OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
You’ll need to list the ingredients in the shampoo formula to get any helpful response. But Salt does not dry the hair.
-
@pma - yes, that’s a good book. The electronics industry has certainly innovated in recent years. But the technology in the cosmetic industry is mature and there have only been tiny, incremental improvements.
Since I’ve been in the cosmetic industry (1992) I can’t even identify a significant new technology. And the ban on animal testing makes real innovation even more difficult.
-
To get a helpful answer you would need to list all your ingredients. Yes, you could use coconut milk powder but you’ll need a robust preservation system.
-
@pma - interesting description of different emulsification strategies.
But I’m left wondering. Let’s assume the technology is superior in some lab-measurable way.
If it has been on the market since 2005, why hasn’t it taken over in the marketplace?
You could say it might be related to patents. But if that were the case, why haven’t Shiseido products taken over the marketplace because consumers love the performance so much?
I suspect the reason it hasn’t taken over the marketplace is because it provides little consumer noticeable benefit over traditional oil in water emulsions.
-
You really have two options.
1. Lower your expectations. Don’t expect inferior ingredients to give you superior effects. Find the best silicone-free product on the market and use that as your performance benchmark. Don’t look for the best performing product and expect you can match it with silicone alternatives. The industry has used silicones because they work the best. They are effective, long lasting, and nothing works better.
You should not think of alternatives as things that you can swap out one for the other and get equal results. Think of it more in terms of vehicles.
Say you want to go from Chicago to Los Angeles. You can take an airplane or an alternative vehicle like a bicycle. Both will get you there. Silicones are the airplane. The silicone alternatives are the bicycle. You should never expect the same performance from alternatives.
2. Use silicones.
If performance is important to you, option 2 is the only choice that makes sense. If you have reasons for avoiding silicones, option 1 is your best bet.
-
@Abdullah - “what was that 1% SLES adding to 10% SLS formula? “
It helped change the characteristics of the foam - tighter, more stable bubbles.
-
They most likely achieve it by misunderstanding how extracts are made or misunderstanding proper INCI labeling rules.
Their “80% Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract” is most likely a 1% solids extract. The solids comes from the plant. This is how most extracts are made in the cosmetic industry. The other 99% is probably water in this case.
So, they buy their extract. Then they use 80% of that ingredient in the formula. They mistakenly label it first making it seem like the formula is made up of 80% tea. Well, only 1% of the ingredient is actually part of the plant, the rest is water. So even if they do use 80% of the extract, the formula is really only 0.8% plant material.
What exactly do you mean by this?
“I’m looking to use between 70%-80% of green tea extract.“If you want to use 80% of the extract the same way that company did, you can just do that. You shouldn’t make the labeling mistake that they did, but you can put it in the formula at 80%. I think it’s a waste of money but it can be done.
If you want to have 80% plant material in there well, you can’t do that. At least not in any cosmetically appealing way.
-
I also wonder whether these are difficult to produce on a large scale. Mixing stuff in a beaker isn’t always the same as mixing it in a 2000 gallon tank.
-
Of course, it’s hard to know how the graphed values translate to real life. Would a consumer actually notice a difference?
-
@Leo - I don’t know the answer but here is my guess.
All this PG / eyelash growth stuff started with Jan Marini back around 2006/7. That brand was using the PG active ingredient that is being used in Latisse now. Jan Marini was doing it off-label and illegally and ultimately their products got confiscated by the FDA. But the Prostaglandin story was now out there.
Revitalash started after they saw the success the Jan Marini was having. Originally they talked about PG analogs and built a recognizable brand. When Jan Marini got into legal trouble Revitalash was quick to rework their claims & dumb down their product. I’m not sure if it ever worked as they implied but enough people were convinced that it worked so they kept selling it.
The success of these early brands spawned the dozens of other copycats and that’s where we are now.
All of them claiming the PG analogs grow eyelashes without any proof that it works.
I personally believe it is all just unproven hogwash. Others might disagree. But I will add that no one wants to think that they have been duped. Consumers who just spent a lot of money on a product are much more inclined to say that it works than to say it doesn’t. I wouldn’t take the reports of consumers on whether a product helps hair growth or not as anything other than anecdotal evidence.
-
@Svemirska_baklava - Phenoxyethanol already has been tagged as a bad ingredient in some circles. https://www.orgaid.com/blogs/news/82910919-top-8-harmful-chemicals-to-avoid-in-skin-care
-
You can try to put your specific search in “quotes”.
But in truth, the search function on this software isn’t great.
