[Pharma]

Vacuum

I know, it’s an unusually short answer for me but that’s the only answer I can give if you’re already trained in proper mixing.

[Pharma]

Weleda does strict tests and I’d say consumers are safe when using their products but honestly, these feel greasy or otherwise unpleasant more often than not. Can’t have it all…

BTW they also use (though not everywhere) glycerol, low pH (citric or lactic acid), w/o emulsions, and in newer concepts also glyceryl caprylate as preservative strategies.

Use the search function, we’ve covered % of alcohol and glycerol on several occasions.

[Pharma]

If your stick is solid enough, quick cooling will not result in needles growing out of your product but, like @Dr_Sara pointed out, blooming (like ice flowers on a window during cold winter nights) might still occur (and these can actually be felt when using the stick).

Learn how to make good chocolate and you’ll get a master in avoiding such crystals . Much of what cosmetics knows in this regard has actually been studied in detail by food industries (not just for chocolate but also butters/margarine, ice cream and many other food products).

[Pharma]

Thanks for sharing. That list is short ;( but still a nice inspiration.

[Pharma]

Quick cool down also helps.

[Pharma]

Perry said:

…
But as far as Cosmos certified…these are your options:
…

What’s with anisic acid/sodium anisate? Wasn’t hat Cosmos approved?

[Pharma]

jr93 said:

…

• Test 1(Control - 0% GDL): 6.0pH adjusted to 5.5ph, after 48 hours the pH had risen back to 6.0pH

• Test 2 (0.25% GDL): 6.0pH adjusted to 5.5ph, after 48 hours the pH had fallen to 3.8 pH

• Test 3 (0.5% GDL): 6.0pH adjusted to 5.5ph, after 48 hours the pH had fallen to 3.4 pH

…

Those results look just normal. Without a buffer, slight (0.5) pH changes over time (especially in an open beaker) are just normal. The other two also reflect expectations.

So, what is your issue? Too low pH? A tip from another use there: Quickly boil the GDL/water stock solution will turn it into gluconic acid within seconds/minutes. Use that to adjust pH. The slow hydrolysis over time is a myth. Use for example triacetin for a pH driven hydrolysis to maintain a more or less stable pH (that’s what’s done to stabilise urea in creams/lotions).

[Pharma]

That’s likely because you have a buffered product.

[Pharma]

By definition, there is no pH in an anhydrous product (actually, there is but this doesn’t have any influence on everyday life) .

If you wanted to add an acid (for whatever reason), use an oil soluble one (salicylic acid comes to mind).

[Pharma]

At a pH of 1, clay will release quite a bit of its cations (lithium, sodium, magnesium) and its thixotropic behaviour might no longer be there… you’d have to try and see.

[Pharma]

Did play around with MSM, wasn’t worth it. It might serve, like urea, as solubiliser for certain compounds if used at more than maybe 3-5% (a rough guess).

BTW it’s not an antioxidant and the claim that it were metabolised to be funnelled into the amino acid pool is based on one poorly made publication wherein they only determined sulphur content but not what type of sulphur. The more likely hypothesis is that gut bacteria mineralise it to sulphate and that it’s not our body which turns it into methionine or cysteine.

[Pharma]

natiyo123 said:

…
1) SLL is anionic, yet Ive seen some products that have citric acid or lactic acid in them? 10% solution in water is acidic, wouldnt it be more compatible in basic pH bc of the (-) ? also, HLB is aprox 14, so why is it not very soluble in water?

2) I understand Zn2+ is antimicrobial and works better in acidic formulas, but why is it considered a neutral salt? could it still be antimicrobial in basic solution?
…

1) Because lactylate esters are anionic but not very strong acids/bases, their apparent HLB depends on pH.  As an examle, Evonik lists sodium stearoyl lactylate as HLB 10-14, foodgrade SSL has a HLB of 8.3 (partially neutralised), and theoretical HLB of SSL would be 17 (100% salt form). At very low pH SLL and SSL turn into lauroyl and stearoyl lactylic acid, respectively, and get a HLB of something in the range of maybe 4. Well, they would hydrolyse over time…
Using HLB is stupid because A) using HLB is stupid per se, lactylates differ greatly between manufacturers and often contain mixtures of fatty acids and number of lactic acid monomers, C) apparent HLB change is most pronounced in the cosmetic pH range, and D) lactylates are often used as liquid crystal formers and that stage lays outside the rationally calculable space of commonly used theories. Furthermore, ‘standard’ lactylate has 2 units but pure sodium fatty acid-2-lactylates are seldom used in cosmetics, hypothetical calculations are hence compromised from the beginning.

