Forum Replies Created

Page 33 of 94
  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 14, 2023 at 5:57 am in reply to: Should I read anything into this slate swap?

    add - it’s not a pathogen. Think it was isolated from a blueberry.

    Here’s the ref for name change - https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijs.0.65021-0

    and good catch!

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 14, 2023 at 5:15 am in reply to: Should I read anything into this slate swap?

    Nothing wrong here - but another weak preservative system. The USP Aspergillus niger isolate (ATCC 16404) used for so many decades was renamed A. brasiliensis early in this century. It is the same fungus.

    https://www.atcc.org/products/16404

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 10:43 am in reply to: diazolidinyl urea vs formalin

    Just as reactive but replaced in equilibrium from the releaser’s chemical reservoir.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 8:30 am in reply to: diazolidinyl urea vs formalin

    This refers to free not total formaldehyde (FA). In my experience, FA releasers at 2000-3000 ppm offer ongoing free FA at 100-200 ppm. Some like DMDM Hydantoin offer more at initially.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 5:30 am in reply to: EDTA and cell membrane disruption?

    Membrane to some extent but EDTA does not kill. More important the impact on bacterial slime and biofilm. Gram negative bacteria - esp. pseudomonads and enterics - produce an alginic acid slime/biofilm that protects the cells vs preservatives. Alginic acid is stabilized by calcium ions and EDTA by sequestering Calcium ion disaggregates the slime facilitating preservative access.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 8:37 am in reply to: diazolidinyl urea vs formalin
  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 8:21 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    Here’s what FDA says regarding testing - “Formerly, there were no validated tests for cosmetic preservative efficacy (9), although the test for pharmaceutical preservative efficacy in the U.S. Pharmacopeia (2) or the cosmetic test in the technical guidelines of the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association (CTFA) (1) were used. Recently, the CTFA test has been AOAC validated (2b) for use with liquid cosmetics.”

    https://www.fda.gov/food/laboratory-methods-food/bam-chapter-23-methods-cosmetics

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 8:17 am in reply to: PFOA and PFOS

    If in US - believe the Bureau Veritas lab in Buffalo NY does this testing.

    https://www.cps.bureauveritas.com/bureau-veritas-buffalo-consumer-product-test-lab

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 7:55 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    Broad spectrum but ECT is ok? No one with depth of experience would see that.

    Sounds like boiler plate. Any elaboration of the cautions - synergism etc.?

    BP is marginally better than USP but allows the BS exemption of B criteria and neither includes any bugs representing contamination risk like CTFA. Is there any comment to cepacia?

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 5:44 am in reply to: Challenge test- “no increase” of mold

    What are other preservatives and pH ?

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 5:43 am in reply to: PFOA and PFOS

    Where are you?

    Here’s FDA position. with recent legislative changes, perhaps they’ll ask for data from ma

    https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas-cosmetics

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 1:27 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    For cosmetics, chose a system/combination at concentrations that technically should be effective as broad spectrum and then confirm it has efficacy with a challenge test. The test (USP, EP, ISO, whatever) is not validated. “Pass” merely show some efficacy but not enough to protect consumers - passing criteria are too tolerant and isolates too feeble. What does IPCS instruct in this regard?

    I’m aware of a few remarkably “synergistic” combinations - not aware any are marketed as combinations.

    ECT is technically not be expected to work by itself.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 12:05 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    You’re right - what efficacy ECT has is at the lower pH, but it is a poor combination even in acidic context as it has a gap vs Gram negative bacteria, the primary contaminants of cosmetics. The pH range and “broad spectrum” are marketing hype. The response you received is silly - preservatives are in Annex and have favorable risk assessments from CIR. The supplier is not going to run more safety studies on the combination. I’m aware of no data and supplier offers none showing the combination is magic.

    If IPSC endorsed this combination - I do wonder at their preservative training. As for FB, think it’s a waste of time in any context.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 11, 2023 at 3:41 pm in reply to: Preservative issue in cream

    David - to your original post - do you have micro contamination and if so with what bugs?

    You have a decent preservative system (tho EDTA would help). If a micro problem - it’s likely in your manufacturing hygiene, not your formula.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 15, 2023 at 6:03 am in reply to: Need help with preservative system

    If phenoxy 0.3-0.5 and 0.25 Benzoate - with EDTA 0.1 as the acid

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 14, 2023 at 5:27 am in reply to: Hair lotion preservative/emulsifier problems

    Sorry Marko - I missed your reply.

    I’m speaking 1) of micro quality - including that of water and 2) of safety of ingredients inhaled.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 14, 2023 at 5:22 am in reply to: Need help with preservative system

    Shampoos are generally resistant to fungal contamination. But Abdullah is spot on - add benzoic acid as a booster vs bacteria - with surfactants its effective pKa is increased you’ll have an effect at that pH.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 10:42 am in reply to: EDTA and cell membrane disruption?

    YUp

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 8:55 am in reply to: diazolidinyl urea vs formalin

    On paper but FA is very reactive. That’s why FA-releasers were developed - to provide a constant level. Simply adding FA to 100 ppm will not sustain 100 ppm.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 6:16 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    Failure to mention cepacia indicates a shallow approach. It and aeruginosa have been responsible for most of the recalls.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 5:42 am in reply to: Preservatives, IPCS, FB groups

    Don’t get excited - every preservative claiming broad spectrum has its data that practical experience does not replicate.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 13, 2023 at 5:36 am in reply to: diazolidinyl urea vs formalin

    That’s what I understand. But I imagine there will be formula impact as well.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 12:21 am in reply to: Preservative that ONLY kills Gram-negative bacteria

    Formaldehyde releasers and isothiazolinones are not that great vs fungi. In any case, we can’t use isothiazolinones in leave on products like creams due to sensitization,

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 12, 2023 at 12:13 am in reply to: Preservative issue in cream

    Good idea - and David’s Germall Plus includes IPBC. I’m not sure he confirmed contamination and if so what it was. But Germall Plus should generally be ok unless manufacturing issues or formula incompatibility.

  • PhilGeis

    Member
    June 11, 2023 at 2:24 pm in reply to: Challenge test- “no increase” of mold
    I appeal to you - if your preservative system is so impotent it has no impact on mold inoculum - please please find a more effective system.
Page 33 of 94