Home Archives for NYSCC

Author: NYSCC

New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists (NYSCC) Announces New At Home Live Series

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

(New York, NY, April 2020)—The New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists (NYSCC) announces the launch of a new NYSCC “At Home Live” Series featuring current topics and trends in cosmetic chemistry and formulation. These free educational programs will be offered several times a week starting April 16th and cover topics that are relevant and timely to chemists and product development teams in the beauty and personal care industries.

The first At Home Live Webinar will be “Color Trends: Do you want to be the Front-Runner or Follower?,” presented by Amy G. Marshall, Head of Sales – Cosmetics, ECKART America Corporation on Thursday, April 16th.  She will explore the origin, influences and development of today’s colors as well as elaborate on the concept of the Mood Board in developing the trends of tomorrow.  This presentation will provide marketing and sales people with a historic perspective that will empower them to lead the market instead of reacting to it and for cosmetic chemists to initiate the process that may result in the next “Big Thing.”

Future series topics include:  Hand Sanitizers & Hand Hygiene; Sustainability 101; Healthy Habits: Cleanse + Care; and The Fight Against COVID 19, Science, Hand Sanitizers and Other Forms of Personal Protection, as well as selected presentations from the Suppliers’ Day Revolutionary Disruptor Series.

“This new webinar series will offer our members an easy and comfortable way to stay informed and move their professional development forward.  It will also help us stay connected and engaged with our members, colleagues and community while working remotely and in our home offices,” said Giorgino Macalino, Chair, NYSCC.

To register for the April 16th presentation, visit bit.ly/Apr16webinar.  For more information on the NYSCC At Home Live Series visit: https://nyscc.org/at-home-live-series/.

###

About New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists (NYSCC)

Dedicated to the advancement of cosmetic science, the New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists, www.nyscc.org, strives to increase and disseminate scientific information through meetings and publications. By promoting research in cosmetic science and industry, and by setting high ethical, professional and educational standards, we reach our goal of improving the qualifications of cosmetic scientists. Our mission is to further the interests and recognition of cosmetic scientists while maintaining the confidence of the public in the cosmetic and toiletries industry. The NYSCC Suppliers’ Day, September 30 – October 1, 2020, at the Javits Center in New York City, has become the most important annual event on the industry calendar in North America for beauty ingredients, formulations, and delivery innovations. It attracts the leading players in the market and has become the showcase for new product launches, and educational programming, on top of being an excellent networking opportunity. For more information and to attend visit: www.nyscc.org/suppliers-day.

Microbiome – An Overview

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

The microbiome research has been expanded over the last decade with extensive research published in many fields – including dermatology, oncology, neurology – where some light has being shed on how the microbiome could be beneficial for our health rather than just being detrimental as long believed (1–3).

The microbiome represents the genome of microbiota or microorganisms such as bacteria, yeast, fungi, viruses, mites… that live within us. A recent evaluation estimated the total number of bacteria inhabiting the human body being close to 40 trillion for 30 trillion of human cells, which at the skin level represents 55 billion of bacteria per square meter (4). With these numbers, it is quite hard to imagine that it took us so long to get interested in these little organisms!

But why is the fascination just starting now?

Microbiome research got a kick start about 10 years ago, when the NIH funded a large program aiming to characterize the human microbiome and to understand how it could influence human health. While long being investigated for environment-related applications, the Human Microbiome Project (HMP) helped unravel fundamental characteristics of the microbiome in several organs including the skin (5).

While defining the microbial landscape of our skin, mouth, lungs or intestine, researches highlighted that the microorganisms that live within us are quite unique to one individual even if they can be generally defined as communities found in all human beings (6). What makes everyone’s microbiota so special comes from one’s history: from the way we were born, to the very first exposures to environmental factors, the lifestyle, the medical history. A baby born by natural delivery will have a much richer skin microbiota than a baby born by C-section, who will not be exposed to its mother vaginal microbiota (7). It is even suggested now that microbiota develops in utero (8). Early exposure to antibiotics will have devastating effects on the microbiota community richness and favor what is called scientifically “dysbiosis”, meaning a disequilibrium in the microorganism population with generally one group of microorganisms overpopulating the others. The lifestyle including diet, sleep, smoke habits will favor some microorganisms over others by providing their preferred food source or creating physicochemical conditions that would favor their growth. In addition to these external factors, the host’s genetical background will influence the microorganisms it welcomes, by the physical and chemical environment it provides (9).

The skin microbiome will develop and organize itself as we grow and become site specific with oily, dry and moist areas bearing their own set of microorganisms (10). The same way the host influences the composition of its microbiome, it has been shown that the microbiome influences the host’s well-being. During development, skin commensals (bacteria naturally living on our skin) will instruct our immune system to develop tolerance toward them, while fighting foreign bacteria or pathogens (11–13). The skin microbiota has also been linked to a stronger skin barrier function, with studies showing that skin lacking a microbiome was weaker and could not respond to external assaults as well as a microorganism-populated skin, because it missed some essential structural components (14,15).

When looking at the relationship between the microbiome and diseases of the skin, studies have shown how a dysregulated microbiome can impact and contribute to conditions such as eczema or acne (9). In both pathologies, it appears that one specific specie becomes pathogenic and overcomes all the other microorganisms, starting to trigger skin damage, including uncontrolled inflammation. How such an event can happen is still unclear, but some argue that bacteria can either acquire virulent features by serial mutations or horizontal gene transfer (thanks to an inactive CRISPR/Cas locus) or express virulent toxins and enzymes by the activation of the quorum sensing (a system regulated by population density and enabling bacteria to sense and communicate with their environment through signal molecules) (13,16).

Because of the control the microbiome can have over skin integrity and health, new therapies are emerging to try restoring a lost balance in the microbiome. Different strategies have been proposed with some already being used in clinical trials in the dermatology field. Some researchers are using either commensal bacteria able to inhibit or kill the pathogen (and using what is called quorum quenching – inhibition of the quorum sensing); or bacteriophages (viruses that infect and can kill bacteria) (17,18). Some therapies are also trying to replace the lost bacterial communities by transferring the skin microbiota of healthy individuals (microbiota transplants) (19,20).

