WATER-BASED COSMETIC

Abstract

A water-based cosmetic including:

agar having a weight average molecular weight of 10,000 to 60,000 (component (A));

xanthan gum (component (B)); and

a water-soluble polymer excluding the component (A) or (B) (component (C)).

Claims

1. A water-based cosmetic comprising: agar having a weight average molecular weight of 10,000 to 60,000 (component (A)); xanthan gum (component (B)); and a water-soluble polymer excluding the component (A) or (B) (component (C)).

2. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, wherein a ratio of a content of said component (A) to a content of said component (B) is from 4:6 to 8:2 in mass ratio; a ratio of a total content of said component (A) and said component (B) to a content of said component (C) is from 1:5 to 15:1 in mass ratio; the content of said component (A) is from 0.01 to 2% by mass with respect to a total mass of said water-based cosmetic; the content of said component (B) is from 0.01 to 2% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic; and 2 0 the content of said component (C) is from 0.01 to 2% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

3. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, further comprising a moisturizing agent (component (D)) in an amount of 3 to 30% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

4. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, further comprising a nonionic surfactant (component (E)) in an amount of 0.01 to 40% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

5. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, further comprising an oil agent in a liquid form at 25° C. (component (F)) in an amount of 0.01 to 50% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

6. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, further comprising an oil agent in a paste form at 25° C. (component (G)) in an amount of 0.01 to 10% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

7. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, further comprising an oil agent in a solid form at 25° C. (component (H)) in an amount of 0.1 to 10% by mass with respect to the total mass of said water-based cosmetic.

8. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, wherein said component (C) is at least one selected from a carboxyvinyl polymer and an acrylic acid/alkyl methacrylate copolymer.

9. The water-based cosmetic according to claim 1, which is an oil-in-water type emulsion.

Description

EXAMPLES

[0703] Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail with reference to examples of the present invention and comparative examples, although the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0704] In the following Examples, “Ena” (manufactured by Ina Food Industry Co., Ltd., weight average molecular weight: 43,000, number average molecular weight: 8,800, Mw/Mn: 4.9) and “Agar S-7” (manufactured by Ina Food Industry Co., Ltd., weight average molecular weight: 290,000, number average molecular weight: 48,000, Mw/Mn: 6.0) were used as low molecular weight agar of the component (A) and high molecular weight agar, respectively.

Examples 1 to 10, Comparative Examples 1 to 6

[0705] In the formulations shown in Tables 1 and 2, all components were weighed in a beaker, mixed, heated to 85 to 95° C. to dissolve, and then cooled with stirring. A gel essence obtained as a result of degassing under reduced pressure was used as a sample.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 (% by mass) Examples 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A Low molecular weight agar 0.35 0.30 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 High molecular weight agar — — — — — — — — — — B Xanthan gum *.sup.1 0.15 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 C Carboxyvinyl polymer *.sup.2 0.50 0.50 0.50 — — — — — — — C Acrylic acid/alkyl — — — 0.50 — — — — — — methacrylate copolymer *.sup.3 C Hydroxyethyl cellulose *.sup.4 — — — — 0.50 — — — — — C Hydroxypropyl methyl — — — — — 0.50 — — — — cellulose *.sup.5 C Polyvinyl alcohol *.sup.6 — — — — — — 0.50 — — — C Acrylate copolymer *.sup.7 — — — — — — — 0.50 — — C PEG-90 M *.sup.8 — — — — — — — — 0.50 — C Sodium alginate *.sup.9 — — — — — — — — — 0.50 Sodium hydroxide Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- priate priate priate priate priate priate priate priate priate priate amount amount amount amount amount amount amount amount amount amount Water Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 *.sup.1 “NOMCORT ZZ” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.2 “Carbopol 980” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited) *.sup.3 “Pemulen TR-1” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited) *.sup.4 “Natrosol HEC” (manufactured by Ashland Inc.) *.sup.5 “Metolose 65SH-4000” (manufactured by Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.6 “Kuraray Poval 235” (manufactured by Kuraray Co., Ltd.) *.sup.7 “Carbopol AQUA SF-1 Polymer” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited) *.sup.8 “Alkox E-160G” (manufactured by Meisei Chemical Works, Ltd.) *.sup.9 “ADS-Oligonol” (manufactured by Ichimaru Pharcos Co., Ltd.)

