252 JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE
Table IX
Comparative Study of Liquid Foundation Using Conventional Excipients and Magnesium Myristate
Evaluation parameter Liquid foundation using conventional
excipients
Liquid foundation using
magnesium myristate
1. Organoleptic properties
Color
Odor
Form
Brownish-yellow
Odorless
Liquid
Brownish-yellow
Odorless
Liquid
2. Homogeneity Homogenous Homogenous
3. Emulsion type Oil in water Oil in water
4. pH 6.17 ± 0.043 6.04 ± 0.018
5. Viscosity (cps) 2,767 ± 1.021 2,671 ± 0.626
6. Spreadability (gm.cm./s) 6.75 ± 0.144 8.33 ± 0.144
7. Adhesivity test (s) 5.01 ± 0.127 4.75 ± 0.030
8. Hedonic test Average spreadability, coverage, and
texture
Good spreadability, coverage, and
texture
Table X
Absorption Maxima of Liquid Foundation Using Conventional Excipients and
Magnesium Myristate With Mean Value-Based SPF Calculation
Wavelength (nm) Liquid foundation using
conventional excipients
Liquid foundation using
magnesium myristate
290 0.923 ± 0.093 0.985 ± 0.148
295 0.997 ± 0.487 0.976 ± 0.798
300 0.985 ± 1.681 1.04 ± 2.989
305 0.976 ± 1.888 1.06 ± 3.476
310 0.969 ± 1.060 0.989 ± 1.843
315 0.964 ± 0.472 0.976 ± 0.817
320 0.958 ± 0.100 0.986 ± 0.178
SPF 9.11 11.02
Table XI
Stability of Liquid Foundation Using Conventional Excipients
Days Organoleptic properties Viscosity (cps) Spreadability (gm.cm./sec) pH
0 Brownish-yellow 2,767 ± 1.021 6.75 ± 0.144 6.17 ± 0.043
15 Brownish-yellow 2,769 ± 0.734 6.73 ± 0.234 6.16 ± 0.036
30 Brownish-yellow 2,781 ± 0.456 6.70 ± 0.278 6.16 ± 0.042
60 Brownish-yellow 2,784 ± 0.321 6.67 ± 0.423 6.17 ± 0.035
90 Brownish-yellow 2,790 ± 0.654 6.63 ± 0.369 6.18 ± 0.048
Table XII
Stability of Liquid Foundation Using Magnesium Myristate
Days Organoleptic properties Viscosity (cps) Spreadability (gm.cm./sec) pH
0 Brownish-yellow 2,671 ± 0.626 8.33 ± 0.144 6.04 ± 0.018
15 Brownish-yellow 2,673 ± 0.344 8.31 ± 0.125 6.05 ± 0.632
30 Brownish-yellow 2,675 ± 0.421 8.28 ± 0.146 6.06 ± 0.125
60 Brownish-yellow 2,678 ± 0.234 8.26 ± 0.247 6.08 ± 0.452
90 Brownish-yellow 2,772 ± 0.354 8.22 ± 0.236 6.10 ± 0.165

253 Magnesium Myristate
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We extend our heartiest thanks to Koel Colours Private Limited, Mumbai, India. We
are honored to have an opportunity to work with such an esteemed organization. Special
thanks to Mr. Dhirubai, Mr. Rishab, and Mrs. Swapnali. We would like to thank Mr.
Vijay Bambulakar, who gave this opportunity. We are very thankful to the all the industry
authorities for giving us the opportunity to learn with prestigious and valuable guidance.
REFERENCES
(1) Kligman AM. Cosmetics. A dermatologist looks to the future: promises and problems. Dermatol Clin.
2000 18(4):699–709 x. doi:10.1016/s0733-8635(05)70221-7
(2) Łopaciuk A, Łoboda M. Global beauty industry trends in the 21st century. In: Management, Knowledge
and Learning International Conference 2013, June:19–21.
(3) Kuller JM. Infant skin care products: what are the issues? Adv Neonatal Care. 2016 16(suppl 5S):S3–S12.
doi:10.1097/ANC.0000000000000341
(4) Rieger M. Color cosmetics. In: Harry’s Cosmeticology. 8th ed. Chemical Publishing 2000:1.901.
(5) Poucher W. Perfumes, Cosmetics and Soaps: Modern Cosmetics. Springer 2013.
(6) Chisvert A, López-Nogueroles M, Miralles P, Salvador A. Perfumes in cosmetics: regulatory aspects and
analytical methods. In: Analysis of Cosmetic Products 2018:225–248.
(7) https://koelcolours.com/cosmetics/magnesium-myristate/. Accessed 9/23/2023.
(8) Nordström J, Klevan I, Alderborn G. A particle rearrangement index based on the Kawakita powder
compression equation. J Pharm Sci. 2009 98(3):1053–1063. doi:10.1002/jps.21488
(9) Shah RB, Tawakkul MA, Khan MA. Comparative evaluation of flow for pharmaceutical powders and
granules. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2008 9(1):250–258. doi:10.1208/s12249-008-9046-8
(10) Olowosulu A, Oyi A, Isah M. Ibrahim, Formulation and evaluation of novel coprocessed excipients
of maize starch and acacia gum (StarAc) for direct compression tabletting. Int J Pharm Res Innov.
2011 2:39–45.
(11) Sonnergaard JM. Impact of particle density and initial volume on mathematical compression models.
Eur J Pharm Sci. 2000 11(4):307–315. doi:10.1016/s0928-0987(00)00119-6
(12) Anwar E, Rizkamiarty S. Formulation and evaluation of cosmetic foundation using epigallocatechin
gallate as a sun protection. Int J Appl Pharm. 2020 12(1):130–134. doi:10.22159/ijap.2020.v12s1.FF029
(13) Box GEP, Behnken DW. Some new three level designs for the study of quantitative variables. Technometrics.
1960 2(4):455–475. doi:10.1080/00401706.1960.10489912
(14) Nafiah U, Rochman MF. Formulation Of Coenzyme Q10 Liquid Foundation With a Variations Virgin
Coconut Oil as The Oil Phase. IHSATEC 14(1):115–126. doi:10.31098/ihsatec.v14i1.493
(15) Roachman M, Marviani T. Formulation of coenzyme Q10 liquid foundation with a variations linseed oil
as the oil phase. International Halal Science and Technology Conference vol 1(1) 2021:105–115.
(16) Scalia S, Marchetti N, Bianchi A. Comparative evaluation of different co-antioxidants on the
photochemical- and functional-stability of epigallocatechin-3-gallate in topical creams exposed to
simulated sunlight. Molecules. 2013 18(1):574–587. doi:10.3390/molecules18010574
(17) Butnariu M, Coradini CZ. Evaluation of biologically active compounds from Calendula officinalis
flowers using spectrophotometry. Chem Cent J. 2012 6:35. doi:10.1186/1752-153X-6-35
(18) Juliana D, Rochman MF. Formulation of coenzyme Q10 liquid foundation with a variations olive oil as
the oil phase. IHSATEC. International Halal Science and Technology Conference. 2022 14(1):127–137.
doi:10.31098/ihsatec.v14i1.494
(19) Siregar CSD, Reveny J, Dalimunthe A. Formulation and Clinical Evaluation of Anti-Aging Activity
of Blemish Balm Cream Vitamin E and Determination of SPF Value with Spectrophotometry. Asian J
Pharm Res Dev 7(6):35–42. doi:10.22270/ajprd.v7i6.623