OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
What @Microformulation said, plus if you pay for a formula, you should have a good level of confidence that it will work, be stable, and is safe to use. At least that is something you should demand from the person you are buying the formula from.
You get no assurances for things you find on the Internet.
-
This is the main problem with using plant extracts. Each of them are made up of dozens of chemicals, any of which can cause allergic reactions.
-
Wow, that’s a lot of ingredients!
Ethylhexylglycerin?
Any of the extracts -
Dreamer77 said:I am pretty sure Oil of Olay doesn’t do that even with a truck of cream unloaded and spread over the face… Please note that the above is a 5 minute result…
I wouldn’t be so sure…
But the reality is that before and after pictures are junk science. They aren’t good proof of anything. In both your pictures and the ones highlighting the Olay product, the lighting is completely different in each picture.
It’s simple to create an illusion of an effect just by using different lighting.
This is why I don’t find before and after pictures compelling.
-
@Dreamer77 - thanks for your comments and insight. I’ll give you a bit more of mine on the subject of actives. Feel free to skip it but your posts have just inspired a little reflection of my own.
I don’t believe there are high end actives that are proven to do anything particularly special. In fact, if these ingredients actually worked as advertised they would be illegal drugs in the US, but let’s ignore that for the moment.
I have been in the cosmetic industry for multiple decades and have seen numerous raw material suppliers bring around all kinds of actives that are supposed to work as well as botox, restart hair growth, magically give you porcelain skin or whatever. And these aren’t cheap ingredients. $15K per KG, sure. If they can get some sucker to pay that, they are doing their job well.
But I also know this, these actives are invariably BS marketing stories. When asked for the science, it’s either not provided or the stuff that is provided isn’t science. It’s pseudoscience designed to look like science but is actually designed to bets market an ingredient. There are innumerable tricks companies can pull to make their “active” ingredient look like it is doing more than a blend of petrolatum, glycerin, and mineral oil.
Science is not about proving what is true. It is about proving what is not true. Only after numerous failed tests to disprove a hypothesis can you say something is true. Selling cosmetics & raw materials however, is about proving what you want to be true as true & ignoring anything that might contradict your proof. This is not science and it is not convincing to people who are interested in what is true.
I’ve read the literature and studies on a vast array of peptides. I don’t find the data or studies convincing. I realize there are scientists who are convinced but most of these people either haven’t taken a critical look at the evidence or they have a bias in wanting it to be true (e.g. trying to sell the ingredient or a formula with said ingredient).
You are convinced that peptides have an effect? Why? (And I’ll address this to anyone else who is also convinced…what evidence am I missing about peptides as active ingredients?)
-
@Dreamer77 - While I do believe it is helpful for marketers to believe their own marketing, formulating chemists respond better to evidence rather than marketing stories.
“High end” actives is just a marketing story told by raw material makers to get formulators to use their ingredients. These ingredient don’t actually provide a consumer noticeable improvement. Although I am always on the lookout for evidence to show my evaluation is wrong so if you have scientifically controlled evidence you find compelling, please let me know.
In fact, I may be so bold to say that you there is no skin cream you can buy that will work better than the relatively cheap Olay Regenerist line. And even in that line of products the “active” ingredients they talk about in their advertising are not the things that actually make the products work.
I’m sure your product works perfectly fine & it’s good you’ve solved your stability problem. But I’m also sure that if you tested your formula in blinded fashion vs Olay, there would be little to no difference.
This is probably not something you would want to do however, as I said at the outset, it is helpful for marketers to believe their own marketing.
-
Sorry, can’t help you. You might consider contacting one of the chemists here directly and hire them to help you solve the problem.
-
I don’t think there would be a difference.
-
@Dreamer77 - what makes you think it’s an oxidation reaction? Color change can be other types of reactions or physical processes. Without your entire list of ingredients it’s difficult to give you any good advice.
