OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
You should only get ingredients from places that you know and trust. Second hand retailers like Amazon and eBay would not be reliable enough for me but that’s a personal choice.
-
@Zink - Thanks for your thoughtful response.
“Think e.g. Seppic or CLR-Berlin would risk their reputation by selling fake ingredients? “
No, I don’t. But there are literally hundreds of small distributors and start ups offering plant extracts in the us. (here’s a sampling - https://www.thomasnet.com/products/herbal-extracts-26821009-1.html) These companies do not all adhere to the same standards. They also know that most of their customers (small contract manufacturers) usually won’t do testing beyond the CofA. It’s too costly and most don’t care. Are you suggesting there are no unscrupulous suppliers?
Easy to prove you wrong here…
You have provided a theory which is interesting enough but you’ve not disputed the original claim. There are many reasons why an extract could contain a derivative of a known, effective ingredient but the extract isn’t effective. Suppose for example, willow bark extract contains only 0.1% salicin but for a specific treatment you need 2% salicylic acid to be effective. You could formulate with 100% extract and still not get a working product. Additionally, the “effective” ingredient could be bound up with some other ingredient in the extract to make it less effective. There are lots of reasons why an extract may not be effective despite containing an effective ingredient.
But you didn’t address the original claim made - “No extract works reliably enough to base a formula on it.” - Where is a successful product on the market that is based only on an extract as its functional ingredient?
Also, if you know salicylic acid is the functional ingredient why wouldn’t you just use that in your formulation instead of an extract that contains a small amount of it? Using the ingredient directly gives you much more control as a formulator.
Artemisinin contained in sweet wormwood which was used in eastern medicine for more than 2000 years to treat malaria,
Your example proves the point I was making. There was a traditional remedy, it was tested, proven to work, and now it’s just…medicine. There are lots of eastern traditional treatments that don’t work (e.g. rhino horn). Only through proper testing can we discover what is actually effective. Wouldn’t you agree?
I also don’t understand how double blind studies are “western” standards? It seems to me they are just science. The same kind of science done by people in Japan, Korea, China, Thailand, etc. What am I missing?
Thanks again for your comments. It’s always helpful for me to get a different perspective on things.
-
You can get a prilled version of Sodium Hydroxide. And you can also work with an aqueous solution of it instead of a solid.
-
Depending where you are on the salt curve, NaCl could reduce viscosity. I’d imagine a silicone could too.
-
@Dtdang - yes, there was a computer glitch and the system reset to yesterday. I’m afraid a couple of the morning comments were lost.
-
@Cafe33 - probably illegal (at least in the US)
-
Some brands think so. I guess it depends on the consumer.
-
That depends on what they are sensitive to. With all those natural plant extracts and oils it wouldn’t be surprising if they had a negative reaction.
-
What else is in your formula? Probably NaOH would generally work.
-
It would be an emollient so skin soothing, softening, but there are better choices for emollients.
-
Yes it is safe. (based on the ingredient list)
No it will not help with hair loss.
No it will not thicken your hair. -
Castor oil isn’t a proven treatment for acne. But maybe it works for your friend.
Just remember when it comes to any treatment three things can happen.1. A condition gets better
2. A condition gets worse
3. A condition doesn’t changeThese three things are also what can happen with no treatment. Only through controlled testing can you figure out whether something actually works or not.
-
I’d also add the Society of Cosmetic Chemist year end meeting in New York. They usually have some good scientific talks on skin care.
If you are International you might check out the IFSCC conference. This year it is in Japan. Next year it will be in Mexico I believe and then the UK after that.
-
@Dtdang - Yes, much of what you read on the Internet about cosmetic products is misleading or downright wrong.
-
Certainly, it’s possible that I’m too dismissive of cosmeceutical claims. I tend to have a more critical view of all things because I would rather err on the side of disbelieving something that is true over believing something that is false.
Also, my response wasn’t meant to close any discussion. I’m happy to read / discuss where I might be wrong.
Comments…
A. Publication bias - “Applies to all research and not entirely true, there are still studies published showing no or little effect.” - I agree it happens in all subjects. That doesn’t make it any less of a problem in cosmetic science. I think it is more of a problem in cosmetic science however because there is a lot less publicly funded / independent research. Papers published related to cosmetic treatments are often done by researchers who’s companies benefit from positive press.
B. Motivated researchers - “…but possibly less true with natural ingredients that can’t easily be patented as there are less financial incentives.” - There are numerous researchers who have a “natural” bias and take on subjects to prove nature is superior to what other researchers can invent. Also, there are huge brands built on the notion that natural is better and they benefit financially from propagating that myth. Getting patents in cosmetics is not nearly as useful as getting good press. Brands sell cosmetic products, not technology or even performance.
C & D. Supply - It’s much easier to doctor natural ingredients than you know. People still sell and buy grapefruit seed extract as a preservative, even though it’s been fairly well demonstrated to only work because it is spiked with parabens. You may have more faith in the sincerity of suppliers than I do. I’ve just seen a lot of shenanigans that go on in the cosmetic industry.1. No extract works reliably enough to base a formula on it. “Bold claim that needs to be substantiated.” - A bold claim perhaps, but it is not one that needs to be substantiated. No one can “prove” a negative claim. But you could dispute the claim by showing a product that uses only an extract as its main ingredient and the results from that. AFAIK there is no such product.