But the enthusiasm about skin microbiome research has not been only restricted to the dermatology field, it has also gained traction in the personal care industry, which aims to improve or maintain one’s microbiome as a part of a healthy skin routine. That said, even if health benefits of the microbiome are becoming quite striking, it is still hard to materialize this thought at the consumer level. However, the personal care industry is working its way through by notably taking advantage of all the work that has been done by the food industry. Nowadays, more and more brands (from indie to well established brands) provide products containing food sources for health associated bacteria such as prebiotics and bacteria lysates or ferment extracts – as we can assume that the metabolism of commensal bacteria provides molecules contributing to skin health (21). Unfortunately, the latter two are often improperly labeled as “probiotics” to help the consumer understand the product. Beyond the technical challenges that represent working with real probiotics, i.e. live microorganisms, we have to keep in mind that the consumer might simply not be ready yet to apply consciously live microorganisms on its skin.

Nevertheless, it is with joint effort and by promoting clear information and education, that this paradigm will change. We are fortunate enough to live in this new exciting technological era enabling us to dive even deeper in our understanding of the microbiome and in the development of appropriate microbiome-related products.

 

References:

  1. Chen J, Douglass J, Prasath V, Neace M, Atrchian S, Manjili MH, et al. The microbiome and breast cancer: a review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Dec;178(3):493–6.
  2. Mohajeri MH, Brummer RJM, Rastall RA, Weersma RK, Harmsen HJM, Faas M, et al. The role of the microbiome for human health: from basic science to clinical applications. Eur J Nutr. 2018 May;57(Suppl 1):1–14.
  3. Byrd AL, Belkaid Y, Segre JA. The human skin microbiome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018;16(3):143–55.
  4. Sender R, Fuchs S, Milo R. Revised Estimates for the Number of Human and Bacteria Cells in the Body. PLoS Biol. 2016 Aug;14(8).
  5. Human Microbiome Project – Overview. Available from: https://commonfund.nih.gov/hmp/overview
  6. Lloyd-Price J, Abu-Ali G, Huttenhower C. The healthy human microbiome. Genome Med. 2016 27;8(1):51.
  7. Dominguez-Bello MG, De Jesus-Laboy KM, Shen N, Cox LM, Amir A, Gonzalez A, et al. Partial restoration of the microbiota of cesarean-born infants via vaginal microbial transfer. Nat Med. 2016 Mar;22(3):250–3.
  8. Walker RW, Clemente JC, Peter I, Loos RJF. The prenatal gut microbiome: are we colonized with bacteria in utero? Pediatr Obes. 2017;12 Suppl 1:3–17.
  9. Dréno B, Araviiskaia E, Berardesca E, Gontijo G, Sanchez Viera M, Xiang LF, et al. Microbiome in healthy skin, update for dermatologists. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol JEADV. 2016 Dec;30(12):2038–47.
  10. Kong HH. Skin microbiome: genomics-based insights into the diversity and role of skin microbes. Trends Mol Med. 2011 Jun;17(6):320–8.
  11. Naik S, Bouladoux N, Wilhelm C, Molloy MJ, Salcedo R, Kastenmuller W, et al. Compartmentalized control of skin immunity by resident commensals. Science. 2012 Aug 31;337(6098):1115–9.
  12. Naik S, Bouladoux N, Linehan JL, Han S-J, Harrison OJ, Wilhelm C, et al. Commensal–dendritic-cell interaction specifies a unique protective skin immune signature. Nature. 2015 Apr 2;520(7545):104–8.
  13. Parlet CP, Brown MM, Horswill AR. Commensal Staphylococci Influence Staphylococcus aureus Skin Colonization and Disease. Trends Microbiol. 2019 Jun;27(6):497–507.
  14. Meisel JS, Sfyroera G, Bartow-McKenney C, Gimblet C, Bugayev J, Horwinski J, et al. Commensal microbiota modulate gene expression in the skin. Microbiome. 2018 30;6(1):20.
  15. Chen YE, Fischbach MA, Belkaid Y. Skin microbiota-host interactions. Nature. 2018 24;553(7689):427–36.
  16. Horvath P, Barrangou R. CRISPR/Cas, the immune system of bacteria and archaea. Science. 2010 Jan 8;327(5962):167–70.
  17. Williams MR, Costa SK, Zaramela LS, Khalil S, Todd DA, Winter HL, et al. Quorum sensing between bacterial species on the skin protects against epidermal injury in atopic dermatitis. Sci Transl Med. 2019 May 1;11(490).
  18. Castillo DE, Nanda S, Keri JE. Propionibacterium (Cutibacterium) acnes Bacteriophage Therapy in Acne: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives. Dermatol Ther. 2019 Mar;9(1):19–31.
  19. Perin B, Addetia A, Qin X. Transfer of skin microbiota between two dissimilar autologous microenvironments: A pilot study. PloS One. 2019;14(12):e0226857.
  20. Hendricks AJ, Mills BW, Shi VY. Skin bacterial transplant in atopic dermatitis: Knowns, unknowns and emerging trends. J Dermatol Sci. 2019 Aug;95(2):56–61.
  21. 35 Microbiome Skincare Products. TrendHunter.com. Available from: https://www.trendhunter.com/slideshow/microbiome-skincare

Mini-biography:

Dr. Carine Mainzer joined Silab in 2016 as a Scientific Support Manager. Before joining Silab, Dr. Carine Mainzer was a postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Dermatology at University of California San Francisco under the supervision of Dr. Peter Elias and Dr. Yoshikazu Uchida, where her work focused on the communication between inflammatory cells and cutaneous cells under bacterial challenges. She obtained her Ph.D. from the University of Lyon (France) in 2014 with work focused on the involvement of the Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 on epidermal differentiation and aging. Dr. Carine Mainzer has been within the cosmetic industry since several years now, working notably with Johnson & Johnson Consumer France, Natura and Silab. Her current position offers her the opportunity to continue applying her scientific expertise to the research problematics of the cosmetic industry in various domain around skin.

The facts you need to know: new FDA proposed Sunscreen Regulation

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

Sunscreen Innovation Act

The Sunscreen Innovation Act sponsored by Jack Reed was introduced to the Senate Committee Health, Education, Labor and Pensions on March 13, 2014.  It amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to establish a process for the review and approval of over-the-counter (OTC) sunscreen active ingredients.

