Pharma
Forum Replies Created
-
THIS might be interesting for you.
-
ngarayeva001 said:Is there a reason why SA shouldn’t be heated?
No, none. SA is very stable.
-
First, I don’t have an answer to your question (I didn’t search thoroughly for it).Second, I’m good with educated guesses and applying/extrapolating from theory to practice.I can’t see anything that could possibly explain the “sulphates are bad” attitude except that sodium dodecyl sulfate is fairly aggressive aka efficient (not just for hair but also to skin, dishes, and so on). Sodium laureth sulfate is milder but hey, it’s still a sulphate and it still kills cells in a petri dish better/faster than lets say non-ionic surfactants. Sulphates are, like PEGs, not super well degraded, contribute to eutrophy, and because the other bad guys like petroleum and parabens are getting an old hat, we need a new bad guy and another reason why.It’s a freaking witch hunt out there! If warts on noses don’t cut anymore, let’s burn ginger gals!!!Something that got me smiling: Some company (was it Evonik or Cosphatec?) calls the “new good guys from the white-list” simply “label friendly”, not green chemistry based, eco-friendly, from renewable resources, CO2 neutral, sustainable, vegan, and fairtrade ingredients. Simply “label friendly” :smiley: .PS Pssst, don’t tell them that there’s only a minor difference between sulphates and sulphonates
. -
Urks…. Hey guys/girls: The other way round!Tetrahexyldecyl ascorbate (THA) is a huge molecule with a comparatively small part being actually ascorbic acid (AA)! If you were to take a 15% AA solution and magically transformed it to THA, the solution would contain 96% THA and there’d be only 4% left for other ingredients. THA is not more active or anything, it’s just sort of diluted in itself (well, theoretically it is more active, that’s the official trick of THA but that’s a different story). Idem for ascorbyl palmitate (AP) wherein only 30% is AA, the remaining 70% is a fatty acid. Hence, it’s not that easy to switch from an concentrated AA formula to an AP and even more tricky to a THA formula.That’s one reason why ascorbyl phosphate, ethyl ascorbic acid, and ascorbyl glucoside became more prominent: These molecules have a comparatively small molecular weight (obviously still higher than pure AA) i.e. you don’t need that much more than with the older derivatives.
-
Nope, unfortunately there is no standard at all ;( . Due to less regulations, you find a lot more junk in pet products (if they even care putting something useful on the label). Some simply put anything in there because it’s cheap and efficient (e.g. BHT, thiazolidinones, SDS and other “bad” guys with high irritation/allergic potential, cause by law, a pet is too often just an object), because they don’t care, because they don’t know anything about pets (except “I loooove cuuute ciiiitiiies!!!! <3”) or anything about cosmetics/veterinary medicine…Some “eco-organic-vegan” pet shampoos are too acidic because eco-friendly preservatives require a low pH, others are too alkaline because they *upps* I should have had that detergent neutralised???? If you want a “clean” shampoo for your pet but don’t want to dissect the label, measure pH and all that, simply buy a baby shampoo.You’re welcome!
-
It’s more of a myth than reality that dogs and cats have a higher skin pH than humans. Some studies show higher, others lower values for all three species.As it seems, pets have a broader pH range than humans.On the other hand, studies (and theory) show that the acid mantle is actually a good thing but some pets may not have an adequate one. “Acid treatment” of dogs for example by applying acidic foam or shampoo actually reduces skin inflammation and reduces “bad” bacteria.There is, however, an alkaline treatment which at least here around is getting a forgotten art and people only find back to it if nothing else works. The product we use is called pasta cerata, it’s a paste based on saponified bees wax and occlusive oils (click HERE for some recipes which are still hand made in pharmacies).Increasing pH requires a base (NaOH, KOH, TEA) or an alkaline salt (e.g. tripotassium citrate). In the end, the latter is the same as if KOH would be used. Bentonite won’t work, it’s not alkaline enough (if at all) unless chemically treated and then, again, as good as a standard base.
-
You could also add a few % wax, cetylalcohol, cetyl palmitate or similar. This would gel your low-viscosity oil and lower its HLB requirement. This increases emulsion stability and is better suited for w/o emulsions. It will however have a lower spreadability.Alternatively, adding hydrogenated peanut oil or lanolin will slightly lower or respectively slightly rise HLB requirement but also “gel” the oil phase and take up some water without the help of emulsifiers and still be stable. However, it will become opaque and occlusive or tacky, respectively.
