70 PRESERVATIVES
Table 2: Challenge Test Formulation Shampoo. Ingredients
A
Sodium Laureth Sulfate Coc-Betaine
PEG-3 Distearate Water
B C D
E F
G
Polyquaternium-10 Water
Guar Hydroxypropyltrimonium Chloride Water
PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil Helanthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seed Oil Preservative
NaOH or Citric Acid Sodium Chloride
the toxicological evaluation of commercially available preservatives for personal care. Sorbitan caprylate – tradename Velsan® SC - is 100% derived from natural resources. One of its main raw materials, sorbitol, is produced from the sugar of corn, while the other, caprylic acid, is derived from coconut oil.
In addition to a co-emulsifying and thickening function, it interacts with microorganism cell walls and enhances the efficacy of traditional preservatives by facilitating their penetration into cells. This enhances preservative activity through the membrane, therefore allowing for a reduction in the amount of preservative used. Usually half of the preservative can be saved.
Its synergism with preservatives is highlighted in Table 1 showing MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration) data for
Table 4: Preservative Efficacy Rinse-off. Preserving System
Unpreserved
Nipaguard SCL Nipaguard SCA Velsan SCA
Phenoxyethanol + Paraben Blend
–
1.0% 2.0% 1.5%
1.3%
Table 5: Preservative Efficacy Leave-on. Preserving System
Unpreserved
Nipaguard SCL Nipaguard SCA Velsan SCA
Phenoxyethanol + Paraben Blend
–
1.0% 2.5% 2.0%
1.3% PERSONAL CARE ASIA PACIFIC Use Conc.
Weight (%) 7.0% 2.0% 1.0%
ad. 100% 0.3%
20.0% 0.3%
20.0% 0.5% 0.1% q.s q.s
0.8%
Table 3: Challenge Test Formulation O/W Cream Gel. Ingredients
A
Caprylic / Capric Triglyceride Dicaprylyl Ether Cetearyl Alcohol Glycerin
B C
Sodium Hyaluronate Water
Ammonium Acryloyldimethyltaurate / VP copolymer
Ubiquinone D
E F
Tocopheryl Acetate Dimethicone Preservative
NaOH or Citric Acid
sorbitan caprylate in comparison to and in combination with phenoxyethanol, benzyl alcohol and sorbic acid respectively. In Table 1, both ingredients were tested against the respective organism separately and then in a mixture. As the MIC is a concentration dependent test, a linear interpolation between the single values would be expected for the mixture. However, in all cases it was found that the values for the mixture are lower than the linear interpolation of the separate values, so the efficacy is higher towards the respective organism for the mixtures. Combining sorbitan caprylate with phenoxyethanol shows that 50% phenoxyethanol can be saved without losing performance. The combinations of sorbitan caprylate with benzyl alcohol and sorbic acid are especially favourable, as the mixtures result in a better performance than
Pa Sa Ec
Efficacy @ pH 5 Ca Ab
Total FAIL
PASS PASS PASS
FAIL Use Conc. –
2.5% 2.0%
1.3%
Weight (%) 5.0% 5.0% 2.0% 8.0% 0.3%
ad 100% 0.5%
0.1% 0.3% 3.0% q.s
q.s.
that of the individual ingredients, and thus a synergy is created.
New highly sustainable options This article focuses initially on three synergistic blends with a higher sustainability profile, offering alternatives to conventional preservatives. Two are COSMOS approved broad spectrum antimicrobial agents:
A blend of sorbitan caprylate, potassium sorbate, and capryloyl/caproyl methyl glucamide (Nipaguard®
SCL) as an
alternative to benzoic acid. This blend is high on renewable ingredients which makes it ideal for preservation of natural cosmetic products.
A blend of sorbitan caprylate and benzyl alcohol (Nipaguard SCA) as an alternative to phenoxyethanol. The third blend features nature identical
Efficacy @ pH 7 Pa Sa
Ec Ca Ab Total FAIL
No Efficacy
PASS PASS
FAIL
Use Conc.
Pa
Sa Ec
Efficacy @ pH 5 Ca Ab
Total FAIL
PASS PASS PASS
PASS
Use Conc. –
2.5% 2.5%
1.3%
Efficacy @ pH 7 Pa Sa
Ec Ca Ab Total FAIL
No Efficacy
PASS PASS
PASS November 2017
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96