FDA Proposes New Safety Testing for Selected Sun Filters

On February 26, 2019 the FDA published a proposed rule that would put into effect a final monograph for non-prescription OTC sunscreen drug products.  It establishes conditions under which certain OTC drugs may be marketed without approved new drug applications, indicating these products would be Generally Recognized as Safe and Effective (GRASE).  The sun care industry was hopeful that data previously submitted to the FDA would lead to the approval of additional sun filters currently used in Europe, under the FDA time and extent rule (TEA) policy.

Significance of the Proposed Safety Testing Protocol

To establish safety in use of sunscreen products, the FDA is proposing a Maximal Usage Trial study (MUsT). This is a human pharmacokinetic test that measures the amount of absorption of a drug into the body.  This study is new to the cosmetics industry and is more commonly used to study absorption of prescription drugs into the body.  The FDA believes this study will help to determine the potential effect of long-term use of an active ingredient.

 


Bio for Howard Epstein, Ph.D.

Howard Epstein is Director of Technical Services for EMD Performance Materials Corporation, Philadelphia, PA., an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. He was a scholar in residence at the University of Cincinnati department of dermatology and received his Ph.D. in Pharmacognasy from the Union Institute & University in Cincinnati, Ohio during that time. He has been in the cosmetics industry for many years since he began his career formulating cosmetics for Estee Lauder, Maybelline, Max Factor, Bausch & Lomb and Kao Brands. In addition to his interest in botanicals Howard previously served as editor of the Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Science and is a member of the International Academy of Dermatology. He is on the editorial board of the dermatological journals Clinics in
Dermatology and SKINmed representing the cosmetics industry to dermatologists.

Howard has authored chapters in various cosmetic technology textbooks including various chapters in Harry’s Cosmeticology, and holds eight patents and two patent applications.

Clinical Study Dos and Don’ts: Designing Safety & Claim Support Studies

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

Clinical Study Dos and Don’ts:  Designing Safety & Claim Support Studies

Nothing makes an R&D director happier than providing a validated sound scientific dossier to his/her marketing team on a technology or formulation that has gone through months, if not years, of development.  From inception to market, there are endless meetings about progress, budgets, resource allocation and most of all, data generation.   When you think about all of the time and energy you have spent on this one aspect of your pipeline, validating your work becomes paramount so that it is universally accepted by not only the market place but by your management and investors as well. Ironically, this is the most crucial and usually the most expensive point of the project as a whole.  What can you do to ensure that you are efficient in your success?

In order to properly validate your mechanism of action and support your claims, an outside lab is usually brought into the fray for good reason: you want an objective 3rd party verification of all you have done to this point.   This will entail having all of your project management skills ready to go. This is akin to getting to the championship game in your favorite sport.  The whole season now rides on how well you do in the next game or series.  How do you position yourself for success?  Below you will find some do’s and don’ts that I have been faced with, both as a client and as a provider of clinical testing for personal care and cosmetic products.

Are you Ready to Test?

From the service side of the industry, I find that many clients come to the table thinking they are ready to test with a 3rd party laboratory. However, after the first meeting is over, they are usually going home with a to-do list longer than the questions they had for me.  So, ask yourself, are we ready to test?  No matter your title or level of responsibility, you must build a team to answer this question.  Having a team in place that represents all facets of the project, including where you have been and where you are going is the first step.  Understanding how you landed on the functional claims, category and target consumer/customer are going to lay the foundation of what type of 3rd party lab you will need and what type of study design is warranted, as not all testing labs are created equal.  All of your team members must bring their information and needs to the table to answer that question before you pick up the phone and ask for 3rd party commitment.  Have a timeline built and map out the approval process commensurate with your company’s policies.  There are some companies that inherently have more red tape than others.  Know and understand your internal process before bringing in outside counsel.  This will certainly convey confidence and keep you in the driver’s seat.

Represent your Stake Holders

Having a good mix of representation on your team of R&D, marketing, operations, regulatory and sales personnel, especially in the initial meetings with a 3rd party laboratory, will ensure that everyone’s needs are accounted for and visible.  This will also make for a much smoother utilization of data when it comes time to launch.  Some of the best launches are the result of this synergy alone.

Communication

Gathering, moving and analyzing information is the norm in today’s market place and is critical for success.  It is imperative that the team you build have an open channel of communication within its team members and the lab when necessary.  As the team leader/project champion, you must know who your go-to people are.   There are often cases of misplaced assumptions regarding who knows what, and who is responsible for deliverables and decisions.  Many times I work with a project team looking to perform validation studies only to find that delays are imposed from executing as planned because the test materials are not available or not delivered on time to the testing facility.  There are many reasons for this.  Some examples include delays in release from QA, test materials that have not passed physical or chemical stability, last minute changes to the formulation design and for our international clients, test materials getting stuck in customs at the border.  All of these issues can be mitigated with proper channels of information being open.  If one person is the gate keeper of all the information, that person needs to have access to all facets of the project and to includes information that the team members possess.  Establishing portals for information sharing especially when collaborations exist over multiple time zones is something to also consider. At the end of the day, proper, concise and efficient communication is paramount to keeping all stakeholders informed and abreast of the status of your project.

Understand your Goals

Have a holistic view of the expectations and goals.  I always say to prospective clients, “work your project backwards”.  Assuming that you get the best data possible, what will you say about it?  Understanding the end game allows everyone to see the goal in the detail that is needed.  Having a vague undefined goal is grounds for confusion, uncertainty and delays to market.  Having the goal in mind is also crucial for developing the protocol to get you to the desired objective.  One of the most common delays and unpredicted expenses companies incur are due to last minute protocol changes.  These cause delays in final approvals, delays in recruiting the required subjects, and ultimately delays in study execution at the 3rd party lab. There is a high risk for decisions being made before final protocols are signed by not having your team review the protocols early on. This can lead to re-works, delays and loss of access to resources, equipment and personnel needed to perform the study.

Know your Financial Limitations

Budget, budget, budget, how many times have we all heard, “we can’t do that, it’s too expensive”?  Have a deliberate budget in mind when you are ready to validate claims.  You can start off shooting for the stars but inevitably, you land back on earth holding your budget in hand saying, “we need a new plan”.  Match your needs within your budget.  So many clients come to me with a beautiful study design only to realize that it is light years beyond what they budgeted for.  Factors that drive price in any clinical study are of course the time and resources allocated by the lab; however, there are study design oversights that drive up study costs significantly.  Having time points that can be managed Monday through Friday and within a regular work day reduces overtime commitment by the lab.  Choosing technicians (or expert graders) to perform evaluations other rather than MD’s (where appropriate) is another way to save money.  IRB cost, interim data requests, expedited reports and last minute changes to the schedule once protocols are signed are huge drivers of cost, and many of these can be avoided with proper planning and good team building.

