PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
If you want to sell in US. Assume this is a pump spray.
Germall + is not at safety issue, tho’ there are some concerns for aerosolized IPBC. But it’s not legal in household products. You need to use chemicals registered with EPA as pesticides for use as preservative. Pretty sure phenoxy and certain cap glycol are not registered (don’t think much of cap glycol in any use). Consider a registered DMDM Hydantoin- e.g. Dantogard with some ethanol and maybe some Sodium Benzoate is your pH allows. Emerald Kamala now Lanxess sells a registered version. Low levels of ethanol even down to 5% can help, but you need ~20% to assure preservation.
You must ensure every chemical in your product is on the “TSCA inventory”. https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.
VOC reg’s are a pain and vary among the states. Use California’s – none are more demanding. . https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/Consumer%20Products%20Reg%20Article%202_11-30-22.pdf
Reading the reg’s is complicated and haven’t dealt with those guys in years but look at the reg’s – you need to decide what you are. Air freshener pumps are 18% VOC but fabric refresher is down to 5%. There is no “Linen spray” category per se. They regulate VOC content by weight with “VOC” being any carbon containing chemical with few exemptions so your product’s plastic bottle is 100% VOC. BUT I recall exempt those with vapor pressure < 0.1 mm Hg at 20C.
-
One of the 1st to posture social and enviro activism. Per this chronology https://www.zippia.com/the-body-shop-careers-67869/history/Lex Wexner screwed them up in the early 90’s with body shop works and by mid 90’s sales were falling and Body Shop was struggling. L’Oreal didn’t take over until 2006.
-
As always excellent comments from my colleague graillotion
-
Safe? Please explain.
Neither is likely to be a good preservative system.
-
Euxyl™ k 712 = Sodium Benzoate (and) Potassium Sorbate (and) Aqua; PE 9010 = Phenoxy + EHG
pH 4-5.
Should be ok. Please confirm with challenge testing as made and in stability.
-
Please drop the commercial names and address the specific chemical preservatives. Decide what actives you want The ones you propose are prob more than you need.
-
Have to ask - what is your pH?
-
1) It was a buddy at J&J pissed that activists scared his management into 86ing Dowicil (Quat 15) from their classic baby shampoo.
https://agricultureandfoodsecurity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40066-018-0166-4
and https://www.cfs.gov.hk/english/whatsnew/whatsnew_fa/files/formaldehyde.pdf
2) Levels vary between products and specific FA releasing preservative. On my exp. with Germall, Glydant, Dowicil, the levels of free formaldehyde were 100-200 ppm and steady. Recall EU regs req’d labeling in >500 ppm to folks were careful to test..
3) Formaldehyde is a carcinogen by inhalation so P&G conducted head space and in-shower studies. Don’t recall levels or if there were any but human safety toxicologist were satisfied with safety factor (orders of magnitude v. NOEL).
-
The next “innovation” will likely be as fictional as “clean beauty” BS.
-
I see.
Problematic but prob useless.
Bacteria will certainly grow in water deposited on the surface - esp. with water dissolving sugar from such a high level. If any preservative would work, it would be a highly water soluble preservative like a formaldehyde releaser. But it’s unlikely you’d find protection from any preservative. It would only access that low level at the contact surface - diluting beyond any effective level.
If you have mold growth on the surface, add a parabens.
-
Can you describe how you water exposure makes a preservative necessary?
-
No - it is not.
-
You should have your supplier take the responsibility.
-
I’d not switch preservatives. If you do, you must support 9010 with something for mold and Gram positive bacteria.
-
You can see how discouraging state regulatory activism is to small businesses. Regulations like these favor big guys who have staff to understand and negotiate and money to comply. They stress small guys who are surprised and haven’t the money and expertise to reformulate without screwing up their product. Big guys can pick off those with good brand names.
Phenoxy/cap glycol may work but is not a legal preservative system. They might have contrived a BS story as cover and hope EPA never gets around to looking at their product - phenoxy is a perfume carrier or solvent and cap glycol is ???
-
Perry’s right. Big guys acquire little guys for brand names and less so products. “Due diligence” is financial and rarely gets down to the folks who know products so most of these generate a bunch of “oh shits!” - micro, safety, regulatory, manufacturing ,personnel problems the resolution of which erodes excitement.
My bet - Body Shop was one of the 1st to use very successfully social and enviro activism to communicate brand. They used little to no conventional advertising so their initial success did not stand up to other brands chasing the same positioning <b style=”background-color: var(-bb-content-background-color); font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; color: var(-bb-body-text-color);”>with conventional advertising. Acquisitions by big companies can be strategic and can be on a whim of management. Bet Body Shop was more of the former - we can rescue this fading brand for a position in a sector we don’t now occupy. Immediate result is always loss of true believers - activist folks who see big companies as the devil and here Roddick as selling out. Bet there were oh shits - including Roddick. Whatever Unilever did - this was still a small brand and management changes of the next years saw it as a distraction that needed to go. years
-
Phenoxyethanol targets Gram negative bacteria - limited vs Gram positive bacteria and poor to nothing vs fungi (yeast and mold). Sensicare 1090 adds ethyl hexyl glycerine (EHG) that helps again versus Gram negative bacteria (seen no data re. Gram positives and do not believe anything vs fungi). Claiming “natural” is pure horse hockey - EHG is synthetic made from glycerine.
Start with the assumption - suppliers are liars. No quite right as claims are made by marketing folks who conveniently know nothing but claim everything.
-
You can not trust preservative supplier marketing data - for efficacy (nothing is broad spectrum) or stability (esp. effective pH range)
There are good books on the subject but pretty expensive. Look at ingredient labels of major manufacturers for preservative combinations.
-
Think CIR has it up to 0.1% (you should check.. I’ve used it at much less, down to 100 ppm Issue with anything that low in % and low water solubility is adequate distribution in batch. Some dissolve in glycol
-
methyl parabens 0.2%and propyl 0.1%
with phenoxy - phenonip[
-
pH is sure on the high side, esp. for a cream. You need something for fungi. Maybe sorbate but stability can be an issue. Parabens would be best - if your policy allows. Can you find a combination with IPBC?
-
What does the company claim?
-
P&G can afford equipment and methods that break out effects - not that these will translate to something a consumer would perceive.
-
Think you should start with BS and look for reasons that being veracity
-
Pasteurization - heating to 140F/60C - try it. May not have same same effect as with aqueous stuff.