OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
A quick heuristic - If an ingredient is hyped, it’s likely just a fluff ingredient.
I’m not impressed with the evidence supporting the use of n-acetyl glucosamine in skin care.
-
@esthetician922 - it might change the way the product feels and behaves inside a particle super collider, but not when topically applied to the skin.
-
@esthetician922 - I can’t imagine any benefit that a person would get using Deuterium in a cosmetic product. Deuterium is composed of an isotope of Hydrogen that contains a neutron. Standard Hydrogen contains no neutron. But the presence or absence of a neutron in water can make exactly zero noticeable difference to a cosmetic product user.
Relevant - “Extracting deuterium from seawater is a simple and well proven industrial process. “Heavy water”, or D2O (water in which deuterium substitutes for hydrogen), is separated from regular water by chemical exchange processes…” https://www.iter.org/newsline/167/631
Using this in marketing materials or as a treatment is a total cock & bull story.
-
@Tyss - Thanks for your participation. I think what @Belassi was trying to do was to encourage you to start a new discussion. While I’m sure you didn’t mean it, your new question diverts attention from the original poster’s question and that is a bit unfair to that person. It would be more appropriate to start a new discussion. There’s a button on the right column to do that.
Belassi also is not a fan of MICT/MIT as a preservative due to known problems of sensitization. It is mostly banned from leave-on products in the EU and highly restricted in most rinse-off products.
MICT/MIT is used at 7 - 15ppm so your use level is quite high. But is also not stable over a pH of 8. Whether your use of it is effective can only be determined by a microbial challenge test.
-
Hello everyone new! Welcome to the forum. I look forward to discussing cosmetic science with you.
-
@Pharma - One of the main reasons there aren’t more cosmetic scientists with their own product lines is because to create a successful line, you have to believe the BS you are selling. That’s hard to do when you know too much.
-
If it did work better than AHAs, you would find more products with it on the market. It isn’t new technology & it’s a pretty obvious idea. There isn’t much new in cosmetics. So you have to ask yourself, why isn’t it used more? The most likely answer is because it doesn’t provide enough of a tangible benefit over other technologies.
-
There are a bunch that are still scheduled
Suppliers Day (late September)
In-Cosmetic’s - October
Teamworks - Octoberbut we’ll see if they actually happen.
has anyone been to a good digital conference?
-
Silver shouldn’t be used for a hand sanitizer
-
The problem with papain in skin products
-
In the US, there are only 11 or 12 banned ingredients in cosmetics. You can find that list here.
https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmeticsBut the most important thing is colorants. The FDA allows only colorants on the linked list. Don’t use anything else to color your products.
https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredient-names/color-additives-permitted-use-cosmetics -
In the US, big corps settle all the time. Whether they are guilty or not doesn’t play much of a factor. Here settling a lawsuit just means that it is more financially beneficial than going to trial. Companies do a calculation and typically take the less expensive route. You can either…
1. Take a gamble on the outcome of a trial - you can pay zero (except for big lawyer fees) or pay a big settlement (plus lawyer fees).
In the US, trials are settled by juries. Juries are made up of average citizens who in my view are particularly gullible. (Especially since somewhere around 2016). The average US citizen also has an anti-corporation attitude so when they get a chance to stick it to the big guys like on a jury, they often rule for the plaintiff (little guy).2. Settle and cut your losses - This option gives you a guaranteed outcome. You’ll have to pay some money but when added all together with lawyer fees, this option usually comes out as the cheapest. You also don’t have to admit to any wrong doing.
Dow Corning & others famously settled a lawsuit about silicon breast implants in which plaintiffs claimed it caused autoimmune disease. The science did not support that conclusion but over 12,000 plaintiff sued anyway. The company filed bankruptcy and paid over $4.75 billion to make the case go away. Over the years, when more published science came in the consensus was that “silicon implants did not cause autoimmune disease.” But the company already settled so the truth didn’t matter to the people involved in the court case.
Bottom line, in the US anyway, settled court case does not equal guilty plea. -
@Pharma - what makes you say they sold asbestos?
Settling a lawsuit doesn’t prove anything about the facts & I think they would still claim they didn’t sell asbestos.
