Foaming cleanser

Abstract

The invention relates to a foaming cleanser cosmetic composition containing, in a physiologically acceptable medium: a surfactant system comprising (i) at least one N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant and (ii) at least one amphoteric surfactant chosen from betaines or (C8-C20)alkyl betaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylbetaines and mixtures thereof; andat least one non associative crosslinked copolymer or acrylic acid and/or methacrylic acid, and optionally of (C1-C4)alkyl esters thereof, wherein said N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant being present in the surfactant system in a major weight amount, and the surfactant system being present in the composition in an amount of less than 15% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition. The invention also relates to a process for cleansing keratin materials, which consists in applying the said composition to the said keratin materials, in working it into a foam and then in rinsing off the said composition, as well as the cosmetic use of the composition as defined above, for removing makeup and/or cleansing the skin, the hair and/or mucous membranes, or for skincare.

Claims

1. Composition containing, in a physiologically acceptable medium: a surfactant system comprising (i) at least one N(C6-30)acyl-amino based surfactant, and (ii) at least one amphoteric surfactant chosen from betaines or (C8-C20)alkyl betaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylbetaines, and mixtures thereof; at least one non-associative crosslinked copolymers of (meth)acrylic acid, and of (C1-C4)alkyl esters of (meth)acrylic acid; and a triglyceride oil, wherein said N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant being present in the surfactant system in a major weight amount, and the surfactant system being present in the composition in an amount of less than 15% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition.

2. Composition according to claim 1, wherein said composition is a foaming cleanser composition.

3. Composition according to claim 1, wherein said composition is a cosmetic composition.

4. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant is chosen among N(C6-C30)acyl aminoacid based surfactant selected from potassium N-cocoyl glycinate and sodium N-cocoyl glycinate.

5. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 0.1 to 6% by weight, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

6. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the N(C6-C30)acyl-amino based surfactant is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 2 to 4% by weight, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

7. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the amphoteric surfactant chosen from betaines or (C8-C20)alkyl betaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylbetaines, and mixtures thereof is chosen among coco betaine, lauryl betaine, oxyethylenated (10 EO) lauryl betaine, oxyethylenated (10 EO) stearyl betaine, cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramidopropyl betaine and mixtures thereof.

8. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the amphoteric surfactant chosen from betaines or (C8-C20)alkyl betaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylbetaines, and mixtures thereof is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 0.1 to 6% by weight, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

9. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the amphoteric surfactant chosen from betaines or (C8-C20)alkyl betaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylbetaines, and mixtures thereof is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 1 to 4% by weight, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

10. Composition according to claim 1, in which the surfactant system further comprises at least one foaming surfactant chosen from anionic, amphoteric, nonionic and/or cationic foaming surfactants, and mixtures thereof, the said anionic surfactant being chosen from anionic derivatives of proteins of plant origin or of silk proteins, phosphates and (C6-C30)alkyl phosphates, (C6-C24)alkyl ether carboxylates, (C6-C24)alkyl(amido) ether carboxylates, (C6-C30)alkylsulfosuccinates, (C6-C30) alkyl ether sulfosuccinates, (C6-C30) alkylamidesulfosuccinates, (C6-C30) acyl or alkyl acids, (C6-C30)alkyl sulfates, (C6-C30)alkyl ether sulfates, (C6-C30)alkylamido ether sulfates, (C6-C30)alkylaryl polyether sulfates, monoglyceride sulfates, (C6-C30)alkyl sulfonates, (C6-C30)alkylamidosulfonates, (C6-C30)alkylarylsulfonates, (C6-C30)?-olefinsulfonates, paraffin sulfonates, (C6-C24)acyl isethionates, taurates, (C6-C30)alkyl sulfoacetates, polypeptides, anionic derivatives of (C6-C30)alkyl polyglucoside, and soaps, and mixtures thereof, the said amphoteric or zwitterionic surfactant being chosen from sulfobetaines, (C8-C20)alkylsulfobetaines, (C8-C20)alkylamido(C1-C6)alkylsulfobetaines, (C8-C20)alkylamphoacetates and (C8-C20)alkylamphodiacetates, and the said nonionic surfactant being chosen from alkyl polyglucosides, oxyalkylenated glycerol esters and oxyalkylenated sugar esters, and mixtures thereof, and the said cationic surfactant being chosen from optionally polyoxyalkylenated primary, secondary or tertiary fatty amine salts, quaternary ammonium salts, quaternary ammonium salts of imidazolinium, and amine oxides of cationic nature, and mixtures thereof.

