Re: Emulsifying Wax NF

[Guest guest]

>If I could lend a hand to a fellow vendor who's being smeared over

>nothing more than a typo: I believe the correct INCI name is:

>Cetearyl Alcohol (and) Polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate.

Cetearyl Alcohol is an INCI name but Polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate is

not an INCI name.

There is no INCI name for Emulsifying Wax NF. For ingredient labeling purposes,

Emulsifying Wax NF is all you need.

Maurice

--------------------------------------------------------

Maurice O. Hevey

Convergent Cosmetics, Inc.

http://www.ConvergentCosmetics.com

-------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

>

> >If I could lend a hand to a fellow vendor who's being smeared

over

> >nothing more than a typo: I believe the correct INCI name is:

> >Cetearyl Alcohol (and) Polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate.

>

> Cetearyl Alcohol is an INCI name but Polyoxyethylene sorbitan

monostearate is not an INCI name.

>

> There is no INCI name for Emulsifying Wax NF. For ingredient

labeling purposes, Emulsifying Wax NF is all you need.

>

> Maurice

>

> --------------------------------------------------------

> Maurice O. Hevey

> Convergent Cosmetics, Inc.

Yes, I'm aware of that. My website lists " Emulsifying Wax NF, INCI:

Emulsifying Wax NF " . But since you assumed that WSP is not selling

Emulsifying wax NF based on the terms they had listed, I thought I

would list them without the typographical errors in hopes of

clearing up this misconception.

[Guest guest]

>If I could lend a hand to a fellow vendor who's being smeared over nothing more

than a typo:

Smeared? Typo? The wrong information was posted on the WSP website.

That was no typo.

I didn't put the wrong information up on the WSP website. At what

point is the owner of the website responsible for the information

posted on that website?

I have no intention to smear anyone. Why would I want to do that? I'm

not in the homecrafting business and would have nothing to gain.

But I am critical of people that misrepresent their products and raw

materials to decieve those that are less knowledgeable.

I think that business people that sell products and raw materials to

homecrafters should be knowledgeable about these products and should

not decieve prospective prospective customers with false information,

parsed wording and innuendos. Don't you?

Maurice

--------------------------------------------------------

Maurice O. Hevey

Convergent Cosmetics, Inc.

http://www.ConvergentCosmetics.com

-------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:35:28 -0700 (PDT), To Die For Inc wrote:

>Yes I do,

You do what? Since you didn't provide any references, I'm forced to

guess. Are you saying that you agree with me when I said

" I think that business people that sell products and raw materials to

homecrafters should be knowledgeable about these products and should

not decieve prospective prospective customers with false information,

parsed wording and innuendos. Don't you? "

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cosmeticinfo/message/23920

If this is the case, then I find that difficult to understand or

comprehend.

Why do you continue encourage homecrafters to buy your " AHA Skin

Rejuvenating Lotion Base " or to purchase Lactic Acid to formulate AHA

products when you know that these AHA products can not be sold if any

real, meaningfull AHA claims. Otherwise they violate the NeoStrata

patents?

The list of NeoStrata AHA patents that specifically list " Lactic

Acid "

in the claims are listed here:

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cosmeticinfo/message/23727

BTW, how much stability data do you have on this new " AHA Skin

Rejuvenating Lotion Base " ? It seems just like yesterday when you

were

thinking of formulating a AHA product. Is this product stable? Is

the

pH stable? How do you know? Have you performed any stability

testing?

It would be or should be important for you customers to know.

Why do you say:

" ISN'T FORMULATING WITH AHAs PATENTED?

According to the manufacturer: Lactic Acid is a natural ingredient,

and

formulating with it in general cannot be patented. Only a method or

recipe can be patented...just as generic terms can't be trademarked. "

http://www.todieforsoap.com/aha_product.htm

I don't think there is any argument about that statement but didn't

Purac, your vendor of Lactic Acid tell you, as I did, that " Neostrata

company has patented combinations of sodium salts with different

acids

(Lactic acid, Glycolic acid, GDL) as rejuventaing agents.

NeoStrata has a patent licensing program in effect through their

subsidiary holding company TriStrata Technologies.'

Did you forget?

Obviously, you know must something that Purac and the highly paid

legal

departments at many major cosmetic companies such as, but not limited

to, Allergan, Avon, Beiersdorf, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chanel,

Cognis, Chesebrough - Ponds, Arden, Erno Lazlo, L'Oreal,

Murad, Neoteric and Pfizer don't know. You should share this valuable

legal insight with your customers.