-
I think a big motivator for them getting out now is because of this…
Their primary supplier filed for bankruptcy and is selling their talc mines.
Add to that slowed sales and the unending lawsuits, I can see why a big Pharma company like J&J would cut and run. -
This is more of a legal question than a cosmetic chemistry question. So, you’d get more reliable advice from a lawyer.
In my non-legal experience, however, if you mention “eczema” in your claim, you make your product a drug. This is implying that your product will treat or prevent eczema. That makes the FDA view it as a drug.
This is a relevant read.
https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/are-some-cosmetics-promising-too-much -
Well, they’ve only stopped selling in US & Canada. They’ll sell it other places around the world.
Fearmongers win!
Incidentally, I don’t personally particularly care much about talc. I don’t use it so if they stop selling baby powder it won’t have much impact on me.
However, it’s very concerning that a specific ingredient is tied to causing cancer when the weight of the scientific evidence doesn’t support this claim. Look out ethoxylated ingredients, silicones, and pretty much all preservatives. Fun times ahead for formulators.
-
Are you familiar with the HLB system?
Basically, to make a stable emulsion you need to match the HLB of your emulsifier with the required HLB of the oils you are using.
Olivem 900 has an HLB of 4.7
Coconut oil requires an HLB of 8
Shea butter requires an HLB of 8
Sunflower oil HLB is 7If you want to emulsify those oils, you need an emulsifier system with an HLB of 7 or 8. Olivem 900 will not work (unless you also include an emulsifier with an HLB of 11 or 12.
Also, when making an emulsion you should use more than one emulsifier if you want it to be stable.
-
If you want to market and sell the product, hire a consultant to help you. If you want to become a manufacturer of sunscreen for other brands, then learn to do it yourself.
-
With that list, it shouldn’t jump around.
-
Any sunscreen in the US is an OTC. If you claim SPF, it is an OTC and you have to follow the monograph.
Relevant. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/status-otc-rulemakings/rulemaking-history-otc-sunscreen-drug-products
-
Does it have oil in it and any emulsifiers? maybe you could list the ingredient list.
But in general, the pH meter may fluctuate a little in the beginning, but it should come to equilibrium and stop moving. If it is an emulsion, then it might not get completely steady.
-
Is it an emulsion or water based formula?
-
@dmh0023 - thanks for the kind words! We actually covered retinol on episode 208. Basically the conclusion is that while Retinoic acid is effective as a drug, retinol is not nearly as effective. It likely has some effect, so I wouldn’t say it’s ineffective, however it’s not nearly as effective as retinoic acid. While it may be the “gold standard” for cosmetic ingredients, its effect is not anything I would call “incredible.”
Then when you further derivatize the ingredient by making it a more stable version like retinyl palmitate, you reduce its effectiveness even more. Basically, I doubt you’ll see any noticeable impact when using retinyl palmitate in a formula. Granted, there might be some lab measurable effects but not something a consumer would notice. It’s those lab measurable effects that get talked about in advertising and beauty magazines.
-
Well, assuming that they are using the terms consistently, a part just refers to an equivalent amount. Specifically, when talking about a liquid I would think it is a volume measurement.
So, if you have 1 part lavender oil and 1 part lemon oil, you would figure it out like this.
1. Add up all the parts. (1+1=2)
2. Figure out the % by dividing parts by the whole.Lemon oil = 1/2 = 50%
Lavendar oil = 1/2 = 50%The % should equal 100%
If, for example, it was 3 parts lavender oil and 1 part lemon oil the calculation would be this
1+3 = 4 total
Lavender oil = 3/4 = 75%
Lemon oil = 1/4 = 25%Formulating should be done in % and all the measurements should be made in mass (grams). Cups, ounces, parts shouldn’t be used.
-
Well, if the physical properties of the product are great then there doesn’t seem to be much else you’ll need to do. Of course, you’ll need to do stability testing to see if there are any formula changes (eg color or taste) but that’s probably about it.
In reality, it’s unlikely that you or your customers will see any noticeable performance difference in whether you use a retinyl palmitate that has stabilized or one that has oxidized. In fact, I would guess you wouldn’t be able to tell a difference whether you put the ingredient in your formula or left it out entirely. Most actives in cosmetics are for stories not for performance.