Lactylates are surfactants and surfactants are usually poorly soluble in water. What they do is forming micelles. As mentioned, the strength of lactylates isn’t in their micelle forming ability but in forming alpha gels, lamellar structures which don’t look like solutions but emulsions/creams.

BTW just because a product contains citric or lactic acid doesn’t automatically make it acidic . Who knows what else is in there and which starting pH raw materials have (several detergents are fairly alkaline).

2) It’s a neutral salt if its partner also forms neutral salts. That’s a rule in chemistry. Zinc ions at higher pH turn into hydroxides and oxides (and carbonates if CO2 is present). These are poorly soluble and hence inactive. Even if you put some sodium hydroxide in a solution of zinc sulfate (more ‘neutral’ than Zn PCA and Zn lactate which aren’t quite neutral), it turns cloudy because of precipitating zinc hydroxide.

[Pharma]

Depends on many factors. Are you sure it’s the 1388 crystallising and not allantoin or IDK?

How much of what does your mask contain?

The lower the pH, the better 1388 works but the less soluble it becomes. You could try and add more glycerol, raising pH would help with solubility but this would also make the microbes very happy.

[Pharma]

What’s in that bottle?

[Pharma]

ETcellphone said:

Cool! Do you know where I can get it? I am in the US. All I can find is 

Cocamidopropyl Betaine

Not the same thing… betaine has different synonyms such as trimethyl glycine or glycine betaine.

Drawback of certain US based supplement suppliers is the lack in information on the bags. EU suppliers have a more precise labelling and you know (at least after you got the package) ‘for sure’ whether you got glycine (anhydride) or glycine monohydrate.

@Perry From what I can tell, EU regulations for food are better than for cosmetics.

[Pharma]

pH 1 plus cellulose = glucose syrup. Same goes for HEC.

[Pharma]

Sorry, no.

[Pharma]

The amount of isoamyl laurate would be the same as EcoSilk, a neat 1:1 replacement.

Macadamia absorbs astonishingly fast and doesn’t feel greasy at all. Absolutely beautiful oil and I don’t know why it’s better than every other natural oil I’ve tried, fatty acid profile doesn’t give any useful clues.

Me too, I wouldn’t use olive oil.

Hemp oil in the hot phase should be fine, just don’t use it for cooking or frying.

[Pharma]

Use benzophenone 5 instead, it’s the even better water soluble sodium salt of benzophenone 4 .

But honestly, BP 4 is very soluble in water. But it’s also very acidic and will lower pH. Dissolve it in water, add an appropriate (equimolar) amount of a base such as TEA and that’ll be it.

What you observe might be other stuff falling out due to a lower pH (transiently and spatially localised around the dissolving BP 4 particles might suffice for such an effect)?

[Pharma]

You could use pure isoamyl laurate (Dermofeel sensolv) instead of EcoSilk. No odour at all and you can add it directly to the oil phase.

Don’t know about replacing other things based on $$ cause I don’t know your prices. You could replace the unrefined oils with more macadamia nut oil. It has a nice nutty aroma whereas I only like hemp oil as food, not on skin.

For me, shea butter is quite costly so I would consider switching it for another cheaper butter.

[Pharma]

Surfactants are nothing more than high HLB emulsifiers . Where to draw a line between surfactants and emulsifiers is an arbitrary choice and giving that line a precise HLB value is completely nonsensical.

Apart from that subtlety, I fully agree with @ngarayeva001.

[Pharma]

If it’s pH 4.4 by nature and your skin perceives it well, stick with that! Better a bit too acidic than too alkaline (for the sake of your skin and microbial stability).

[Pharma]

It’s not doing anything (at least not at budgetary reasonable concentrations) on skin… meaning you just have to add traces. Why not use a diluted product?

[Pharma]

You shouldn’t eat it.

The problem is not arbutin but hydroquinone, its hydrolysis product and this one is not recommended as topical treatment during pregnancy (FDA lists it as possibly embryotoxic based on animal studies though human data are lacking). Example publication HERE.

Now, we don’t know how much arbutin turns into hydroquinone but the part that does, is systemically available and potentially harmful. If you balance the benefits of arbutin (or rather lack thereof), probably a transient/reversible increase in skin pigmentation, and the fact that you’d better be use something against stretch marks than pigment issues against a possible, irreversible damage to the unborn child and as a consequence probably to its mother too… Sure, some people put beauty first but honestly, one would wonder why someone with that attitude decided that getting pregnant were a smart idea.

[Pharma]

Vitamin E oil? You mean tocopherol acetate? Replace with tocopherol.

Else, agree with @Bill_Toge, it’s an oil .