PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
Expanding on ketchito’s excellent point
You should be cautious re enzyme dust as aerosolized it’s quite allergenic - sufficient to risk anaphylaxis. In laundry detergent (with enzyme) manufacturing, dust control is a major safety priority, and employees are periodically tested and moved to jobs of nonexposure if allergy detected. -
assume enzymes blend is liquid
-
As chemicalmatt said - there is no specific requirement in US for a test. However, you are responsible to defend the safety of your product
21 CFR 740.10
A cosmetic is considered misbranded if its safety has not adequately been substantiated, and it
does not bear the following conspicuous statement on the PDP:Warning - The safety of this product has not been determined.
-
Thanks Mark
-
I’d looked it up online - all I found was
attorneys https://www.sheehanlawyers.com/.
The plaintiff is in Cleveland NY. -
@MarkBroussard
Thanks Mark. I understand.
One can preserve effectively without the traditional “unclean” preservatives. However the numerous small guys at for example Sephora are the least capable both in formulation and making/packing to do so effectively. I think retailers have an obligation to consumers - if compelling/encouraging alternative and obscure micro safety at the preservative level, they should assume some informed role in ensuring the end product is still safe. -
As ketchita said, and consider in context. Are these both for machine use? HE?
Hard water of geography of sale? -
Mark - you’re involved with Clean at Sephora.
What can you say about their oversight for micro quality in the nontraditional clean context? If you are free to say - what is in-house expertise regarding preservative? I’ve seen some pretty silly systems that may pass USP 51 but are nothing in the real world. -
Since the manufacturer recalls, retailer names are not typically associated. Here’s a connection to a recall by Benefit -https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5058475/Contaminated-eye-make-recalled-Myer-Sephora.html
and
https://www.mygc.com.au/popular-makeup-concealer-recalled-from-sephora/ -
Sephora has made it easier for microorganisms.
Clean Beauty does nothing for safety, as the message implies - just facilitates crap preservative systems.
-
My anger at this concept is not the consumer snow job - that’s the business we’re in. My issue is safety compromise, esp. for micro. That Clean Beauty implies safety while ignoring everything but many ingredients whose sole purpose is to maintain safety and are safe and the most effective in that regard.
-
Between my former employer and industry organizations, I had data regarding what consumers said they knew - not an assumption. Don;t have recent data. Curious - your source of data? Inside Sephora stuff? My bet - if anything, it’s more to how well does the concept sell.
The industry challenged retailer priority lists a decade ago and heard they knew next to nothing of the chemicals other than they were targeted by EWG et al. (aka scare mongers) and were not compliant with the growing green trends.
Clean Beauty is anything but. The inadequate, sometimes ridiculous preservative systems combined with the lack of executional depth of their typical suppliers no doubt have contamination common in use. I’ve served as expert on market contamination issues with products of this type..
-
@MarkBroussard
No. “Clean ” is indeed a marketing claim but consumers generally have no idea what the banned ingredients are. It was not developed to consumer demand - it’s an extension of the scare mongering chemophobia.
Cosmetic marketing generally endeavors to tell what they want and see if they fall for the story. -
The vitamins work on the “fairy dust” principle.
-
Agree it goes nowhere. But the question “What ingredients are Clean at Sephora products formulated without?” is not much of a definition. I hope it goes far enough that Sephora responds with m more - and why.
A pox on both houses. -
A pox on both of them.
She’s no worse than Sephora and their BS unclean chemical list.
https://www.sephora.my/faqs/900001745503-Clean-at-Sephora/900004644366-What-ingredients-are-Clean-at-Sephora-products-formulated-without -
I do get some pleasure seeing Sepharo getting burned by their own BS. Imagin e the management meeting - “How can they sue us over ‘Clean Beauty’ when nobody knows what it means?”
-
Sephora is full of it as is the “clean” BS, but Xanthan gum is synthetic? Mother of pearl!
-
I’d put my money on perpsective from Graillotion, Pharma, Perry anytime!!
-
coco said:@PhilGeis oh! Caprylyl Glycol EHG is considered weak? What’s wrong with it?
< weak.
Please understand, safety including micro safety is an affirmative process. If you can’t defend it - you haven’t met the standard.
For preservation - design a system that should work and then confirm it passes a test. This doesn’t meet the 1st. -
Right - more natural than most of the ingredients claimed to be so.
-
Please consider a more effective preservative system - whatever the stability.
-
Synthetic?
-
Not aware Propyl parabens is an “antioxidant”.
-
You can do better than just Geogard ultra.