Alternatives in Cosmetic Raw Materials - Trend or Necessity?
The modern challenges of environmental pollution and climate change evoke strong emotions, prompting us to rethink our attitudes and habits. Strict recycling practices, cotton shopping bags, and reusable straws have become a permanent part of our everyday reality.
How is the cosmetic raw materials industry adapting to a changing world and evolving customer expectations?
Very dynamically. Over the past few years, many suppliers have expanded their portfolios to include naturally derived substances intended as alternatives to widely used synthetic raw materials. There are numerous such groups of ingredients, and it would be impossible to discuss them all, but we will focus on the most important ones below.
Due to their multifunctionality, some of the most challenging ingredients to replace when developing cosmetic formulations are acrylate-based ingredients. They can be used to thicken a formulation, suspend particles, create a uniform film on the skin (as in sunscreens), improve formulation stability, provide opacity, create emulsions without conventional emulsifiers, and build thixotropic systems. All of this can be achieved at relatively low concentrations and moderate cost.
Given the versatility of acrylates, why look for alternative thickeners at all?
Because consumer trends and preferences are clearly moving towards replacing synthetic ingredients with natural raw materials, and this is at least partially achievable. Cellulose is a polymer that occurs widely in nature, and its derivatives can be used in ways similar to acrylates. There is a wide range of cellulose-based raw materials available. Working with them requires a little patience when it comes to finding the right combinations, but the results are well worth the effort.
Here are a few examples of how cellulose derivatives can be used instead of synthetic ingredients, according to their INCI names:
Ethylcellulose – a thickener for anhydrous formulations that provides a rich, substantial texture, for example in a lip gloss based on natural oils and emollients,
Cellulose + Cellulose Gum – a specialized blend for suspending particles (such as exfoliating particles or clay) in surfactant-based formulations,
Microcrystalline Cellulose + Cellulose Gum – thickening and improved sensory properties in a single raw material, providing a silky, satin-like finish,
Cellulose – an alternative exfoliating agent to microplastics,
Microcrystalline Cellulose – a natural alternative to Nylon-12 in color cosmetics.
Acrylate derivatives are also used as opacifying agents in surfactant-based formulations, such as shampoos and shower gels. In an effort to address this issue, raw material suppliers offer alternatives such as kaolin or powdered chicory root extract. However, these solutions are still far from perfect. In the first case, additional measures are needed to prevent the heavy particles from settling, while in the second, the colour of the formulation shifts towards ecru or an off-white shade.
We still lack effective natural alternatives to acrylate-based styling agents used in hair-styling products such as hairsprays, pastes, and powders.
Another major group of raw materials that is increasingly avoided when developing natural formulations is silicones. Until recently, ingredients such as Cyclopentasiloxane and Dimethicone were widely used in retail products. The former was used to reduce the tackiness of emulsions on the skin, while the latter provided a velvety finish and a soft skin feel. As fully synthetic ingredients that do not occur naturally, they have ended up on the blacklist simply because they do not fit the prevailing trend towards natural formulations.
It should be clearly emphasized, however, that these ingredients are almost impossible to replace in professional hairdressing products. The same applies to colour cosmetics, where elegant foundations and powders rely on carefully selected silicones, elastomers, and their derivatives.
Raw material suppliers are gradually introducing natural alternatives, focusing primarily on Cyclopentasiloxane and Dimethicone. Available options include ingredients based on:
light fractions of olive, palm, or coconut oils (e.g. Coco-Caprylate/Caprate (and) Hydrogenated Olive Oil Unsaponifiables),
sebacic acid derivatives (e.g. Diheptyl Succinate (and) Capryloyl Glycerin/Sebacic Acid Copolymer),
fractions of castor and coconut oils (e.g. Triheptanoin (and) C13-15 Alkane).
An interesting alternative to “heavier” silicones in hair care is the ingredient with the INCI name Hydrogenated Castor Oil/Sebacic Acid Copolymer. It has repairing and smoothing properties while being 100% naturally derived.
Meanwhile, the ingredient with the INCI name Trimethylolpropane Tricaprylate/Tricaprate can serve as a silicone alternative in hair conditioners.
A major challenge for raw material manufacturers is developing alternatives to microcrystalline waxes with different melting points. As substances obtained through petroleum refining, they are deliberately avoided by many consumers, prompting formulators to search for suitable alternatives. The problem is that plant-based waxes generally have somewhat lower melting points than microcrystalline waxes. The highest melting point is exhibited by Carnauba wax, at 86°C. This makes it difficult to match and replace these substances in cosmetic formulations such as lipsticks, sticks, and hair pastes.
Another group of raw materials that are only partially naturally derived are hair conditioners. They are absolutely essential in hair care and styling products because the positive electrical charge present in their molecules helps close the hair cuticles, leaving the hair smooth, shiny, and easier to comb.
The most commonly used conditioners in shampoos include:
guar gum derivatives (Guar Hydroxypropyltrimonium Chloride)
polyquaterniums with different numbers (Polyquaternium-10, Quaternium-80)
silicones (Dimethicone, Amodimethicone, Polysilicone-15)
Given that the first group is approximately 70–85% naturally derived, there have been no significant changes in this category for some time. In the second group, however, we now have Polyquaternium-80 and Polyquaternium-81, which are entirely naturally derived. This is still not enough, but research into suitable alternatives is ongoing.
The aim of these changes is not always to obtain the same ingredients from plant-based sources, but rather to use an entirely different substance that provides a similar effect. Many suppliers claim that their ingredients, when used at a specific concentration (e.g. inulin or plant-derived peptides), can produce an effect comparable to that of Polyquaternium-10.
The final major segment of the raw materials industry worth discussing is emulsifiers. For many years, Ceteareth-20, Steareth-21, Polysorbate-20, and PEG-100 Stearate have been popular choices. This is hardly surprising, as from both a technological and economic perspective they have many advantages: they are easy to use, reliable even under extreme pH conditions, gentle enough for baby skin, resistant to oxidation, effective at low concentrations, and suitable for a wide range of applications, including mists, lotions, and hair conditioners. On top of that, they are competitively priced and available from almost all suppliers.
The downside, however, is their origin. They are only partially naturally derived (cetyl alcohol) and are also partially ethoxylated using ethylene oxide derived from petrochemical sources. So far, it has not been possible to obtain the aforementioned emulsifiers from plant-based materials, leaving formulators to choose from dozens of other raw materials.
One particularly interesting example of the search for more environmentally friendly solutions is the development of Polysorbate-20 without the use of petrochemical feedstocks by one of the major industry players. The ethylene oxide used to synthesize the ingredient is obtained from gases generated from waste, making the entire process a good example of the circular economy and efforts to reduce environmental pollution.
We still have a long way to go before synthetic substances can be eliminated from cosmetic products. In the meantime, however, an important question arises: is this unquestionably necessary and, above all, is it even possible? It is worth emphasizing that using a high concentration of synthetic ingredients in a formulation does not diminish its value. Quite often, it is simply a compromise resulting from the need to achieve the desired properties.
Not all manufacturers choose natural formulations because they are simply more expensive and require greater investment of time and work. Favorable economics combined with satisfactory product performance remain the most important considerations for the majority of customers.
Zuzanna Fedyczak for Life Science 04/21 s.16
