OldPerry
Forum Replies Created
-
Most of the chemists here formulate cosmetic products so you may not get any quick replies. You also haven’t provided a list of ingredients in your formula which makes it hard to opine whether the ingredient will work.
My suggestion is to put it in your formula at 1% then adjust the pH and track the viscosity. I believe PVA requires an acidic environment to thicken so it probably won’t work with bleach but I’ve not done the experiment so can’t say.
-
Look up the individual ingredients here.
https://www.cir-safety.org/ingredientsPolyquaterniums are not similar. They are vastly different polymers who all happen to have an amine group but are otherwise not the same.
And when searching for such information go to https://scholar.google.com/
-
Serum is a marketing term, it is not a descriptive, scientific term.
Anything can be called a serum. -
What do you mean by “organic”?
Are you talking about certified organic by the USDA?
Are you talking about “organic” = “natural”?
Are you talking about “organic” as in certified by some lesser natural standard?
Are you talking about “organic” as in organic chemistry?Probably the most effective and reliable preservative which has been tested, are organic molecules, and are broadly effective are Methylparaben & DMDM Hydantoin. But I suspect you might mean something else by the term “organic”.
-
Just send me a message.
-
And to make it easier to form smaller emulsion particles.
-
@bahey - In my experience, Dimethicone has a measurable effect. Guar Hydroxypropyltrimonium Chloride may work better that PQ7. Also PQ10 is a good option.
,"y":1192,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":2758}”>But just because I don’t find PQ7 particularly impressive in the formula I was working with doesn’t mean you will have the same experience. It’s used by a lot of formulators. Unfortunately, I think a lot of formulators just put ingredients in because they trust what suppliers are saying.
,"y":1306,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":2872}”>The most important thing is to experiment and take measurements. Test your formulations (on a blinded basis) and see if you can tell a difference with and without an ingredient. Don’t rely on supplier information or even the declarations of formulators on this forum to shape your final opinions.
,"y":1420,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":2986}”>And when you run experiments, come back here and post your results so we can all advance the science.
,"y":1477,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":3043}”>Cosmetic science suffers from lots of motivated research, anecdotes and secrecy. There is surprisingly little controlled, unbiased published research. A forum like this can change it but only if people are willing to experiment, learn, and share. -
@ngarayeva001 - because you don’t get even heating. The part of the container that is in direct contact with the heating element can get hotter than boiling water. Using a water bath is a better, more controlled choice.
-
We always used it as supplied. You don’t need a lot of polymer to get an effect. Of course, I never found PQ-7 particularly conditioning in a shampoo formula.
-
@”Dr Catherine Pratt” - I don’t think the author was the one who posted the article. It was put up by someone who stumbled onto it while doing some Google searching.
-
Near as I can tell, that is not a requirement in the regulations.
https://www.ceway.eu/cosmetics-regulatory-services/cosmetics-responsible-person/ -
@Dtdang - of course, being misinformed about a subject is usually worse than being uninformed about a subject.
,"y":41,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":3655}”> -
It is difficult to answer your question without you explaining what you mean by some of your terms.
When you ask “why this works?” what exactly do you mean? What are the indications that the product is working? Specifically, how is your hair different when you use this treatment versus a standard shampoo and conditioner treatment? How is it different from doing no treatment or just rinsing your hair with water?
In truth, there is no simple answer to your question. The most likely answer is that you enjoy the process of creating and using the treatment, which makes you believe your hair is in great condition. A scientific evaluation of your hair after treatment may indicate that your hair is actually not more clean than a standard shampoo/conditioner wash, but that matters less than how you feel about it.
There is nothing special in rosemary or rye flour that would be beneficial to hair. The chemical composition of rye flour isn’t that much different than that of wheat flour. Also, there is nothing particularly good about rinsing your hair with apple cider vinegar. There is zero scientific evidence that it’s good for hair or that it cleans hair.
Cosmetic science is not an exact science. And psychological effects are a big part of the functioning of cosmetics.
-
If someone is trying to sell you something, their opinion about a subject should be viewed suspiciously. This is not to say that the person is lying, but you can be certain you are not getting the full picture of whatever subject they are opining on.
