PhilGeis
Forum Replies Created
-
Prob not - if you need one, it has to be food grade.
-
I sure would. Add EDTA and maybe benzoic acid. If no stability issues - I think you’d do well.
Are you making it yourself? -
I’ve never used hydroxyacetophenone and not aware of any significant data that supports it as preservative.
Glyceryl caprylate. Too susceptible to microbial esterases - and pseudomonads have plenty.
So don’t think either will help much for preservation.I know you asked about formnaldehyde releasers - can you use those?
-
Thanks again for following through.
I examined the documents and sent comments. My take is that documents sent would not satisfy technical (safety, micro, analytical, regulatory, esthetics, occupational) due diligence of any large company - cost and quantity aside. -
Right - not legally either.
-
I haven’t notes from the 2006 book. Agree with Abdullah, does look odd.
Mayday - this does speak to the necessity of testing in product context and the limited significance of supplier data. That’s why it’s not in 3rd ed that just includes target levels.
-
I’ve not found the email.. Can you send again?
-
Right - does seem confusing.couternintuitive. These were different tests and one has to take published data as they are.
Didn’t inlcude that and other specific testing data in 3rd ed. for that reasoin. -
MIC - the cells are alive but are not growing. If you removed those cells from exposure to formaldehyde and put them in medium without the formaldehyde, they would grow.
Minimal Germicidal concentration. Those cells are dead. If you put them in medium without formaldehyde, they would not grow. -
Minimal /lowest concentration, in context of the test ,that rendered all cells nonviable. No growth after agent was removed - neutralized.
-
Apparently not - and that is pretty bad too. As you prob know, attorneys are usually meticulous oin these things.
-
-
You’ll always have those. I was in a legal suit as an expert. The opposition to the attorney that hired my had an “expert” consultant whose testimony about micro contamination was crazy - +/-cepacia has never been an issue for cosmetics and thre FDA doesn’t care if its present.
Pissed me off - but the attorney that brought me in told me to calm down and “watch this”. He asked - “isn’t it true” that the state of Texas has determined you’re trstimony is unreliable and will are permitted to testify as an expert in state court? -
Dave Steinberg’s books are excellent but I’m not aware he addresses the organic acid combination. I’d worry less about synergism than, as Mark said, efficacy of comnbinations. I know it takes a lot of resources but once you’ve established a good combination you can prob reapply with confidence. P&G did this with isothiazolinone/benzoate/EDTA in all its shampoos through all versions for over a decade. Benzoate/Benzyl alcohol/EDTA was another combination that carried over well. - in shampoos atd up to neutral pH.
Alternative systems can work but aren’t so versatile. -
Please do not belei.ve supplier literature. almost all claim broad spectrum through wide pH range.
Think you’re ok with Benozate/Phenoxy/EHG in a emulsion context - but add EDTA. -
Thanks - Think you should read these carefully - they do not support “synergism” of the combination.
By design, they’re not that relevant to cosmetic preservation - metric was MIC in various broths without pH control. “Synergism” defintion was arbitrarty.The first two concluded no synergism and the last didn’t address the phenomenon.
1st. Tho difficult to follow - concluded twice no synergism e.g. “The sodium benzoate + potassium sorbate combination exhibited no synergistic effect; ..”
2nd looked only at a Bacillus isolate - not relevant to cosmetic preservation - but concluded “The combined treatment of the two preservatives did not show any synergistic effect of the growth inhibition of B. subtilis.”
-
This is not my claim - it is yours. Please do not send unsolicited samp,es.
-
Why not share the link here?
-
I’m not aware there is effective synergy. The conclusion is often poorly supported in such papers - largely an opinion rather than meeting a predetermined justifiable performance level. Can you share the ones you find compelling?
-
Why does she think its misbranding?
Please consider Olay Regenerist Micro-Sculpting Cream
https://www.olay.com/en-us/skin-care-products/regenerist-micro-sculpting-cream-moisturizer-
INGREDIENTS LIST
WATER, GLYCERIN, ISOHEXADECANE, NIACINAMIDE*, DISTARCH PHOSPHATE, ISOPROPYL ISOSTEARATE, DIMETHICONE, PANTHENOL**, PALMITOYL PENTAPEPTIDE-4***, SODIUM HYALURONATE^, CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE, ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN, HYDROXYACETOPHENONE, DIMETHICONOL, CETEARYL GLUCOSIDE, CETEARYL ALCOHOL, STEARIC ACID, PALMITIC ACID, STEARYL ALCOHOL, CETYL ALCOHOL, BEHENYL ALCOHOL, DISODIUM EDTA, SODIUM ACRYLATES COPOLYMER, PEG-100 STEARATE, TITANIUM DIOXIDE, MICA, PHENOXYETHANOL, FRAGRANCE
-
-
Labeling is responsibility of name on the bottle.
-
There should be no effective difference.
-
There is a 3rd ed (2020) that includes more info - natural and multifunctional preservatives/preservation, detailed manufacturing etc. but it’s kinda pricey.
-
Most major manufactuers use 100 cfu/g for all produicts.
FDA offers “Since there are no widely acceptable standards for numbers, temporary guidelines are used instead. For eye-area products, counts should not be greater than 500 colony forming units (CFU)/g; for non-eye-area products, counts should not be greater than 1000 CFU/g. “