Pharma
Forum Replies Created
-
ETcellphone said:Do you know a good place to purchase it?Mine is food grade from the local health food shop
. Cheaper versions are available in Europe from BulkPowders.com and MyProtein.com, for US customers, PulkSupplements.com would be a place to look for it. I have the impression that, more often than not, food grade is way purer than cosmetic grade & you can use your ingredients for cosmetics and food without any worries. -
Epsom salt is worse than sea salt in breaking emulsions. How does it perform without any sea & Epsom salt?It’s probably the EO emulsion droplets floating up. If the particles don’t fuse (the emulsion/micelles hold), a gelling agent might resolve flotation.
-
bsingle said:…My question is that what are the reasons of development of these three?…
Honestly, I guess most manufacturers don’t actually care about pH beyond product stability & appearance… but that’s just my impression. @Perry is the go-to guy for shampoos.
-
It depends on the ingredients, not all surfactants tolerate low pH . There is seldom a ‘best’ in cosmetics but a middle ground and a bunch of opinions of people with completely opposite expectations and demands.The right question would be: What is the best for me (followed with as many helpful informations as possible).
-
Ferulic acid is about as soluble in propanediol as it is in ethanol. Also, tocopherol is nicely soluble in it too. So no worries there . If the mentioned 17% are correct: Mix everything, shake (heat always speeds up things but isn’t mandatory) and call it a day of hard work, if anyone asks. :smiley: The Ordinary uses propanediol as ‘fairly cheap solvent for everything which isn’t purely oil soluble’.No preservatives needed, it’s self-preserving as it is.Where there is no water, there is no need to care about pH (usually).You already have a basis of pure solvent… if you want to increase absorption of ascorbic acid, switch to ethylascorbate . Pure propanediol doesn’t feel super nice already, adding common cosmetic penetration enhancers will likely turn your solution turbid/milky, call for emulsifiers, and will leave your skin even oilier without actually helping with the ascorbic acid.If you want a nice feel, yes, tweak your formulation. If you want it skin-friendly, adjust pH (which requires addition of water) and you end up with a cream or similar.
-
Lipstick & detergents = no more lipstick especially if heated above melting point of lipstick. With a bit of bad luck, some colour will remain (can even happen with acetone).Nail paint & detergents = only no more nail paint if your nail paint is of piss poor fabrication and should be reformulated. Else, no reasonable detergent without solvent (or mechanical scrubbing) will work.
-
Try acetone (as long as you don’t have polyacrylate materials).
-
A chelate is something which grabs (‘complexes’) heavy metals (most of all iron) in a tight grip so they can no longer redox cycle and oxidise unsaturated fatty acids (i.e. make them go rancid faster, a process deliberately initiated by addition of metal salts to speed up drying of linseed oil paints and varnishes). Now, your toothpaste is at pH 9 which would be a good pH for citric acid chelation and contains a lot of bicarbonate. At that pH and carbonate content, most of the heavy metals are in insoluble carbonate, oxide, and hydroxide form and don’t do much other than just hanging around. Adding citrate (assuming there is enough water to actually keep it in solution) would be catastrophic (in theory) because it will make said metals become soluble and bioavailable for micro-organisms. From a chemical and microbiological point of view, adding citrate to a toothpaste is an utterly bad idea.What citrate does is to chelate calcium. In case you use hard tap water for cleaning your teeth, it will make it feel softer and, should you have soap inside your toothpaste, also boost foam and produce a nicer lather. This is likely the only good reason why you should add citrate (for example as sodium citrate).In anhydrous products, you’re well advised to add an oil soluble antioxidant (vitamin E) to protect the oils from getting rancid too fast. You can’t do much with a chelate (because they require water) in this regard (at least not with ‘natural’ and potentially edible ingredients) except adding a tannin rich plant extract such as rhatany which is great for the gums but also bears the chance that it precipitates iron ions (however, having an anhydrous formulation might forestall the latter effect).How to use sodium citrate in oil: as a suspension exactly like you use sodium bicarbonate.BTW I wouldn’t bother too much about HUMANS drowning in plastic but rather the whole rest of our planet .
-
Preserved water aka aqua conservans is a pharmaceutical term for water preserved with methyl- and propylparaben .Unless there’s a lot of coconut and mineral oil in there, it seems unlikely that you reach saturation by upping urea to 48%. On the other hand, that composition isn’t in decreasing weight-% order ;( . You don’t happen to have a proper LOI, do you?
-
Dr_Sara said:…????Wouldn’t pink cocoa products be fantastic in cosmetics?
