Soap Dish Forum

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> No Tears?
Pegasudz
post Dec 3 2002, 10:10 PM
Post #1
spectator
*

Posts: 27
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Patchogue NY - Long Island




Greetings All,

Can anyone out there explain how "no tears" soaps/shampoos are made?

TIA
xxx

--------------------
Pegasuz

<href="http://www.wingedwonders.com"></a>
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Susanna
post Dec 3 2002, 11:03 PM
Post #2
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,223
Joined: 12-November 02




I think it has something to do with pH values and the fact that these products are not soap.
xxx
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rebecca-VT
post Dec 3 2002, 11:06 PM
Post #3
forum guru
******

Posts: 3,335
Joined: 12-November 02




They are made with very mild surfactants (more specifically they are most often amphoteric surfactants), and they are formulated to have a pH very close to the eye.
xxx

--------------------
user posted image ~Rebecca~
""I would like to thank the Canadian people who came out to wave, with all five fingers, for their hospitality" ~George W. Bush
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 4 2002, 09:56 AM
Post #4
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




what rebecca said. The myth about using a topical anesthetic is just that.

There is a product called "shur-clens" which is like a liquid soap, which we use to wash lacerations around the eyes, because it doesn't sting at all (actually I'm cost-unconscious, I use it for washing out all lacerations, cuz it doesn't sting in the cut, either). You can't make a soap shampoo bar that won't irritate the eye. Nature of the beast.
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pegasudz
post Dec 4 2002, 04:30 PM
Post #5
spectator
*

Posts: 27
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Patchogue NY - Long Island




Thanx so much, you guys! That's kinda what I was afraid of. Which leads me to my next question: What would you guys do about a soap crafted for use on babies that hurts if it gets in the eyes? Please help. After soooo many failed batches, I finally got a truly nice baby soap, made it with my niece's baby in mind. Well Niece came over last nite & "tested" the soap. She lathered it up & then put it in her eye. I thought I was gonna hafta take her to the hospital. I felt terrible. I hadn't even thought about the baby's eyes. I feel like such a jerk. What would you guys do? Would you just not make baby soap? Would you put some kind of warning on a label? What would you say? Are any of your making baby soap? Does the fact that it can irritate the eyes scare people away from it? How 'bout you Mommies out there...would you use it on your baby? I think its really nice, EXCEPT for the fact that it can irritate the hell outta your eyes. What would you do?

TIA
xxx

--------------------
Pegasuz

<href="http://www.wingedwonders.com"></a>
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JulesH
post Dec 4 2002, 07:11 PM
Post #6
enthusiast
***

Posts: 388
Joined: 22-November 02
From: Nashville, TN




PS -

Just my 2 cents worth. Unless a label claimed it was "Tears Free" I would not think about putting it in baby (or pets) eye. I may be the exception, but unless told so I would not assume it was okay.

Just my humble opinion,

Jules
xxx
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CathyMb
post Dec 4 2002, 07:23 PM
Post #7
the queen
******

Posts: 12,049
Joined: 12-November 02
From: Winnipeg eh?




Geez...I'm a mommy. My babies are huge now..but I washed their faces with soap all the time. I was careful not to get it into their eyes.

Same with shampoo.

It ain't rocket science..Moms shouldn't be getting stuff in their babies eyes period. I don't care if its the gentlist surfactant in the world.
xxx

--------------------
user posted image

Queen of the Freakin Universe!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sultana
post Dec 4 2002, 08:16 PM
Post #8
forum guru
******

Posts: 4,490
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Southern Arizona




I make and sell baby soap. Most of the customers who buy it though are looking for a good fragrance free bar, so I usually sell them that. On the other hand, I don't put a label saying it is tear free. I have always thought it be comom sense. I use the baby soap to wash my son, but I don't use it in his hair or near his eyes. I think a warning label isn't a bad idea, you could simply say. This product is for external use only, use caution near eyes as this may cause irriation and tears.
xxx

--------------------
Proud to be Sultanacoot
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Susanna
post Dec 4 2002, 08:40 PM
Post #9
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,223
Joined: 12-November 02




The problem is that people nowadays assume that anything that is for babies will be tear-free. I will not sell a baby soap for that reason.
xxx
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Radagast
post Dec 5 2002, 10:39 AM
Post #10
enthusiast
***

Posts: 265
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Atlanta




The pH of natural soap is what stings eyes. The only way to drop this pH to a point low enough to be "tear-free" is to use synthetic soaps, similar to SLS. The synthetic fatty acids of these soaps are stronger, resulting in soaps that have a more balanced pH. There are certain scents and additives that can also cause a 'normally' tear-free' soap to sting the eyes.
xxx

--------------------
Glenn

"What is mu"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 5 2002, 12:06 PM
Post #11
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




Glenn. it's more than a pH issue, it's a surfactant issue as well.

