PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
To what purpose? Micro testing, product stability?
-
Can you tell us your formula, packaging, water source and pH.
As Jennifer said, you might preserve around phenoxyethanol. Not enough by itself and “microbiome friendly” is a BS claim.
-
Again on the negative side - there are hundreds of publications - usually from academics - that would have some of the silliest preservative systems useful.
-
Are these pure powder form or solution?
Of these hexyl resorcinol is most vulnerable.
-
fda.gov
How to Report a Cosmetic Product Related Complaint
Bad reaction to a cosmetic? Please tell FDA!
-
Check for micro contamination. Even if clean, your product is very poorly preserved.
-
Prob need something for Fungi/Gram positives and EDTA if it works.
-
Hopefully a pump or some other protective package.
Risk in making is process water and hygiene quality - somewhat mitigated by heat of process. Adding a preservative (as aq. solution) in cool down will likely not help.
W-in-O emulsions are fairly resistant to contamination in use. Primary risk would be water added in use and you can’t protect vs. that. 221 is weak but does target mold.
-
describe packaging.
-
What preservative(s) in what context (liquid, powder?). Consider adding to water phase.
-
<b style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit;”>Regulation (EC) No 648/2004, 1223/2009 addresses household and industrial “detergents” NOT cosmetics.
“Detergent” means any substance or preparation containing soaps and/or other surfactants intended for washing and cleaning processes. Detergents may be in any form (liquid, powder, paste, bar, cake, moulded piece, shape, etc.) and marketed for or used in household, or institutional or industrial purposes.
- “Cleaning preparation”, intended for domestic all purposes cleaners and/or other cleaning of surfaces (e.g.: materials, products, machinery, mechanical appliances, means of transport and associated equipment, instruments, apparatus, etc.);
. “Washing” means the cleaning of laundry, fabrics, dishes and other hard surfaces.
-
This is antiperspirant with excessive active - Aluminum chlorohydrate max is 25%. If irritation it’s probably this ingredient that you could eliminate - making it a simple deodorant. You’ll need a preservative..
No idea how you could defend “chemical free”.
-
It’s not the dilution per se, it’s the hard water - poorly soluble Calcium phosphate.
Why is phosphate in your formula?
-
try Eurofins
-
Think you’ve got yo work through an experimental process - 1st phase achieving a stable formula. next need establish preservative efficacy. I’m surprised the stability is such as issue with your formulas.
I wish folks could use single preservative chemicals but those are commodities with low margin commodity pricing so not as av in small quantities.. Proprietary blends warrant specialty pricing and are marketed in part for that but tossing in so much stuff risks stability problems and rarely are these actually “broad spectrum” through a wide pH range.
-
Perhaps the issues are a result of concentrations and unnecessary complexity that distinguishes these commercial systems.
keep phenoxy at or less than 5000 ppm (perhaps EHG but 9010 separated), organic acid - esp. benzoate 3000 ppm (or try benzyl alcohol), EDTA.
-
Why not add vitamin solution to water phase?
In addition to solubility concerns, be aware the premix with aqueous vitamin solution becomes a micro risk that will need preservation - chemical or temporal.
-
4 and with differing pKa’s
https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/159581/acidity-and-structure-of-edta-at-different-ph
-
It’s ok - was in soap biz for many years never used EDTA (may be Mike can comment) and of course you can/should use in emulsions e.g.https://incidecoder.com/products/olay-regenerist-micro-sculpting-cream.
Can destabilize some gels.
We used either, not both.
-
The big guys invest in environmental assessments for product, package and each ingredient - that can include expensive testing. Considering the huge volumes and global coverage, this is a clear corporate responsibility. Looks like they’re trying to leverage that into a claim. Certainly more substance than clean beauty but feels strange claiming priority for a basic responsibility.
-
Sorry! My error - was distracted with “Lotioncraft” and missed the PE. That should be a good system.
Still - have you checked for micro contamination? That is a reasonable source of rancid odor.
-
These are separate and independent regulations
One regulates only household and industrial detergents products, NOT cosmetics . That is Regulation (EC) No 648/2004, 1223/2009 that only requires EDTA on ingredient labeling fs >0..2%.
EU Cosmetic Directive that regulates cosmetics NOT household and industrial detergents requires EDTA on ingredient label if added at any level.
If you question is why the difference? Who knows - there may be a record of consideration somewhere but the regulatory expectation is always that folks comply, not ask why.
-
As I said. The cosmetics industry is driven primarily by hype, not technology..