To me, this sounds rather scary! LoL! But I can imagine that it’s fairly easy to find customers for something like that.
-
Dr_Sara said:I have a bit more geographic knowledge than you might imagine.Wasn’t meant as an offence . I simply assumed that you’re from the states due to you mentioning studies in Philadelphia. :blush: Swiss MILK chocolate is allegedly the best (can’t comment on that, I don’t appreciate it that much) but dark one ain’t. I was under the impression that it’s no longer a secret that French and Belgian high cocoa chocolate are world-class but now it looks like the NDB (Swiss Secret Service would sound sooo much cooler) is better at its job than I imagined.
-
They might use it as chelate, not preservative. Sodium citrate would work as well.Toothpaste usually comes with a very low water content and can hence be self-preservating.
-
Water and urea will be too liquid I guess.
-
All I can see on that table is traces of allergenic constituents but nothing above 20 ppm (or, in the case of benzyl alcohol less than 184 uM). That’s not even going to preserve pure Naticide itself and, once diluted by a factor of 2, doesn’t have to be labelled separately.I studied and did my PhD at ETH Zurich and a post doc at EPGL in Geneva. Both towns are in Switzerland, the former in the German speaking eastern part, the latter in the French speaking western part. Just in case prejudice or your natural science proficiencies excel your geography and cultural knowledge by far: Switzerland is a little central European landlocked country with direct democracy, big mountains and bigger prices but small everything else. Yes, I live on chocolate and cheese fondue although IMHO France has better dark chocolate and better stinky cheese too though their raclette and fondue suck. And yes, we (hopefully not me but most of the others) aren’t a very warm-hearted nor accommodating people but no, corona lock-down and the 1.5 metre distance didn’t bring us closer together, that’s just an internet meme based on false statistical trends which were caused by elderly people running out of batteries for their hearing aids. 🙂
-
It is a cationic emulsifier with good antimicrobial efficacy but it’s also irritating and AFAIK is recommended mostly for rinse-off products or at really low levels in leaf-ons.
-
Just to add some more confusion (or clarity, if you were a chemist): the ‘official’ names of chemicals are according to IUPAC and @Perry’s example would be called sodium dodecyl sulfate. There are other nomenclatures too and colloquial terms as well… sometimes, these are identical but too often they are not.Grades are also used to describe purity such as cosmetic, pharmaceutical, food, technical, analytical grade…
-
VEN said:…Am now senior software architect! :smiley: …And in fact, ended up being sharper than needles! …
To clarify, the raw product is 113ml, if that changes the calculation at all…Ah, the guy who programmed Windows Vista
!Okay, maybe you’re above solubility then… what else is in your product?Volume only matters if you want a v/v or w/v percentage but for w/w density is irrelevant. -
Simple answer: You can’t.Acids preserve (the water phase, not oils) by lowering pH below 6 (the lower the better). Alas, low pH is poison for teeth and your bicarbonate would turn your toothpaste into a ‘self-igniting effervescent paste’.
-
Benzyl alcohol, phenethyl alcohol, phenylpropanol, anisic acid, and levulinic acid can all be labelled as preservative or as perfume and they are all just slightly water soluble but well alcohol and/or oil soluble or even miscible. Many other preservatives (all parabens included) have a logP greater than 1 and they wouldn’t work with a logP below that (they have to penetrate cell walls and membranes) .For the non-chemists: Simply said, logP represents phase distribution of molecule X if thrown into a 1:1 mixture of water and octanol. If the molecule in question prefers water, logP is negative and if it likes oils, logP is positive. logP 0 would mean that it goes into the two phases at equal amounts because it’s equally well soluble in both solvents, 1 means it likes oils 10 times more than water and 2 means it likes oils a 100 times more.I’m also wondering what the heck is in that Sinerga product!On the other hand, the product Fenicap they sell contains phenylpropanol and is listed as ‘fragrance-free’ and Feniol contains phenethyl alcohol and is listed as ‘for fragrance-free formulations’. Marketing, I hate marketing!BTW Naticide is, according to Sinerga, ‘obtained through a particular and reserved process, according to IFRA recommendations. It does not need the use of co-preservatives. Perfumed note of almond and vanilla.’Almond indicates benzylalcohol and slight vanilla could be vanillyl alcohol, benzoic acid… As a wild guess, it could be purified and maybe hydrolysed balsam of Peru or Tolu balsam. Good antimicrobial activities and approved as fragrance.
-
Cool idea!