Focus on what you want to Achieve

Validation of claims or target mechanism of action is in the eyes of the beholder.  Keep in mind, in the personal care industry, consumer perception trumps all.  If your technology/finished product does not deliver on consumer perceivable results, you most likely will not get a return customer and the market will quickly lose interest in your product.  The good news is, consumer use studies are not that expensive.  Know your consumer base, ask the right questions and provide the best use instructions possible.  Many clients like to marry consumer use data with objective instrumental measures and/or expert grading.  This is the trifecta of clinical study success.  If you can show agreement with consumer perception, instrumental measures and expert assessment, you have a solid foundation for a bullet proof marketing campaign.

Understand your Consumer

Consider the consumer experience when designing your study.  Have you prepared use instructions that best represent how the product will be used?  Do you have a mechanism in place to understand off indication used of your product?  Factoring in these questions is critical to reduce the variation in consumer generated data.  People in general are variable in their recollection of experiences.  Having a way to reduce this through easy to read, easy to understand, and simple use instructions makes for a happy experience.  Consumers/subjects evaluating a product will, when asked, provide valuable negative feedback as well.  Ask for it, don’t wait for it.  It’s better to understand the short comings of using your product before it hits the market.  Is your product providing comfort and ease of use?  If so, it will be viewed in a better light.  Ask for diary comments, proof of use, have a hot line into the testing company for adverse event reporting.  All of these provide subjects on your study with a positive experience which will ultimately be reflected in your data on product performance.

Translate your Science and Check Regulatory Requirements

Marketing should play an integral role as a co-champion of the validation process.  They should be able to translate the science to consumer language which in turn should be converted to questions used for consumer perception studies.  Marketing should also understand what the competition in their particular category is saying about similar products.  3rd party labs do not make marketing claims; they provide data to support them.  Your marketing team should also have a hot line to a regulatory expert in the geographic regions of where you plan to sell your product.  So much for world harmonization, the individual regulatory requirements worldwide are ever growing further apart and complex.  Don’t spend your valuable time and resources developing a technology only to find out you can’t sell it in your target region because of regulatory hurdles, restrictions on trade, and/or miss alignment with what is culturally acceptable.

Know your Data

Finally, what to do with your data?  Chances are, you may be in charge of getting a 3rd party laboratory to perform some validation or claim support studies but you don’t remember the first thing about statistics.  Your report comes back from the lab with P values and Z scores.  Paragraphs about significant and non-significant data along with ANOVA analysis….YIKES!, what does all of this mean?

Did you set up the study to have the data be understandable or are you counting on one of your science team members to make sense of it all?  Is the data audited?  So many times as a client, I have asked for the raw data to review and “crunch” myself to better understand the relationships.  On the flip side, as a testing lab, I have had clients spend significant time and money on a study and not know what their data means or how to apply it back to the original objective of the study.

Final Remarks

No matter how you get to your goal, always keep in mind the fundamentals.  They are so easy to take for granted and in retrospect, the lack of attention to the fundamentals is the very reason why projects don’t go as planned.  So, build an effective and comprehensive team, know your budget limitation upfront, manage information in and out of the team efficiently, understand the expectations and stick to the plan. Understand the needs of your customers and translate the data in a way they understand.  Last but not least, know your market and consumer front to back and translate data so that they both understand it to the point at which they come back for more.

 

Author’s Biography:

Michael Anthonavage is the current VP of Operations and Technology at Eurofins CRL Cosmetic Testing. Michael has 20+ years of experience in personal care product development and a career spanning background in skin biology and models and methods development. He specializes in R&D to marketing translation and claims validation, both in vitro and in vivo. Michael is an engaging public speaker and product technology advocate with an ability to marry complex ideas and concepts to various consumer needs; he is also an educator in the area of herbal studies, instructing students in the study of plant chemistry and their impact on human physiology.  Michael has a number publications and patents to his name and continues to be an influential speaker in personal care, bioinstrumentation and skin testing.

 

 

New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists (NYSCC) Announces 2020 Executive Board

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

Leaders Representing Prominent Brands, Suppliers & Manufacturers will Chart the Future Course!

 

(New York, NY, November 2019) – The announcement was made by Sonia Dawson, Chair, NYSCC and Regional Marketing Manager -DSM Personal Care North America, that the Executive Board has been confirmed for 2020 with some current board members assuming new roles, and newly elected members joining in roles that will carry through to 2021.  The 2020 Executive Board includes:

Giorgino “Gino” Macalino, Chair
Manager, Makeup Innovation, The Estée Lauder Companies

Sonia Dawson, Advisor/Past-Chair
Regional Marketing Manager, DSM Personal Care North America

Susanna Fernandes, Chair-Elect
Lead E-Sales Executive, TRI-K

Stephen Carter, Treasurer
Business Manager, Jarchem Innovative Ingredients

Mohamed Abdulla, Treasurer-Elect
Account Manager, SEPPIC

Leor Fay Tal, Secretary
Technical Marketing Leader, Gattefossé USA

“I am excited to get down to business and keep building on what my predecessors have done over these past few years,” said Gino Macalino. “Our educational programs anchored by Suppliers’ Day in NYC continue to dominate the landscape of North America.  We are eager to keep the SCC brand flourishing across our region, North America and across the globe!”

With the support of the newly-elected board, 2020 programming is already in place and will embody the  theme of “Revolutionary Disruptors.”  Programs will focus on elements and sectors of cosmetic/personal care product development that are literally changing the traditional landscape.  In addition, NYSCC Show Management has implemented strategies, programs and partnerships for Suppliers’ Day taking place May 5-6, 2020 at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.  NYSCC and Suppliers’ Day will continue to have a presence at SCC and industry events across the nation and around the world with the aim of continuing to strengthen the NYC event’s position as the dominant North American tradeshow.