11. Composition according to claim 1, in which the surfactant system further comprises at least one non foaming surfactant chosen from (C8-C20) fatty acids, mono-, di-, or tri-esters of (C6-C30) fatty acids and of (poly)glycerol, lecithins and mixtures thereof.

12. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the non-associative crosslinked copolymers of acrylic acid and/or methacrylic acid, and optionally of (C1-C4)alkyl esters thereof, is selected from a crosslinked copolymer of acrylic acid and/or methacrylic acid and of an ester thereof comprising less than 6 carbon atoms, a crosslinked copolymer comprising at least one methacrylic unit and at least one C.sub.1-C.sub.4 alkyl acrylate unit, a crosslinked copolymer of vinyl neodecanoate and one or more monomers of acrylic acid, methacrylic acid or one of their (C1-C4)alkyl esters crosslinked with an allyl ether of trimethylolpropane or pentaerythritol, and mixtures thereof.

13. Composition according to claim 1, comprising a salt of C.sub.8-C.sub.20 fatty acid.

14. Composition according to claim 13, wherein the salt of C.sub.8-C.sub.20 fatty acid is selected among a salt of caproic acid, capric acid, caprylic acid, oleic acid, linoleic acid, lauric acid, myristic acid, stearic acid, palmitic acid and mixtures thereof.

15. Composition according to claim 13, wherein the salt of C.sub.8-C.sub.20 fatty acid is present in the composition in an amount ranging from 0.1 to 6% by weight, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

16. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the triglyceride oil is selected from an oil, a butter, and mixtures thereof.

17. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the triglyceride oil is selected from jojoba oil, babassu oil, sunflower oil, olive oil, canola oil, coconut oil, meadowfoam seed oil, Brazil nut oil, marula oil, maize oil, argan oil, soybean oil, marrow oil, grapeseed oil, linseed oil, sesame oil, hazelnut oil, apricot oil, macadamia oil, arara oil, coriander oil, castor oil, avocado oil, shea butter oil, rapeseed oil, copra oil, shea butter, Nilotica shea butter, galam butter, Borneo butter or fat or tengkawang tallow, shorea butter, illipe butter, madhuca butter, Madhuca longifolia butter, mowrah butter, katiau butter, phulwara butter, mango butter, murumuru butter, kokum butter, ucuuba butter, tucuma butter, painya butter, coffee butter, apricot butter, macadamia butter, grapeseed butter, avocado butter, olive butter, sweet almond butter, cocoa butter, sunflower butter, and mixtures thereof.

18. Composition according to claim 1, wherein the triglyceride oil is selected from sheabutter, olive oil, canola oil, meadowfoam seed oil and mixtures thereof.

19. Composition according to claim 1, comprising at least a filler chosen among thickening inorganic or organic particles.

20. Composition according to claim 18, wherein the filler is selected from inorganic particles chosen among silica, hydrated silica, microcrystalline cellulose, polyolefin particle, perlite, clays, ceramic beads, calcium carbonate, titanium oxides, talc or magnesium silicate, kaolin or aluminium silicate, perlite, kaolin and mixtures thereof or from organic fillers, such as starches, maize starch, Nylon microspheres, microspheres based on vinylidene chloride/acrylonitrile/methacrylonitrile copolymer including isobutane, expanded microspheres, micronized or nonmicronized plant, polytetrafluoroethylene powders; acrylic copolymer powders; polyethylene powders; polyamide powders; powders and mixtures thereof.