-
Polyglyceryl-4 oleate is a low HLB emulsifier, suitable for the desired w/o emulsion whereas lysolecithin is mainly a o/w emulsifier but can be used in combination with low HLB emulsifiers for w/o.Use HLB values!Squalane/CCT 1:1 has an HLB requirement of 8. 8 is the HLB “exactly” between o/w and w/o emulsions. Given the small quantity of water you’re going to add, a w/o should work. An HLB of 8, or better try 7.5 could be achieved with sorbitan oleate (HLB 4.3, 3 parts) plus lysolecithin (HLB 9, 7 parts) or polyglyceryl-4 oleate (HLB ~5-6, 4 parts) plus lysolecithin (HLB 9, 6 parts). This is, if you know how many % lysolecithin are in ecogel!
Which emulsifiers do you have in stock?
-
Did you try pure octyldodecanol to see if it’s this or really the pigments?
-
BTW, 15% ascorbic acid equivalents equal 35% ascorbyl palmitate or 96% tetrahexadecyl ascorbate. Just saying…
-
Okay. Sounds interesting (but you’re probably not going to share in-depth company secrets with me here, are you?).What’s the concentration you’re going for? If you are using a diluted solution, you could likely use any sort of w/o emulsifier system or a mixture of mainly w/o plus some o/w. I’d use a mixture of two to three nonionic/zwitterionic ones and simply try to make an “empty” emulsion at first so you’re not going to waste any of your peptide during the first trial and error runs. Me personally, today and because it’s Monday, I’d start with polyglyceryl polyrhizinoleate as main emulsifier and either hydrogenated lecithin or Xyliance as auxiliary emulsifier. Mind, there’s no rational reason behind my choice! The choice is only yours and might be influenced by things like colour/turbidity, consistency, viscosity… probably these factors are more important than the peptide itself.You may want to think about using a gelling agent (for water and/or oil), a polyol (to reduce water activity) and some magnesium salt (if the peptide tolerates that) to increase emulsion stability.
-
Or you use sodium or potassium ascorbyl palmitate. It’s an anionic emulsifier which forms micelles in water if heated to roughly 35°C.
-
Depends which peptide you have.Many peptides have a very short shelf life once dissolved in water (I’m talking hours to days). Cosmetics gives a sh** about it because most (in many countries by definition all, that’s the difference between cosmetics and pharmaceuticals) have no pharmacological activity if applied to skin anyway.Some peptides can be dissolved in non-aqueous solutions wherein they are a lot more stable than in water.
-
It’s simple: The incompatibility is a pure problem of solubility. The higher the concentration, the more likely it is that something precipitates. The longer such a mixture hangs around, the larger eventual crystals grow. Also, large volumes slowly dripping through valves and a small hollow needle have it clog more easily than manually and quickly forcing 2 ml through just a needle. Also, small crystals in a muscle of an otherwise healthy patient are tolerable whereas many crystals circulating in the blood stream of a patient who’s already fighting for his life isn’t.I’ve never seen precipitates forming when mixing and injecting B12/lidocaine.BTW, if it did, then it’s easy and no real loss to just ditch the syringe and start anew whereas a cyanokit infusion isn’t that easily re-applied without additional worries arising. The patient groups to which both products are applied have a huge influence on what kind of possible interaction can or can not be tolerated. In this context, it’s not just about theoretical chemistry/physics but about people.
-
No, it’s not a good buffer. It’s not the worst depending on the pH range you wanted to buffer. For a “cosmetic” pH, one would consider using either citric acid + sodium/potassium citrate or triethanolamine + triethanolamine HCl or the like (mineral acid for neutralisation).Sodium, carbon dioxide and water do not split either, their reaction product NaHCO3 does. Salt is the combination of an acid and a base; reacting TEA with an acid such as hydrochloric acid results, once dissolved in water, in TEAH+ + Cl-. If you simply add TEA to water, it still acts as base and abstracts a proton from water: TEAH+ + OH-. It’s like ammonia. The one you buy is dissolved in water and actually consists of NH3 + H2O <-> NH4+ + OH-. The stronger the base, the more the equilibrium shifts to the right. Ditching Na2O (sodium oxide) into water doesn’t give an equilibrium Na2O + H2O -> 2 NaOH and that’s what we call a strong base, no or nearly no equilibrium.TEA can neutralise and hence gel carbomer, if used as base. But that’s mixing medium strength acid with medium/semi-strong base where both, acid and base stand in equilibrium with their “free” form. Using NaOH or KOH results in carbomer salts which are good buffers, a polymeric and hence weird and hard to predict one but nonetheless good buffers. Carbomer triethanolamine on the other hand is not as neat. It works and it may suffice for cosmetic intentions.Carbomer (depending which one) may stay/turn liquid if not enough or too much base (depending which one) has been added or it falls out. Hence, neutralising carbomer with soda lye and adding a buffer has carbomer “feel” like using too much neutralising lye. See, using the exact amount needed neutralises at best 100% of the acids on carbomer, applying more lye simply adds “salt” but doesn’t neutralise more because there is no more to neutralise. Adding more lye or additional salt simply interferes with electrostatics, the whole trick of carbomer is annihilated. Carbomer depends on a certain amount of negative charges (salt form) to gel, if these charges are shielded by floating around positive charges from added salts no matter that there are also negative ones floating around, the effect is gone, carbomer molecules collapse like they weren’t neutralised, and the product liquefies.Citrate carries 3 negative charges and might thereby bridge carbomer salt molecules. This effect is weaker than the aforementioned shielding because it’s yet another ion layer further away from the carbomer molecule (carb-…TEAH+…citrate3-…TEAH+…carb-).Besides, for carbomer it doesn’t matter if there is 2 Na+ or 1 Na+ and 1 TEAH+, all that counts are total positive charges and these are for both cases 2.Gotta go… nighty-night!