I just go to Google and put chemistscornerl.com/cosmeticsciencetalk - and then whatever I want to search.We’re upgrading the software so hopefully that improves the search.
-
@Pattsi - “In chemists point of view, what makes a marketer a good marketer?“
This is a difficult question. Some characteristics or behaviors that a good marketer would have.1. They have unique ideas and don’t just chase after “hot” ideas of the moment. CBD, Niacinamide, Bakochiol, Hyaluronic acid…it’s all been done. Yawn. Clean beauty…right everyone wants to be clean. Cruelty free…of course, what brand wants to be cruel? These ideas have been done. They aren’t unique.
2. They are aware of what is already on the market. They know that ideas like all natural cosmetics already exist, so they don’t waste a formulator’s time trying to convince them it’s never been introduced before. There are rarely any really new ideas.
3. They have a sense of what performance is possible (from a cosmetic). They don’t ask for “chemical free” products or products that perform like drugs. Yes, everyone wants to sell hair products that grow hair. If something like that existed, the giant corporations would already be selling it!
4. They realize that just because one company makes a claim doesn’t mean that your company can make the same claim. Small companies make unsubstantiated claims all the time. That doesn’t mean they are doing it legally.
5. They know who their customer is, what they want, and how to communicate with them. You can’t sell to everyone. Only through knowing your consumer can you really make a product that appeals to them.
6. They must believe their own BS. This is probably the most important factor and one of the reasons there aren’t more successful brands created by chemists/scientists. A marketers has to really believe in what they are selling. A chemist wants to believe in what is true. Often, the truth is an impediment to marketing a product.
In truth, I’ve not met very many really great marketers in my career. That is mostly because people who are really great marketers end up starting their own companies. I think it is difficult to get 100% behind a product when you are a paid employee for a company. When you own the company and live or die based on it being successful, then you be come a great marketer.
-
@Svemirska_baklava - I’d suggest you start a new discussion for this question. But the preservative system you use depends on the other ingredients in your formulas. In general, parabens are the best performing preservatives for creams & lotions. Geogard is not a robust preservative in my opinion.
There is no good natural preservative. That’s why companies use synthetic ones. In fact, most of the “natural” ones are actually synthetic too.
-
Thank you for the kind words and for all the people who keep this forum going!
-
Depends on your formula but typically this is solved by adding a silicone like dimethicone
-
Have you tried making Elmers Glue slime?
https://www.elmers.com/on/demandware.store/Sites-elmers-Site/default/Content-Show?cid=glitter-slime-recipe -
This was talked about a little while back but the info still applies.
https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/comment/49092I think the marketing is most important for getting someone to try the product. The product is more important for getting someone to repurchase the product. In my opinion, as long as you provide a pleasant experience with your product (fragrance, feel, packaging) the rest of the performance doesn’t matter as much. Consumers are just not that good at telling differences in performance.
To separate out a new brand? I don’t know. There isn’t one answer. You need a compelling story. You need to identify consumers who will want to buy your stuff. And you need a way to communicate to those consumers. Whether an influencer will help or you need a derm, yes and no. Brands have been successful with those things and they have been successful without them.
Social media is nice but nothing beats a good email list.
I will add that too many people spend time learning how to make products (formulate) when they should be learning how to market and sell their products. It’s much easier to hire a good chemist than a good marketer.
-
@Leo - “It is also my understanding that this natural product has prostaglandins that can cause eyelash growth?“
Lots of people claim they have “natural versions” of synthetic things proven work (prostaglandins, retinol, botox, etc.). That doesn’t mean these “natural versions” actually work. In fact, usually it means it doesn’t work but the marketer of the ingredient wants to convince you it does without having to conduct a proper study.
Stay skeptical. Require proof before you accept the claims of marketers.
-
Hmm, when I hover over the back picture at Target.com it zooms in and is readable to me.
For Ulta and Sephora the text of what is written on the back of their bottles is typically listed in the “About the Product” section. This has all the claims you would want to know about the product.
-
@ketchito - no, they are not always effective during the full life of the product. It IS suggested that you check preservative efficacy during stability tests to ensure that it remains effective over the life of the product. In our stability testing protocol we did microbial checks at 12 weeks for RT and 45C samples.
-
@DaveStone - What @vitalys says. Skin is never really “dry”
-
Lots of them.
Target.com
Ulta.com
Sephora.com
etc… -
Eyelash growth products are a drug. The only approved ingredient shown to actually work is produced by Latisse.
-
Relaxers affect the hair fiber, not the follicle. You can’t permanently change the follicle with any topical product that I know of