21. Foaming cleanser cosmetic composition according to claim 1, comprising at least one polyol comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms.

22. Foaming cleanser cosmetic composition according to claim 21, wherein the polyol comprising from 2 to 20 carbon atoms is glycerine.

23. Cosmetic method consisting in applying to keratin materials a composition as defined in claim 1 for removing makeup and/or cleansing the skin, the hair and/or mucous membranes, or for skincare.

24. Process for cleansing keratin materials, which consists in applying to the said keratin materials a composition according to claim 1, in working the said composition into a foam and then in rinsing off the said composition.

Description

EXAMPLE 1: FOAMING COMPOSITIONS FOR SKIN WASH

(1) a) Compositions 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F and 1G According to Invention

(2) TABLE-US-00001 Components 1A 1B 1C 1D 1E 1F 1G INCI names % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt Potassium cocoyl 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 glycinate + (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) potassium cocoate (30% in water) sold under the name Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Lauryl betaine 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 coco betaine 2.2 2.2 Glycerin 10 10 10 10 10 PEG-45M 0.2 (POLYOX WSR N 60K, by Dow Chemical) Acrylate/vinyl 3 3 3 3 3 neodecanoate crosspolymer sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer 3 sold under the name Aculyn 33? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer 3 sold under the name Carbopol Aqua SF-1? by Lubrizol Polyquatemium-7 0.1 (MERQUAT 7SPR POLYMER by Lubrizol) Poly quaternium-39 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 MERQUAT 3330PR POLYMER by Lubrizol) KOH q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total surfactant (%) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 pH 7.7 6.6 7.4 7.9 8.4 7.7 7.7

(3) Compositions A, B, C, D, E, F and G provide satisfactory foam quality while achieving skin mildness when applied on skin.

(4) b) Comparative Composition 1.1 Versus Composition 1A According to Invention

(5) Comparative composition 1 comprises 16.4% by weight in active material of surfactants whereas composition A according to invention comprises 8.2% by weight in active material of surfactants.

(6) TABLE-US-00002 Components Comparative Composition 1.1 INCI names % wgt Potassium cocoyl glycinate + potassium 12 cocoate (30% in water) sold under the (7.6:4.4) name Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Lauryl betaine 4.4 Glycerin 10 Acrylate/vinyl neodecanoate crosspolymer 3 sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Polyquaternium-39 (MERQUAT 3330PR 0.5 POLYMER by Lubrizol) KOH q.s. water q.s. 100 Total surfactant (%) 16.4 pH 7.7

(7) The foaming quality and density of composition A according to the present invention having a low surfactant level are comparable to those of comparative composition 1 which has a larger amount of surfactants.

(8) This result is quite amazing since, in general, it is expected that a composition containing a higher surfactant ratio gives more foam volume and density.

(9) Thus, composition 1 according to the invention allows achieving completely satisfying quality and density foaming properties even at lesser amount of surfactant system.

EXAMPLE 2: ANTI-SHINE FOAMING COMPOSITIONS

(10) a) Compositions 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E and 2F According to Invention

(11) TABLE-US-00003 Components 2A 2E 2C 2D 2E 2F INCI names % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt % wgt Potassium cocoyl glycinate + 6 6 6 6 6 6 potassium cocoate (30% in (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) water) sold under the name Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto Lauryl betaine 2 2 2 2 2 2 Glycerin 10 10 10 10 10 10 Acrylate/vinyl neodecanoate 2.7 2.55 3 3 crosspolymer sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer sold under 2.9 the name Aculyn 33? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer sold under 3 the name Carbopol Aqua SF-1? by Lubrizol Polyquaternium-39 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (MERQUAT 3330PR POLYMER by Lubrizol) Talc 5 10 10 10 Kaolin 5 Perlite 5 KOH q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. 100 100 100 100 100 100

(12) Compositions 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E and 2F provide satisfactory foam quality while achieving skin mildness and anti-shine effect when applied on skin.

