it is (or is not) natural.
What could be more natural than oil? It comes right out of the ground! I guess it’s probably animal derived but Coal is natural and plant based. Any compound create from coal should be able to be called plant-derived.If your consumer accepts that Mineral Oil is all natural you can feel free to call it that. -
Sadly, the Whole Foods acceptable/unacceptable list is not put together by anyone with scientific knowledge.
See this series of posts about it. -
@Bati - you make an excellent point. It could be this ingredient was just the best of the ingredients submitted. This is more of reflection of the dearth of true innovation in the cosmetic industry. I can’t remember the last time any real innovative ingredient was launched. Maybe the Rhodia Structured surfactant?
-
There’s not really some magical ingredient that works in all cases. It just depends on your formula. Propylene Glycol is an option for many things. But also formulating products such that they are stable even after being frozen then thawed.
-
Yeah, this is all puffery. You see this kind of marketing everywhere. On some level it is up to the consumer (or buyer) to be skeptical.
-
That’s an interesting approach. I doubt this product would foam too well though. Is this some kind of 3-in-1 with conditioning and styling in addition to cleansing? This is not a product that would be sold in the US as the word ‘tallow’ isn’t found too often anymore.
-
@Bmupenda - My first suggestion is that you get a copy of our free report. http://startacosmeticline.com
The first place to start is to come up with your point of differentiation. Answer to yourself, why would someone buy your product instead of something that is already on the market?And if you believe that there is nothing else on the market like it, you haven’t done enough research. If there really isn’t anything else like your idea on the market that only suggests that the idea is not a viable one. -
@bobzchemist - It’s a good idea. I’ve created a category called ‘Resources’ which should have stuff like this. It’s hard to know what references people are going to want.
-
@Bri - I don’t think anyone was saying all shampoos are alike. They aren’t. But if you are using a conditioner you wipe out any effect on hair from the shampoo.
-
Agreed. Wash off products and coconut oil shouldn’t be a problem.
-
It’s a small but growing market segment. There hasn’t been much new in the shampoo market so it makes sense that something different like this could be appealing to marketers and some consumers.
-
Perhaps it’s different outside the US but the mid-priced mass market shampoos are really the best performers in all measurable areas. I’ve done dozens of blinded consumer tests and consistently found that the best & most preferred shampoos was Pantene. Fructis & Tresemme also scored very high. What didn’t score high were expensive salon brands.
SLS is not the problem.In my research I’ve found that If you are using a conditioner the shampoo you use does not really matter. You can test it yourself. Get 5 different shampoos, 5 hair tresses and one conditioner. Wash each tress with one type of shampoo and use the same conditioner on each tress. If you do it on a blinded basis you will be hard pressed to see any differences.Co washing is just a marketing gimmick “discovered” by people who forgot to wash their hair and embraced by stylists who thought anything with the word sulfate in it was awful. Sulfates are not awful & you can formulate perfectly fine products using sulfates.Interestingly, when this co-wash trend started about 10 years ago the go to product was VO5 Conditioner, a simple Cetrimonium Chloride based conditioner with no silicones. -
Maybe a polysorbate? 20 or 80