Pharma
Forum Replies Created
-
helenhelen said:…do you replace some oil with it, or do you simply add it while leaving the original level of oils unchanged?Also, how much is needed to make a difference? Would 1% cetyl palmitate in an emulsion with a high level of oil (around 20%) have any effect?
Is cetyl palmitate problematic in terms of increasing a draggy effect and whitening/soaping on rub-in?
…I use it at about 1-2%. Hence, no real need to replace anything. I, for no particular reason, tend to subtract such additives from my fall guy water LoL. As a pharmacist, I works more often with older pharmaceutical formulations which often lack aesthetics/haptics of ‘modern’ cosmetics. Cetyl palmitate is a good starting point to try to render them smoother/softer if beeswax is proportionally swapped for it and less greasy/tacky if it’s used to replace some hydrogenated peanut oil (pretty common traditional ingredient here in Switzerland).The effect is not super strong/evident, it just feels nicer/silkier somehow. I really appreciate that dry-ish silkiness whilst my wife doesn’t share the same opinion.Can’t comment on soaping… I haven’t paid much heed to that. -
Cetearyl (a mixture of cetyl and stearyl alcohols) and pure cetyl alcohol are very common and probably the grandfathers and go-to standards of fatty alcohols. For your climate, behenyl alcohol might be more suitable due to its higher melting point???Since whales are no longer hunted down for spermaceti, cetyl palmitate is the prototype of fatty alcohol esters. Historywise, this wax is pretty similar to cetyl alcohol. I like it but now tend to myristyl myristate which might be too soft for hot climates.For traditional pharmaceutical as well as minimalist formulations, cetyl or cetearyl alcohol and cetyl palmitate are ‘must haves’.
-
nullafulla said:@Pharma clay mask without clay.. we might try that and see if anyone notices 😉
Who was it again who has a sugar scrub without sugar? As long as your mask looks like a clay mask, you may call it clay mask if you add something which might be interpretable as clay-ish related. :blush:
-
I wouldn’t use clay :smiley: .Seriously, I can’t tell you what I would use because I haven’t given clay-based products much thought.You could try figuring out which of the four is the issue and only replace that.
-
Astonishing that we didn’t already have someone ask for colloidal silver against coronaviruses… there are so incredibly many people out there preaching shit they don’t know anything about and the brainless masses feed out of their hands, it’s scaring!I’ve heard from folks using similar bogus and sometimes actually dangerous procedures (with hypochlorous acid or colloidal silver amongst other things) to treat diseases like common cold and even cancer. Fools!
-
You will have a hard time finding real research paper regarding that.Clays contain huge amounts of metals such as iron, adding chelates may not work at ‘common’ concentrations. How much really needs to be added depends on clay type and quality and would have to be tested.Clays bind quite a few ingredients and may thereby rendering them useless. Caprylhydroxamic acid would be such an example.Small cationic (pH dependent) but also hydrophobic compounds may also bind to clay which makes clay a fairly hard thing to preserve. Mix that with lecithin and you’ve got yourself a real tough nut to crack.Regarding adverse effects of your product: Might be any of the used preservatives. They are all known for, to a more or less often and/or severe degree, causing burning sensation and/or skin reddening. These effects are pH dependent (except phenoxyethanol) -> what’s the pH of your product?
-
Freezing is also great, fridge on the other hand max for a week.
-
Cold process, okay. Still, chances that you could blame enzymes is still very low whereas chances that it’s microbial are higher.I’d try a test batch with boiled water. Simply boil it for a few minutes, fill it in a container up to the brim and close it as good as possible (to avoid contact with air), let cool and use that water directly without introducing too much air in the process. Hence, the final product shouldn’t contain much oxygen. If you still have the very same effect (zero effect is unlikely, oxygen is everywhere)… then I’m like ??? Maybe try adding metabisulfite to quench oxygen?Sucrose stearate is a surfactant, it can speed up chemical reactions (lower surface tension equals better contact between molecules and it helps tocopherol to get in touch with AA*) and it also stabilises bubbles (instead of ‘evaporating’, gas gets trapped as visible bubble).*Tocopherol is known to act as oxidation booster under certain conditions and it regenerates AA if in contact with it (because one is in water, the other in oil, only an emulsifier brings them together). This means that one AA molecule might redox-cycle several times instead of being a one way ticket or, the other way round, it activates tocopherol better/more often so that tocopherol can do damage to whatever compound it does damage to. Given the respective % of the two, the latter option seems more likely but I can’t see how tocopherol could produce gas.Unfortunately, the effect of emulsifiers on oxidation stability is not predictable, there is no good or bad, only trial and error will tell.
