OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
I’d guess the last significant innovation in skin care was Alpha Hydroxy Acids.
Some might disagree with me but I haven’t seen evidence to convince me otherwise.
-
Marketers are gonna market.
If a company profits from making you believe something is true, you should discount what that companies says. This doesn’t mean they are necessarily lying. But it does mean that they probably aren’t telling you the whole truth.
-
@Pharma - Indeed. I remember learning chemical nomenclature in college and then being surprised that I didn’t know what half the ingredients on my shampoo bottle were. But the cosmetic industry probably figured IUPAC names were too long to fit nicely on the packaging and too irrelevant to consumers. Also, imagine trying to come up with a single molecular name for the numerous blends of ingredients used.
-
What do you mean by “stabilizing”? Are you having separation issues? What is happening with your formula that you want fixed?
-
Indeed….
“In cosmetics, some researchers publish something with a weak but ‘marketable’ effect on a trendy subject”I’m reminded of all the articles about Bakuchiol being better than Retinol. All based primarily on a study of 6 people.
-
What studies have you read that convinced you they work?
I understand that it is frustrating and disappointing that things don’t work. But reality is what reality is. On this site we try to focus on what can be proven. Not what we want to be true. If there is good evidence, I would be happy to change my mind. But I’ve been in the industry too long and have seen too many people being duped by marketing that I just don’t want to propagate nonsense.
There are scientists that believe peptides do something notable in skin care. I’m not one of those scientists. I’m not convinced by the evidence. I know how bad consumers are at noticing differences. And I know how much marketers will take tiny differences and blow them up into extraordinary results.
In my opinion, based on the evidence, peptides don’t do anything that any consumer would notice. The only thing that works in skin care is moisturizing, sunscreens, exfoliation, some skin lightening, anti-acne (if it’s a drug active), and…well that’s about it.
It may be a bummer but it is reality.
-
Agree with @Belassi - extracts have no noticeable impact on skin so what you use doesn’t matter much. It all comes down to what marketing story you want to tell.
-
1. Yes, everything should add up to 100% in a formula.
2. What do you mean by “active ingredient”?
3. What do you mean by “effective” ingredient?
The reality that in a body wash the only functional ingredient is the detergent. Everything else you add (with some minor exceptions) will be washed down the drain.
-
If they have the same INCI name you combine them.
-
While chirality makes a difference for drug actives, I’ve not seen any evidence that it matters at all for cosmetic actives.
-
It’s difficult to give you advice for the following reasons.
1. You haven’t said what benefit you are hoping to get out of using the product. Toners don’t really do much so why are you using the product?
2. You haven’t said what is wrong with your formula. Why are you dissatisfied with what you are making?
Without that information there isn’t much advice I can give except don’t use a toner.
-
Yes, it’s all hype.
-
@Belassi - makes sense. Those aren’t hydrolyzed
-
@kot - I don’t know, perhaps it works better with their marketing story of the ingredient.
-
@kot - yes, they should still work fine.
-
Hydrolyzed proteins are pretty much denatured (all the secondary structure is broken down) so you can add them whenever you like. You would need to heat the system well over the point of boiling water to break a peptide-peptide bond.
-
@Graillotion - in their “study” they use 0.3% glycerin and it is compared to materials like Butylene Glycol at 2%. This is not a reasonable comparison. Also, their data makes no sense when they include Glycerin plus their material and get a multiple increase in moisturizing. Add to that it was a corneometer study (never very accurate) and it conflicts with previous industry findings, I wouldn’t put much faith in their findings.
In my opinion, Glycerin is generally the best humectant to use in a formula. From a cost / effectiveness standpoint, it can’t be beat. I’d be interested in seeing data that demonstrates I’m wrong.
See this discussion about glycerin vs hyaulronic acid
-
DMDM Hydantoin plus Methylparaben is a better preservative system for cosmetics than potassium sorbate + citric acid.
-
It’s unlikely you or a consumer would be able to notice much difference between any of those emollients. Go with the Caprylic/capric triglyceride or the PEG 16 Macadamia glycerides and call it a day.
Emollients are gonna emollient.
-
The first thing you should do is to take a sample, determine the mass (weigh it), then put it in an oven for a couple hours. After that, you weigh it again. Put it back in the oven for another half hour and then weigh the sample again. If the weights haven’t changed, congratulations…you now know the approximate % of water in the formula.
The rest of the numbers will have to add up to 100% - % water. After that, you’ll just have to guess but most likely Glycerin is the highest percentage ingredient and the others are lower.
-
That depends on the integrity of the manufacturer.
But assuming they are being honest, 8% Glycolic Serum means that 8% of the formula is made up of Glycolic acid.
-
There is no “just use this” preservative if you are going to avoid parabens and formaldehyde donors.
In that case, the specific preservative you use will depend heavily on the chemical composition of your formula.
You might check your premises though. I contend that going paraben free is not consumer driven but marketer driven. Some of the best selling cosmetic products are preserved with parabens (and formaldehyde donors).
-
Propylene glycol has been determined to be GRAS. (Generally regarded as safe).
This means it is safe enough to eat.
No, it’s bad reputation is not warranted.
It’s strictly fearmongering likely created by smaller brands to frighten consumers into staying away from products from large brands that use it as a humectant & solvent. It’s inexpensive, effective, and safe.
-
You can try it. Some people have successfully used preservative systems like that. Of course, it also depends on what else is in your formula.
-
@ngarayeva001 - yes, it will be bug food & it won’t provide a significant benefit.