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 (% by mass) Comparative Examples 1 2 3 4 5 6 A Low molecular weight agar 0.40 — — — — — High molecular weight agar — 0.40 — — — — B Xanthan gum *.sup.1 — — 0.40 0.50 — — C Carboxyvinyl polymer *.sup.2 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 Sodium hydroxide Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- Appro- priate priate priate priate priate priate amount amount amount amount amount amount Water Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Balance Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 *.sup.1 “NOMCORT ZZ” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.2 “Carbopol 980” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited)

[0706] (Impression of Usability)

[0707] Samples of Examples 1 to 3 and Comparative Examples 1 to 6 were applied to the entire face of 15 panelists, after washing the face, who were asked to answer the questionnaire regarding their impressions of usability of these samples, and the “ease of scooping (scoopability) with a finger”, “feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin (skin compatibility)”, “sliminess”, “stickiness”, “freshness” and “moist feeling” were evaluated in accordance with the following criteria.

“Scoopability with a Finger”

[0708] a: 12 or more panelists answered that it was easy to scoop with a finger.

[0709] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that it was easy to scoop with a finger.

[0710] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that it was easy to scoop with a finger.

[0711] d: 3 or less panelists answered that it was easy to scoop with a finger.

“Skin Compatibility”

[0712] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was a feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin.

[0713] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was a feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin.

[0714] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was a feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin.

[0715] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was a feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin.

“Sliminess”

[0716] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was no sliminess.

[0717] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was no sliminess.

[0718] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was no sliminess.

[0719] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was no sliminess.

“Stickiness”

[0720] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was no stickiness.

[0721] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was no stickiness.

[0722] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was no stickiness.

[0723] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was no stickiness.

“Freshness”

[0724] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was a feeling of freshness.

[0725] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was a feeling of freshness.

[0726] c: 4 to 11 panelists answered that there was a feeling of freshness.

[0727] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was a feeling of freshness.

“Moist Feeling”

[0728] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was a moist feeling.

[0729] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was a moist feeling.

[0730] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was a moist feeling.

[0731] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was a moist feeling.

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Examples Comparative Examples 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 Scoopability with a finger a a a b b d d d b Skin compatibility b b b b c c c d d Sliminess a a a b b d d a a Stickiness a a a b c d d c c Freshness a a a d d c c a b Moist feeling b b b c c c c d d

[0732] The evaluation results are shown in Table 3. As a result, the gel essences of Examples 1 to 3 containing low molecular weight agar as the component (A), xanthan gum as the component (B) and a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had no sliminess and stickiness, and exhibited favorable scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility, feeling of freshness and moist feeling. On the other hand, the gel essences of Comparative Examples 3 to 5 that did not contain at least one of agar and xanthan gum as the component (B) easily dripped off when scooped with a finger, and exhibited poor scoopability (that is, ease of scooping with a finger). Further, the gel essences of Comparative Examples 5 and 6 that did not contain the xanthan gum as the component (B) exhibited poor skin compatibility (that is, poor compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin) and also lacked a moist feeling, although there was no sliminess.