NYSCC Suppliers’ Day 2020 Announces Show Theme & New Programs

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

Revolutionary Disruptors Frame the Leading Trade Show & Conference for Innovations in Beauty and Personal Care Ingredients, Raw Materials and Formulations  

(New York, NY, November 2019)—North America’s main event for beauty ingredients, formulations, and delivery innovations, New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists (NYSCC) Suppliers’ Day, recently held a press and friends reception in New York City at Casellula to announce its show theme and new educational programming.  The 41st Annual Suppliers’ Day will take place May 5-6, 2020, at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York, NY.

At the reception, Giorgino “Gino” Macalino, NYSCC Chair Elect, announced the  theme for Suppliers’ Day 2020: Revolutionary Disruptors”.   Macalino stated, “New educational programs, returning popular content as well as show floor experiences will illustrate how revolutionary disruptors are impacting the traditional way of sourcing and the entire product development cycle.  These disruptors impact what consumers want, as well the companies that manufacturer them.”

Suppliers Day 2020 will also have a full day conference program on one of the beauty industry’s trendiest disruptors, Cannabis, featuring speakers covering sourcing, formulating, testing, branding and distributing as well as legal and regulatory updates.       The latest innovations in the Indie market will be featured in a targeted program featuring an experiential component that will include many of the supplier accelerators on the show floor.

Another trend that Is disrupting product development Mindfulness/Wellness, will be explored in a session highlighting why this is driving consumer purchasing.  Mindfulness/Wellness will also be evident in show floor activations and showcased in the Suppliers’ Day 2020 INNOVATIONS HUB.

Disruptors will be highlighted in Suppliers’ Day core programs, including Digital Age of Beauty, World of Chemistry, Discover Sustainability as well as included in new tracks focusing on color cosmetics, hair care, and healthy aging.

NYSCC Suppliers’ Day also announced it will continue working with other industry-empowering organizations that are committed to helping the beauty and personal care industry innovate and grow including ICMAD, IFSCC, PCPC, and market analyst firms such as Kline, Spate and Mintel.

NYSCC will again partner with CEW on its Supplier’s Award: Ingredients and Formulation, recognizing the role of formulation and ingredients in creating standout products for consumers. The winner will be announced at Suppliers’ Day and then celebrated at the prestigious CEW Beauty Awards luncheon the following week.

The Future Chemists Workshop will be back at Suppliers’ Day 2020.  This “live lab” experience on the exhibit floor is popular with students and will include a wider net  of participating schools, as well as a challenge that will allow winning students to be rewarded; details to be announced shortly.

“Revolutionary Disruptors will take Suppliers’ Day to the next level and provide attendees with relevant content and immersive experiences that will advance their product development and formulations,” said Macalino.

Sunscreen Monograph Proposed New Rules and its Impact on Formulations-Part II

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

In my recent blog published in August, changes to the current sunscreen tentative monograph were proposed.  These changes are probably the most drastic changes to the sunscreen monograph since its inception.  In this section, I would like to tackle two key areas related to the changes requested by the FDA.  The first one is the human pharmacokinetics Maximal Usage Trial (MUsT) for sunscreens conducted by the FDA and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in May 2019.  The second is the response from the Personal Care Product Council (PCPC) to the requests from the FDA for additional safety data.

The FDA conducted a MUsT trial on 4 sunscreen formulations.  The products consisted of 2 sprays, one lotion and one cream. A detailed description of the products used in the study and the sunscreens concentrations used is displayed in Table I below.

Table I

Concentrations of sunscreens in all treatments

Treatment Percent sunscreen contents per label
Avobenzone Oxybenzone Octocrylene Ecamsule
Spray 1 3.00 6.00 2.35 0.00
Spray 2 3.00 5.00 10.00 0.00
Lotion 3.00 4.00 6.00 0.00
Cream 2.00 0.00 10.00 2.00

Twenty-four subjects were enrolled in the study and were randomized into 4 groups.  Each treatment was studied on 6 individuals. All subjects finished the study except one.  Products were applied at a rate of 2 mg/cm2 on 75% of the body area.  Products were applied by a trained expert and were re-applied every 2 hours four times a day.  The study ran for 4 days and panelists were kept indoors.  Thirty blood samples were collected from each panelist over a period of 7 days and were analyzed for their concentration of sunscreens using a validated HPLC method.

Mean maximum plasma concentrations for all sunscreens were calculated for the four treatments and are displayed in Table II.

Table II

Geometric mean maximum plasma concentration for all treatments

Treatment Geometric Mean Maximum plasma concentration, ng/mL (%CV)
Avobenzone Oxybenzone Octocrylene Ecamsule
Spray 1 4.0 (60.9) 209.6 (66.8) 2.9 (102) Not applicable
Spray 2 3.4 (77.3) 194.9 (52.4) 7.8 (113.3) Not applicable
Lotion 4.3 (46.1) 169.3 (44.5) 5.7 (66.3) Not applicable
Cream 1.8 (32.1) Not applicable 5.7 (47.1) 1.5 (166.1)

As seen from the table, all sunscreens tested had higher blood levels than the FDA proposed threshold of 0.5 ng/mL.  These levels were also achieved on the first day of treatment.  The levels obtained triggered the FDA to request safety data not only on the sunscreens studied but also on the 12 sunscreens listed in the monograph.  In addition, the FDA requested MUsT studies to be conducted by the manufacturers on several dosage forms to establish proper guidelines for usage based on safety and efficacy.  Regardless of the results obtained, the FDA insisted on the fact that individuals should not refrain from using sunscreens.

In response to the request from the FDA, the PCPC sent a letter to describe the protocols and studies suggested by the council as well as a timeline.  The PCPC suggested to conduct, in addition to MUsT studies, several surveys on usage of sunscreen products to guide the council in designing the MUsT studies.  The timeline extends till 2023 which should give the industry some breathing room in terms of formulations.  Once the studies are received and completed, an additional timeline delineating the safety of the selected molecules will be proposed.  In the council’s response, two sunscreens were not considered for MUsT studies.  These are Cinoxate and Dioxybenzone.  The fate of these two sunscreens is not determined at this stage yet.

The sunscreen monograph has been evolving for the past 35 years to keep up with the advancement in science.  Formulators, and companies in the field of sun care will have to adjust one more time to the changes.  These changes bring a lot of new challenges and opportunities to innovate and lead.


