PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
Adding to fareloz’s good points, I understand these folks allegedly will check a product if you ask, and the primary appears to be promotion of the site. Saw no protocol for products selected for recommendation. Can’t get details of specific products without logging in. Site was licensed by Mayo, to HER and run by EmpowerHer - mission: “empower women to achieve her (sic) goals”. Makes me wonder if the many small brands reco’d involved multiple agendas.
Invested a few minutes in examining recommended products to find one consisting of 100% “organic” castor oil rated 100% Top Allergen Free). Note - “Applying pure castor oil to the skin can cause irritation and allergic reactions like contact dermatitis,.” https://health.clevelandclinic.org/castor-oil-benefits. Guess they’re working from Mayo’s list rather than risk assessment per se.
-
I’m with fareloz. Answer is no.
-
Unilever cosmetic microbiology is pretty good. Not know pH, package, ingred. preservatives, balance - I’ll note benzoate is more effective with some surfactants
-
Doubt a concern unless you plan to hold it.
-
Happy New Year!!
Benzoate’s effective pKa can be uncreased with some surfactants such as SLS - efficacy up to and > 7
-
I don’t think you should have any issues. what is max temp you estimate?
-
Annex 3 addresses labeling for presence, whatever the source in the formula.
Benzyl alcohol is commonly and intentionally used as a preservative and is labeled in that regard.
-
Isothiazolinones for rinse off and FA releasers, now phenoxy, with additions for leave on. Unfortunately, go to preservatives are largely eliminated by those playing the natural/clean beauty game.
Please don’t chase “hurdle” and multifunctionals unless you have the depth of testing - esp. in- use to validate. They’re more often excuses for anti preservative marketing than commitment to quality. Hurdle is generally a bad idea - any one of the weak unvalidated (esp.in-use) elements compromised compromises the product -
-
CMIT can be used in drug products. Context of CHG scrubs can involve broken skin so you’d need a relevant risk assessment.
Do you have any alcohol in your product?
-
The liquid shampoo, soap based as this one, was 1st developed and marketed in 1927 by Hans Schwartzkopf. He’s also credited the synthetic detergent shampoo followed shortly by L’Oréal and P&G.
-
In a micro sense - BHT is not relevant but you should add a chelator - esp. EDTA.
No one can guess at your challenge data. Let challenge testing guide your system - your system is not “too much” as the constituents are within the accepted safety in use ranges. You should not titrate to just barely passing whatever protocol used.
-
CMIT is stabilized with a Mg salt - if diluted and held in water, CMIT is unstable as the Mg salt is diluted. I don’t know if the same happens in another polar solvent like a glycerol. If you have analytical of micro capabilities - you can check. Otherwise contact the folks at Arxada and ask.
-
Gram negative bacteria have always been the primary contaminants of cosmetics. They are the most commonly found bacteria in water - whether pristine snow melt in the alps or process water in a drug plant. They are also the most adaptable. resistant to preservatives, antibiotics, disinfectants and can metabolize these and almost anything ss carbon and energy sources. Cepacia is the classic example - it has a bunch of copies of its DNA and picks up genetic i-from other bacteria.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro1085
nature.com
The multifarious, multireplicon Burkholderia cepacia complex - Nature Reviews Microbiology
The Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc) is a collection of genetically distinct but phenotypically similar bacteria that are divided into at least nine species. Bcc bacteria are found throughout the environment, where they can have both beneficial and detrimental effects on … Continue reading
-
there’s almost no preservative or product poor manufacturing can’t screw up.
-
Don’t know specifics - historically these have involved plastic particles in product, rodent droppings/mold from water ingress in warehouse.
-
Sorry -meant increased (not uncreased).
and I’ve noted this in preservation of surfactant-based personal products - shampoos, hand wash
-
True - you can be sure that every cosmetic recalled for micro issues passed a USP 51 type test.
-
Sorry - I’ve not enough information to answer with validity. My approach has always been Edisonian
-
Be aware the study addressed the Chinese market. Few alternatives are legal preservatives in most of the world.
-
Please Mike - regulators know crap all about preservation. Not a one has preserved has relevanmt experience and judgement.
-
Mike - it’s not lab testing that reveals hurdle as inadequate - it’s in-use consumer testing. USP 51 and the like are unvalidated and not useful in addressing moderate divergence in pH, Aw, etc. GMP and QC are irrelevant to preservation. They’re the price of entry - if we can’t make it clean we shouldn’t be in the business.
One can effectively preserve so-called natural products (esp. with a increasingly bastardized definition of natural)- it demands more labor and systems are pretty limited in that they don’t carry over well between products.
-
Maybe a bit weak v Gram + bacteria. In right packaging, should be ok, esp if from Estee. I’m more familair with chlorphenesin in makeup and color cosmetics than high water products.
-
Ethanol (even down to ~5%)/CHG can be an effective in a preservative context.
-
Mike - the same Schwartzkopf https://www.schwarzkopf.com/
-
Prob too high for organic acids.
