Antyperspirants and deodorants
Updated: Aug 30
Sweating and body odour
Sweating is a physiological process that allows the body to maintain the correct temperature. Under stress, hormone secretion increases, which causes the sweat glands to work more intensely. Sweat itself is almost odourless; however, bacteria living on the skin transform its components into unpleasant-smelling compounds, such as trans-3-methyl-2-hexenoic acid (TMHA). This is precisely why deodorants and antiperspirants are so widely used. They have become an indispensable part of daily hygiene, as cleanliness and comfort are primarily associated with preventing unpleasant body odour.
What is the difference between a deodorant and an antiperspirant?
The main difference lies in their composition. Deodorants primarily focus on neutralising unpleasant odours. They rarely reduce perspiration because they do not contain aluminium salts, but rather mild astringent and antibacterial ingredients. Antiperspirants, on the other hand, are mainly based on aluminium salts and effectively reduce sweating while also providing a deodorising effect, although they may cause irritation in some users.
Although a large number of scientists work every day on ingredients capable of reducing body odour and perspiration, none has yet proven as reliable as aluminium salts.
Feature | Deodorant | Antiperspirant |
Purpose | Neutralisation of unpleasant odour | Reduction of perspiration and, consequently, odour |
Mechanism | Inhibiting bacterial growth and masking odour | Constriction and temporary blockage of sweat gland openings, reducing moisture secretion in the underarm area |
Effect on sweating | Does not reduce it | Significantly reduces it |
Active ingredients | Alcohol, potassium alum, zinc salts and zinc oxide, plant extracts, glycols | Aluminium salts, Aluminium Chlorohydrate, Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex GLY |
Perceived effect | Freshness and odour masking | Protection against moisture and unpleasant odour |
Skin mildness | Gentle | May cause skin irritation |
Duration of effect | Typically up to 12 hours | Up to 72 hours |
Frequent skin irritation associated with the use of antiperspirants and sweat blockers has led consumers to focus more on alternatives, namely deodorants.
Many manufacturers have introduced new formats of these cosmetics:
cream or butter formulations applied to the underarm with the hand;
water-based sticks without silicones;
fat-based sticks;
natural roll-ons.
Unfortunately, each of these solutions has its drawbacks. For example, a fat-based stick can leave greasy stains on clothing, while a butter formulation requires washing the hands after application. However, the main characteristic they unfortunately share is relatively low efficacy.
Naturalness
The Polish cosmetics industry is known for developing highly natural products, but the relatively narrow range of antiperspirants is not particularly flexible in this respect. As a result, there have been no major breakthroughs in this segment for years, either in terms of raw materials or innovative product formats.
For a long time, the market has been dominated by products from large corporations, whose formulations are based primarily on aluminium salts (most commonly Aluminium Chlorohydrate) and synthetic ethoxylated ingredients such as Steareth-21, Steareth-2, Ceteareth-20 and PPG-15 Stearyl Ether.
Meeting consumer expectations regarding the naturalness and mildness of deodorising products requires combining a range of ingredients to achieve a synergistic effect. Unfortunately, even a blend of five or six such raw materials does not provide odour-control efficacy comparable to that of an antiperspirant.
Consequently, deodorants are an option for consumers who sweat little or moderately and who have the opportunity to reapply the product in the afternoon or evening.
Modern deodorant and antiperspirant ingredients
A review of products available on the market, as well as raw materials offered by distributors, reveals a wide range of formulation possibilities.
Substances that absorb sweat:
clays (INCI: Kaolin, Montmorillonite);
zeolites (INCI: Zeolite);
silica (INCI: Silica);
starches (INCI: Distarch Phosphate, Zea Mays Starch);
magnesium hydroxide (INCI: Magnesium Hydroxide);
hydroxyapatite derivatives (INCI: Calcium Magnesium Zinc Hydroxyapatite);
diatomaceous earth (INCI: Diatomaceous Earth).
Substances that inhibit bacterial proliferation:
potassium alum (INCI: Potassium Alum);
methylheptylglycerin (INCI: Methylheptylglycerin);
tea tree essential oil (INCI: Melaleuca Alternifolia Leaf Oil) and sage oil (Salvia Officinalis Leaf Oil);
triethyl citrate (INCI: Triethyl Citrate);
terpineol (INCI: 4-Terpineol);
shikimic acid (INCI: Shikimic Acid);
ethyl alcohol (INCI: Alcohol Denat.);
sodium usnate (INCI: Sodium Usnate);
beard lichen extract (INCI: Usnea Barbata Extract);
zinc salts (e.g. Zinc Gluconate) and zinc oxide;
glycols (propanediol, pentylene glycol, caprylyl glycol).
Astringent substances:
sage extract (INCI: Salvia Officinalis Leaf Extract);
oak extract (INCI: Quercus Robur Bark Extract);
horsetail extract (INCI: Equisetum Arvense Extract);
pullulan (INCI: Pullulan).
The use of targeted odour neutralisers has also become increasingly popular. They can be found under some interesting INCI names, including:
Citronellyl Methylcrotonate;
Carnosine + Acetyl Tetrapeptide-2;
Saccharomyces Ferment;
Saccharomyces/Acetobacter/Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract Ferment Filtrate.
An interesting development is the increasingly frequent use of Botox-like ingredients, which reduce perspiration by constricting the openings of the sweat glands.