Examples 11 to 15, Comparative Examples 7 to 9

[0733] In the formulations shown in Table 4, all components were weighed in a beaker, mixed, heated to 85 to 95° C. to dissolve, and then cooled with stirring. A water-based essence obtained as a result of degassing under reduced pressure was used as a sample. The same low molecular weight agar, xanthan gum, and carboxyvinyl polymer as those in Example 1 were used.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 (% by mass) Examples Comparative Examples 11 12 13 14 15 7 8 9 A Low molecular weight agar 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 — — B Xanthan gum 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 — — C Carboxyvinyl polymer 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 0.20 Methylparaben 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Propylparaben 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 D Glycerin *.sup.1 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 D Dipropylene glycol *.sup.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 E PEG-20 glyceryl 1.00 — — — — 1.00 1.00 1.00 triisostearate *.sup.3 E PEG-40 hydrogenated — 1.00 — — — — — — castor oil *.sup.4 E Laureth-7 *.sup.5 — — 1.00 — — — — — E Polysorbate 60 *.sup.6 — — — 1.00 — — — — E PEG-20 sorbitan cocoate *.sup.7 — — — — 1.00 — — — Citric acid 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Sodium citrate * 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 Sodium hydroxide 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.06 Water 91.62 91.62 91.62 91.62 91.62 91.75 92.62 92.49 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 *.sup.1 “Concentrated glycerin for cosmetics” (manufactured by Sakamoto Yakuhin Kogyo Co., Ltd.) *.sup.2 “DPG-RF” (manufactured by Adeka Corporation) *.sup.3 “SALACOS GE-318” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.4 “EMANON CH-40” (manufactured by Kao Corporation) *.sup.5 “EMULMIN NL-70” (manufactured by Sanyo Chemical Industries, Ltd.) *.sup.6 “RHEODOL TW-S120V” (manufactured by Kao Corporation) *.sup.7 “EMALEX ET-2020” (manufactured by Nihon Emulsion Co., Ltd.) indicates data missing or illegible when filed

(Impression of Usability)

[0734] The “ease of scooping (scoopability) with a finger”, “feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin (skin compatibility)”, “sliminess”, “stickiness”, “freshness” and “moist feeling” of the samples of Example 11 and Comparative Examples 7 to 9 were evaluated in the same manner as in Example 1.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Example Comparative Examples 11 7 8 9 Scoopability with a finger a a d c Skin compatibility a b d d Sliminess a c b b Stickiness a d c c Freshness a c a b Moist feeling b b d d

[0735] The evaluation results are shown in Table 5. As a result, the water-based essence of Example 11 containing low molecular weight agar as the component (A), xanthan gum as the component (B) and a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had no sliminess and stickiness, and exhibited favorable scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility, feeling of freshness and moist feeling. On the other hand, the water-based essence of Comparative Example 7 that did not contain a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had stickiness and sliminess, although the scoopability with a finger was favorable, and the water-based essences of Comparative Examples 8 and 9 that did not contain low molecular weight agar as the component (A) and xanthan gum as the component (B) were both evaluated as poor in terms of scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility and moist feeling.

Examples 16 to 25, Comparative Examples 10 to 11

[0736] In the formulations shown in Tables 6 and 7, all components were weighed in a beaker, mixed, heated to 85 to 95.sup.0 C to dissolve, and then cooled with stirring. An oil-in-water emulsion type essence obtained as a result of degassing under reduced pressure was used as a sample. The same low molecular weight agar, xanthan gum and carboxyvinyl polymer as those used in Example 1 and the same glycerin as that used in Example 11 were used, respectively.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Comparative Examples Examples 16 to 25 10 11 A Low molecular weight agar 0.3 — 0.6 B Xanthan gum 0.2 — 0.4 C Carboxyvinyl polymer 0.1 0.2 — D Refer to Table 7 6 6 6 E Polyglyceryl-10 oleate*.sup.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 F1 Refer to Table 7 0.35 0.35 0.35 F2 Refer to Table 7 0.6 0.6 0.6 F3 Refer to Table 7 0.85 0.85 0.85 G Dipentaerythrityl 0.25 0.25 0.25 hexa(hydroxystearate/ stearate/rosinate)*.sup.2 G Cholesteryl hydroxystearate*.sup.3 0.15 0.15 0.15 H Refer to Table 7 0.3 0.3 0.3 Sodium hydroxide 0.036 0.073 — 1,2-pentanediol 3.5 3.5 3.5 Phenoxyethanol 0.2 0.2 0.2 Methylparaben 0.1 0.1 0.1 Butylparaben 0.05 0.05 0.05 EDTA-2Na 0.005 0.005 0.005 (Vinyl dimethicone/methicone 2.5 2.5 2.5 silsesquioxane) crosspolymer Hydrogenated lecithin 0.2 0.2 0.2 Water 83.809 84.172 83.445 Total 100 100 100 *.sup.1“SALACOS PG-180” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.2“COSMOL 168ARV” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.3“SALACOS HS” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.)

