OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
@mhart123 - That’s a great idea!
-
Despite it’s obvious flaws, the regulatory in the US doesn’t seem to lead to significantly more harm than the more controlled system in the EU.
Our system also makes it much more risky for big companies to cut corners than small companies. If a large multi-national puts a product out on the market that harms people, they will get sued to the tune of millions of dollars.
If a small company does the same, they just go bankrupt, shutter the business and start a new one. This encourages more risky behavior.
But I agree with @MarkBroussard that for the most part, small companies will be kept honest because they work with contract manufacturers who are generally going to force compliance.
-
@DAS - lol. And I thought I was cynical about marketing.
-
I just thought of one. How about…
“Sunscreens are causing significant damage to coral reefs” (Yea or Nay)
-
@”Dr Catherine Pratt” - Sure.
Typically, a debate follows a format where a statement is made and one side argues the affirmative while the other argues the negative.
So for the Clean Beauty debate we started with the following statement:
Clean Beauty results in safer products for consumers.
Then we had one person argue that this was true someone else argued it was false. The audience at the end voted on who “won” the debate.
For your sunscreen testing the debate might be:
Current sunscreen testing is adequate for predicting product effectiveness.
Then we would have someone argue that it is not, and why. And someone argue that it actually is adequate.
@EVchem - I like that. I think we may be able to get a debate on Sulfates and whether sulfate free is better.
-
@PhilGeis - yes, I don’t know the regulations exactly but I recall that styling gels were included and when I was formulating, there was movement on including shampoos, moisturizers, and other personal care products. Not sure where the regulations stand at the moment.
-
@”Dr Catherine Pratt” - Interesting topic but what are the debate sides?
-
For cosmetics we kept retention samples for 1 year after manufacture.
-
You need at least 20% ethanol to be a preservative. But a significant problem is that ethanol is classified as a VOC which generally puts it in violation of environmental regulations if you use it at that level in something like a lotion.
-
Since Sodium PCA is a salt, I would guess that it can affect the viscosity. You could probably do a salt curve analysis using the ingredient to plot how it affects viscosity in your system.
PS: Incidentally, I’d say glycerin is not of much use in the shampoo and neither is the water soluble Sodium PCA. They both just wash down the drain when the shampoo is rinsed out.
-
@Graillotion - I will look into that. I thought it opened up a new window but I guess sometimes it doesn’t.
-
@Learntounlearn - Thanks for the heads up. Yes, we are making some updates on the website and there is a link issue that is redirecting to that page. Bottom line…we’re working on getting that fixed.
If only we were a big company. They’d have dozens of people working on the problem
-
Yes, in the Search box at the top right column.
-
@Aziz - thanks for that perspective. I do agree that having a sincere, high quality individual is important for producing safe & effective products. And certainly small companies can have those as can big companies.
But I also believe that the damage caused by one bad actor can be better minimized in a big company vs a small company. This is why it’s a probability thing with me. When making recommendations to consumers, unless I know the people behind a small company, I’d recommend the big guys.
-
And 1% Panthenol is not going to do much in the formula either (except increase the cost of goods)
-
No. You will need a more robust preservative system.
-
@mikethair - I understand this position and agree that it is nice to be able to communicate with who makes the product. It’s just very easy for an unscrupulous individual to start a beauty product line, cut corners, and produce something that might harm consumers.
I have no great love for the big guys. But when it comes to safety, I think they are the better bet for consumers.
-
No, propylene glycol is not considered an emulsifier. It’s a humectant and also used as a solvent.
-
Storm said:Also, how long after manufacture did you notice viscosity drop?
I would say 2 weeks.
-
See this list of cosmetic science programs around the world.
-
@raveena - Good question. I can only guess why silicones got a bad rap but I think some of the following factors are part of it…
1. Silicones work by depositing on the hair surface. Theoretically, this means they can build up. In practice however, this doesn’t happen to a significant extent.
2. Big companies use silicones in mass market products to get good results (E.g. Pantene, Tresemme, Fructis, etc.)
3. Stylists want people to buy products from them rather than things you can get for less money in the stores.
4. Silicones aren’t seen as “natural”
Add all those factoids together and you get the hate for silicones.
Yes, there are silicone alternatives on the market. The reality is that in practice they don’t work nearly as well as silicones. They just don’t. See the analogy I used in this discussion thread. https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/comment/54157#Comment_54157
-
Maybe. You just have to test it.
-
If you’ve achieved what you wanted, I don’t think you need to make any more changes. Unless you want the formula to be less expensive.
-
@Paprik - I agree. There is no point in including Cetrimonium Chloride, BTMS and behentrimonium chloride. They will all just compete with each other and most will wash down the drain.
-
1. Yes they can but it depends on the ingredient level. @ozgirl - is right in the EU you can’t use methylisothiazolinone in leave-on but there is a level allowed in the US.
2. You can thicken with HEC or Xanthan Gum or maybe increasing the level of cetearyl alcohol. It really depends on the rheology you are looking to achieve.
3. Yes, that would be water based.