I was a biology major then switched to chemistry in my final year in college. Every chemistry major had to take biology too and had to learn how to read biology research papers. Her claims about the abilities of different scientists are ridiculous.
Also, practically nothing I learned in biology or chemistry was directly helpful in my job as a cosmetic chemist or formulator. College does not teach you about specific ingredients, formulating, what’s best for skin or hair or anything else about making products.
There are some valid points about essential oils, extracts, etc. but there is a lot of BS too. For example physical scrubs do not cause cell death & foaming has nothing to do with surfactant’s “destruction of skin”
Overall, I find the author of this paper to be immature and insecure.
-
There may be a pH difference but they can probably be used in the same types of formulas.
-
I doubt you could find any significant difference between Quinoa hydrolyzed protein and other hydrolyzed proteins. Maybe the amino acid distribution might be a bit varied but nothing that would make a substantial difference.
-
I don’t know. You have to experiment. 5% is a good place to start.
-
Yes, you have 0.6% active cetrimonium chloride where the CIR safety recommendation is 0.25% maximum for leave-in products.
,"y":2660,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":5960}”>https://www.dropbox.com/s/36lf0xpi5x9ts33/cetrimonium-chloride%20copy.pdf?dl=0
,"y":2717,"w":0,"h":18,"abs_x":384,"abs_y":6017}”> -
Heat protection is marketing speak for conditioning the hair and this looks like it will do that.
Is this a leave-in or rinse out?
If it’s a leave in the Cetrimonium chloride can be a problem as might the behentrimoium chloride.
If it’s a rinse out, the PVP and VP/VA copolymers will likely just rinse down your drain.
-
I suppose I should recreate my Facebook answer here…
The challenge in your question is in quantifying damage. To say “reduce damage caused by heat” you’d have to be able to quantify that damage. The studies I’ve seen aren’t able to quantify it. Take this example. https://www.dropbox.com/…/heat-damage-to-hair.pdf… While they had some nice SEM pictures and pointed out damage, they didn’t show a quantitative measure of heat damage. So from a blow dryer standpoint, there isn’t much heat damage.
This study looked more specifically at heat treatments and the effect of a flat iron. They conclude that some polymer treatments provide protection, https://www.dropbox.com/…/hair-heat-flat-iron.pdf… most notably from hair breakage. But from my reading the reduction in breakage could just have been coming from the polymer coating and the heat wasn’t relevant. Hair could have been damaged by heat but the polymer resisted hair breakage because of the coating.
All this is to say, it’s complicated. They may just be conditioners that provide conditioning benefits and have no noticeable protection of the fiber from heat.
-
To answer your question, no there isn’t a simple test to run to say definitively yes or no that a product contains piptoporus betulinus, birch tar, and betulinic acid.
Piptoporus betulinus and birch tar are extracts which can be made up of a wide variety of different chemicals. You would have no way of telling whether a formula contains those extracts. You can theoretically determine some components of those extracts but you wouldn’t know for sure.
Betulinic acid is a more simple chemical so you should be able to identify unique peaks in a mass spec or GC/IR or something like that. There isn’t a simple test that I know of.
But it seems like none of this really matters. If you want to include those ingredients for marketing purposes (which is the only legal reason to include them), just buy an extract like this
http://www.greentech.fr/en/protectol-3/#commentsor this
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1j17awld7f7v0di/VenusBarkExtractMarketingSheetOct2015.pdf?dl=0And put it in at some low level 0.1% and that’s it.
-
In the US, the regulations say that it is illegal to sell unsafe cosmetics. If you can prove that your products are safe, then you can use food grade ingredients. Proving safety will be challenging.
-
Psoriasis is a medical condition and the FDA has a monograph specifically written for it. If a product is going to claim it treats psoriasis, it must include only actives laid out in the FDA monograph. See this.
The easier-to-read version is here.
https://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/psoriasis/topical-treatments-psoriasis#1The bottom line is that none of the ingredients you listed are approved for treatment of psoriasis. It’s an unproven folk remedy.
And since this is the case, you can put in however much you want.
,"w":564,"h":37,"abs_x":424,"abs_y":693}”>https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/5339/where-to-find-free-formulas-for-cosmetics#latest