OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
Generally, the Ethanol level is not affected by pH
-
By “inferior technology” I mean this…
If we did a blind test experiment on a group of 100 people. We gave them two shampoos to test; one based on soapwort and one based on Sodium Lauryl Sulfate. The Sodium Lauryl Sulfate would be overwhelmingly preferred vs the soapwort one.
That is not to say everyone would pick SLS over soapwort but the vast majority of people would. So, while your experience is different, it does not represent what most consumers would experience.
And as far as lye (sodium hydroxide) goes it is neither bad nor good. For a standard shampoo sodium hydroxide is added in order to increase the pH of the system (it is an alkaline material). For a soap-based shampoo it is used to chemically convert fatty acids into soap surfactants. In the process the lye gets “used up” and no longer exists in the formula.
-
What characteristics of the conditioner do you want to improve?
-
See this post about raw material expiration. It answers your question.
-
I would echo Mark’s sentiments. The only part I’d disagree with a bit is the suggestion of Formula Botanica. I have nothing against them and they produce nicely marketed courses. If you’re looking for a hobby, they may be helpful. But based on their published content and basic philosophy, they are naive about working in industry and would not be helpful for someone who wants a job in industry. Our courses give a more realistic view of how an industry job would work and the IPCS stuff is good. Another excellent option is the distance learning program from SCS.
-
It depends on the system. Yes, you can do this. We used to do this when making a hair conditioner that required heating and cooling. Production times went from 6 hours a batch to 2.5 hours a batch.
But we also conducted numerous stability tests to ensure that the production change resulted in a stable product that behaved the same as the standard procedure.
-
@Paprik - what convinces you that Sodium PCA is superior to glycerine as a humectant?
-
Hello Graillotion - you can find past Q&A’s at the following links.
Andreas - https://vimeo.com/660727321
Phil - https://vimeo.com/493481372
Valerie - https://vimeo.com/533340522
Mark (1st time) - https://vimeo.com/581168649/301fee65cc
Belinda - https://vimeo.com/610742836
Dennis - https://vimeo.com/569497013At some point these might go behind a pay wall as a bonus for students of our courses but not any time soon.
-
You have a science degree and have worked as a cosmetic chemist for a few years. I think you qualify as a cosmetic chemist. Although, if you don’t really have any industry experience (e.g. you’ve learned formulating on your own and haven’t worked for a company) I could see how you might hesitate to say you’re a chemist.
I’ll say you are much more qualified to call yourself that than many people online who get a “diploma” from some online program and take to calling themselves a cosmetic chemist.
Ultimately, you can call yourself whatever you like as there is no official requirements (in the US) to be able to call yourself a cosmetic chemist. The question really is can you convince other people that you are what you claim to be?
-
I have heard of significant problems getting silicones.
-
There’s no real specific rule, just industry standards, or at least what the big companies do.
Roughly, sample stored at 45C for 12 weeks = 1 year stability at Room Temperature.
This is vaguely based on the Arrhenius equation which predicts chemical reaction rates of systems. Reaction rates double every 10C.
So if RT = 25C and lasts 1 year
the same system at 35 C would last 6 months
the same system at 45 C would last 3 monthsOf course, this is just a rough guideline because you don’t really know what would be causing something to become unstable. If it is microbial contamination then these numbers wouldn’t really hold up. But it’s a rough guess.
I think the guideline for longer stability is 1 year at 45C = 3 year RT. However, big companies don’t expect cosmetic products to last more than 1 year.
See this post on cosmetic stability testing.
-
Exactly. When someone applies a body wash whatever pH it started with is going to get very close to pH 7 or whatever the pH of the water you’re using is. For in-use, pH 4.7 or 5.5 is irrelevant. (although it could matter for your preservative system).
It’s also nice to remind people that skin being a solid does not actually have a pH.
-
I’ll start off that if this is just a hobby and an interesting project for you then that’s fine. If you want a shampoo that actually works in the way you’re used to commercial shampoos working…just keep buying commercial shampoos. You will NEVER make something that works as good using the chemicals you’ve described. It can’t be done.
Ok. First step, read this article about how shampoos are made.