 

Biography

Dr. Fares started his career in personal care studying the effect of solvents on sunscreen chemicals.  His interest in skin drug delivery especially from polymeric matrices grew during his graduate work at Rutgers, where he completed his Ph. D. in Pharmaceutics.

Dr. Fares worked at Block Drug and GlaxoSmithKline where he held positions in research and development in the areas of skincare and oral care.  After that, he joined L’Oreal where he held several positions of increasing responsibility leading to AVP of skincare.  He is currently the Senior Director of skincare and oral care at Ashland Specialty Ingredients.  Dr. Fares is the author of many publications, and patents and made many presentations in national and international meetings in the areas of suncare, skincare, and oral care.

 

Natural and Clean Cosmetics – The Science Behind the Ingredients

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

In recent years we have seen in the cosmetic market an increase of simplified products with fewer ingredients.

The marketing message of these products is often linked to the ingredients sourcing, functionality, and safety (including the absence of the so called no-no ingredients). Labeled as clean beauty products, they often rely on natural ingredients that, due to the identification of natural with recognized by the human body, biodegradable, and often used in traditional medicine, they easily fit into the concept of safety (and carry a nice story on sourcing). But what about efficacy? Is it possible today to develop clean beauty products, carrying the purest and most ethical sourced natural ingredients, and prove their efficacy with Science? Technology and science is available today for both developing the natural extracts and for testing them, therefore increasing their safety and efficacy while maintaining their positive image of clean, pure, eco-friendly, safe and sustainably sourced. Technologies derived from the pharma and the imaging industries are available at affordable cost and flexibility. Genomics, proteomics and metabolomics analysis are now offered to the cosmetic scientist1 as well as machines able to qualify and quantify skin characteristics in a non-invasive way. In other words, it is finally possible to verify the scientific edge and efficacy of any natural and natural derived ingredient.

Raw materials – Minimal Processing

Raw materials sourcing from sustainable supply chain are often linked to:

– Biological agriculture

– Sustainable harvesting form the wild

These raw materials seem to emerge in the food supply chain first. Initial markets are in the country of origin on a micro-scale (local green markets), following a macro-scale and industrialization step (larger distribution in retail space). Often commercialized at a continent level, they are eventually “discovered” in other continents and growing according to their commercial and marketing appeal.

Example – Pomegranate Seed Oil

Pomegranate is sourced through a sustainable model and cold pressed oil is produced. Due to its unique and elevated level of omega-5 (conjugated linolenic acid, punicic acid) (Table 1),  the oil is a strong anti-oxidant, showing protection from UV-induced protein oxidation (carbonylation) and DNA damage.2


Table 1. Omegas Fatty Acids and Vitamin E Composition of Pomegranate Seed Oil

Further research highlighted the oil’s soothing properties such as inhibition of inflammatory mediator lipoxygenase;3 but also its regenerating characteristics, like the stimulation of keratinocytes growth.4

Raw Material – Extraction and Transformation in an Active Ingredient

Raw materials are often transformed into active ingredients for personal care applications. Specific extraction by using biodegradable and natural solvents produces ingredients with specific physical-chemical characteristics and solubility for different cosmetic applications. Once ingredients are validated based on stability assays and scaled up, they can be tested for safety and efficacy in different models (in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical – non animal).

Example – Fucoidan from Seaweed

Seaweeds are rich in phenols derivatives and polysaccharides with protecting activity.5,6 Brown seaweeds also contain a compound called fucoidan that assists with protection from marine pathogens.  Fucoidan is a fucose-rich polysaccharide with anti -viral, immune modulating and matrix metalloprotease inhibiting properties.7 By isolating fucoidan from seaweeds, the formulator can use smaller concentrations of the extract. These lower levels reduce the risk of incompatibilities and material setting, color issues and scent, improving overall stability.8 Recent research highlighted the scientific added value of fucoidan as skin soothing and skin regenerating agent (reduction of Trans Epidermal Water Loss, decreased wrinkle’s depth, increase elasticity, reduction of proteases) (Figure 1).9

Figure 1. Seaweed Extract rich in Fucoidan inhibits proteases and tyrosinase (from Fitton JH et al.9)

Conclusion

Natural and Clean Beauty Products contain natural ingredients communicated through ethical sourcing and safety. Scientific tools allow to analyze and test these ingredients for efficacy, therefore helping to select the right ingredient concentration to add to the finished product for optimal functionality. Natural and Clean Beauty Brands need to start validate their ingredients efficacy through real scientific testing and/or select their suppliers based on how scientific is their ingredient offer. Natural ingredients can step up for efficacy once good science is performed to validate their benefits for cosmetic applications. There is a clear need in the market for more science and more credible claims and we can provide them both helping consumers properly chose the cosmetics they need.

References

  1. Rai A, Saito K, Yamazaki M. Integrated omics analysis of specialized metabolism in medicinal plants. Plant J 90(4):764-787, 2017
  2. Afaq F, Zaid MA, Khan N, Dreher M, Mukhtar H. Protective effect of pomegranate-derived products on UVB-mediated damage in human reconstituted skin. Exp Dermatol 18(6):553-561, 2009
  3. Schubert SY, Lansky EP, Neeman I. Antioxidant and eicosanoid enzyme inhibition properties of pomegranate seed oil and fermented juice flavonoids. J Ethnopharmacol 66(1):11-17, 1999
  4. Aslam MN, Lansky EP, Varani J. Pomegranate as a cosmeceutical source: pomegranate fractions promote proliferation and procollagen synthesis and inhibit matrix metalloproteinase-1 production in human skin cells. J Ethnopharmacol 103(3):311-318, 2006
  5. Fernando IP, Kim M, Son KT, Jeong Y, Jeon YJ. Antioxidant activity of marine algal polyphenolic compounds: a mechanistic approach. J Med Food 19(7):615-628, 2016
  6. de Jesus Raposo MF, de Morais AM, de Morais RM. Marine polysaccharides from algae with potential biomedical applications. Mar Drugs 13(5):2967-3028, 2015
  7. Fitton JH, Stringer DN, Karpiniec SS. Therapies from fucoidan: an update. Mar Drugs 13(9):5920-5946, 2015
  8. Dell’Acqua G. Sustainable ingredient science: brown algae. Cosmet Toil 128(4): 226-229, 2013
  9. Fitton JH, Dell’Acqua G, Gardiner VA, Karpiniec SK, Stringer DN, Davis E. Topical benefits of two Fucoidan-rich extracts from marine macroalgae. Cosmetics 2(2): 66-81, 2015

