58 TRENDING TECHNOLOGIES


[Identifier NCT02615912], which have submitted studies to examine the influence of ingredients on the skin microbiome. To date, it does not appear that any


consumer companies have submitted requests for clinical studies in which living probiotics are applied to the skin. This kind of research appears to remain firmly in the academic research arena. Presently, there are several companies


that are active in the field of providing living microorganisms to the skin. AObiome has developed technology, sold into the cosmetic arena through the company Mother Dirt, that can deliver ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) to the skin.5


Mother Dirt was one of


the pioneering companies that saw the skin microbiome as a key target of new technology related to topical applications of living microorganisms in cosmetics. Another company, Dakota Biotech, suggests


delivery of living probiotics via probiotic microbeads which, according to the company’s patent, are stable in an aqueous environment containing a preservative.6


The nature of the


probiotics being delivered, however, is not disclosed in the patent and company literature. One of the more intriguing companies


addressing troubled skin is S-Biomedic. This company is expanding on the ideas proposed around gut health called fecal transplant in which healthy intestinal microorganisms are transplanted into the lower intestines of individuals with problems such as Crohn’s disease. S-Biomedic has developed science around


transplanting good Cutibacterium acnes to replace similar bad C. acnes bacteria in skin with acne conditions.7,8


Similarly, researchers


at Access Business Group have developed technology in which a blend of skin beneficial Corynebacterium are applied topically to the skin to reduce the presence of a specific species known as Corynebacterium kroppenstedtii that had been previously associated with troubled and aging skin phenotypes.9 Onwuliri et al, published an interesting


examination of the influence of Lactobacilli on odour-causing microorganisms in the skin axillary areas.10


This is an interesting application


of probiotics, controlling malodorous commensal microorganisms to minimize body odour. Another interesting company active in the


arena of the skin microbiome is JooMo. The company believes it is the diversity of the skin microbiome that drives skin health, much as a diverse forest contains numerous plants, animals etc. to create a healthy forest.11,12


TABLE 1: INGREDIENTS IN JUST-ADD-WATER POWDER


Ingredient INCI Names


Sodium Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyl Dimethyl Taurate Copolymer Cetyl Alcohol Glycol Stearate Glyceryl Stearate Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride Lactobacillus @ 200 million CFU/g


while true probiotic systems are dynamic and living and can readily communicate via normal microbial channels with the living cells of the skin and microbiome. Whether this has any kind of influence on skin physiology, appearance, health, aging etc., remains to be investigated. Part of the reason for this is due to the


difficulty of creating water-containing cosmetics that contain microbial lysates verses similar water-containing products that contain living microorganisms without the use of preservatives. This is a not only a scientific challenge but also a commercial one.


Stratabiosys™ Technologies Recently, a new method for examining the skin microbiome in vivo after a 3% hydrogen peroxide (H2


O2) dysbiosis was described.13


Figure 1: Image of cream after thorough mixing applied to a Leneta chart and spread showing the lack of powder granules after complete dispersion of the powder into water


and did not address the other important question which is how rapidly the skin’s microbiome returns to normal after sanitization. Questions raised by these various real-time


The


methodology and results of a 30-arm clinical study has published as a non-peer reviewed preprint and is presently undergoing more rigorous scientific review. The work described testing the presence


of the microorganisms on the skin in a global fashion, without attention to specific microbial species, using a rapid testing technique that employs adenosine triphosphate (ATP) biofluorescence. It was noted in the paper that both the


microorganisms on the skin and potential somatic (skin cell) resident ATP could contribute to the measurements and differentiating these two sources is a challenge for the test method. Yet it appeared from the work presented that after the application of 3% H2


O2 , the surface


ATP diminished quickly compared to adjacent non-sanitized sites. More importantly, it appeared that after


JooMo


does not offer finished products containing living probiotics, but they suggest that their ingredients can lead to a more healthy, diverse skin microbiome. At this time, there have been no studies done either in vitro or in vivo examining if probiotic lysates influence skin differently than living probiotics. There is an absence of solid scientific work done on skin that defines if applying living probiotic microorganisms to the skin works the same, better, worse, or differently than applying non-living microbial components. What is clearly apparent is that lysates are static systems, grown in isolation from the skin


PERSONAL CARE June 2022


the skin was sanitized, the levels of ATP, as measured using the biofluorescence technique, returned to normal within eight hours and were totally identical to baseline measurements within 24 hours. This indicates that the microbiome is a robust, actively growing surface phenomena that does not remain unaltered very long.


The initial study does appear to indicate


that there is a period in which, after stripping the surface microbial population with the sanitizer, the skin is essentially unprotected or, more precisely, microbially unprotected. This idea is supported by previous work reported by Becker Heathcare in which they examined various sanitizing products for their ability to kill microorganisms on the skin using similar ATP testing methods.14 This earlier work only examined the


antimicrobial efficiency of the various sanitizers


studies remain to be answered but include thoughts on what happens to the skin when the surface microbial population is stripped and is the time it takes the skin to return essentially to normal important and possibly a measure of the health of skin? What was not discussed in either of these


previously published papers was the idea that, perhaps, the skin dysbiosis might not have to be a sanitizing process, but rather a dysbiosis caused by application of living probiotics to the normal undisturbed skin microbiome. We wish to expand on the earlier H2


O2


sanitizing work to describe the use of ATP biofluorescence to examine the increase in microbial population that occurs when an aqueous emulsion, created from an anhydrous powder containing approximately 200 million colony forming units (CFU)/g of Lactobacillus plantarum in a quiescent, stable blend is prepared at the point-of-use and applied directly to the skin.13,15 The technology of storing quiescent, viable


living probiotics in a just-add-water powder has been developed by BotanicalsPlus and is called Stratabiosys Technologies. We wish to introduce this new, novel point-of-use technology here.


Materials and methods Stratabiosys Lactobacillus powder The just-add-water anhydrous powder containing quiescent, viable Lactobacillus cultures was provided by BotanicalsPlus and is comprised of the ingredients shown in Table 1. The powder was added to sterile, deionized


water at 5% just before the beginning of the study presenting approximately 10 million CFU/g in the emulsion and was converted into a cream with vigorous mixing at room temperature using an alcohol-sterilized spatula until no visual indications of remaining particles was noted as measured by spreading onto a Leneta chart (Figure 1).


Volunteer selection This study employed similar techniques


www.personalcaremagazine.com


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