It is also worth mentioning nano-silver, which was an excellent deodorising ingredient. However, since the second quarter of 2026, its use in cosmetic products has no longer been permitted.
Formulation challenges
There is a wide range of antiperspirants and deodorants available on store shelves. However, it is worth noting that they differ relatively little from one another in terms of their ingredients.
Deodorants offer a greater choice of raw materials, whose synergistic effects can be carefully exploited. Nevertheless, their mechanism of action is fundamentally similar. Therefore, regardless of how many substances are combined, it is not possible to achieve the efficacy of an antiperspirant.
When designing and preparing deodorant samples, a formulator faces a number of formulation challenges. Here are some of them:
Raw material antagonism – in typical fat-based sticks, it is difficult to incorporate an adequate amount of an aqueous extract. For example, the best efficacy of sage extract is achieved when using approximately a 5% solution, which requires considerable formulation ingenuity when incorporating it into a stick and increases the cost of the formulation.
Finished-product pH – in water-based sticks based on sodium stearate, the high pH prevents the incorporation of ingredients that require a pH below 7.0. Adjusting the pH can result in precipitation of stearic acid and complete loss of the product structure.
Temperature – some active ingredients are sensitive to elevated temperatures, making it impossible to incorporate them into a stick formulation that requires hot filling.
Colour – high concentrations of aqueous extracts can turn the cosmetic mass yellow-brown, which is unattractive to consumers. Correcting the colour is difficult because colourants can be temperature-sensitive, ruling out the stick format, while the range of achievable colours is limited to just a few shades, such as green-blue or orange-pink. Furthermore, the alkaline environment of a sodium-stearate stick can distort the colour or cause it to fade rapidly.
Raw material incompatibility – popular zinc salts can react with other ingredients in the formulation.
Thickening – producing natural gels suitable for roll-on products can create sensory problems: the formulations can be very sticky and take a long time to dry under the arms. Synthetic thickeners, where their use is acceptable, generally perform better, but they may be sensitive to zinc salts or acidic active ingredients.
Fragrance – essential oils and terpineol can be effective, but their distinctive odour, which is difficult to mask, is unacceptable to many users.
Application and sensory properties – these depend largely on the degree of naturalness of the product. Where silky silicone powders or acrylate-based thickeners can be used, achieving ideal sensory characteristics is easier. In highly natural products, sensory properties can only be optimised to the extent permitted by the alternatives to synthetic cosmetic raw materials available on the market – for example, substitutes for volatile silicones, blends of plant waxes instead of synthetic waxes, and blends of plant gums instead of acrylates.
Designing antiperspirants that combine high naturalness, clean beauty and a reasonable budget also creates numerous challenges.
Among the limited range of aluminium salts, formulators must select one that is financially accessible to the customer. Few raw-material suppliers offer these substances, and most are available only in quantities starting at four drums or an IBC container. In practice, this means that the launch of new antiperspirants is most often undertaken by large manufacturers supplying the most popular retail chains in Poland.
Commercial antiperspirant formulations are largely based on ethoxylated ingredients, such as Steareth-21 and PEGs, or on silicones. These are used to create lightweight emulsions that dispense efficiently through roll-on packaging and are convenient to apply.
Natural thickeners and emulsifiers, however, prove completely unstable in these formulations because the chemical environment created by aluminium salts is extremely demanding:
the typical product pH is around 3.5, whereas most natural emulsifiers work from approximately pH 4.0;
the high concentration of aluminium salts drastically reduces the amount of available water in the formulation, preventing thickeners from developing properly;
aluminium salts behave as strong electrolytes, causing natural emulsifiers and thickeners to lose their functional properties.
Therefore, creating a natural base for an antiperspirant can be extremely difficult and, in some cases, virtually impossible.
Compromise
At present, we can observe an interesting compromise among consumers regarding the naturalness of the key active ingredient versus the base formulation.
The idea is that although the active raw material may be of synthetic origin, its high efficacy makes it acceptable in the product, while the remainder of the formulation must be as natural as possible.
For example, products containing high levels of synthetic niacinamide combined with a natural base are popular. A similar approach can be seen in antiperspirants: aluminium salts are acceptable, but synthetic emulsifiers and thickeners are not.
The high level of naturalness expected from antiperspirants presents a considerable challenge for formulators, because aluminium salts create an extremely demanding chemical environment and most natural solutions unfortunately do not perform adequately under these conditions.
Minor shortcomings on labels
Companies sometimes use certain tricks and vague claims on product labels. Consumers looking for aluminium-free products who are unable to interpret INCI lists may purchase products described as mineral, assuming that they are primarily based on alum.
However, when we examine the ingredient list, we may find that aluminium salts are still the dominant ingredient, while alum is present merely as a proverbial “pinch in a tanker.”
We also encounter situations in which consumers are misled by a product being described as an antiperspirant, even though it is actually a deodorant.
Conclusion
Developing a cosmetic product that is simultaneously effective, convenient, natural and gentle on the skin remains an elusive goal.
So far, manufacturers have not developed a solution to the unpleasant effects of sweating that is completely free of drawbacks. However, the dynamic cosmetic raw-materials industry, constantly searching for innovation, together with advances in technology, offers hope that a product meeting all of these criteria will eventually emerge.
Zuzanna Fedyczak dla Świat Przemysłu Kosmetycznego 2/2026 s.45
