Pharma
Forum Replies Created
-
Tocopherol is likely to interact with AA, lactic acid might… something has to, doesn’t it?Hmm… glass should theoretically be as inert as plastic. Metal jars/tubes would have been my first guess (we’ve probably covered that already but I’ve forgotten it). -
Hi PaulaPolyacrylate and carbomer require neutralisation i.e. a neutral pH. Once you add ascorbic ACID, pH drops because you add, well, an acid. Version 1: add a base to correct pH and lose some of the effects of Vit. C. Version 2: use another pH independent gellant.
-
IPA grade matters. Some qualities are even alkaline though really pure IPA/water mixtures are pH neutral (pH 7).You always have to adjust pH with pH sensitive gellants.
-
RDchemist15 said:@Pharma Typo? (80%v/v) or am I missing a step here?
…No typo. The fact you’re probably missing is that mixing x grams of ethanol with y grams of water will result in volume depression. You can hence not use density of pure ethanol for your calculation but have to consider density of 63% w/w or 70% v/v, respectively.
Likewise, mixing 630 g ethanol with 270 g water will not result in 1 litre. Therefore, it’s not advised to just weigh the required amount of ethanol and top of with water to 1 litre because during this manipulation a certain mixing of both liquids at the interphase will take place and mess up your calculations and as a result the final %. -
Did you knock-out other ingredients such as tocopherol, lactic acid and most of the water phase?Assuming the issue is of chemical and not microbial nature, leaving preservatives and the like out might be okay for figuring out what’s going to happen.Did you also use plastic packaging?
-
Fekher said:…Where is the problem by spraying solution in Air.It usually doesn’t work and there is commonly no need to ‘disinfect’ air. I’ve seen enough people doing so and it’s utter nonsense. If you want to disinfect air, you’d have to hermetically seal the room, use unreasonably large quantities of disinfectant, and leave that for hours just to find yourself in an unbreathable atmosphere.
BTW, liquid disinfectants are generally better than gel-based ons because of better/broader wetting especially under fingernails. Gels are simply easier to use on the go because they don’t drip. Apart from convenience, there is absolutely no reason why someone would want to turn a liquid disinfectant into a gel.
-
It is a well-known fact that 20% ethanol alone does only stop bacteria and fungi from growing but it does by no means kill them and it doesn’t really hurt viruses either. Soap on the other hand may inactivate viruses (octyl glucoside is known to disintegrate bacterial cell membranes). There is a small chance that mixing the right detergent with ethanol turns it virucidal at least against certain types of viruses. As an educated guess based on the scarce knowledge regarding soap and (corona) viruses I doubt that your cocktail will do the trick. Only proper testing will tell.
-
zeeshan said:…
Triethanolamine [TEA] (99%) - 2.5
Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer (Ashland Ultrathix 21) - 0.35…I may be wrong but the proportion TEA/UltraThix doesn’t sound right. 7 times more base than polymer for neutralisation? Try adding just enough TEA to obtain a neutral pH (around 7). I have to guess how much TEA you’d actually need but my gut feeling tells me it has to be around 10 times less than what you use i.e. around 0.25. -
I had a customer at the pharmacy where I used to work who loved THIS eye cream but wasn’t too happy with it containing not enough urea. Given all the benefits of urea combined with her high appreciation of that particular cream and my careful/minimalist attitude, the solution was obvious: When she bought a pot, which was about once a month, I simply put 5 g of pure urea on top of the new 50 g cream pot, mixed it with a tiny spatula, let sit for a minute, remixed and tada!Every time a perfect cream and a happy & satisfied customer.Urea, if it doesn’t lead to emulsion destabilisation, is so super water soluble, that it can easily be mixed into a cream/lotion afterwards, like making 200 g stable urea-free cream and then taking smaller aliquots wherein you mix urea right before starting to use respective tiny pot. Should urea turn out to be super unstable in a product, mixing can even be done in your hands by roughly estimating 10% by eye just before you apply the cream (probably weigh cream and urea the first 1-2 times to get a better visual judgement). If your off by a few % it’s highly likely that it won’t matter. Urea is quite forgiving in that regard.
-
That’s correct
-
Trace amounts are more or less common and difficult to remove. You’ll be fine.Glycerol is not needed, it’s in there as skin conditioning agent in order to not dry your hands out too much.
-
lmosca said:…
I am surprised it does even look like a gel, I would say more like plumber’s putty.
…LoL!What a smart invention this formulation is. Bashing and bouncing the viruses to ‘death’ has many advantage: no resistance develops, you can reuse the gel ball/bat many times and can even put it to good use when it comes to enforcing social distancing or getting the last roll of toilet tissue at walmart.