(13) b) Comparative Composition 2.1 Versus Composition 2A According to Invention

(14) Comparative composition 2.1 does not comprise non-associative crosspolymer whereas composition 2A according to invention comprises 2.7% of acrylates/vinyl Neodecanoate Crosspolymer (sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical).

(15) TABLE-US-00004 Components Comparative Composition 1 INCI names % wgt Potassium cocoyl glycinate + potassium 6 cocoate (30% in water) sold under the name (3.8:2.2) Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Lauryl betaine 2 Glycerin 10 Polyquaternium-39 (MERQUAT 3330PR 0.5 POLYMER by Lubrizol) Talc 5 KOH q.s. water q.s. 100

(16) Comparative composition 2.1 does not provide any matifying effect but only a good foam quality.

(17) Thus, the presence of both a non-associative copolymer according to the invention and talc in a composition according to the invention allows achieving both anti-shine effect when applied on skin and satisfactory foam quality.

EXAMPLE 3: MOISTURIZING FOAMING COMPOSITIONS

(18) a) Compositions 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 3F and 3G According to Invention

(19) TABLE-US-00005 Components INCI names 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E 3F 3G 3H 3I Potassium cocoyl 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 glycinate + potassium (4.4:2.6) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) (3.8:2.2) cocoate (30% in water) sold under the name Amilite GCK- 12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Coco betaine 3.3 2.2 2.2 Lauryl betaine 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 Glycerin 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Acrylate/vinyl 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3 2.4 2.4 neodecanoate crosspolymer sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer 3 sold under the name Aculyn 33? by Dow Chemical Acrylates copolymer 3 sold under the name Carbopol Aqua SF-1? by Lubrizol Polyquaternium-7 0.1 (MERQUAT 7SPR POLYMER by Lubrizol) Polyquaternium-39 0.45 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 5 0.5 (MERQUAT 3330PR POLYMER by Lubrizol) Sheabutter 10 10 20 10 10 10 10 Olive oil 10 Canola oil 10 PEG-90M (POLYOX 0.1 WSR 301 by Dow Chemical) PEG-45M (POLYOX 0.1 WSR N 60K by Dow Chemical) mixture of glyceryl 1 1 mono- and distearate (36/64) (TEGIN PELLETS by EVONIK GOLDSCHMIDT lauric acid 1.8 1.8 KOH q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. qs qs water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total surfactant (%) 10.3 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2

(20) Compositions 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 3F, 3G, 3H and 3I provide satisfactory foam quality while achieving skin mildness as well as a moisturizing effect and an emollient effect when applied on skin.

(21) b) Comparative Composition 3.1 Versus Compositions 3B or 3C According to Invention

(22) Comparative composition 3.1 does not comprise sheabutter whereas compositions B and C comprise respectively 10% and 20% by weight of sheabutter relative to the total weight of the composition.

(23) TABLE-US-00006 Components Comparative Composition 1 INCI names % wgt Potassium cocoyl glycinate + 6 potassium cocoate (30% in (3.8:2.2) water) sold under the name Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Lauryl betaine 2.2 Glycerin 10 Acrylate/vinyl neodecanoate 2.4 crosspolymer sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Polyquaternium-39 0.5 MERQUAT 3330PR POLYMER by Lubrizol) KOH q.s. water q.s. 100 Total surfactant (%) 8.2

(24) Comparative composition 3.1 does not provide any moisturizing/emollient effect when applied on skin but only a good foam quality as compositions 3B or 3C according to the invention.

(25) Thus, the presence of sheabutter in a composition according to the invention allows achieving moisturizing effect while maintaining a satisfactory foam quality.

(26) c) Comparative Composition 3.2 Versus Composition 3E According to Invention

(27) Comparative composition 3.2 does not comprise lauryl betaine whereas composition 3E comprises 2.2% by weight of lauryl betaine relative to the total weight of the composition.