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 D F1 F2 F3 H Example 16 Glycerin Hydrogenated Triethylhexanoin*.sup.12 Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl polydecene*.sup.16 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 17 Polyglycerol*.sup.1 Mineral oil*.sup.11 Isononyl Methylphenyl Glyceryl isononanoate*.sup.13 polysiloxane*.sup.21 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 18 Propanediol*.sup.2 Squalane Isopropyl Cyclopentasiloxane*.sup.22 Glyceryl myristate*.sup.14 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 19 Diglycerin*.sup.3 Hydrogenated Glycerol Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl polydecene*.sup.10 tri(caprylate/caprate)*.sup.15 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 20 PEG-20*.sup.4 Hydrogenated Neopentyl glycol Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl polydecene*.sup.10 dicaprate*.sup.16 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 21 Sorbitol*.sup.5 Hydrogenated Olive oil Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl polydecene*.sup.10 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 22 Trehalose*.sup.6 Hydrogenated Macadamia nut Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl polydecene*.sup.10 oil*.sup.17 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 23 Sodium Hydrogenated Argania spinosa Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl hyaluronate*.sup.7 polydecene*.sup.10 kernel oil*.sup.14 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 24 PPG-10 Hydrogenated Castor oil Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl methyl polydecene*.sup.10 (behenate/isostearate/ glucose*.sup.8 eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Example 25 Methyl Hydrogenated Jojoba oil*.sup.19 Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl gluceth-10*.sup.9 polydecene*.sup.10 (behenate/eicosadioate)*.sup.24 Comparative Glycerin Hydrogenated Triethylhexanoin*.sup.12 Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl Example 10 polydecene*.sup.10 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 Comparative Glycerin Hydrogenated Triethylhexanoin*.sup.12 Dimethicone*.sup.20 Glyceryl Example 11 polydecene*.sup.10 (behenate/isostearate/ eicosadioate)*.sup.23 *.sup.1“Adeka PG” (manufactured by Adeka Corporation) *.sup.2“ZEMEA SELECT Propanediol” (manufactured by Zemea Co., Ltd.) *.sup.3“Diglycerin 801” (manufactured by Sakamoto Yakuhin Kogyo Co., Ltd.) *.sup.4“PEG #1000” (manufactured by NOF Corporation) *.sup.5“SORBITOL KAO” (manufactured by Kao Corporation) *.sup.6“Daily Trehalose for Cosmetics” (manufactured by Hayashibara Co., Ltd.) *.sup.7“Hyaluronic Acid Q-5” (manufactured by Kewpie Corporation) *.sup.8“GLUCAM P-10” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited) *.sup.9“GLUCAM E-10” (manufactured by Lubrizol Japan Limited) *.sup.10“NOMCORT HP-30” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.11“CARNATION” (manufactured by Shima Trading Co., Ltd.) *.sup.12“T.I.O” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.13“SALACOS 99” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.14“IPM” (manufactured by Kao Corporation) *.sup.15“O.D.O” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.16“ESTEMOL N-01” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.17“Refined Macadamia Nut Oil” (manufactured by Yokozeki Oil & Fat Industries Co., Ltd.) *.sup.18“Lipofructyl Argan LS 9779” (manufactured by LABORATOIRES SEROBIOLOGIQUES) *.sup.19“Jojobal” (manufactured by Mitsuba Trading Co., Ltd.) *.sup.20“KF-96A-10cs” (manufactured by Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.21“KF-56” (manufactured by Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.22“SH245 Fluid” (manufactured by Dow Corning Toray Co., Ltd.) *.sup.23“NOMCORT SG” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.24“NOMCORT HK-G” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.)

(Impression of Usability)

[0737] The “ease of scooping (scoopability) with a finger”, “feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin (skin compatibility)”, “sliminess” and “freshness” of the samples of Example 16 and Comparative Examples 10 to 11 were evaluated in the same manner as in Example 1.

