CATIONIC COSMETIC COMPOSITION FOR REINFORCING ADHESION OF MAKEUP AND PREVENTING RUBBING-OFF THEREOF

Abstract

Provided is a powder cosmetic composition including a positive charge donor material for enhancing makeup skin adhesion and preventing staining. The powder cosmetic composition may provide an effect of excellent makeup skin adhesion by including a positive charge donor material of a specific combination, thereby exhibiting a significantly higher positive charge than when a single positive charge donor material is included.

Claims

1. A cosmetic composition comprising a powder comprising a positive charge donor material, wherein the cosmetic composition prevents makeup staining and has improved skin adhesion.

2. The cosmetic composition of claim 1, wherein the positive charge donor material is iron oxide, polyquaternium-10, polyquaternium-7, guar hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride, poly-L-lysine, or a combination thereof.

3. The cosmetic composition of claim 1, wherein the powder is a mixed powder comprising iron oxide and polyquaternium-10.

4. The cosmetic composition of claim 3, wherein the powder comprises 0.05 wt % to 95 wt % of iron oxide.

5. The cosmetic composition of claim 3, wherein the powder comprises 1 wt % to 50 wt % of polyquaternium-10.

6. The cosmetic composition of claim 1, wherein the powder exhibits a zeta potential of 40 mV to 120 mV.

7. The cosmetic composition of claim 1, comprising 0.0001 wt % to 20 wt % of the powder, with respect to the total weight of the composition.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0021] FIG. 1 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a powder according to Comparative Example 1.

[0022] FIG. 2 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a powder according to Comparative Example 2.

[0023] FIG. 3 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a powder according to Comparative Example 3.

[0024] FIG. 4 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a mixed powder according to Example 1.

[0025] FIG. 5 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a mixed powder according to Example 2.

[0026] FIG. 6 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a powder according to Comparative Example 4.

[0027] FIG. 7 is a graph showing a surface potential (mV) measurement value of a powder according to Example 3.

[0028] FIG. 8 is an image confirming an effect of enhanced skin adhesion and prevention of mask staining of a cosmetic composition containing a cationic powder.

BEST MODE

[0029] Hereinafter, the present disclosure will be described in more detail through examples. However, these examples are intended to illustrate the present disclosure, and the scope of the present disclosure is not limited to these examples.

Comparative Examples 1 to 3, and Examples 1 and 2. Preparation of Mixed Powders Containing Positive Charge Donors

[0030] In order to prepare powders having a positive charge, powders were mixed and prepared in the compositions of comparative examples and examples shown in Table 1 below. Specifically, Comparative Examples 1 to 3 were prepared to contain iron oxide, silica, or polyquaternium-10, respectively, and Examples 1 and 2 were prepared to contain iron oxide, silica, and polyquaternium-10.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Content (wt %) Comparative Comparative Comparative Ingredient Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Example 1 Example 2 Iron oxide — 100 — 90 10 Silica 100 — — 1 50 Polyquaternium-10 — — 100 9 40

Comparative Example 4 and Example 3. Preparation of Mixed Powders Containing Positive Charge Donors

[0031] In order to prepare powders having a positive charge, powders were mixed and prepared in the compositions of comparative examples and examples shown in Table 2 below. Specifically, Comparative Example 4 was prepared to contain black iron oxide and polyquaternium-6, and Example 1 was prepared to contain yellow iron oxide and polyquaternium-10.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Content (wt %) Comparative Ingredient Example 4 Example 3 Black iron oxide 90 — Yellow iron oxide — 90 Silica  1 1 Polyquaternium-10 — 9 Polyquaternium-6  9 —

Experimental Example 1. Confirmation of Surface Potential (Zeta Potential)

[0032] 1.1 Confirmation of Particle Size and Zeta Potential

[0033] Surface potential of a mixed powder containing a positive charge donor material was measured as follows. Surface potential of the powder was measured by using a dynamic light scattering device (HORIBA, SZ-100) capable of measuring particle sizes and surface potential. Prior to measuring the surface potential of the mixed powder, surface potential of distilled water was first measured, and it was confirmed that the surface potential was zero. As a method of measuring the surface potential of the mixed powder, the mixed powder was uniformly dispersed in water, and then the surface potential was measured by using an SZ-100 analyzer. The measured zeta potential values of the powders of Comparative Examples 1 to 3 and Examples 1 and 2 are shown in FIGS. 1 to 5 and Table 2 below. In addition, the measured zeta potential values of the powders of Comparative Example 4 and Example 3 are shown in FIGS. 6 to 7 and Table 4 below.

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Experiment Comparative Comparative Comparative item Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Example 1 Example 2 Zeta potential (mV) −46.8 13.9 41.4 67.9 49.3 −47.5 18.8 40.8 65.8 50.2 −51.7 16.1 39.9 68.8 49.0 −54.0 13.8 41.1 67.5 48.2 −51.8 12.9 40.7 67.6 51.6 Average −50.4 15.1 40.8 67.5 49.7

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Experiment Comparative item Example 4 Example 3 Zeta 14.8 66.1 potential (mV) 17.7 67.5 22.5 67.7 Average 18.3 67.1

[0034] As a result, as shown in FIGS. 1 to 5 and Table 3, the powder of Comparative Example 1, which does not contain a positive charge donor material, exhibited a negative charge, whereas the powders of Comparative Examples 2 and 3 containing only iron oxide or polyquaternium-10 had an average surface potential of 15.1 mV and 40.8 mV, respectively, showing a moderate positive charge.