(28) TABLE-US-00007 Components Comparative Composition 2 INCI names % wgt Potassium cocoyl glycinate + 6 potassium cocoate sold under (3.8:2.2) the name Amilite GCK-12H? by Ajinomoto, cocoyl glycinate:soap = 19:11) Glycerin 10 Acrylate/vinyl neodecanoate 2.4 crosspolymer sold under the name Aculyn 38? by Dow Chemical Polyquaternium-39 0.5 MERQUAT 3330PR POLYMER by Lubrizol) Canola oil 10 KOH q.s. water q.s. 100 Total surfactant (%) 8.2

(29) Comparative composition 3.2 does not provide a good foam quality as compositions E according to the invention.

(30) Thus, the presence of lauryl betaine in a composition according to the invention allows achieving a satisfactory foam quality.

EXAMPLE 4: FOAM EXPERT PANEL TEST

(31) Tests were performed to evaluate and compare the foam quality of an example according to the invention, i.e. composition 1A of example 1 versus comparative compositions 1.1 of example 1 such as already defined above.

(32) Protocol

(33) The invented example (composition 1A of example 1 above) was evaluated by a internal foam expert panels. The foam quality was compared between the composition 1A of example 1 versus the comparative composition 1.1 in example 1 given above.

(34) Results and Conclusion: Composition 1A of Example 1 Versus Comparative Composition 1.1 of Example 1

(35) The following table shows the profile of the foam quality evaluated by 16 internal experts. This table indicates that the attributes related to foam are identical to those of comparative composition 1.1 of example 1 even though comparative composition 1.1 of example 1 has two times more surfactant than composition 1A of example 1.

(36) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 1 Foam Size of Foam Foam density bubble homogeneity volume composition A of example 1 12 2.14 11.58 7.16 comparative composition 1 11.71 2.27 11.84 7.14 of example 1

(37) In general, it is expected that a formula containing a higher surfactant ratio gives more foam volume and density. However, these results show that surfactant level is independent on foam volume and density in the claimed compositions.

EXAMPLE 5: IN VITRO KERATIN TEST

(38) Tests were performed to evaluate and compare composition 1B of example 1 with the following comparative composition 5.1:

(39) TABLE-US-00009 Components Comparative composition 5.1 INCI names % wgt Stearic acid 13 Myristic acid 1 Lauric acid 16 Palmitic acid 4 Glyceryl stearate 1 Glycerin 21 Polyquaternium-7 MERQUAT 7SPR 0.9 POLYMER by Lubrizol KOH q.s. water q.s. 100 pH 9.8

(40) In general, skin is mostly composed of keratin cells, and as such an experiment was designed that uses keratin powder as a representative of a skin protein. This simple analysis basically evaluates how the keratin cells behave when in contact with face cleansers in order to evaluate skin mildness. If the keratin cells swell and expand overtime, this equates to a negative impact a face cleanser has on keratin. However, if the cells remain virtually unchanged, then the face cleanser has nearly no impact on the skin and is considered mild to the skin. Keratin swelling often facilitates release of lipids and a natural moisturizing factor (NMF=blends of lipids, cermainde, collagen etc.) from the skin, leading to skin damage/dehydration.

(41) Toward this end, four experiments were performed using keratin cells that were in contact with three aqueous diluted solutions of face cleansers and a water-only control sample.

(42) Protocol

(43) Keratin powder was mixed with a 10% solution of a foaming cleanser, and the mix was incubated at 40? C. for 24 hours. The powder was then observed under a microscope to assess the morphological aspect of the cells after being in contact with the aqueous solutions of cleansers and were also compared to a powder in water-only sample.

(44) Results and Conclusion

(45) Microscopic images are obtained from of keratin powder in water (reference examplesample A), composition 1B of example 1 (sample B), and comparative example 5.1 as defined above (sample C).

