PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
I’m just a micro guy so can’;t judge impact on senstive skin. You might look at labels of “sensitve skin” products from the bug guys.
-
Jeecide Cap 7 - pretty lame preservativ and think you should be concerned with ethics of a bunch claiming “preservative free” based on use of unapproved preservatives.
Cap glycol at <1% is in no way a substitute for phenoxy v. Gram negs; glycerol laurate (Monolaurin) is nothing more than a hand wave; undecylenate has never gotton much traction - and you have to rely on ester hydrolysis..
-
stress cracking at high pH
-
Please be careful. It is not typical practice to glove up for hand and spot wash and consumer are unlikely to read your/comply to your label caution.
-
People will always use some for hand and spot wash. I wonder if child resistant packaging might be considered.
-
pH 13 is sure high - ponder at its safety. don’t see any buffering - what about Sodium silicate and a lower pH ala Liquid Tide?
-
Think it lowers CMC -Fig 3 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237192364_Self-aggregation_of_ionic_liquids_Micelle_formation_in_aqueous_solution/figures?lo=1
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 19 hours ago by PhilGeis.
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 19 hours ago by
-
Diethylene glycol and Methanol too - prob pass risk assessment but why get the attention - 1st cut EWG works on risk elimination not risk assessment. Same with formaldehyde.
Acetaldehyde is Prop 65 and think prohibited in EU. Another teaser for EWG.
Don’t why formaldehyde so far down list - support preservative.
-
If ingredient labeled with just “Denatured alcohol” ss here, the denaturants must also be labeled. SD alcohol 3a use methanol as denaturant and is allowed in cosmetics (shampoos, bath and body).
SD 29 uses acetaldehyde but is not authorized for cosmetics.
Not aware formaldehyde or diethylene glycol are used a denaturants.
-
-
Please - this is a garbage preservative system as is - even without the formula incompatibility and likely pH problem (most conditioners pH < 5). Depending on your water system quality , you may have trouble making it clean, but be assured consumers will contaminate.
I’ll add - whatever preservative system you use, you’re responsible for the life of the product and that means more than a “few” or “short-term” stability tests.
-
Agree with ozgjrl’s comment and suggest you add Na benzoate to the isothiazolinone.
-
This reply was modified 2 weeks, 5 days ago by PhilGeis.
-
This reply was modified 2 weeks, 5 days ago by
-
You’re very welcome. And thanks for the “novel” claims support - and I thought “clean beauty” was great fiction.
-
Thnaks for the text and links. The issue remains - your long chain diols and product. Are those your articles?
Re. phenylethyl, thanks for the admission that it was added as a fragrance rather than another unapproved preservative.. Right - you can make a garbage, dishonest claim. There are plenty on this category. Phenylethyl IS a fragrance by your intent.
21 CFR 701.d. The term fragrance means any natural or synthetic substance or substances used solely to impart an odor to a cosmetic product.
Recall - ” I add phenethyl alcohol only because of its subtle rose scent.”
-
Propylene glycol - if a cosmetic were formulated at high levels such as 30%, the purpose would not be for preservation (ala stick deodorants). It would also be irritating for some consumers.
Again, the long chain glycols you offered as preservatives are ok for US if safe in use but not on EU Annex 5 (prob not any country’s pos list) and would be out of compliance with directives. The penetration enhancer claim is lame - penetrating what? - and if penetration were there objective, efficacy decreases with chain length so PG would be the choice, not long chains.
You seem to be confused. Recall you offered phenylethyl addition only for its rose scent, specifying it was not part of the preservative system. You intended phenyethyl for fragrance effect. I continue to challenge “fragrance-free” as appropriate.
- your comment 10/30 - “These 3 diols are sufficient as preservatives when used at a high enough concentration (I use around 8% of these 3 diols combined). They serve dual purpose in my formulas as penetration enhancers and preservatives. They also improve the sensory aspects of my formulas dramatically.<b style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit;”> I add phenethyl alcohol only because of its subtle rose scent.”
-
“none has pursued”
-
“The majority of the “unapproved” ones such as 1,2-alkanediols are used as penetration enhancers for actives and as humectants. Hence, they are not classified as preservatives.”
Hence? Love to see the historic policy record for that. No, there is no “hence” - they are not in Annex and because nine have pursued testing and regulatory effort for addition.
<b style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit;”>Intent is the compliance element. There’s no enforcement and you have an excuse. If folks choose not to comply that is their call.
btw -Ii’d still like your rational for your “fragrance free” claim for that fragranced product.
-
Yes
-
Sorry, can;t help to that. Maybe look at Tide et al. formulae
-
10
-
Please forget this report - it’s typical of academics playing technologist. The investigator has no record of microbiology, no neutralization step mentioned, no control, everything passed including “sorbic acid” (at A good grief) and no stability testing.
Some diols at high levels can be cidal - in some formulas. One must test their own product hopefully by more than the EDP/EP/ISO bugs (esp. cepacia) through all stabilities and live with those data.
-
Na benzoate will only help with preservation.
Not sure it would work but, if you’re marketing in US, you most certainly can NOT use chlorhexidine (CHG) unless you have an approved NDA (new drug application). Assuming not, the antimicrobial claim is only accessible to you via the monograph*, and CHG is NOT approved in the monograph. FDA has been trying to kill the monograph for decades because these products are fairly useless in a consumer context.
*https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/05/01/2015-10174/safety-and-effectiveness-of-health-care-antiseptics-topical-antimicrobial-drug-products-for
federalregister.gov
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing this proposed rule to amend the 1994 tentative final monograph or proposed rule (the 1994 TFM) for over-the-counter (OTC) antiseptic drug products. In this proposed rule, we are proposing to establish conditions … Continue reading
-
No, as i said it can have biocidal activity esp. at levels ~8%. Never is a long time.
It does not take a PhD to read the literature in this field where experience and data are certainly more compelling. Good for Neutrogena - we do not know the levels and perhaps this is a unique formula where this works for efficacy and formulation - as I noted above. In any case, we do not know the policy and risk assessment applied.
I remain concerned for fragrance free claim re your fragranced product. Would expect from marketing folks but not from technology. Do you make a preservative-free claim for the diol system?
-
sorry for late reply - been traveling.
A PhD in anything hardly qualifies one for cosmetic preservation expertise. Mine is Microbiology and Mycology and my understanding is based on experience and data that are often counterintuitive to conventional technical understanding.
Diols at high levels can exert biocidal activity. I’ve found these incompatible with enough formulas that these they don’t serve product dev cycle time. They can be compromised by consumer practices in use practices more so than classic preservatives. Data rather than a lecture might be better for discussion - but of course you can share data at your discretion.
I was responsible for with environmental risk assessments of P&G beauty products and am not familiar conventional preservative offering relevant risk . Perhaps you can share you data/perspective that responds to harm to the environment as a factor in preservative choice..
Help me on this - you don’t like free-from claims but don’t mind making one for a fragranced product?
-
Add phenylethyl for fragrance and claim fragrance free? Do you think that ethical?
@8% glycol if formulas can take it why again do you need diversity - can you share data?
-
Why so many diols and why phenylethyl vs phenoxyethyl? Think weak v fungi and staph