You are already using a surfactant. Soapwort is a surfactant. It’s not a particularly good one which is why your product is difficult to use. Yucca also has some surfactant properties. But you have to understand, these are inferior technologies.
As for thickening, maybe one of these natural thickeners might work. But again, at best what you will end up with a thicker shampoo that doesn’t leave your hair feeling good after using it.
The “natural” liquid shampoo that you describe is using better surfactants than soapwort & yucca. However, what you describe sounds like soap. Saponified fatty acids is also old technology. Washing your hair with soap used to be what people did before the invention of superior synthetic detergents. There is a reason they were invented and that is because they didn’t leave the hair feeling dry or being tangled.
So, if you want to keep down this path just know that you are never going to make something that works particularly good, certainly not as good as modern shampoos. As an analogy, what you are attempting to do is make something that works like a light bulb using ingredients to make a candle.
That doesn’t work.
-
@Paprik - great question! But it’s difficult to answer because you haven’t specified what benefits you are asking about and how they are measured.
The company claims “soothing of dry, irritated areas”. What exactly does that mean? How would you measure it?
I can think of 2 ways. One is you have consumers try a product and then have them rate their feelings of how “soothing” the product was. You show statistically significant responses on a 5 or 10 point scale and viola…you’ve supported your claim. But to me, this is just BS claims support. It’s not science and doesn’t prove anything. It’s trivially easy to create a study the convinces consumers that some technology shows some benefit. Consumer are easily swayed by story, texture, fragrance, color, etc. I discount consumer research almost completely. It’s valuable for determining if a product or story is going to be something people want to buy, but as far as proving something scientifically, it’s garbage.
The second way is to come up with some measurement that acts as a proxy for the characteristic of “soothing”. For this cosmetic companies have traditionally chosen Trans Epidermal Water Loss (TEWL). The idea is that if you prevent water from evaporating out of the skin, you relieve or sooth dry skin.
I’m going to ignore the difficulty of measuring TEWL consistently. (I know it’s incredibly difficult to get repeatable studies.) But let’s just pretend that it isn’t. Let’s say the corneometer or TEWLmeter is 100% accurate in measuring what it measures.
Here’s a study that shows 5% Panthenol reduces TEWL by about 50% or so. Yeah! Compared to a crappy control, a ton of panthenol can reduce TEWL.
Ok, but Petrolatum reportedly reduces TEWL by 99%.
So, while panthenol may have some effect, why would anyone use an inferior technology that costs more?
I’ll tell you why. It’s a much more marketable story than telling people to just slap some vaseline on your skin.
Perhaps I’m too cynical.
-
1. Distilled water is fine.
2. Probably don’t need one if you can pass a preservative efficacy test
3. The trick is test it and see. No shortcuts.
4. For fragrance a solubilizer like Polysorbate 20 or Oleth 40 can help. Yes, heat helps dissolve surfactants.
5. Maybe a cationic polymer like Polyquaternium 7 or 10 or Guar. But it depends on what performance characteristic you’re trying to improve. -
Yes, it comes down to the way you word your claims and what you’re implying what the product does. Anything that affects the body biochemistry is a drug in the US. If you focus on making scars look better (not healing them) then you may be able to make it as a cosmetic. But if you are actually offering a drug active, even rewording your claims may not be enough.
-
@jemolian - On the US version they claim 1% Dimethicone. This means that there is no way it contains an active level of 5% Panthenol because it comes listed after Dimethicone. Ingredients above 1% have to be listed in order of concentration. Anything higher than 1% would be listed before Dimethicone. So, unless they’ve made a substantial labeling error there is not 5% panthenol in the formula.
-
Peg 12 Dimethicone is water soluble. Dimethicone is not
-
There is no requirement that you must use an amphoteric in a shampoo.
In fact, you could make a shampoo using just water, SLS and a preservative.Of course, the question is - what do your consumers want?
Generally, it’s good to use a secondary surfactant in a shampoo. It helps with lowering irritation of the main cleanser but it can also impact foam & aid in thickening. However, there is no requirement to have one.