[0035] In particular, the surface potentials of the powders of Examples 1 and 2 including a mixture of iron oxide and polyquaternium-10, which are positive charge donor materials, were on average 67.5 mV and 49.7 mV, respectively, showing a significantly increased positive charge compared to the powders of Comparative Examples 2 and 3 including a single positive charge donor material, as well as the powder of Comparative Example 1 not including a positive charge donor material.

[0036] In addition, as shown in FIGS. 6 to 7 and Table 4, the mixed powder of Example 3 including a combination of iron oxide and polyquaternium-10 exhibited a remarkably stronger positive charge, compared to the mixed powder of Comparative Example 4 including a combination of iron oxide and polyquaternium-6.

Comparative Example 5 and Example 4. Preparation of Foundation Containing Positive Charge Donor Substance

[0037] In order to investigate the effect of the presence or absence of a mixed power which contains a positive charge donor material on the prevention of staining of a makeup cosmetic composition, foundation cosmetic compositions of Comparative Example 5 and Example 4 were prepared by varying whether or not the mixed powder of Example 1, which has the highest surface potential, was contained.

[0038] Specifically, each raw material was weighed in a beaker according to the components and contents shown in Table 5 below, and then uniformly mixed for 5 minutes at 1,000 rpm using a disper at a temperature of 75° C. to 80° C. After mixing, a powder was added at the same temperature and uniformly mixed for 3 minutes at 1,000 rpm. Then, air bubbles were removed and the mixture was cooled to prepare each cosmetic composition. Table 5 below shows specific components and contents of the cosmetic compositions of Comparative Examples 5 and Example 4.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Content (wt %) Comparetive Ingredient Example 5 Example 4 Lauryl PEG-10 tris(trimethylsiloxy)silylethyl 3.0 3.0 dimethicone Phenyl trimethicone 10.0 10.0 Cyclopentasiloxane 21.0 21.0 Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate 7.0 7.0 Ethylhexyl salicylate 5.0 5.0 Disteadimonium hectorite 0.5 0.5 Particulate titanium dioxide 7.0 7.0 Titanium dioxide 9.0 9.0 Yellow iron oxide 1.0 1.0 Purified water To 100 To 100 Disodium EDTA 0.02 0.02 Magnesium sulfate 0.7 0.7 Glycerin 5.0 5.0 Phenoxyethanol 0.7 0.7 Mixed powder containing positive — 3.0 charge donor material (Example 1)

Experimental Example 2. Evaluation of Makeup Staining

[0039] For the foundation cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5, the degree of makeup staining when wearing a mask was evaluated.

[0040] Specifically, after washing, and waiting for 10 minutes under constant temperature and humidity conditions, the cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 were applied to the right and left sides of the face, respectively, and the product was fixed for 5 minutes. Thereafter, the mask was worn, and after 2 hours of daily life, an image of the worn mask that was in contact with the face was taken.

[0041] As a result, as shown in FIG. 8, the composition of Example 4 was confirmed to show significantly less mask staining when applied to the skin, compared to the composition of Comparative Example 5. From the above results, it was confirmed that the composition of Example 4, compared to the composition of Comparative Example 5, may increase skin adhesion of the cosmetic composition, by further including a mixed powder containing a positive charge donor material, thereby preventing the problem of staining on the mask.

Experimental Example 3. Skin Safety Evaluation

[0042] Skin safety of the foundation cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 was evaluated.

[0043] Specifically, irritation degrees of the cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 were evaluated with 20 men and women without a skin disease as subjects. After applying 20 μL of the sample to the entire arm of the test subjects, the test site was sealed and patched for 24 hours. 30 minutes and 24 hours after removing the patch, the reaction of the skin was examined according to the terminology presented in the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association (CTFA) guidelines. Skin irritation index (PII) scores of the test subjects obtained according to the criteria were averaged, and the irritation was evaluated as mild, when the average was less than 1, moderate, when the average was less than 2, and severe, when the average was 3.5 or more. Skin irritation indexes of the cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 are shown in Table 6 below.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Experiment Comparative item Example 5 Example 4 Skin irritation index (PII) No irritation No irritation

[0044] As a result, as shown in Table 6, it was confirmed that both compositions of Comparative Example 5 and Example 4 may be safely used as cosmetic compositions without irritation. From the above results, it was confirmed that even when the mixed powder containing the positive charge donor material was further included, skin safety was not adversely affected.

Experimental Example 4. Sensory Evaluation

[0045] Sensory evaluation (5-point scale) was performed on the foundation cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5.

[0046] Specifically, sensation of application, feeling of adhesion, and overall satisfaction were evaluated as very good 5 points, good 5 points, moderate 3 points, bad 2 points, and very bad 1 point. The sensory evaluation results of the cosmetic compositions of Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 are shown in Table 7 below.

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Comparative Item Example 5 Example 4 Sensation of application 4.0 4.0 Feeling of adhesion 3.0 4.5 Overall satisfaction 3.7 4.4

[0047] As a result, as shown in Table 7, it was confirmed that the cosmetic composition of Example 4 maintained an excellent degree of sensation of application similar to the composition of Comparative Example 5, and was significantly improved in terms of feeling of adhesion and overall satisfaction, compared to the composition of Comparative Example 5. From the above results, it was confirmed that the composition of Example 4 exhibited remarkably improved feeling of adhesion of the makeup and overall satisfaction, compared to the composition of Comparative Example 5, without negatively affecting the sensation of application, by including a mixed powder containing a positive charge donor material. From the above results, it was confirmed that the cosmetic composition including the positive charge donor material significantly increased skin adhesion and could solve the problem of makeup staining, by including a positive charge donor material, in particular, by including a composition of iron oxide and polyquaternium-10.