OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
I always found “placental protein” to be a strange ingredient. https://cosmetics.specialchem.com/inci/placental-protein
And how about snail secretion? I wonder do they have workers following the snails and scooping up their slime?
-
It could be the Sodium Benzoate.
-
If you want the most helpful advice, you should list all the ingredients in your formula.
-
@ketchito - Interesting. Yes in the US, EU, Canada & other places that adopt those regulations, ingredient listing is dictated by the rules in the INCI Dictionary.
I did not know in your area they required listing in order but it’s not surprising. We do not have global regulations about cosmetics. In fact, when I started in the industry Canada did not even require ingredient lists.
-
@klangridge - what evidence convinces you that ethanol is drying to skin?
-
Honestly, you don’t have any ingredients in your formula that would make this a “great” conditioner. Panthenol, silk amino acids and honeyquat are just claims ingredients.
If you want to make a great conditioner you’ll need a cationic surfactant, cationic polymer and a silicone.
-
You’ll need to provide more information (e.g. your formula) to get any useful answer.
-
I’ve never been able to demonstrate a difference. It’s one of those things you have to test yourself in your system.
-
@ketchito - On the list of ingredients and concentrations…yes, things have to be listed in order of concentration but only if the concentration is higher than 1%. Concentrations of 1% or less can be listed in any order. Although typically, colorants are listed at the end.
-
@twokchu - you should run a contamination test on the old samples and see if they are contaminated now. I would guess this is a microbial contamination issue.
-
I don’t exactly understand what you are saying. You say you hear me, then you link two articles that both say “parabens are safe to use in cosmetics” But you contend there is a lot of information suggesting parabens are unsafe.
I’m a bit confused.
The CIR and the SCCS, both independent groups made up of toxicologists have concluded that parabens as used in cosmetics are safe.
The second article you posted (that you erroneously classify as more balanced) references the Darbe article about parabens and breast cancer. This paper has been debunked numerous times & the author herself didn’t say it was proof that parabens caused breast cancer.
The whole movement against parabens is chemophobia & not based in science. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/cancer-controversial-science-cosmetics-health-news-quackery-toxicity/joe-schwarczs-right-chemistry-paraben-phobia-unjustified
If there was good evidence, I would be willing to change my opinion. But there isn’t good evidence. There is only bad evidence that people with an agenda of fearmongering & the naturalistic fallacy try to propagate to the public.
I’ll just add that sodium levulinate has not been determined to be safe in cosmetics. The CIR report insufficient data to declare safety.
“Impurities (purity is reported as 97% what is the remaining 3%)
28-Day dermal toxicity study (and, if found to be absorbed other endpoints may be needed, e.g., DART) Ocular irritation data at or above the highest leave-on concentration (0.57%) reported in an eye area product”Now, I’m not saying that it is unsafe. But the CIR doesn’t have enough data to say that it is. https://www.cir-safety.org/ingredients
-
@biofm - Parabens are not toxic and it is only through fear marketing that people have come to see them as problematic. They aren’t.
And Sodium levulinate or sodium anisate are fine secondary preservatives but they are not effective enough to be the main preservative.
-
That depends on what you are having them do.
Some will charge you $500 for a formula but that won’t include testing, scale up, etc.
Some will charge you $25,000 for a formula but that will include everything you need. -
Yes, microbial contamination. Have you done a preservative efficacy test or a contamination test?
-
@Zara - Generally, when making an emulsion that uses ingredients like Cetyl Alcohol, Stearyl Alcohol, Glyceryl Stearate or other fatty acids/alcohols/waxes, it makes sense to heat above 70C and hold it there for some time. This is to melt the materials and ensure they blend together.
Also, when you create the emulsion you heat up the water to the same temperature and mix the two phases together. The heat (and mixing) will ensure you get smaller emulsion particles. This will lead to a more stable emulsion.
-
You’ll have to try it. If your rose water or fruit extracts have high microbial loads, then it may not work for you.
-
It will wash out with a good shampoo.
-
It depends on your formula because as @ngarayeva001 said, a number of formulas use fatty alcohols and waxes that melt at around 60 - 70C. When creating an emulsion with them you need to melt them so the temperature has to get over 70C just to use them. But “heat and hold” is often suggested as a preservative strategy. This is not a good preservative strategy.
-
Try to find it on knowde.com or chemberry.com
-
These are all just opinions of a formulator and may not be shared with cosmetic marketers. I don’t think scientists or business people really have answers to most of these questions but many people have opinions. Here are mine.
1. Everyone can make products that work just as good as everyone else’s product (at least big companies). Small companies usually (but not always) make inferior products. Now that you can fill orders online, it has never been easier to launch a cosmetic product. You don’t need retail but still, the vast majority of product is sold through large stores like Target & Walmart.
2. The marketing story sells the first bottle. The fragrance and experience sell the next.
3. P&G has a target of creating brands that sell $1 billion a year. They launch enough products to ensure that launch size. But I’d say if you can build a brand to $100 million a year, you’re doing alright.
4. 6 months good, 1 year average, more than that…not good.
5. Most of the product cost goes into the packaging and marketing. Formula makes up 1/3 or less in costs.
-
@ZleyHoldings - While you may “feel” DMDM and isothiazolinones can be harmful to the body, this is not based on scientific evidence. These ingredients have been proven to be safe for use in the way they are used in cosmetics.
If you base your preservative choices on feelings, I’m afraid chlorphenesin won’t make the cut with some consumers. For example, https://www.annmariegianni.com/ingredient-watch-list-chlorphenesin-the-synthetic-preservative-that-can-cause-dermatitis-and-infant-respiratory-distress/
Neither will Carpylhydroxamic acid since it is causing “an epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis” - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28421670/
Traditional preservatives can be used safely. If formulators avoid them and buy into “fear marketing” there aren’t going to be any effective preservatives left.
-
Generally, regulators ban ingredients that aren’t used very often. Manufacturers have been getting away from butylparaben over the last few years so that makes it easier to ban it (if indeed that is what happened). Looking at use levels in 2013, Butylparaben was used in about 5000 products whereas Propylparaben was about 10,000 and Methylparaben about 15,000. Anyway, I don’t think there are good replacements so don’t think they will be banned any time soon.
-
@ahealy - this may sound like dodging your question but the truth is that without knowing more information there is no “ideal” cleanser to suggest.
It depends on a number of factors including…
1. Your product performance goals
2. Your marketing position / story
3. Your cost target
4. The aesthetics that you (or your customer) believe are best
5. Your manufacturing capabilities
6. The raw materials you have access toIn my mind a blend of water, SLES, Cocamidopropyl betaine, & salt will give you the best functional performance. Of course you’ll need preservative, fragrance and color to make it a more appealing product but that is pretty much it.
-
Certainly sounds like it could be a contamination problem.
-
Cleanser work by removing oil. The Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) in your formula seeks out oil, surrounds it, and then removes it when rinsed away. The SLES does not care whether the oil comes from your face or from the other things in your formula. So, when you include oils to a cleansing formula you essentially tie up your surfactant with that oil and it isn’t available to clean the oil off your face. Thus your cleanser no longer cleans as well as it should.
No, I do not think those additional ingredient provide any benefit. Cleansers are meant to remove things from the surface. Glycerin is water soluble so that will rinse away (it also reduces foam). The licorice root extract is also water soluble and rinses away. And the oils, they will all get emulsified by the SLES and rinsed away.
If you add them for claims reasons, that makes sense. Just know that they are actually not providing any benefit beyond claims.