-
@Pharma - of course, none of those ingredients are actually found in nature except maybe lecithin. But then again cosmetics are not natural!
-
@Abdullah - No. But the idea is that you temporarily get those benefits because you mostly need them when you are styling the hair. Then over time, the silicone evaporates off your hair so it won’t build up.
-
You have to understand that terms like Night Cream and Day Cream are marketing terms. There is no scientific definition. It’s just defined by what people expect.
Cyclomethicone is added to ingredients to get the benefits of silicone (shine, slickness, smoothness) without the downside of building up on hair. In skin products it can make the product feel lighter than say a dimethicone I suppose but it takes enough time that you might not notice that over time.
I doubt you would see much benefit if you’re already using high end emollients.
-
Typically, humidity doesn’t matter for cosmetic packaging but try to keep it consistent at each temperature.
-
It’s to help you wash it out after the coloring is done.
-
If you want to figure out the amount of water you could do the following.
1. Weight a 100 g sample
2. Put the sample in an oven at about 50C
3. Monitor the mass until it stops getting lower.
4. The difference in mass between 100 and where it stops losing weight is the amount of moisture (water) in the product.You’ll have to guess at the rest.
-
Not surprising.
If you provide ingredient lists it might give us more to comment about.
-
@Abdullah - I don’t know if it is “better” but that does mean the difference is less likely due to chance alone.
Think of it this way. p = 0.05 means if you conducted the same experiment 100 times, 5 of those experimental results are the work of chance alone. If p = 0.01 then only 1 time out of 100 would you expect the result to be due to chance alone.
p = 0.05 = 1 in 20
p = 0.01 = 1 in 100For comparison, when they wanted to verify the existence of the Higgs Boson particle, they required to results to be accurate within p =3×10^-7. That means 1 in 3.5 million.
-
You have 5 surfactants in this system. Why?
Here are my guesses.
1. You have SLES as the main detergent. That’s fine
2. You have SLS to boost the foam a bit. Makes sense since SLES doesn’t foam great.
3. You have Cocamidopropyl Betaine to make foam creamier & affect rheology. Ok?
4. Glucoside? Why?
5. Cocamide DEA? Why? Especially at 4%? yikes!Why is Tea Tree oil in the formula? If your shampoo is working properly, this will get washed away without having an effect. If it is your fragrance well, ok.
Polyquaternium 7 - Why at 3%? That seems a lot higher than you need. 1% should do.
Quarternized panthenol? 1% of this? That’s a waste since it won’t have any effect. Especially won’t have an effect with the presence of Polyquaternium 7!
Extract 6%? A complete waste of money since it doesn’t do anything.
Hydantoin - preservative. Ok that makes sense.
Suggested tweaks - Get down to 3 surfactants. Reduce level of extracts, panthenol & tea tree oil to less than 1%. Reduce level of Polyquat 7 to 1%. Then see what you get.
-
You’re also looking at a company who obviously doesn’t follow the rules of INCI labeling so there may be a preservative in the formula that they just don’t list.
-
It also depends on the company. On the brand I worked on years ago (VO5) we introduced a body wash in which we just took our shampoo, changed color, fragrance, and label and called it body wash. In some cases, there is really no difference.
-
@DCSkincare - you might enjoy this debate too.
https://ifscc.org/videos_and_webinars/a-clean-beauty-debate-is-clean-beauty-real/ -
@amitvedakar - if there is an effect of an active contained in the extract, then it would make more sense to just isolate the active and use that. Using the whole extract just results in a diluted, less effective version of the ingredient.
Often this is how drugs are discovered. They find a plant extract that does something. They isolate what makes it work and then turn that into a drug. The rest of the stuff in the extract is gotten rid of.
-
Parabens and formaldehyde donors of course.
-
It’s a byproduct from the Ethoxylation process. So, unless the manufacturer specifically removes it, there will be some residual 1,4-Dioxane.
-
What happens to the pH over time?