PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
Prob not. Fungi are ubiquitous.
-
@Perry
Good point. Maybe original sin. -
@ketchito
Thanks! And 2 years later, the same issue is US with same bug/species . That’s a disappointment for Clorox. Wonder if their regional folks talk to one another? -
Thanks Prob no diff - maybe little more is it places finger on orifice to close but flip top allows water and gravity-accessed particles when open.
https://journals.asm.org/doi/abs/10.1128/aem.56.5.1476-1479.1990 -
Disk cap - can you describe?
-
For the study, uterine cancer is more common in black women. As black women are more apt to use hair straighteners, one would expect that increased uterine cancer associates with use of hair straighteners.
Could be cause and could be just coincident with practice of primary user group.
The reach for parabens and formaldehyde shows researcher’s very limited depth incontext of cosmetic ingredients.
-
Neither helps but prefer the DMDM H for stability.
-
Safety concerns , esp. “endocrine disruption”:, re. parabens have no real significance. Doubt there’s chemical family more closely examined and they are still considered by folks like CIR, FDA and SCCP (EU) safe in use.
Formaldehyde concern re. cosmetic preservation is another great absurdity, esp in context of the study. The stuff is used at low levels and is too reactive to ever enagage.. For releasers, you’d find about as much formaldehyde in a bottle of shampoo as fruit like apples, plums
EWG et al. gets no donations, no one to to buy their endorsement unless they scare monger.
-
You prob do need an antifungal preservative.
The question of formaldehyde is stability. That’s why the releasers. -
What is packaging?
-
Happi (Household and Personal Care Product) is a trade magazine that offers formula and limited making instructions for a wide range of products. You might search through archived issues.
ArmorAll safety data sheet shows nothing but the preservative. -
safety data sheet
-
SDS pH 10-11
-
@Perry
Agree. -
@Abdullah
guess not -
Good - Cosgard221 (as DHA) should not be used in spray products.
Might cut down on phenoxy - 0.3 will prob be adequate -
@Discovery
what is your intent in penetration of “small particles”? -
Skin penetration - to what benefit do you intend?
-
Be aware - unlike cosmetics, preservation of household products is directed primarily at manufacturing - not consumer use.
-
It’s EPA’s “FIFRA” regulation - and you’re very unlikely to ever get challenged.
Preservatives in household products such as dish, clothes, cleaning detergents are regulated as pesticides and must be registered for that purpose with EPA. Without this - it’s an unregistered pesticide. I don’t think there’s a registered version of phenoxy.
-
Assume this is not for sale in US?
-
To Pharma’s excellent point - some will recall thalidomide. Used to control nausea during pregnancy, it caused significant birth defects. FDA had not approved it so less tragedy in US. It was a factor in development of current NDA process that identifies specific safety endpoints(esp teratology) that must be satisfied before approval .
-
@Graillotion
I’ve seen it linked to water solubility of the preservative. Parabens can be screwed up but CMIT is not affected. BAK is also reduced in efficacy and recall it likes sorbate too. -
Don’t see a preservative
-
pH must be addressed throughout making as well as in final product and mistakes in order of addition can screw up preservation. Tho’ stable in the finished product, some can hydrolyze/precipitate within the making process due to brief or spatial excursions in pH, solubility, chelators, etc.
Alkaline pH and simple aqueous solution will degrade Kathon, parabens can react with carbohydrates, clays and cyclodextrin can absorb preservatives, sorbate auto-oxidizes at higher pH, etc.