search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
TESTING


TABLE 7: SAMPLE B RESULTS FROM VEGAN ALTERNATIVE TEST METHOD


Test Species


Colony forming units per g after inoculation 2 Day


7 Day P. aeruginosa 3.0x105 S. aureus C.albicans A. brasilliensis


6.10x 102


- -


3.0x105


3.00x 105


14 Day


- -


- 3.0x105 - 3.2x104


28 Day / / / /


forth by the European Pharmacopeia (EP). This implies that this sample has successfully undergone the required microbiological testing, and provided all other documentation aligns, it will be eligible for legal sale in the global market. As evidenced by the data presented in Tables 4 and 5, the outcomes are virtually identical, with the exception of a single result at two days for the Staphylococcus aureus test species. However, by the seven-day mark, the result reverts to <10, which is the desired outcome in any preservative efficacy test. In contrast, Sample B did not meet the


prescribed criteria and did not pass the European Pharmacopeia (EP) challenge test. Testing was ceased after collecting results from the 14-day evaluation. It is evident that Sample B experienced


failure at each testing interval: two, seven and 14 days, as indicated in both test methods (Tables 6 and 7). Results highlighted in red underscore the failure to achieve the required log reduction, signifying a failure at that particular testing point during the assessment period. The traditional testing approach, utilizing animal-derived media bases TSA and SDA, and the vegan-friendly alternative method, which employs media and materials free from animal- derived components, yield identical overall outcomes for both samples A and B. Our testing results have confirmed the


equivalence of the vegan alternative test method when compared to the traditional challenge test.


Conclusion Our findings demonstrate our ability to replicate the initial challenge test results through our in-house vegan alternative test method. Through our collaboration with The Vegan Society, we have obtained certification for the following test methods employed at ISCA Cosmetic Testing: European Pharmacopoeia (EP), United States Pharmacopeia (USP), ISO 11930, and our Total Viable Count (TVC) method. These accredited methods are available


to our clients and instil confidence in the knowledge that they are utilizing a micro- testing facility that not only efficiently tests their products but also does so in a vegan-friendly and certified manner since October 2022.


References 1. Lionetti N, Rigano L. (2018). Labeling of Cosmetic Products. Cosmetics. 5(1), p. 22. doi:10.3390/cosmetics5010022


www.personalcaremagazine.com November 2023 PERSONAL CARE


2. Saraiva I. (2021). The contribution of green marketing to brand strengthening and Consumer Loyalty: The lush case. Springer Series in Design and Innovation. pp. 631–638. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89735-2_51


3. Dos Santos RC, De Brito Silva MJ, Da Costa M et al. Go vegan! digital influence and social media use in the purchase intention of vegan


products in the cosmetics industry. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 13, 49 (2023). https://doi. org/10.1007/s13278-023-01034-7


4. The Body Shop moves to vegan testing with MSL. Personal Care Global. 11 August 2021. https://www.personalcaremagazine.com/ story/36244/the-body-shop-moves-to- vegan-testing-with-msl


59


PC


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