-
If the hand sanitiser is meant to kill microbes, then you should throw it away and start anew with less DEA
.I really advise against trying to ‘repair’ your mistake, it might result in a less effective product and for obvious reasons, this can be dangerous. -
THIS link to the EPA might help.
-
Enzymes are present as contaminants in/on most anything. But most do not produce gas, are not stable over time, are inactivated by heat (those which go into the product at 70°C will likely be destroyed), require specific conditions such as electrolytes and pH… some exceptions are enzymes found in laundry detergents which withstand harsh conditions and function under varied conditions but those do not produce gas. Common enzymes I recall which may result in formation of gas are (my brain is still halfway asleep) carbonic anhydratase and cytochromes. The former requires carbonate as educt though this will be gone if you bring your water to a rolling boil for a few minutes because by doing so, it degases (air, including oxygen and CO2 will ‘evaporate’) whereas cytochromes are sensitive to chelates such as phytate.Bottom line is: It’s more likely that microbes are responsible.What I’ve noticed during my PhD is that oxidation (of ascorbyl palmitate but also certain additives used for enzymatic assays) is somewhat unpredictable. Simply changing a detergent/emulsifier or the buffer whilst maintaining the same pH and overall composition greatly impacts oxidation reactions. Also, presence of air (basically oxygen and CO2) in the medium is detrimental.
-
@ngarayeva001 Not at all! Urea is soluble in the water phase and because it’s so hydrophilic, it even works with water as the internal phase (that’s why it required a minute waiting between the two mixing steps). Imagine how fast you’ll be with water as outer phase
. -
@Belassi You’re not going to kill spores with lavender EO. What you need is one or several of the following strategies:- Use another oxidising agent: Iodine or hypochlorit comes to mind- Cook the sh*ç@ out of your product (not to recommend with gels and alcoholic products, you know why better than I do :blush: )- Use sterile filtration (not easy with gels and doesn’t solve container contamination and the like)- Don’t care about spores (for more or less clean raw materials and GMP/GxP an acceptable decision)- Use an aldehyde: Formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde are common but require uncomfortably high levels to go from sporistatic to sporicidal. As an educated guess, aldehyde containing EOs might be an option (unfortunately, that includes several of those which have to be labelled due to allergic potential exactly due to presence of reactive aldehydes).The trick with spores is that they are very tough nuts to crack and require removal, heat (for some species even more than the product can take), or chemical reactions. Lavender EO contains mostly hydrocarbons as well as phenols and esters thereof which do not undergo necessary chemical reactions with spores. If you need inspiration which to choose, döTerra as an example has a list for possible candidates (first hit asking Google).BTW go somewhat acidic (alkaline would work too but destroys the skin acid mantle and that’s obviously bad, worse regarding the current situation).
-
Regarding the FDA files shared by @Vinnyg32, please note the following statement: The firm does not add other active or inactive ingredients. Different or additional ingredients may impact the quality and potency of the product.This means: You shall not produce or sell hand sanitisers containing gelling agents or any other non-listed ingredients no matter what unless you get your product properly tested and registered! Anything other than the FDA proposed composition is, at least in the US (Switzerland for example has a slightly different formula with 10 times less glycerol and optional H2O2), not approved as ‘anti-coronavirus’!Regarding surface disinfection: go with the EPA recommendations.
-
The officially recommended formulation by leading health authorities such WHO does not contain gelling agents.Some gellants might in fact reduce the efficacy of the sanitiser -> don’t play around with products & additives which haven’t proven safe and efficient in this regard and go with simple alcohols at appropriate concentrations!
-
63% w/w equals 70% v/v. WHO uses v/v and nobody uses w/v any longer (except probably the US cause they also stick to imperial measurements without reason).BTW I don’t calculate due to volume depression but go with conversion tables, a lot faster and easier .
-
Add a wax, behenyl alcohol, stearic acid or other high melting ingredients.
