PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
Choice of supplier is sometimes forced by volume you want as some will not sell small volumes. Suggest you also consider Arxada. These guys have consolidate some of the older supplier houses - Dow MC, Lonza etc. and rather than just repackaging combinations are developing preservatives - real stuff, not natural eye of newt toe of frog BS.. Their phenoxy may not be special but their profits are investments.
-
On what data are you claiming biodegradability?
-
“Safe”?
pH - not at issue. Skin has no pH per se but techniques that propose to measure find it effectively buffered.
Fatty acids in soap - short chain are more biologically active - C12 may be more irritating on skin than longer chain.
-
To your questions - cleaning what material and neutralization/eliminating what odor?
-
That is a poor preservative system and a higher risk population is exposed. What is pH and packaging?
-
That is a pretty weak preservative system - not much Gram neg protection.
-
Was this changed supported by challenge by data?
-
What size tank? Spray balls? What type of product residue?
-
It’s associated with the addition of which preservative?
-
Come on!. Put some skin in the game - try it where the sun don’t shine! How else will you know its effect - good or bad..
-
Biphasic - as in ribbons? Preservative migration is no more and prob much less a concern than with emulsion. But use preservatives with great water solubility.
-
You’ll need preservation. Suggest Neolone or Dantogard with a chelator such as EDTA.
-
Hold mother of pearl!! Finally, the miracle. Think secret was the magnetism. Looks like I’m out of a job.
-
FD&C Act definition of “cosmetic” has 2 sections. The one with which we are familiar and the second:
.. (2) articles intended for use as a component of any such articles; except that such term shall not include soap.”
Ingredients of cosmetics are themselves cosmetics. FDA BAM established 1000 cfu/g as limit for all other….
Not aware folks have been busted on this alone - but prob would come out as 483 item in an audit.
-
btw - this does show the supplier as full of crap - calling it “Cosmetic Grade”
-
-
Might consider Univ Cinc. https://online.uc.edu/masters-programs/ms-in-cosmetic-science/faculty/
Faculty is big company credentialed (GSK, P&G, Unilever). Can’t address courses directly - but for the Manuf. Hygiene for which I’m faculty and confident there is no competitive course.
-
you do not need the plus.
-
Agree - MIT/CMIT prob not appropriate. Can you describe packaging, process and anticipated consumer use?
-
What is your country - regulatory climate? Methylisothiazolinone effectively banned in EU.
-
Chelator is useful in preservation. Not sure its surface safety in your application.
-
As in the microbial encountered in manufacturing - e.g. do you clean and sanitize equipment, control micro content of raw materials?
Rarely is one preservative enough. In this case, I anticipate the above will not be in control and application will bring water addition. If using only one - use the formaldehyde releaser.
-
Should be ok. ~ 0.5% (5000 ppm) phenoxy and 0.3% Na benzoate.
-
It’s not that great a system anyway. Why not try something more pedestrian like benzoate/phenoxy.
-
Some of those are +/- garbage in any use and, if you’re in US, don’t think any are legal in your application. A formaldehyde releaser such as Sodium Hydroxymethyl glycinate with phenoxyethanol might work if your making is reasonably clean, BUT to be legal you need to find versions compliant to relevant biocidal/pesticide regs. - in US, registered as EPA pesticidal preservatives..
-
Methyl isothiazolinone (MIT) and Dimethyl dimethylol hydantoin (DMDM hydantoin)