It's been a long time since I've washed my kids' faces but here was my routine: "OK, Close your eyes now...(wash...rinse...)ok, open! all done!"
Anyone that can't figure that out should go to Mommy School...

sorry, Pegasuds, but I wonder what on earth your sister was thinking...why didn't she try it on her own eyes first???
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rebecca-VT
post Dec 5 2002, 12:32 PM
Post #12
forum guru
******

Posts: 3,335
Joined: 12-November 02




Glenn, I have to agree with Goatpharmer.

I'm kind of jumping to conclusions based on what I know, so this is kind of a question/comment.

Most surfactants, like SLS are anionic (negative charge).

Amphoteric surfactants which are most commonly used for tear free shampoos are Zwitterionic (they get a positive charge in a acid environment, negative charge in alkaline environments and no charge in neutral environments).

When comparing all the different surfactants, anionic and cationic (positive charge) surfactants are generally the harsher of the bunch, where as Amphoteric and Nonionic surfactants are the mildest.

This leads me to believe that the charge also has something to do with how mild/harsh a surfactant is.

What do you think?
xxx

--------------------
user posted image ~Rebecca~
""I would like to thank the Canadian people who came out to wave, with all five fingers, for their hospitality" ~George W. Bush
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Radagast
post Dec 5 2002, 01:03 PM
Post #13
enthusiast
***

Posts: 265
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Atlanta




Why should the surfactant portion of the soap molecule make any difference whether it's positive or negative?

Nonionic surfactants, I can see completely, though without an explanation of why the surfactant portion should be milder with one charge vs the other needs further explanation [for me to understand].
xxx

--------------------
Glenn

"What is mu"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rebecca-VT
post Dec 5 2002, 01:30 PM
Post #14
forum guru
******

Posts: 3,335
Joined: 12-November 02




QUOTE
Nonionic surfactants, I can see completely, though without an explanation of why the surfactant portion should be milder with one charge vs the other needs further explanation


I don't know either :D .

Like I said, I was kind of jumping to conclusions... The book I have explains Nonionic and Amphoterics, which have no charge (amphoterics having no charge in a neutral PH) are the mildest. Cationics and Anionics are the harshest. A baby shampoo would be formulated to have a pH very close to the eye (which would be very close to neutral), so the amphoterics would have no charge in those formulas.

The book doesn't specifically say that a +/- charge equals a harsher surfactant, so it IS jump for me to say that, but based on the above information it seems kind of logical, doesn't it? :)

Formulating a tear-free shampoo does have a lot more to do with just the surfactant, or the pH, because like you said, there could be many other ingredients that could cause eye irritation.
xxx

--------------------
user posted image ~Rebecca~
""I would like to thank the Canadian people who came out to wave, with all five fingers, for their hospitality" ~George W. Bush
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Radagast
post Dec 5 2002, 01:48 PM
Post #15
enthusiast
***

Posts: 265
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Atlanta




An Amphoteric will have a charge, no matter the pH, as long as the molecule has dissociated (as most any dissolved ionic compound will). Baking soda is an amphoteric compound. All that means is it can act as an acid or a base, depending on the pH of the environment. Sort of a self-contained buffer.

Not that the above changes anything you've said about tear's free formulations, but I figured I could help clarify that point.
xxx

--------------------
Glenn

"What is mu"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 5 2002, 02:47 PM
Post #16
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




"...depending on the pH of the environment."

In the right environment, Baking soda will not dissociate, or at least the rate of dissociation will equal the rate of "reassociation" so that the pH of the solution will remain the same...is that correct? So, an amphoteric 'detergent', formulated to do the same at neutral ph, will not alter the pH in the tear film...

There is, as I said, more to this than the pH, I think. There is something about this type of cleanser that does not disturb the surfactant produced by the mucosal membrane of the eyelids, or perhaps more accurately, replaces it with something equally protective. Soap carries it away, leaving our eyes feeling a tad raw until the mucosal membranes can rebuild this protective layer. The more soap in the eye, the more surfactant removed, the worse the eyes feel, the longer it takes to replace. pH changes sting, but the buffers in tears would take care of this sooner (unless a strong alkali is present - then it becomes an issue of corrosion) than the surfactant removal.
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 5 2002, 02:54 PM
Post #17
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




BTW, the same effect can be achieved by flushing the eyes with alot of water...you remove the surfactant, mechanically in this case, and your eyes feel raw and there's a 'drag'/dry eye feeling until the layer is rebuilt. The surfactants produced by our eyelids are lubricants. They allow our lids to slide effortlessly over our globes. Thus the drag when they are gone.

There are several medical conditions where this lubricant is no longer produced. It's very unpleasant for the patient, as you can well imagine. The tear film has to be replaced frequently, manually.
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CathyMb
post Dec 5 2002, 03:56 PM
Post #18
the queen
******

Posts: 12,049
Joined: 12-November 02
From: Winnipeg eh?




This is kinda making me shiver.

