June 27, 2008
Liz |
9th Annual Meeting of Skin Forum |
Back in London and I am just finishing a few days at the 9th Annual Meeting of Skin Forum, a series of academic and research presentations at the School of Pharmacy in the University of London. As a distinctly non-academic, I usually have to ask the lecturers to explain some of their finer points in layman’s language as most of the other delegates are post-grad researchers or senior clinicians (I counted at least 16 Professors in the room). Luckily I’ve had our technical manager Steve with me and he untangles some of the jargon when the physical chemistry flies way over my head.
The presentation where I felt most at home was given by Professor Monique Simmonds, head of the plant research unit at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. We’ve met on a number of occasions as we’ve commissioned the labs here to conduct some independent research for us over the years, notably with aloe identification and also when we started to make our own plant extracts without propylene glycol as a solubiliser (the Kew team were pleasantly surprised at their level of activity). Prof Simmonds made the point that the correct identification of plant species is vitally important for both cosmetic and drug use. The taxonomy department at Kew is world-class, with over 8 million preserved specimens in their library and around 40,000 living accessions. However, last year, 25% of the plants they were asked to identify were wrongly labelled and out of 1,684 samples 15 of these were extremely toxic. The difficulties are legion – there are over 100 different legal names for Santalam album (sandalwood) so there is plenty of scope for rogue traders. The Prof revealed that of the 29 samples of “Santalam album” sandalwood essential oil supplied, none met the standard and one was actually completely synthetic! This is just one reason why we have our own in-house botanical and ingredient sourcing team as well as very strict measures in place when we buy our raw materials, as so much of what is available on the market to the formulators in our industry is not actually as it appears. We try and buy direct from farmers, growers and co-operatives we know and trust and not from industry wholesalers, as this can be a bit of a grey area.
Another fascinating area of research is nano-technology and much of the discussions focused on the nano and micro- particle size of skincare ingredients and whether these present any potential danger. As regular readers will know, I have previously written on Professor Jonathan Hadgraft et al’s research that de-bunks the beauty myth that 60% of what we put onto our skin is absorbed (it isn’t – the figure is closer to 1 – 2% and even that depends very much on the specific formulation as skincare ingredient molecules are simply too large to ‘slip’ through the stratum corneum of the epidermis, let alone reach the lower basal layer or dermis). It was interesting to hear presentations from international teams of researchers (notably France, Belgium and the United States) all conclude that even the most microscopically small nano-particle is still too large to penetrate into living tissues below the dead, outer stratum corneum of the skin. Of especial interest was the work looking at titanium dioxide, as we use this in our Sunshade range and are currently working on improved formulations for next year, potentially with higher SPF protection. It seems this ingredient is not only a very good sunscreen, but is also the safest of all to use, having no toxicity even when injected into the body (something only researchers would actually do, of course), making it the very best choice for the sensitive, fair skinned and youngsters. If you’re interested in this field of bio-chemistry, you might like to check out the data on their website - www.skin-forum.eu