-
@Graillotion, @jemolian - It’s highly unlikely that based on the ingredient listing that this formula contains 5% panthenol. More likely it contains 0.5% and someone made a printing error, or they put in 5% of a 1% solution.
The marketing on their website is so annoying to me. They play up the fake benefits of the “key ingredients” and completely ignore the ingredient that actually makes the product work. (dimethicone).
And even at 5%, you will see no benefits from panthenol in a formula that also has dimethicone, shea butter, glycerin, and hydrogenated polyisobutene. It will just get swamped by the effects of those other ingredients.
-
I’m not sure I understand your question. Why do you want to use a buffer system in your formula? For Geogard Ultra Gluconolactone (and) Sodium Benzoate) to work you just need to adjust the pH below pH 5.0. No buffering required. But as @PhilGeis said, it’s not a very robust preservative system.
Sodium Citrate has 3 acid groups on it while sodium lactate has 1 so there will be differences.
Finally, it’s pretty rare that anyone could predict stability of a system without making it and testing it. Unless there is some obvious ingredient conflicts, the only way to know is to make the system and test it.
-
The answer is actually right on the front of the bottle: Dimethicone
It is an approved, OTC drug active for this very purpose.
No, panthenol is not doing anything. It’s just a marketing ingredient.
Similarly, Azelaic acid is not an approved drug active so it won’t work as well.Colloidal oatmeal is approved as a drug active for this purpose, but as you’ve discovered, some drug actives work better than others. It’s difficult to beat the effectiveness of silicones.
Now, why you and r/SkincareAddiction like this product so much…well there are a variety of reasons. First, the Dimethicone of course. It actually has been proven via the most rigorous medical testing that we have (independent, placebo controlled, double-blind study). It is not a sexy or trendy ingredient, companies can’t call it out in marketing, and it doesn’t inspire consumers. I mean look at their website, they bury the key working ingredient as the fourth one on the list of key ingredients. Dimethicone gets no respect.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, LaRoche Posse does an excellent job of branding and marketing. They have created a product that people like to use. They like the fragrance, the feel and the results. They like the packaging and the marketing story. Someone plops down $15 for 2 ounces of product they’re much more inclined to believe it’s working than if they buy Thera Skin Protectant which only costs $5 for 4 ounces.
I’d say less than half of the performance of a product can be attributed to the formula, except for the fragrance. You can make the best performing product in the world but if doesn’t smell good, it won’t be successful.
As a consumer you can’t help be affected by a product’s marketing. But if you took away the branding, packaging and pricing, you would evaluate the performance of products in a much different way.
Now, I’m not here to dissuade you from using the product. It works for you and you should keep using it. But there are probably less expensive products that would also work as well on a blinded basis.
-
Welcome to the forum! Thanks for your question.
You are legally required to verify that the products you are selling are safe. This means before selling something you have to do proper testing. I’m afraid watching a product for 3-4 months is not adequate testing. There is a specific Preservative Efficacy Test that you need to run before you sell your product.
See this post about microbial testing.
-
@GeorgeBenson - Personally, I think it is disingenuous of a company to list Aloe Vera Juice as the number one ingredient even if they are genuinely using it as the solvent. This is because it is 0.5% solids which means it is essentially 99%+ water. For example this aloe specification. While that may not technically be against the rules (I checked with someone I know on the INCI committee and they said it was ok to do that), it smacks of trickery to me.
But this is also not what most people who list aloe first are doing. It is my contention that most people are taking powdered aloe which is much less expensive, then diluting water with 0.5% solids and calling it Aloe Vera Juice. This practice is actually breaking the rules and not allowed by INCI.
There is also no way to tell a difference if a company is using actual Aloe Vera Juice (which is about $1 a pound in bulk) or taking powdered aloe & blending it with water at 0.5% (which would cost about 15 cents a pound).
So, when I see companies doing that, I assume it is done out of ignorance or malice. I’ll add that generally big companies aren’t doing this.
I abhor ingredient label trickery.
-
Polymers like hydroxymethycellulose or Guar. Then depending on what surfactants you are using, some surfactants can improve foam. It might help if you listed your ingredients