-
If it does seem to work, the only thing you’ve done wrong is exact maths.Assuming you added 8 g urea and 2 g water to 100 g gel, the result would be 110 g = 43.6% urea .If you were to add 15.5 g pure urea, this would result in your desired 48% .The one thing you did exactly right is not going for that $ 700 product!In my experience and given the great water solubility of urea, simply adding pure urea even in prill form, mixing, letting sit for some minutes, re-mixing (and probably repeating once more) is all it takes to fully dissolve and incorporate urea into creams or gels. It may transiently cause issues but if the end product can handle the added amount of urea, these issues will pass once homogeneously mixed.In theory, urea is soluble at ~54% (w/w) in water and with the proper knowledge and one single ingredient (which you probably have in stock), a 73% (w/w) honey-like liquid is possible. A bit more knowledge and maybe some trial and error turns that into a gel (with obviously lower % than the initial 73).
-
I’ve never been a fan of these, especially not in products for direct contact with humans & animals, and was saying so for over two decades now.The main issue of such allergens and not just isothiazolinones is not their chemistry but that they’re often excessively used in many different products of everyday life such as washing detergents (dishes, clothes, cars, you name it), paints, lacquer, glue, fertilisers, pesticides & other agrochemicals, all kinds of industrial liquids down to the stuff used to build our houses, colour our clothes, or clean machines which process our food. I don’t have actual numbers for MIT & CMI but these are produced in many million metric tons per year (guess who sells a metric ton as MOQ?). MIT, CMI and other isothiazolinones are present in nearly everything (literally nearly everything!) which contains water at some point in its production process and isn’t meant for consumption such as paper and in a lot (= estimations talk of ~50%!) of materials potentially degraded by microbes such as fillings and insulation materials. It is virtually impossible to live in a halfway modern world without getting in constant contact with these chemicals and that’s the main issue. No, not just for these two but for nearly every similar product and we will see exactly the same shit going down with ‘modern’, ‘better’, and more ‘natural’ preservatives (as of now, my bet is on caprylhydroxamic acid when it comes to cosmetics).At least, isothiazolinones have been regulated in cosmetics and allergy prevalence is going down slowly since that day. But, as said ‘same shit, new name’ is so far all humanity managed to produce in too many fields of our lives. We need to rethink the basics and not just find ways around legislations because we can cheat customers and dupe politicians but we can’t cheat nature and we can’t dupe biology.
-
Probably/likely the semi-synthetics and the oils for shine… like the mentioned HPG, Elaeis Guineensis (Palm) Oil, Organic Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Cetearyl Olivate, Organic
Butyrospermum Parkii (Shea) Butter, Glyceryl
Stearate, Organic Euterpe Oleracea (Acai) Berry Pulp Oil, Cetyl
Babassuate, Passiflora Edulis (Passion Fruit) Seed Oil, Oryza Sativa
(Rice Bran) Oil, Orbignya Oleifera (Babassu) Seed Oil. Obviously, you can’t just use these for most hair types or you’d look like drowned in butter. These may, depending on hair type, also help against frizz and increase combability.Moisturising, besides the aforementioned ones, are the hygroscopic ingredients Kosher Vegetable Glycerin and probably Triticum Vulgare (Wheat) Protein too. -
Just keep in mind that many solid moisturisers are hygroscopic, they tend to attract moisture form air turning your product into a sticky lump over time if you’re not careful (like working the moisturiser into an oil to protect it from air and hence moisture).Other dry moisturisers are salts such as sodium PCA (also pure PCA) and sodium lactate, amino acids like proline, other sugar alcohols (polyols) which are often less hygroscopic than sorbitol such as erythritol, xylite, or inositol. Several, often quaternary, amino acid derivatives are highly efficient but often very hygroscopic moisturisers like choline chloride and the less hygroscopic choline bitartrate, betaine aka glycine betaine aka trimethyl glycine and carnitine and it’s derivatives, or related DMAE bitartrate, ectoine, and citrulline (commonly available as malate salts). Also sugars (trehalose comes to mind), taurine, allantoin, and creatine can serve as poorly hygroscopic humectants. And obviously, urea is a solid. There’s also stuff you’ve probably never heard of and which may not be used as cosmetic ingredients such as beta-alanine betaine, pipecolic acid and its salts, betonicine and choline-O-sulphate which would be great though they are highly hygroscopic.And then, there are all the more or less lipophilic and hence non-hygroscopic emollients which often have a moisturising effect (although many are liquids or semi-solids).
-
It’s basically AMTicide plus salicylate or sorbate plus propanediol (at pH 4.5-5.5).IMHO this combo is likely already contained in some products on the market. In which case, that patent is nil.I wouldn’t trust such a preservative blend although it might work with 10% propanediol…