I would say no “eastern medicine” that hasn’t been proven by a double-blind study works. Similarly, no “western medicine” that hasn’t been proven by a double-blind study works either. There is no such thing as “alternative medicine.” There are just things that work, and things that don’t. Which eastern medicine “works” that hasn’t been incorporated into working medicine?- I think supplements, at least in the US, are mostly a scam (except when prescribed by a doctor) and it is safer to avoid them than to use them. They are less regulated than cosmetics even though they are significantly more dangerous.
I do apologize that this has gone a bit off from the original question. I just haven’t seen reliable data that would make me recommend an extract for use as an anti-inflammatory. If someone has data to the contrary, I’d be keen to review it.
-
I have real world experience with extracts and the suppliers of extracts. Extracts are added for only one reason…to support the marketing story. They don’t have any impact on the performance of the product.
If you’re looking to put an extract in your formula, expect it to have exactly zero impact on the performance of the product. Especially an anti-acne product.
The stuff published in literature about extracts is not reliable and overly optimistic. There are a number of reasons for this including…
A. Publication bias - no one publishes the studies where they found no effect
B. Motivated researchers - most of the studies are published by people who want to find an effect.
C. Inconsistent supply - you’re never able to buy exactly the same extract twice.
D. Questionable supply - you have no reliable way to identify the composition of an extract. Is it licorice extract or propylene glycol spiked with brown food coloring?To answer your questions…
1. No extract works reliably enough to base a formula on it.
2. No, non-OTC ingredients are not better & they don’t work reliably.
3. No/yes - These are claims ingredients & they help convince people to buy your otherwise standard product. But they can introduce unknown allergens and can actually cause problems with your product.The reality is that if there was an extract that was effective, researchers would figure out which ingredient in that extract was responsible for the effect. That ingredient would be isolated and then that’s what would be recommended for use. Lots of the effective drugs we use today came from some plant extract. There is nothing special that the extract provides that a synthesized version of the active ingredient couldn’t.
-
Serum is a marketing term. Whatever the marketers want to call a serum & whatever they can get consumers to believe is a serum makes a product a serum.
The concentration of active ingredients does not need to be (and usually isn’t) high in a serum.
If you look on the market, serums are usually clear, slightly thickened liquids delivered in eyedropper bottles or just small bottles. They are not difficult to make.
-
Also, Zinc Oxide is not natural. According to regulations, all the zinc oxide available for formulating is synthetically produced.
-
Yes, EDTA can affect the thickness of a system if the thickening effect is a result of surfactant micelle packing or acrylic polymers. If it is a system thickened with something like HEC then it won’t have much impact.
-
We used 1.5% cetrimonium chloride but I think that was of a 25% solution.
-
VO5 conditioner was pretty much Cetrimonium Chloride, Cetyl alcohol, fragrance and some adjustment agents. Yes, you can make a conditioner with what you’ve got.
-
You have to be able to prove that your product is safe. If the CIR has shown that an ingredient is safe up to a certain percentage, you’ll be able to use that as evidence that your product should be safe. But if you use a higher level, then you’ll have to conduct product toxicology testing or you have to include the following warning on the label “Warning - The safety of this product has not been determined.”
What happens depends on how lucky you are. If you stay under the FDA radar then nothing will happen. More likely you’ll get a letter and a fine. You could also have your product confiscated and impounded. If you’re serious about building a legitimate brand / business, it’s not a good strategy.
Being “quite sure” that the bars are safe is not adequate proof that they are safe. You’ll need actual toxicology studies.
Perhaps worse than you getting in trouble with the FDA, one of your consumers might buy the product and have a reaction. This reaction might be to your product or maybe not, maybe they just say it’s your product. Then you’ll have to produce your product safety testing proof. Without this you won’t be able to prove that your products are safe and will likely lose in court. Your business and perhaps your own self could be bankrupted.
This doesn’t seem like a good idea to me.
-
@Dtdang - No. The FDA does not “approve” any cosmetic product. Yes, all testing on cosmetics is done by the manufacturer.
-
@mehrzadkia - very good question. The unsatisfying answer is because that’s what the regulations are.
The FDA even specifically says “Approval of a color additive for one intended use does not mean approval for other uses.” Therefore, even if a colorant is approved for food, that does not mean it is approved for cosmetics.
The cosmetic industry in the US is not highly regulated except in a couple areas. Colorants is one of those areas. Formulators (who follow the law) are limited to the colors listed in the FDA approved colorants. The safety or origin the ingredient does not matter. If it’s not on the list, it’s illegal to use as a colorant.
-
It is illegal to use beetroot powder as a colorant in your cosmetic formulas. If the ingredients are not listed here (FDA approved colorants) it is illegal to do what you are requesting and not recommended.