 

Giorgio Dell’Acqua, PhD, is a cosmetic scientist and a consultant for the personal care industry. A graduate from the University of Rome, Italy, Dr Dell’Acqua worked for 15 years as an investigator in applied medical research in different Research Institutes and Universities, including Mount Sinai Medical School in New York and Harvard Medical School in Boston. Moving to the private sector in 2000, he has spent the last 20 years as an executive and cosmetic scientist in the personal care industry. He is specialized in skin and hair care ingredients, finished product development and technical marketing. He has helped bring more than 200 successful active ingredients and finished products to market and has authored more than 70 publications in medicine and cosmetic science. From last 10 years he has been writing and lecturing on natural cosmetic ingredients, sustainable supply chain, and helped sourcing, developing and bringing to market many natural ingredients. He is an award winning speaker on natural ingredients and a regular writer on sustainability and cosmetic science. He is also the chair of the Scientific Committee for the New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists and its scientific blogger.

 

 

 

Phyto Complexes

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

As the quest for natural ingredients is growing, the interest in phyto-cosmetics is raising. Phyto in Greek means plant and phyto-cosmetics are products based on natural plant extracts or containing predominantly ingredients derived from plants such as polyphenols, vitamins, etc. Since I started working on ingredients development 15 years ago, I focused my attention on natural extract, especially those rich in active molecules, preferably from the same chemical family (1, 2). My grandfather introduced phyto-cosmetics in Italy in the early 30s and I read some of his early publications. In particular, I was intrigued by how he described the power of ingredients families or phyto-complexes when compared to single ingredients from the same family. In the late 50s he published together with my uncle, at the time a young chemist in Milano, a paper on beta carotene where he highlighted the capacity of carotenoids as a family to have a more powerful effect than single moleculebeta carotene on a series of skin benefit (beta carotene was used at the same concentration of the phyto-complex).

We know that plants are often mobilizing different isoforms, variants of same molecule to create a more effective and sophisticated response to a particular need. Molecule families are common, they often work in synergies and there are evidences that molecules belonging to the same family can protect each other against oxidation, so increasing stability of the phyto-complex. Phyto-complex is not a new definition neither a new concept, but I think the recent understanding of the importance of a multifactorial and synergetic approach when formulating a product for cosmetic applications has brought a renovated interest into this strategy and into phyto-complexes.

While in the last 50 years the approach to treatment was a reductionist approach based on single purified molecules (often compared to a plant extract with little efficacy), more recently a comprehensive approach based on plant extract fractionation and enrichment has proven to be as effective as single molecules, and often more stable in finished formulations. Phyto-complexes are also the basis of modern aromatherapy, where complex composition of essential oils showed therapeutic values to treat conditions associated to diseases (3). Moreover, studies have shown that encapsulation of polyphenols phyto-complexes were able to increase wound healing (4). Interestingly, when single molecules where combined with their phyto-complex, the complex acted as an enhancer to increase molecule bioavailability, and helping stabilizing the molecule itself (5). Numerous experiments have shown the phyto-complex superior to the single molecule in mechanisms meant to reduce inflammation, such autophagy (4) and apoptosis (5). Carotenoid such as lycopene was significant inferior in anti-oxidant activity when compared to tomato seed phyto-complex (6, 7).

Finally and intriguing, combination of phyto-complexes from different parts of the same plant was superior to single plant part extracts when used for healing (8). In conclusion, evidences exist to support the use of phyto-complexes instead of (or in combination) with single molecules from the same family. The use of phyto-cosmetics and phyto-complexes will grow in the next years as more experimental evidences on their stability and efficacy will be established.

 

Tomato Seed Oil (TSO) is superior to Purified Lycopene (Lyc) in inhibiting ROS production (Ref 8)

 

References

  1. Ebrahimi SN, Gafner F, Dell’Acqua G, Schweikert K, Hamburger M. Flavone 8-C-glycosides from Haberlea rhodopensisFriv. (Gesneriaceae). Helvetica Chimica Acta, 94 (1): 38–45, 2011.
  2. Germani F, Dell’Acqua G. An extract from blueberry processing by-product (press cake) inhibits blue light induced physiological changes and increases radiance in human skin, Poster IFSCC Milano, 2019
  3. Scuteri D, Morrone LA, Rombolà L, Avato PR, Bilia AR, Corasaniti MT, Sakurada S, Sakurada T, Bagetta G. Aromatherapy and Aromatic Plants for the Treatment of Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia in Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease: Clinical Evidence and Possible Mechanisms. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2017:9416305, 2017
  4. Moulaoui K, Caddeo C, Manca ML, Castangia I, Valenti D, Escribano E, Atmani D, Fadda AM, Manconi M. Identification and nanoentrapment of polyphenolic phytocomplex from Fraxinus angustifolia: in vitro and in vivo wound healing potential. Eur J Med Chem 89:179-88, 2015
  5. Hasa D, Perissutti B, Dall’Acqua S, Chierotti MR, Gobetto R, Grabnar I, Cepek C, Voinovich D. Rationale of using Vinca minor Linne dry extract phytocomplex as a vincamine’s oral bioavailability enhancer. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 84(1):138-44, 2013
  6. Lascala A, Martino C, Parafati M, Salerno R, Oliverio M, Pellegrino D, Mollace V, Janda E. Analysis of proautophagic activities of Citrus flavonoids in liver cells reveals the superiority of a natural polyphenol mixture over pure flavones. J Nutr Biochem 58:119-130, 2018
  7. Ettorre A, Frosali S, Andreassi M, Di Stefano A. Lycopene phytocomplex, but not pure lycopene, is able to trigger apoptosis and improve the efficacy of photodynamic therapy in HL60 human leukemia cells. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 235(9):1114-25, 2010
  8. Müller L, Catalano A, Simone R, Cittadini A, Fröhlich K, Böhm V, Palozza P. Antioxidant capacity of tomato seed oil in solution and its redox properties in cultured macrophages. J Agric Food Chem 61(2):346-54, 2013
  9. van Vuuren SF, Viljoen AM. In vitro evidence of phyto-synergy for plant part combinations of Croton gratissimus (Euphorbiaceae) used in African traditional healing. J Ethnopharmacol 119(3):700-4, 2008