-
The WHO formulation only contains H2O2 because the sanitiser should also work against everything and be clean even if prepared under low hygienic standards. That’s why they recommend traces of H2O2 to get the product as clean as possible. It has no use against the coronavirus and you can leave it be.
-
Fekher said:…
I see that for coronavirus sanitizer have 75%IPA or 80%ethanol so the lower level will not work for coronavirus???!!
All share here about sanitizer talk about 60%and 70% alcohol’s level which seems not efficient for coronavirus??
Liquid soap based on LABSA or N70 is it effective solution for coronavirus??
…Higher % is simply more efficient against viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 than lower % which is fine against bacteria. Lower % is better than nothing but given the choice, go with the WHO recommendations.
Soap is poorly understood and we still lack valid data which soap is more or less efficient. IIRC @Perry posted something in this regard. The main effect of soap is not to destroy viruses but to mechanically remove them. In everyday life, regularly washing your hands with soap (for at least 30 seconds) has proven a valuable tool to reduce bioload and infection risk.A: Stick to the recommendations given by WHO, CDC, ECDC etc.!B: If you’re not sure what you do, don’t do it!C: This is not a beauty topic but serious business which puts lives in danger if done wrong and therefore should be left to health professionals or at least those who stick to the rules given by health authorities!
Only formulations approved by above mentioned organisations may be called antivirals or disinfectants without further testing. All other concoctions and formulations require proper antimicrobial testing, else they are just something like cosmetic refreshment products. -
Ups… haven’t seen that you use 91% ethanol. Still results in 70% v/v.
-
If you have a look at the table @jemolian posted, TEA won’t work for your 77% v/v.
-
Beryl01 said:…How are they dispersed in the product?Err… this may now sound like a stupid question but I have to ask, no offence: Do you know the definition of the word ‘disperse’ and what this actually means?If yes: Did you ever make cheese fondue (real one, not the ready-to-cook in vacuum sealed tin-foil pouches)? If yes, this would greatly reduce my time trying to explain things. If not: You may really want to consider doing so, it’s very much worth it :smiley: ! I recommend ‘moitié-moitié’ (half Gruyère and half Vacherin fribourgeois).
-
If it is really leaf and root powders, then they are not fully soluble in anything and have to be dispersed in the product.
-
Graillotion said:…reasonably natural Mosquito lotion with Vanillin……Oxidation is very much a consideration……using only carrier oils that are thought to repel…ie: Karanja, Pracaxy, Andiroba, Soy, etc……I added ROE and dl panth, as that was about the only two antioxi’s I had on the bench……mosquito lotion…Reasonably natural… what should I say… you might want to consider adding IR3535 to your lotion. It’s a reasonably natural insect repellent and it’s fairly efficient too, not as efficient as DEET and icaridin but readily biodegradable instead. Officially, it’s synthetic but given the fact that it’s an amino acid derivative with two out of three modifications being ‘natural’ and the third is also found in ‘green’ or ‘clean’ cosmetics ingredients…What is it with vanillin? Do you just like it’s scent or do you add it as fixative for repellent EOs? As a more stable and scentless alternative you could try Glucam P-20.Why is oxidation a problem and what do you fear is going to oxidise?There are certain oils which do repel insects such as ticks but I’ve never heard of those you mentioned containing anything repellent at useful concentrations. Maybe they help insofar as mosquitoes slip on it, fall on their faces, and break their proboscis? And when they go rancid (you really shouldn’t include antioxidants if you’re aiming for that effect) they greatly help keeping larger carnivores at bay though you may be facing vultures instead.What is ROE? I know roe as fish ‘eggs’… If you call it caviare, you may sell your product for a lot more $$ . You’re on Hawaii (How nice is that! Here around, weather forecast announces frost for the next few days now that everything starts flowering ;( .) and hence, applying fish eggs might have people fearing they’re going to be pray of branchiura, otherwise known as fish lice, instead of mosquitoes 🙂 .Panthenol is not an antioxidant.And lastly, a mosquito lotion ain’t that a lotion mosquitoes use to rub on their bellies after feeding to avoid stretch marks?
-
@JLLL18 Maybe you and your friends just grew older and gravity and co. got the better of you? *Ducks-and-runs-away*