-
2.4% is likely to cause whitening on nearly all types of tissue dyes and will show the latest after washing your clothes (you can even get holes in some materials). Else, you did something wrong or have already white clothes .Citric acid shows some antiviral activity and might be an option for third world countries for some types of application. Also, a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and acetic acid (or formic acid) known as peracetic acid is very effective (and very aggressive but degrades to rather harmless acetic acid).Air disinfection? Tricky!
-
It also depends on concentration, not just of the extract in the product but also of active constituents within the extract. In case of bear berries: the active brightening/whitening agent is arbutin. If you find an extract standardised for arbutin and use it at high enough levels, it’s likely to be as effective (often, plant extracts are more efficient than their single constituents) as using arbutin.Turmeric does not work. Why? I did run tests with turmeric extracts and curcumin (it’s main active constituent) and worked with a guy who tested it but also read a lot more than I did (he claimed that he literally read every halfway worthy scientific publication on curcumin/turmeric prior to 2010). Although turmeric (which, in pharmaceutical terms, stands synonymous to curcumin) is probably the one silver bullet out there, only doing what’s good and healthy for humans and nothing that harms no matter in which test you run it! Too stupid that it only does so in in vitro assays. Curcumin is so extremely lipophilic, that it does not penetrate deeper than 1 cell layer deep (maybe 2, maybe just one cell membrane depending on the way of administration). There are tricks to increase bioavailability (for example the Ayurvedic trick of combining it with pepper) by a factor of 10 but this only rises blood levels to a low two digit nanogram/ml range. Unfortunately, that’s over 1’000 times too low. Just try it out: cook some cauliflower in water wherein you add some turmeric powder. It takes about 20 minutes until it’s done and all yellow. Cut it in two and see where it’s yellow and where still white.Japanese scientists tried to chemically modify curcumin to keep its pharmacological activities on one hand but increase water solubility and bioavailability on the other… they successfully created such molecules but alas, all showed considerable toxicity and could not be used in/on humans!Curcuminoids which don’t colour your skin bright yellow (remember, curcumin is not just THE active constituent but also the dye which turns curry yellow) make up a very small portion of turmeric extract and are acceptable antioxidants, about as good or bad as any polyphenol and hence, are about as good or bad anti-ageing compounds as the rest. But that’s all they are, average antioxidants.Other stuff in turmeric are a bit essential oil (of unpleasant smell, if you ask me) and a lot of starch and some minor stuff you find in mostly any plant.
-
Your calculation is correct (neglecting rounding errors). Quesiton: Why use 99.9% ethanol? This dried ethanol is usually more expensive than commonly distilled 96% ethanol. As long as you correctly adjust the amounts (consider density-changes upon dilution!), it does not matter which one you use.Ethanol, unless industrial one for burning or synthesis, should contain methanol. Ask your supplier whether it does not not. Do not use methanol-containing products! This stuff goes through skin (and lungs) and can cause blindness amongst other severe and irreversible damages to your health.
-
Sodium hypochlorite solutions at 0.4-0.5% at a slightly alkaline pH is known as Dakin’s solution and has been used to disinfect wounds since (quickly checking Wiki) 1916. Hypochlorite, like hydrogen peroxide and potassium permanganate, is a strong oxidant and will, at sufficiently high concentrations, kill and dissolve EVERYTHING living. The trick is to find the line between killing only microbes without harming humans. Those 0.5% have proven safe and effective but mostly to prevent bacterial and fungal infections.Is it effective against viruses? Good question… logic dictates that it has to be. Found some publications which state that surface decontamination depends on the type of virus tested and may take 5 to 10 minutes residence time (using 0.2 to 0.65% expressed as available chlorine).Higher % and higher pH certainly boost performance but also lead to skin irritation.A drawback is that iron and steel don’t like hypochlorite.
-
Denatonium benzoate is added at extremely low levels because denatonium is the most bitter substance known to mankind. It’s use on skin is without problem. On the other hand, MIK is regarded as possibly carcinogenic… up to you whether or not you want to use it for personal use.Are there regulations: Where I live, yes there are. Where you live… probably not (after all, your country still uses MIK as denaturant).
-
The problem with urea is it’s degradation which theoretically shouldn’t occur but regularly does in every industry. Why exactly, we don’t know but it tends to hydrolyse (the exact mechanism is only partially known and partially speculative and/or formulation dependent). Problem No. 1: Full hydrolysis results in 1 part CO2 and 2 parts ammonia -> depending on pH, you’ll get a lot or twice a lot of gas bubbles. Problem No. 2: Partial degradation results in formation of cyanide and derivatives thereof.Gotta run, watch the news (corona as usual, I’m quite sure about that).