And in the discussion of your " ALL NEW REJUVENATING ALPHA HYDROXY

ACID

LOTION BASE "

http://www.todieforsoap.com/aha_product.htm

you state that " We used all the great ingredients you would choose if

you made this yourself, for a skin rejuvenating Lotion you will be

proud to offer as part of your product line! " " We included all of

the

following for their wonderful properties: "

In referencing the " wonderful properties " of Allantion, you state the

following:

" Cell proliferation and rapid formation of epithelium. Skin-

irritation,

chapping and cracking of the epidermis disappear, together with other

blemishes.. When used on intact facial and body skin allantoin

produces

as silky, smooth and healthy appearance. Details on the active

mechanism of Allantoin are not yet fully established, but it is

assumed

that allantoin produces a transient local increase in leukocytes.

Indications: minor everyday injuries, lacerations, rhagades, cuts

and

burns to stubborn and suppurating wounds, refractory ulcers of

various

genesis, including the treatment of burns of varying cause and

severity, for instance, those following exposure to heat, x-ray and

solar irradiation. preparations containing allantoin also have a

beneficial effect on eczema, contact dermatitis of the hands,

hyperkeratosis, paradentosis, and aphthae. Of particular advantage is

the fact that wound healing proceeds without keloid development. In

addition, internal and external hemorrhoids respond well to

suppositories and ointments with allantoin. "

When you realize that the term " drug means àarticles intended for use

in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of

disease

in man à and articles (other than food) intended to affect the

structure or any function of the body " ,

http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/fdcact/fdcact1.htm

you can understand why these benefits you attribute to Allantoin are

drug claims. By posting this information, are you encouraging

prospective customers to make these same drug claims?

I don't think you or your customers (real or prospective) have the

experience and qualifications to make, sell or market drugs.

For the sake of brevity, I am not going to dissect the drug benefits

that you attribute to the other ingredients that are found in

your " all

new rejuvenating alpha hydroxy acid lotion base " .

To me, the casual observer and, I think, a FDA inspector would

consider

this as series of blatant drug claims. Are you parsing words in

order

to sell product.

I don't think or expect that you will agree with me but your website

copy speak volumes.

> but why not contact the vendor to clarify the matter

Actually I did. I sent WSP an email query about this matter on or

about March 9, 2003 when someone on Soap Dish Forum said

" I made 2 - 100oz batches of lotions today using my same recipe as

always, no changes EXCEPT a different supplier for the E-wax. It

separated 2 hours later!!!! I count my blessings that I have never

ever had any batch of lotion separate, and now this. Now, when I have

to get product out. Man, I'm pissed, and sick to top it off. "

http://www.soapdishforum.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=246199#246199

Come to find out she was using Emulsifying Wax NF from WSP (aka

Steryl

Alcohol (and) Ceteareth-20).

I never receive a response from WSP and the webpage has not changed

as

of today. My conclusion was, based on past experiences and

observations of the WSP website, WSP didn't care.

>before starting an unjustified thread stating that WSP's Ewax is

not NF

That's a matter of perspective. I didn't start the thread nor do I

think my comments and observations were unjustified or unwarranted.

>and making inflammatory comments?

Inflammatory? That's a matter of opinion.

>I think perhaps this MO has been pointed out to you before as well,

(e.g. " wall of shame " ).

Actually it was a " Hall of Shame " . Ah yes! I remember that well.

The

Hall of Shame was first conceived in

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cosmeticinfo/message/6804

When I said

" I want to let every [one] know that I am starting a WWW Hall of

Shame

for companies that misrepresent their products and/or the ingredients

that they sell to unsuspecting customers. I will post the beginning

of

this list latter today. "

It all goes back to my frustrations of vendors selling natural

Potassium Sorbate.

The Hall of Shame Volume 1 was published on January 10, 2002

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cosmeticinfo/message/6807

I think some list members might find it interesting to read ALL the

responses and comments.

>IMO there's a difference between a vendor purposely misleading

customers and a vendor inadvertently making an error.

I think you were and are well informed on the Neostrata AHA patent

situation and yet you continue to encourage people to buy your " drug "

laden " all new rejuvenating alpha hydroxy acid lotion base " . How do

you explain that? Am I missing something?

>They ARE selling Ewax NF, whether they know the INCI name or not.

How do we know that? Could it be that WSP posted the INCI name and

called it Emulsifying Wax NF?

What could WSP say to a customer? It may be true but then again, who

knows for sure? WSP trusts their vendor and has no way of conducting

any quality assurance.

Call me old fashion, but I think the burden of proof is on the seller

not the buyer and WSP is the seller and the homecrafter is the

buyer.

Do you agree? Don't you agree that the burden of proof is the

sellers'

responsibility? Or do you believe that this burden of proof lies in

the customers' backyard?

Maurice

--------------------------------------------------------

Maurice O. Hevey

Convergent Cosmetics, Inc.

http://www.ConvergentCosmetics.com

-------------------------------------------------------