PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
This is a rinse off product. Whatever dog skin pH may be and the literature finds it mild alkaline - how would a pH 5 shampoo affect dog skin?
-
Vince - curious the research that recommended those. There not effective in anything.
Folks use the same preservatives in human products - incl. isothiazolinones and formaldehyde releasers such as the Germall+ your colleague uses. Look on labels. -
Whatever the pH of dog skin, on what basis is a shampoo rinse off product with 6-8 pH going to affect it? What are the data?
-
Maybe not CMI - it’s unstable at 10 so effect is very time limited
Benzoisothiazolinone is ,prob more common in this category. -
I don’t recall the levels. It’s been way too long - Sorry
-
Then use phosphate
-
Phosphate in household products was banned last century on the mistaken belief that source cause eutrophication of surface waters.
-
Why not zeolite
-
From one-trick-pony microbiologist - could av chlorine in tap water also be a factor?
-
Think 1% DHA is excessive and beyond solubility limit. not sure you need benzyl alcohol if phenoxy 0.3% and EDTA 0.1%.
-
@abhiromeo
chloromethylisothiazolinone (Kathon) or a formadehyde releaser -
Sorry as not relevant to your question - parabens are not good preservatives for shampoos.
-
what is pH?
-
Please describe the formula context.
-
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?