 

About the Author

Giorgio Dell’Acqua, PhD, is a cosmetic scientist and a consultant for the personal care industry. A graduate from the University of Rome, Italy, he worked for 15 years as an investigator in applied medical research in Universities such as Mount Sinai Medical School in New York and Harvard Medical School in Boston. Moving to the private sector in 2000, he has spent the last 19 years as an executive and cosmetic scientist in the personal care industry. He is specialized in skin and hair care ingredients, finished product development and technical marketing. He has helped bring more than 200 successful active ingredients and finished products to market and has authored more than 60 publications in medicine and cosmetic science. From last 10 years he has been writing and lecturing on natural cosmetic ingredients, sustainable supply chain, and helped sourcing, developing and bringing to market many natural ingredients. Some of his recent product development activity has focused on food by products to cosmetics, prebiotics and postbiotics to skin, and adaptogens for skin and hair care. He is an award winning speaker on natural ingredients and a regular columnist on sustainability and cosmetic science. He is also the chair of the Scientific Committee for the New York Society of Cosmetic Chemists and its scientific blogger.

Sunscreen Monograph Proposed New Rules and its Impact on Formulations

by NYSCC NYSCC No Comments

Introduction

In February of 2019, the FDA stunned the cosmetics industry one more time by publishing proposed rules for sunscreens in the Federal Register.  As indicated by its name, these are only proposed rules but historically companies have implemented proposed rules into their formulations to be proactive.  The FDA used the argument that since the issuance of the original Final Monograph in 1999, the use of sunscreens and exposure to UV filters substantially increased.  It was important for the Agency to re-evaluate sunscreens based on current scientific understanding and extend safety assessments for such topical products to include chronic use.

 

What are the changes

The biggest change that the proposed ruling brought was the reduction of the number of Category I (Safe and effective) approved sunscreens that can be used in the US.  The FDA reduced the number of sunscreens in Category I from 16 to 2.  These two sunscreens are Titanium Dioxide and Zinc Oxide and they are approved at a level of 25% in formulations.  In addition, the FDA classified paminobenzoic acid (PABA) and Trolamine Salicylate as Category two II (Not safe and effective) which means that these two sunscreens can no longer be used in sunscreen formulations.  The remaining 12 sunscreens namely, Cinoxate, Dioxybenzone, Ensulizole, Homosalate, Meradimate, Octinoxate, Octisalate, Octocrylene, Padimate O., Sulisobenzone, Oxybenzone, and Avobenzone were classified as Category III (Additional data needed to confirm safety and efficacy).  These 12 sunscreens can be used in formulations until the FDA categorizes them into Category I or II.  From a formulation prospective, the FDA decreased the number of sunscreens to 14 until further action.  The FDA did not address the percentage at which those sunscreens can be used specifically, but probably a good fall back would be to use them at the levels published in the 1999 Monograph.  The proposed rule does not address the sunscreen active ingredients that are being evaluated under a TEA (Time and Extent Application).

In addition, the FDA proposed changes to the types of dosage forms that can be used for sunscreen products.  For Category I, they proposed the following dosage forms: oils, lotions, creams, gels, butters, pastes, ointments and sticks.  The FDA proposed Category I status for sprays subject to testing for inhalation and flammability.  Powders were classified as Category III pending additional data.  All additional dosage forms including wipes, shampoos, body washes, towelettes and others are considered as new drugs.

Broad spectrum testing was also changed.  In most parts of the world, the Critical Wavelength is used to measure broad spectrum.  The FDA is proposing to use the UVAI/UV ratio of 0.7 or higher as a standard for all sunscreens of SPF 15 or higher.  The FDA had previously proposed to make the ratio 0.9 or higher but realized that it is impossible to achieve such ratio with the portfolio of approved Category I sunscreens available in the US.  The new ratio seems reasonable but now manufacturers must perform two tests for global products, the UVAI/UV ratio and the Critical Wavelength.

Final formulation testing and labeling requirements have changed as well.  The FDA proposed to label products with the lowest SPF number achieved in in vivo testing to eliminate the variability associated with such testing.  The FDA also raised the maximum labeled sunscreen product to SPF 60+ and they attributed their decision to the lack of evidence that higher SPF product could bring meaningful clinical benefits.  The FDA proposed to label sunscreens products with an SPF 30 or higher in increments of 10 (i.e. SPF 30, 40, 50 and 60+).  They also proposed labeling sunscreens with SPF 15 to 29 to be in increments of 5 (i.e. SPF 15, 20, and 25).  The FDA also brought attention to products that are labeled SPF2 to SPF 14 and proposed that such products be removed from the market since they do not bring any adequate protection to consumers.

Sunscreens-insect repellant combination products are proposed to be classified as Category II due to incompatibility between FDA and EPA labeling instructions.  In addition, the FDA believes that combining DEET with certain sunscreens may increase cutaneous absorption of either or both.

 

What is the impact

In this proposed ruling, the FDA addressed so many safety concerns that companies and consumers suspected for years.  Many sunscreens used in the US are no longer used in Europe, Asia and the rest of the world due to their safety profiles.  However, these markets have alternative sunscreens in their portfolio that they can use to formulate safe and effective sunscreens.  In the US, such large portfolio of approved Category I sunscreen does not exist, so I would like to urge the FDA to speed the approval of all the molecules awaiting approval in the TEA process.  This will enable US formulators to have the same tools that their counterparts in the rest of the world have.  In the meantime, I am sure that formulators will use their creativity and start adapting their new formulations to the guidelines set forth by the FDA.

 

About the Author

Dr. Hani Fares started his career in personal care studying the effect of solvents on sunscreen chemicals.  His interest in skin drug delivery especially from polymeric matrices grew during his graduate work at Rutgers, where he completed his Ph. D. in Pharmaceutics.

Dr. Fares worked at Block Drug and GlaxoSmithKline where he held positions in research and development in the areas of skincare and oral care.  After that, he joined L’Oreal where he held several positions of increasing responsibility leading to AVP of skincare.  He is currently the Senior Director of skincare and oral care at Ashland Specialty Ingredients.  Dr. Fares is the author of many publications, and patents and made many presentations in national and international meetings in the areas of suncare, skincare, and oral care.

 

X