(46) Sample A clearly demonstrates that the keratin cells remain unaffected without swelling. Regarding sample B according to the invention, the keratin powder remained in its original shape after 24 h, indicating that the present claimed composition can be considered mild to the skin. In contrast, the keratin cells swelled after being exposed to the comparative composition, i.e. a harsher soap only system (sample C).

EXAMPLE 6: HYDRATION AND TRANSEPIDERMAL WATER LOSS (TEWL) MEASUREMENTS AFTER CLEANSING

(47) Tests were performed to evaluate and compare composition 1B of example 1 with the comparative composition 5.1 as detailed in example 5.

(48) Hydration and TEWL were measured on the forearm after rinsing off the samples in order to evaluate the impact of cleansers on skin. Two samples were evaluated: composition 1B of example 1 compared to comparative composition as defined above.

(49) Protocol

(50) 1. Models (N=16) wait in a standard condition for certain period of time for T0 data acquisition.

(51) 2. The technician randomly applies a fixed amount of products per area of forearm of the models according to the random table; rinses this area with a controlled amount of demineralized water; then wipes with a paper tissue.

(52) 3. TEWL of their forearms are measured at a certain period of time.

(53) Reference samples containing water-only were used to obtain baseline measurements.

(54) Results

(55) The following table gathers the data on variation of hydration and TEWL on forearm over time for composition 1B of example 1 and comparatively for comparative composition 5.1 as defined in example 5 above. Two reference samples of water-only were also compared. Hydration measurements were conducted over a period of 15 minutes following the protocol above.

(56) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 2 0 min (before wash) 2 min 5 min 10 min 15 min TEWL (g/hm2) Composition B of example 1 4.35 ? 0.59 8.43 ? 1.35 5.21 ? 0.61 4.12 ? 0.625 4.34 ? 0.435 Ref of composition B (water only) 4.33 ? 0.625 6.59 ? 1.15 4.9 ? 0.565 4.48 ? 0.59 3.97 ? 0.49 Comparative composition in example 5 4.08 ? 0.52 11.26 ? 1.77 6.38 ? 1.06 4.86 ? 0.56 3.88 ? 0.65 Ref of comparative composition (water only) 4.03 ? 0.465 6.03 ? 0.87 4.34 ? 0.455 3.86 ? 0.475 3.78 ? 0.645 Hydration () Composition B of example 1 29.04 ? 2.575 35.63 ? 2.195 32.69 ? 2.345 30.63 ? 2.84 32.21 ? 5.58 Ref of composition B (water only) 27.96 ? 2.54 33.04 ? 2.095 31 ? 2.07 29.9 ? 2.255 30.63 ? 5.02 Comparative composition in example 5 27.13 ? 3.485 34.73 ? 2.52 31.48 ? 2.94 29.73 ? 3.18 30.83 ? 6.13 Ref of comparative composition (water only) 27.67 ? 3.975 31.11 ? 2.975 28.94 ? 3.07 28.5 ? 3.015 30.52 ? 6.81

(57) Conclusion

(58) It is important to note that the comparative composition must be compared its reference: water-only, while composition 1B of example 1 must be compared to its water-only sample because each Model during the study has a different biological response to water in general.

(59) At the 2 minute mark, the results showed significant increase in hydration for the comparative composition (soap cream sample) compared to its water-only sample. This immediate hydration can be correlated possibly to the swelling of the skin, i.e. negative impact. This swelling is somewhat related to the in vitro keratin test showed above in the images (Sample D). This swelling ultimately can lead to a significant increase in TEWL, which can be correlated to the body's response mechanism to some modification at the skin surface. This in fact is what was observed in the table 3 at time=2 minutes, in which the TEWL for the comparative composition is higher than its reference. This suggests that the comparative composition is more harsh to the skin than water-only.

(60) For the inventive composition 1B of example 1, one can see a similar trend for the hydration experiments; however, the TEWL value difference between composition 1B of example 1 and its reference is smaller than that of comparative composition compared to its reference at times equal to 2, 5, and 10 minutes. It is concluded that composition 1B of example 1, therefore, impacts the skin's biology less than comparative composition, and that composition 1B of example 1 could be considered milder to the skin than comparative composition.

