Artificial Intelligence in the Work of a Contract Technologist

Artificial intelligence tickles our industry in interesting ways, serving up regular doses of admiration or irritation. I observe its development from the narrow perspective of a cosmetics technologist, and while sharing a few small reflections, I secretly hope that as you read this, a faint smile might sneak under your moustache. AI influences our work depending on who uses it and for what purpose:

1️⃣ Scientists use it to analyze thousands of data points that no human could ever study, leading to discoveries such as new peptides effective against acne. This is truly a beautiful fruit of the efforts of some of the world’s greatest minds, and one I am delighted to use in my work.

2️⃣ Clients, however, are a more tangled story. ChatG.. is, for them, an instant source of information about raw materials and trends. How does that reflect on our work? Not very nicely 😞 Clients want to stay close to every stage of creation, so they educate themselves with AI to ensure nothing surprises them and to “support” the technologist they work with. It is truly right and just - I genuinely believe that! But… in practice, it generates many extra hours of work each month and a bonus migraine, because AI’s knowledge of cosmetic raw materials is superficial.  It doesn’t know prices, availability, or incompatibilities.

And what comes of that? Hours spent explaining why it will be too expensive, or why a change will not deliver the same result. To put it plainly - some people trust Chat more than a technologist who has spent years performing thousands of lab trials. Real-life examples:

💠 hyaluronic acid, retinol, and niacinamide are not innovative ingredients, even though Chat presents them as such.

💠 you cannot replace acrylates with xanthan gum and get the same sensory feel (this AI suggestion literally left me speechless).

Sometimes clients even show up at the factory with a formula created by Chat. The formulation makes sense at first glance, but has never been produced and lacks required testing. And then the technologist - the very person they tried to cleverly skip in the creative chain - has to fix the unstable mass and thoroughly justify every tiny correction (“someone’s been eating from my bowl!?”).

Fortunately, the % of such cases is small, and all we can do is wait out this period of excessive excitement 😉