-
The official recommendation is on a volume/volume base; 70-80% ethanol, or 60-80% isopropanol, n-propanol or a mixture of all three is the current % against the corona virus. Weight-wise, 63% w/w would correspond to 70% v/v and therefore, your range might indeed be on a w/w basis but it’s not, read the CDC guidelines. Given that higher % are more effective against viruses, the range can, again with regard to the corona virus, go as high as pure ethanol. w/v is usually not used.It does not matter what exactly is in it as long as the % of alcohols is within the antiviral range. In case of ‘perfume’ ethanol, also called ARO ethanol, the denaturant is commonly rosemary extract which doesn’t smell but gives the ethanol a bitter, undrinkable taste. This denaturant does not hamper antimicrobial efficacy and you’re absolutely fine and safe using it.On the other hand, you should refrain from adding other stuff (except for glycerol which is proven safe at up to 1.45%) because it might decrease efficacy. Sure, certain additives do increase it, others should, and yet others at least boost antibacterial efficacy but if you’re not 100% sure which ones do what, better don’t add any.
-
Dtdang said:…Because each person has his own cell receptors?
Not each one his own cell receptors in a strict sense. Many if not all receptors, enzymes, and other proteins have so called SNPs and other polymorphisms. If this makes a noticeable difference, we commonly refer to these often minor deviations as alleles. Some alleles make up the majority of a given protein within world population, other proteins occur in a dozen different varieties each at a substantial percentage. Many such polymorphisms are ‘silent’, they neither affect how said protein performs nor it’s binding to common xenobiotics/drugs. In case of the aforementioned alcohol dehydrogenase, most westerners have a fully functional allele (we have to spend more $$ for getting drunk) whereas an only partially functional allele is very common in the Asian population (many but by no means all Asians get drunk easier). You could compare it to hair curling or eye colour; you’re not the only one with allele X but you’re unique regarding the whole of your genome with all it’s evident and unnoticeable alleles and mutations. Apart from looking different, allele-drug interactions play only a minor role although they are more common than we want to believe. One of the most common cases are SNPs in the MDR1 which leads to certain people getting sleepy when taking antihistaminic pills whereas others can take twice as much and still won’t feel this adverse side effect. As said, we are only starting to see these differences with regard to certain pharmaceutical drugs whereas we ignore most of the minor and hence hard to determine polymorphisms. Take for example MMPs, a common target for cosmeceutical peptides: We know shit about effects of MMP polymorphisms and there’s nearly no way seeing and hence determining an effect upon dermal application of an alleged inhibitory peptide. It’s not like MDR1, a protein/gene commonly found as dysfunctional polymorphism in collies, which makes the common veterinary drug ivermectin a deadly poison for that breed.
-
Peptides, especially the small ones, usually only work in vitro. The fact that peptides are very small by nature automatically results in stronger differences regarding their binding affinity to different alleles. I don’t know if it’s really the case with cosmetic peptides and wouldn’t be astonished if it were wrong (cosmetics industries does strange and stupid things in the name of marketing) but logic dictates that cosmetic peptides should be those protein parts which bind to the active sites. Active sites rarely show point mutations due to loss of function (two exceptions are for example alcohol dehydrogenase and MDR1) and therefore shouldn’t show much differences between users.The main bias regarding ‘it works for person A but fails for person B’ is likely subjectivity and placebo effect.
-
- Use isopropanol or n-propanol- Don’t go outside aka self-quarantein- Stick to the basic rules as for example published on the WHO homepage- Distill your own moonshine
-
Imagine that already now, China has so clean air as it hasn’t seen in a long time.Imagen that already now, crude oil price is plummeting due to reduced mobility worldwide.Imagine that already now, many airplanes are grounded.Imagine that this situation might go on for some more months and mother nature is already smiling. Greta Thunberg must be smiling too…
-
Dilution of a factor 10 with distilled water will not affect pH (scientifically, it does but the deviation is so small, it doesn’t matter in practice) and is hence a valid tool to measure pH in thick creams or w/o emulsions or hard products such as soap.Strong dilutions will show a pH shift which is usually in the zero point something range. Effects of temperature on pH are about as strong/weak and therefore, dilution commonly won’t show noticeable effects in everyday life.Pure water has a pH of 7 which is due to self-dissociation into equal parts of hydronium and hydroxide ions. Once there are even small quantities of pH active substances dissolved in said water, pH reading will reflect pH of aforementioned substances and no longer water.
-
Melting the two together is all it takes, no solvent needed
.