EXAMPLE 7: TEST ON THE PARTICLE DEPOSITION OF A ANTI-SHINE COMPOSITION ACCORDING TO THE INVENTION

(61) Protocol

(62) Visual characterization by microscopy was used to observe particle deposition on the skin. More specifically, talc deposition on forearm was observed under high magnification from the scanning electron microscope (SEM) using a tape stripping method. Basically, the forearm was first cleaned with ethanol to remove any impurities from the skin, and then washed using two formulas containing 5% talc with and without Aculyn 38 (composition 2A of Example 2). The foam that was prepared from a cleanser described in the invention was used on the clean surface of the forearm. After using a standardized rinsing protocol, the forearm was dried for 5 min. In order to microscopically observe the particle deposition on the skin, an adhesive tape was attached on the treated area of the forearm, and then removed. The tape strip was then observed under SEM.

(63) Evaluation Results

(64) SEM images on forearmtape stripping was performed on two formulas. Both formulas contain talc particles; however, one of the images (1) was taken after using the formula containing Aculyn 38, while another image (2) had no thickener (comparative composition 1 of example 2). No image is appended.

(65) Image (1) shows that talc is deposited because the image comprises white square particles above skin cells.

(66) Image (2) does not comprise such white square, showing that no talc particles remain on skin cells in image.

(67) Conclusion

(68) The SEM images indicate that the soap-rich formula without thickener did not deposit particles whereas the formula with Aculyn 38 (composition 2A of example 2) allowed particle deposition, indicating that microgel type of thickening polymer is also necessary for talc deposition.

EXAMPLE 8: SKIN FINISH TEST: PERCEIVED SKIN FEEL AFTERSKIN WASHING WITH A MOISTURIZING COMPOSITION ACCORDING TO THE INVENTION

(69) Protocol

(70) Internal panelists were asked to wash their face once with the formulas containing the different amounts of oil, and then were asked to evaluate the skin tightness, dryness, and hydration using a scale of 1-5 after a certain period of time.

(71) The tested formula=composition 3B of example 3 (10% Shea butter) and composition 3C of example 3 (20% Shea butter), and comparative example 3.1 of example 3 (0% Shea butter)

(72) Evaluation Results

(73) In order to test the perceived skin finish, skin attributes (tightness, dryness and moisturized) were monitored by panelists after product usage on the face. The three tables below describe the skin attributes versus time (up to 10 minutes) for the three formulas. The same formula were tested as described in the above section except were applied to the face as opposed to the forearm.

(74) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 3 Variation of skin tightness, dryness and hydration as a function of time 1 min 2 min 5 min 10 min skin tightness comparative example 1 2.8 ? 0.5 3.2 ? 0.55 3.7 ? 0.65 4.1 ? 0.5 of example 3 composition B of 2.1 ? 0.65 2.3 ? 0.7 3.1 ? 0.7 3.3 ? 0.65 example 3 composition C of 1.8 ? 0.3 2.2 ? 0.45 2.5 ? 0.5 2.9 ? 0.6 example 3 Dryness comparative example 1 2.9 ? 0.45 3.4 ? 0.4 3.7 ? 0.45 4.1 ? 0.45 of example 3 composition B of 2.2 ? 0.6 2.8 ? 0.7 3.5 ? 0.6 3.7 ? 0.65 example 3 composition C of 2 ? 0.55 2.5 ? 0.55 2.6 ? 0.5 2.9 ? 0.6 example 3

(75) The formula with no oil was used as a reference and compared with the formula containing 10% and 20% oil.

(76) Conclusion

(77) The formulas containing 10 and 20% Shea butter oil demonstrated a perceived increase in moisturization compared to the 0% comparative composition, and a decrease in skin tightness and dryness over a 10 minute trial period. This perceived moisturization is due to oil deposition on skin after rinse off.