[0738] In addition, samples were applied to the entire face of 15 panelists, after washing the face, who were asked to answer the questionnaire regarding their impressions of usability of these samples, and the “oiliness” and “feeling of richness” of each sample were also evaluated in accordance with the following criteria.

“Oiliness”

[0739] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was no oiliness.

[0740] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was no oiliness.

[0741] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was no oiliness.

[0742] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was no oiliness.

“Feeling of Richness”

[0743] a: 12 or more panelists answered that there was a feeling of richness.

[0744] b: 8 to 11 panelists answered that there was a feeling of richness.

[0745] c: 4 to 7 panelists answered that there was a feeling of richness.

[0746] d: 3 or less panelists answered that there was a feeling of richness.

[0747] Furthermore, the “storage stability” of each sample was visually evaluated in accordance with the following criteria by degrees of water separation, oil separation and creaming after storage for 1 month at 50° C.

[0748] a: No water separation, oil separation or creaming was observed.

[0749] b: Any one of water separation, oil separation and creaming was observed.

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Comparative Example Examples 16 10 11 Scoopability with a finger a c a Skin compatibility a d b Sliminess a a d Oiliness a a d Freshness a a c Feeling of richness a d b Storage stability a a a

[0750] The evaluation results are shown in Table 8. As a result, the oil-in-water emulsion type essence of Example 16 containing low molecular weight agar as the component (A), xanthan gum as the component (B) and a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had no sliminess and oiliness, all of the scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility, freshness and feeling of richness were favorable, and the storage stability was also favorable. On the other hand, the oil-in-water emulsion type essence of Comparative Example 11 that did not contain a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had sliminess and oiliness, although the scoopability with a finger was favorable, and the oil-in-water emulsion type essence of Comparative Example 10 that did not contain low molecular weight agar as the component (A) and xanthan gum as the component (B) was inferior in all of the scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility and feeling of richness.

Examples 26 to 32, Comparative Examples 12 to 13

[0751] In the formulations shown in Tables 9 and 10, all components were weighed in a beaker, mixed, heated to 85 to 95° C. to dissolve, and then cooled with stirring. A cream obtained as a result of degassing under reduced pressure was used as a sample. The same low molecular weight agar, xanthan gum and carboxyvinyl polymer as those used in Example 1, the same glycerin as that used in Example 11, the same hydrogenated polydecene, triethylhexanoin and dimethicone as those used in Example 16 and the same glyceryl tri(caprylate/caprate) as that used in Example 19 were used, respectively.

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 (% by mass) Comparative Examples Examples 26 to 32 12 13 A Low molecular weight agar 0.18 — 0.18 B Xanthan gum 0.12 — 0.12 C Carboxyvinyl polymer 0.1 0.1 — D Glycerin 8 8 8 D 1,3-butylene glycol 7.5 7.5 7.5 D Erythritol 1 1 1 E1 Glyceryl stearate 2.5 2.5 2.5 E2 Refer to Table 10 2.5 2.5 2.5 F1 Hydrogenated polydecene 1 1 1 F2 Triethylhexanoin 7 7 — F3 Glyceryl tri(caprylate/caprate) — — 6.5 F4 Dimethicone (10 cs) 7.5 7.5 7.5 F5 Refer to Table 10 0.9 0.9 1.5 G Glyceryl 2 2 2 tri(caprylate/caprate/ myristate/stearate) H Microcrystalline wax 1 1 1 H Cetanol 3 3 3 H Stearyl alcohol 1 1 1 H Behenyl alcohol 0.7 0.7 0.7 Phenoxyethanol 0.1 0.1 0.1 Methylparaben 0.1 0.1 0.1 Ethylparaben 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sodium hydroxide 0.026 0.026 — Water 53.724 54.024 53.75 Total 100 100 100

TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 E2 F5 Example 26 PEG-100 stearate*.sup.1 Dipentaerythrityl tripolyhydroxystearate*.sup.8 Example 27 Polyglyceryl-2 oleate*.sup.2 Pentaerythrityl tetraethylhexanoate*.sup.9 Example 28 Sorbitan sesquioleate*.sup.3 Diisostearyl malate*.sup.10 Example 29 Sorbitan sesquiisostearate*.sup.4 Polyglyceryl-2 triisostearate*.sup.11 Example 30 Steareth-20*.sup.5 Ethylhexyl hydroxystearate*.sup.12 Example 31 PEG-11 methyl ether Di(phytosteryl/octyldodecyl) dimethicone*.sup.6 lauroyl glutamate*.sup.13 Example 32 Cetearyl glucoside*.sup.7 Hydrogenated polyisobutene*.sup.14 Comparative PEG-100 stearate*.sup.1 Dipentaerythrityl Example 12 tripolyhydroxystearate*.sup.8 Comparative PEG-100 stearate*.sup.1 Dipentaerythrityl Example 13 tripolyhydroxystearate*.sup.8 *.sup.1“EMALEX 8100” (manufactured by Nihon Emulsion Co., Ltd.) *.sup.2“SALACOS DG-180” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.3“COSMOL 82” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.4“COSMOL 182V” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.5“EMALEX 620” (manufactured by Nihon Emulsion Co., Ltd.) *.sup.6“KF 6011” (manufactured by Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.7“TEGO Care CG 90” (manufactured by Evonik Goldschmidt GmbH) *.sup.8“SALACOS WO-6” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.9“SALACOS 5408” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.10“COSMOL 222” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.11“COSMOL 43V” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.12“SALACOS EH” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.13“Plandool-LG2” (manufactured by Nippon Fine Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.14“PARLEAM 18” (manufactured by NOF CORPORATION)

(Impression of Usability)

[0752] The “ease of scooping (scoopability) with a finger”, “feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin (skin compatibility)”, “sliminess”, “oiliness”, “freshness”, “feeling of richness” and “storage stability” of the samples of Example 26 and Comparative Examples 12 to 13 were evaluated in the same manner as in Example 16.

TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Comparative Example Examples 26 12 13 Scoopability with a finger a b a Skin compatibility a d b Sliminess a b d Oiliness a a d Freshness a a c Feeling of richness a c a Storage stability a a d

[0753] The evaluation results are shown in Table 11. As a result, the cream of Example 26 containing low molecular weight agar as the component (A), xanthan gum as the component (B) and a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had no sliminess and oiliness, all of the scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility, freshness and feeling of richness were favorable, and the storage stability was also favorable. On the other hand, the cream of Comparative Example 13 that did not contain a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had sliminess and oiliness, although the scoopability with a finger was favorable, and the cream of Comparative Example 12 that did not contain low molecular weight agar as the component (A) and xanthan gum as the component (B) lacked the skin compatibility and the feeling of richness was also absent.

Examples 33 to 39, Comparative Examples 14 to 15

[0754] In the formulations shown in Tables 12 and 13, all components were weighed in a beaker, mixed, heated to 85 to 95° C. to dissolve, and then cooled with stirring. A cream obtained as a result of degassing under reduced pressure was used as a sample. The same low molecular weight agar, xanthan gum and carboxyvinyl polymer as those used in Example 1, the same glycerin as that used in Example 11, the same hydrogenated polydecene, triethylhexanoin and dimethicone as those used in Example 16 and the same dipentaerythrityl tripolyhydroxystearate as that used in Example 26 were used, respectively.

TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 (% by mass) Comparative Examples Examples 33 to 39 14 15 A Low molecular weight agar 0.60 0.60 B Xanthan gum 0.40 0.40 C Carboxyvinyl polymer 0.10 0.10 D Glycerin 6.00 6.00 6.00 D 1,3-butylene glycol 3.00 3.00 3.00 E Glyceryl stearate 0.50 0.50 0.50 E PEG-10 stearate 1.20 1.20 1.20 F Hydrogenated polydecene 10.00 10.00 10.00 F Cetyl ethylhexanoate 3.00 3.00 3.00 F Triethylhexanoin 5.00 5.00 5.00 F Dipentaerythrityl 0.80 0.80 0.80 tripolyhydroxystearate F Dimethicone 3.50 3.50 3.50 G1 Refer to Table 13 3.00 3.00 3.00 G2 Refer to Table 13 1.00 1.00 1.00 H Polyglyceryl-10 (behenate/ 2.00 2.00 2.00 eicosadioate) H Cetanol 2.50 2.50 2.50 H Behenyl alcohol 0.50 0.50 0.50 Pentylene glycol 2.50 2.50 2.50 Methylparaben 0.10 0.10 0.10 Propylparaben 0.05 0.05 0.05 Ethylparaben 0.05 0.05 0.05 EDTA-2Na 0.03 0.03 0.03 Sodium hydroxide 0.04 0.04 0.02 Stearic acid 1.00 1.00 1.00 (Vinyl dimethicone/methicone 0.50 0.50 0.50 silsesquioxane) crosspolymer Water 52.63 53.63 52.75 Total 100 100 100

TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 G1 G2 Example 33 Vaseline*.sup.1 Cholesteryl hydroxystearate*.sup.2 Example 34 Lanolin Hydrogenated palm oil*.sup.6 Example 35 Purified lanolin Hydrogenated coconut oil Example 36 phytosteryl oleate*.sup.3 Hydrogenated castor oil*.sup.7 Example 37 Dipentaerythrityl Phytosteryl macadamiate*.sup.8 tetra(hydroxystearate/ isostearate)*.sup.4 Example 38 Dipentaerythrityl (Phytosteryl/isostearyl/cetyl/ hexahydroxystearate*.sup.5 stearyl/behenyl) dimer dilinoleate*.sup.9 Example 39 Vaseline*.sup.1 Di(phytosteryl/octyldodecyl/ behenyl) lauroyl glutamate*.sup.10 Comparative Vaseline*.sup.1 Cholesteryl hydroxystearate*.sup.2 Example 14 Comparative Vaseline*.sup.1 Cholesteryl hydroxystearate*.sup.2 Example 15 *.sup.1“NOMCORT W” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.2“SALACOS HS” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.3“SALACOS PO(T)” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.4“COSMOL 168EV” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.5“COSMOL 168M” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.6“NOMCORT PHS” (manufactured by The Nisshin OilliO Group, Ltd.) *.sup.7“CASTER WAX A FLAKE” (manufactured by NOF CORPORATION) *.sup.8“Plandool-MAS” (manufactured by Nippon Fine Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.9“Plandool-H” (manufactured by Nippon Fine Chemical Co., Ltd.) *.sup.10“Plandool-LG1” (manufactured by Nippon Fine Chemical Co., Ltd.)

(Impression of Usability)

[0755] The “ease of scooping (scoopability) with a finger”, “feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin (skin compatibility)”, “sliminess”, “oiliness”, “freshness”, “feeling of richness” and “storage stability” of the samples of Example 33 and Comparative Examples 14 to 15 were evaluated in the same manner as in Example 16.

TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 Comparative Example Examples 33 14 15 Scoopability with a finger a b a Skin compatibility a d b Sliminess a b d Oiliness a a d Freshness a a c Feeling of richness a c a Storage stability a a a

[0756] The evaluation results are shown in Table 14. As a result, the cream of Example 33 containing low molecular weight agar as the component (A), xanthan gum as the component (B) and a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had no sliminess and oiliness, all of the scoopability with a finger, skin compatibility, freshness and feeling of richness were favorable, and the storage stability was also favorable. On the other hand, the cream of Comparative Example 15 that did not contain a water-soluble polymer as the component (C) had sliminess and oiliness, although the scoopability with a finger was favorable, and the cream of Comparative Example 14 that did not contain low molecular weight agar as the component (A) and xanthan gum as the component (B) lacked the skin compatibility and the feeling of richness was also absent.

INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY

[0757] According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a water-based cosmetic that exhibits excellent scoopability with a finger, provides excellent feeling of richness and moist feeling while providing a highly fresh tactile sensation at the time of application to the skin, and provides a feeling of compatibility, as if to blend in, with the skin. Therefore, it is extremely useful industrially.