Strange how we react to certain thoughts eh?
xxx

--------------------
user posted image

Queen of the Freakin Universe!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 5 2002, 04:50 PM
Post #19
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




LOLOL!

what part? :lol:
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pegasudz
post Dec 5 2002, 05:01 PM
Post #20
spectator
*

Posts: 27
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Patchogue NY - Long Island




Wow, what a thread! You guys are way too smart for me! LOL

GP, I must not have been clear & for this I apologize. My niece is 29 years old. It is her baby Joshua I had in mind when I made this soap. My niece, Carrie, tried the soap in her OWN eyes. She told me she would not use it on Joshua for fear that he might get soap suds on his hands & tough his eyes. She wouldn't dream of using it on his head/face or do anything to deliberately get the soap in his eyes. She was more concerned with him doing to himself inadvertently. She did say she's use the soap for her two daughters, aged 3 & 6, because they're presumably old enough not to touch their eyes.

Anyway, I think I will have to come up with some kind of label. Any suggestions on wording without scaring people away?

Thanx again for all the input & information. You guys are the best!
xxx

--------------------
Pegasuz

<href="http://www.wingedwonders.com"></a>
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goatpharmer
post Dec 5 2002, 09:00 PM
Post #21
forum guru
******

Posts: 1,614
Joined: 17-November 02
From: Pa




I'm sorry, pegasudz, I was wrong to assume and accuse. Thanks for being so gentle with me! :oops: :D

A medical model for a label would be: "Soap may sting if lather comes into contact with eyes. Do not use if the potential exists for this to occur."

A legal model for a label would be: "The maker assumes no responsibility for the improper use of this product, including application to body parts not intended by the maker. All such incidents are the full responsibility of the user of this product."

A occupational health model for a label would be: May be hazardous when
applied to eyes and other mucosal surfaces. If contact occurs, flush with copious amounts of water and call a physician."

A theological model for a label would be: "As cleanliness is next to Godliness, apply liberally with frequency. If lather gets into eyes, crying may occur, but remember to give thanks for all trials as God tries those he loves as a father disciplines his children."

A politically correct model for a label would be:"While the maker recommends that this product not come into contact with eyes, the maker definately respects any person's right to use this product in any manner the buyer sees fit to do so."

A Laconian model for a label would be: "Avoid contact with eyes."

Waaaaaaaaaaay too much time on my hands at this moment!!!!!

[img]http://smilies.networkessence.net/s/contrib/edoom/very_first_smiley.gif[/img] ".....beam me up, Scotty!"
xxx

--------------------
gp
[i]goatfarming...it's not for city folks...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
janiece
post Dec 5 2002, 09:18 PM
Post #22
forum guru
******

Posts: 2,234
Joined: 26-November 02
From: Illinois




Thanks for the chuckle, goatpharmer! You are tooooo clever! :D
xxx
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Radagast
post Dec 6 2002, 08:22 AM
Post #23
enthusiast
***

Posts: 265
Joined: 19-November 02
From: Atlanta




QUOTE
\"...depending on the pH of the environment.\"  

In the right environment, Baking soda will not dissociate, or at least the rate of dissociation will equal the rate of \"reassociation\" so that the pH of the solution will remain the same...is that correct?  So, an amphoteric 'detergent', formulated to do the same at neutral ph, will not alter the pH in the tear film...


Virtually all sodium compounds dissociate. If Baking soda doesn't dissociate, it isn't dissolved. Now there's a separate issue about the bicarbonate ion stealing hydrogen from water, producing a small amount of hydroxyl ions. When the pH of the NaHCO3 is stable, then the rate of hydroxyls produced vs HCO3- reproduced is at equilibrium.

Understood the point about amphoterics acting as buffers, thus stabilizing pH.


QUOTE

There is, as I said, more to this than the pH, I think.  There is something about this type of cleanser that does not disturb the surfactant produced by the mucosal membrane of the eyelids, or perhaps more accurately, replaces it with something equally protective.  Soap carries it away, leaving our eyes feeling a tad raw until the mucosal membranes can rebuild this protective layer.  The more soap in the eye, the more surfactant removed, the worse the eyes feel, the longer it takes to replace.  pH changes sting, but the buffers in tears would take care of this sooner (unless a strong alkali is present - then it becomes an issue of corrosion) than the surfactant removal.


I would guess that some surfactants would try to emulsify mucosal membranes too, causing damage. I guess osmotic balance would also be a question that would have to be addressed.

[tried to post this yesterday, but the forum didn't want to speak TCP/IP with my browser]
xxx

--------------------
Glenn

"What is mu"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CathyMb
post Dec 6 2002, 09:46 AM
Post #24
the queen
******

Posts: 12,049
Joined: 12-November 02
From: Winnipeg eh?




hahahahaha...
xxx

--------------------
user posted image

Queen of the Freakin Universe!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Help Support the Soap Dish    Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd April 2014 - 03:51 PM