-
Higher concentration, more volume, slow injection, i.v. line etc. make it something completely different from mixing two diluted vials for immediate i.m. injection
. There’s so much more that could go wrong in the former case (including a life). -
I admit, I kinda always think of TEA as triethylamine because that’s what I used in the lab and it shares the same abbreviation. Apart from the same behaviour of the central nitrogen, triethanolamine has also three primary alcohol groups which could form esters with for example fatty acids but these won’t as long as there’s an excess water present.Other types of chemical reactions (degradation) and even further condensation reactions are in theory possible but require harsh conditions. Sure, nature is seldom all or nothing, and hence such reactions happen at very faint quantities under mild conditions too. Danger arises if such faint quantities are not as faint as they should be or sufficient to pose a health risk.TEA is “free” to 99.9-whatever % and not bound to anything. What the rest does or degrades to… I don’t know how stable the molecule really is in a cosmetic mixture. That’s why I, personally, don’t trust TEA (both, actually). It’s more of a hunch than backed up science but my gut feeling was right more than once.
-
Not enough. Most microbes won’t grow but won’t die either. Think of wine which may have up to 15% ethanol before fermentation stops. At about 20% you’re on the safe side but microbes will still be alive. Only above 40% makes them all die.
-
The only preservatives on there are methyl- and propylparaben whilst salicylic acid and EDTA could be used as additives. Some of the products on that list are unknown to me.Could you use the two parabens for your serum? Yes. Though I would increase the amount of polyols too.
-
If you’re in for a lengthy reading, click HERE.Apart from pharmaceutical drugs, they repeatedly mention polyunsaturated fatty acids and restoring skin barrier by applying ceramide, cholesterol, and (polyunsaturated) fatty acids (3:1:1). They also mention vitamin E and D and lactobacilli as well.Regarding your quote “Have tried diet already (I prepared a wholefood diet using brown rice, beans, carrot, green beans, apple…) - no effect at all.”I’m talking strict exclusion diet and that’s not it, that’s a healthy diet but here, it’s not about health but exclusion of ANYTHING food-related which could cause an allergy. It means feeding your dog something he/she never had before, like kangaroo and amaranth or elk and quinoa (obviously plus a full-spectrum multivitamin/mineral preparation because it’s not an equilibrated diet, just calories) for at least 2 weeks, that’s what I mean. It’s a PITA to do and most mess up at some point. An full-panel allergy test seems easier for most. Such a test can help but often doesn’t.You probably had some bloodwork done; if you’d like me to have a
look at them… can’t promise that I’ll see something new (I probably
don’t) but I have a different way of looking at things and I’m
personally interested seeing them. -
The cyanokit is something completely different and can not be compared with a standard B12 injection used to treat B12 deficiency .Burning during and shortly after a B12 i.m. injection is an often observed adverse effect. It’s not always happening, I do know people who don’t feel anything at all (except a prick in the beginning) but most do complain to a degree.
-
Good morning @DoreenNaw, I’m not mistaken. What I didn’t point out explicitly is that lidocaine and B12 come as separate products/vials and are only mixed in the syringe. And you’re correct, it an i.m. injection, never i.v. (did I write i.v.?).
-
Or it’s a fungus… Let me rephrase: most likely, it’s a fungus.1% propylene glycol plus 0.5% glycerol do not suffice for preservation! You’d need at least 10 times more of these to halfway keep microbes from growing.It is unlikely that any of your ingredients precipitate given their exceptional high solubility in water. Even if they degrade, their decomposition products remain highly water soluble. On the other hand, your serum is a great food for microbes and they will even feed on the two polyols if provided at such low concentrations.(I like smileys/emojis to underline personal feelings otherwise hard to express in a objective text like this. I really have the urge to post one here but alas, there’s none which gets green in the face and throws up…)
-
What is already in your oil serum? Only pure oils and nothing else?
-
HERE
Sorry :blush: