Category Archives: beauty and cosmetics

Needle-free tattoos, smart and otherwise

Before getting to the research news from the University of Twente (Netherlands), there’s this related event which took place on April 18, 2019 (from the Future Under Our Skin webpage (on the University of Twente website) Note: I have made some formatting changes,

Why this event?

Our skin can give information about our health, mood and surroundings. Medical and recreational tattoos have decorated humans for centuries. But we can inject other materials besides ink, such as sensing devices, nano- or bio-responsive materials. With the increased percentage of tattooed population in recent years new health challenges have emerged; but is also a unique possibility to “read from our own skin”, beyond an artistic design. 
 
We have invited scientists, innovators, entrepreneurs, dermatologists, cosmetic permanent make-up technicians, tattoo artists, philosophers, and other experts. They will share with us their vision of the current and future role our skin has for improving the quality of life.

Open Event

This event is open to students, citizens in general as well as societal and governmental organisations around the different uses of our skin. The presence of scientists, medical doctors, tattoo artists and industry representatives is guaranteed. Then, we will all explore together the potential for co-creation with healthy citizens, patients, entreprises and other stakeholders.


If you want to hear from experts and share your own ideas, feel free to come to this Open Event!
 
It is possible to take the dish of the day (‘goed gevulde noedels met kippendij en satésaus en kroepoek’) in restaurant The Gallery (same building as DesignLab) at own costs (€7,85). Of course it is also possible to eat à la carte in Grand Café 

Wanneer: : 18 april 2019
Tijd: :17:30 – 20:00
Organisator: University of Twente
Locatie: Design Lab University of Twente
Hengelosestraat 500
7521 AN Enschede

Just days before, the University of Twente announced this research in an April 16, 2019 news item on Naowerk (Note: A link has been removed),

A tattoo that is warning you for too many hours of sunlight exposure, or is alerting you for taking your medication? Next to their cosmetic role, tattoos could get new functionality using intelligent ink. That would require more precise and less invasive injection technique.

Researchers of the University of Twente now develop a micro-jet injection technology that doesn’t use needles at all. Instead, an ultrafast liquid jet with the thickness of a human hair penetrates the skin. It isn’t painful and there is less waste.

In their new publication in the American Journal of Physics (“High speed imaging of solid needle and liquid micro-jet injections”), the scientists compare both the needle and the fluid jet approach.

Here’s an image provided by the researchers which illustrates the technique they have developed,

Working principle of needle-free injection: laser heating the fluid.The growing bubble pushes out the fluid (medicine or ink) at very high speed. Courtesy: University of Twente

An April 15, 2019 University of Twente press release, which originated the news item, provides more detail about tattoos and the research leading to ‘need-free’ tattoos,

Ötzi the Iceman already had, over 5000 years ago, dozens of simple tattoos on his body, apparently for pain relief. Since the classic ‘anchor’ tattoo that sailors had on their arms, tattoos have become more and more common. About 44 million Europeans wear one or more of them. Despite its wider acceptance in society, the underlying technique didn’t change and still has health risks. One or more moving needles put ink underneath the skin surface. This is painful and can damage the skin. Apart from that, needles have to be disposed of in a responsible way, and quite some ink is wasted. The alternative that David Fernández Rivas and his colleagues are developing, doesn’t use any needles. In their new paper, they compare this new approach with classic needle technology, on an artificial skin material and using high speed images. Remarkably, according to Fernández Rivas, the classic needle technology has never been subject of research in such a thorough way, using high speed images.

Fast fluid jet

The new technique employs a laser for rapidly heating a fluid that is inside a microchannel on a glass chip. Heated above the boiling point, a vapour bubble forms and grows, pushing the liquid out at speeds up to 100 meter per second (360 km/h). The jet, about the diameter of a human hair, is capable of going through human skin. “You don’t feel much of it, no more than a mosquito bite”, say Fernandez Rivas.

The researchers did their experiments with a number of commercially available inks. Compared to a tattoo machine, the micro-jet consumes a small amount of energy. What’s more important, it minimizes skin damage and the injection efficiency is much higher, there is no loss of fluids. And there is no risk of contaminated needles. The current microjet is a single one, while tattooing is often done using multiple needles with different types or colours of ink. Also, the volume that can be ‘delivered’ by the microjet has to be increased. These are next steps in developing the needle-free technology.

Skin treatment

In today’s medical world, tattoo-resembling techniques are used for treatment of skin, masking scars, or treating hair diseases. These are other areas in which the new technique can be used, as well as in vaccination. A challenging idea is using tattoos for cosmetic purposes and as health sensors at the same time. What if ink is light-sensitive or responds to certain substances that are present in the skin or in sweat?

On this new approach, scientists, students, entrepreneurs and tattoo artists join a special event ‘The future under our skin’, organized by David Fernandez Rivas.

Research has been done in the Mesoscale Chemical Systems group, part of UT’s MESA+ Institute.

Here’s a link to an d a citation for the paper,

High speed imaging of solid needle and liquid micro-jet injections by Loreto Oyarte Gálveza, Maria Brió Pérez, and David Fernández Rivas. Journal of Applied Physics 125, 144504 (2019); Volume 125, Issue 14 DOI: 10.1063/1.5074176 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5074176 Free Published Online: 09 April 2019

This paper appears to be open access.

Real-time tracking of UV (ultraviolet light) exposure for all skin types (light to dark)

It’s nice to find this research after my August 21, 2018 posting where I highlighted (scroll down to ‘Final comments’) the issues around databases and skin cancer data which is usually derived from fair-skinned people while people with darker hues tend not to be included. This is partly due to the fact that fair-skinned people have a higher risk and also partly due to myths about how more melanin in your skin somehow protects you from skin cancer.

This October 4, 2018 news item on ScienceDaily announces research into a way to track UV exposure for all skin types,

Researchers from the University of Granada [Spain] and RMIT University in Melbourne [Australia] have developed personalised and low-cost wearable ultraviolet (UV) sensors that warn users when their exposure to the sun has become dangerous.

The paper-based sensor, which can be worn as a wristband, features happy and sad emoticon faces — drawn in an invisible UV-sensitive ink — that successively light up as you reach 25%, 50%, 75% and finally 100% of your daily recommended UV exposure.

The research team have also created six versions of the colour-changing wristbands, each of which is personalised for a specific skin tone  [emphasis mine]– an important characteristic given that darker people need more sun exposure to produce vitamin D, which is essential for healthy bones, teeth and muscles.

An October 2, 2018 University of Granada press release (also on EurekAlert) delves further,

Four of the wristbands, each of which indicates a different stage of exposure to UV radiation (25%, 50%, 75% and 100%)

The emoticon faces on the wristband successively “light up” as exposure to UV radiation increases

Skin cancer, one of the most common types of cancer throughout the world, is primarily caused by overexposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR). In Spain, over 74,000 people are diagnosed with non-melanoma skin cancer every year, while a further 4,000 are diagnosed with melanoma skin cancer. In regions such as Australia, where the ozone layer has been substantially depleted, it is estimated that approximately 2 in 3 people will be diagnosed with skin cancer by the time they reach the age of 70.

“UVB and UVC radiation is retained by the ozone layer. This sensor is especially important in the current context, given that the hole in the ozone layer is exposing us to such dangerous radiation”, explains José Manuel Domínguez Vera, a researcher at the University of Granada’s Department of Inorganic Chemistry and the main author of the paper.

Domínguez Vera also highlights that other sensors currently available on the market only measure overall UV radiation, without distinguishing between UVA, UVB and UVC, each of which has a significantly different impact on human health.  In contrast, the new paper-based sensor can differentiate between UVA, UVB and UVC radiation. Prolonged exposure to UVA radiation is associated with skin ageing and wrinkling, while excessive exposure to UVB causes sunburn and increases the likelihood of skin cancer and eye damage.

Drawbacks of the traditional UV index

Ultraviolet radiation is determined by aspects such as location, time of day, pollution levels, astronomical factors, weather conditions such as clouds, and can be heightened by reflective surfaces like bodies of water, sand and snow. But UV rays are not visible to the human eye (even if it is cloudy UV radiation can be high) and until now the only way of monitoring UV intensity has been to use the UV index, which is standardly given in weather reports and indicates 5 degrees of radiation;  low, moderate, high, very high or extreme.

Despite its usefulness, the UV index is a relatively limited tool. For instance, it does not clearly indicate what time of the day or for how long you should be outside to get your essential vitamin D dose, or when to cover up to avoid sunburn and a heightened risk of skin cancer.

Moreover, the UV index is normally based on calculations for fair skin, making it unsuitable for ethnically diverse populations.  While individuals with fairer skin are more susceptible to UV damage, those with darker skin require much longer periods in the sun in order to absorb healthy amounts of vitamin D. In this regard, the UV index is not an accurate tool for gauging and monitoring an individual’s recommended daily exposure.

UV-sensitive ink

The research team set out to tackle the drawbacks of the traditional UV index by developing an inexpensive, disposable and personalised sensor that allows the wearer to track their UV exposure in real-time. The sensor paper they created features a special ink, containing phosphomolybdic acid (PMA), which turns from colourless to blue when exposed to UV radiation. They can use the initially-invisible ink to draw faces—or any other design—on paper and other surfaces. Depending on the type and intensity of the UV radiation to which the ink is exposed, the paper begins to turn blue; the greater the exposure to UV radiation, the faster the paper turns blue.

Additionally, by tweaking the ink composition and the sensor design, the team were able to make the ink change colour faster or slower, allowing them to produce different sensors that are tailored to the six different types of skin colour. [emphasis mine]

Applications beyond health

This low-cost, paper-based sensor technology will not only help people of all colours to strike an optimum balance between absorbing enough vitamin D and avoiding sun damage — it also has significant applications for the agricultural and industrial sectors. UV rays affect the growth of crops and the shelf life of a range of consumer products. As the UV sensors can detect even the slightest doses of UV radiation, as well as the most extreme, this new technology could have vast potential for industries and companies seeking to evaluate the prolonged impact of UV exposure on products that are cultivated or kept outdoors.

The research project is the result of fruitful collaborations between two members of the UGR BIONanoMet (FQM368) research group; Ana González and José Manuel Domínguez-Vera, and the research group led by Dr. Vipul Bansal at RMIT University in Melbourne (Australia).

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Skin color-specific and spectrally-selective naked-eye dosimetry of UVA, B and C radiations by Wenyue Zou, Ana González, Deshetti Jampaiah, Rajesh Ramanathan, Mohammad Taha, Sumeet Walia, Sharath Sriram, Madhu Bhaskaran, José M. Dominguez-Vera, & Vipul Bansal. Nature Communicationsvolume 9, Article number: 3743 (2018) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06273-3 Published 25 September 2018

This paper is open access.

Cosmetics breakthrough for Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST)?

Cosmetics would not have been my first thought on reading the title for the paper (“Rates of cavity filling by liquids”) produced  by scientists from Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST).

A September 17, 2018 news item on Nanowerk announces the research,

A research team, affiliated with Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) has examined the rates of liquid penetration on rough or patterned surfaces, especially those with pores or cavities. Their findings provide important insights into the development of everyday products, including cosmetics, paints, as well as industrial applications, like enhanced oil recovery.

This study has been jointly led by Professor Dong Woog Lee and his research team in the School of Energy and Chemical Engineering at UNIST and a research team in the University of California, Santa Barbara. Published online in the July 19th issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (“Rates of cavity filling by liquids”), the study identifies five variables that control the cavity-filling (wetting transition) rates, required for liquids to penetrate into the cavities.

A July 26, 2018 UNIST press release (also on EurekAlert but published on September 17, 2018), which originated the news item, delves further into the work,

In the study, Professor Lee fabricated silicon wafers with cylindrical cavities of different geometries. After immersing them in bulk water, they observed the details of, and the rates associated with, water penetration into the cavities from the bulk, using bright-field and confocal fluorescence microscopy. Cylindrical cavities are like skin pores with narrow entrance and specious interior. The cavity filling generally progresses when bulk water is spread above a hydrophilic, reentrant cavity. As described in “Wetting Transition from the Cassie–Baxter State to Wenzel State”, the liquid droplet that sits on top of the textured surface with trapped air underneath will be completely absorbed by the rough surface cavities.

Their findings revealed that the cavity-filling rates are affected by the following variables: (i) the intrinsic contact angle, (ii) the concentration of dissolved air in the bulk water phase, (iii) the liquid volatility that determines the rate of capillary condensation inside the cavities, (iv) the types of surfactants, and (v) the cavity geometry.

“Our results can used in the manufacture of special-purpose cosmetic products,” says Professor Lee. “For instance, pore minimizing face primers and facial cleansers that remove sebum need to reduce the amount of dissolved air, so that they can penetrate into the pores quickly.”

On the other hand, beauty products, like sunscreens should be designed to protect the skin from harmful sun, while preventing pores clogging. Because, clogged pores hinder the skin’s function of breathing or exchange of carbon dioxide and then cause further irritation, pimples, and blemished areas on your skin. In this case, it is better to reduce volatility and increase the amount of dissolved air in the cosmetic products, as opposed to facial cleansers.

“This knowledge of how cavities under bulk water are filled and what variables control the rate of filling can provide insights into the engineering of temporarily or permanently superhydrophobic surfaces, and the designing and manufacturing of various products that are applied to rough, textured, or patterned surfaces,” says Professor Lee. “Many of the fundamental insights gained can also be applied to other liquids (e.g., oils), contact angles, and cavities or pores of different dimensions or geometries.”

This study has been supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant, funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Rates of cavity filling by liquids by Dongjin Seo, Alex M. Schrader, Szu-Ying Chen, Yair Kaufman, Thomas R. Cristiani, Steven H. Page, Peter H. Koenig, Yonas Gizaw, Dong Woog Lee, and Jacob N. Israelachvili. PNAS August 7, 2018 115 (32) 8070-8075 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804437115 Published ahead of print July 19, 2018

This paper is behind a paywall.

Brighten and whiten your teeth (more safely) with nanoparticles?

This is for anyone who’s ever suspected that the all the tooth brightening and whitening might not be such a good idea after all. A July 18, 2018 news item on Nanowerk announces work on what scientists hope will be a safer way to whiten teeth (Note: A link has been removed),

In the age of Instagram and Snapchat, everyone wants to have perfect pearly whites. To get a brighter smile, consumers can opt for over the counter teeth-whitening treatments or a trip to the dentist to have their teeth bleached professionally. But both types of treatments can harm teeth.

According to an article published in ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering (“Blue-Light -Activated Nano-TiO2@PDA for Highly Effective and Nondestructive Tooth Whitening”), researchers have now developed a new, less destructive method.

A July 18, 2018 American Chemical Society (ACS) news release (also on EurekAlert), which originated the news item expands on the theme,

Teeth can become discolored on their outer surfaces when people consume colored foods and drinks, such as coffee, tea or red wine. As a result, many people turn to non-invasive whitening treatments that bleach the teeth. Currently, the most common bleaching agent is hydrogen peroxide, which steals electrons from the pigment molecules that cause teeth discoloration, and this process can be sped up by exposing teeth to blue light. But high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide can break down a tooth’s enamel, causing sensitivity or cell death. So, Xiaolei Wang, Lan Liao and colleagues wanted to see if a different blue-light-activated compound could be a safer, but still effective, alternative.

The team modified titanium dioxide nanoparticles with polydopamine (nano-TiO2@PDA) so that they could be activated with blue light. In a proof-of-concept experiment, the nano-TiO2@PDA particles were evenly coated on the surface of a tooth and irradiated with blue light. After four hours of treatment, the whitening level was similar to that obtained with hydrogen-peroxide-based agents. The group notes that no significant enamel damage was found on the surface of the tooth, and the treatment was significantly less cytotoxic than hydrogen peroxide. In addition, the nano-TiO2@PDA therapy showed antibacterial activity against certain bacteria.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Blue-Light -Activated Nano-TiO2@PDA for Highly Effective and Nondestructive Tooth Whitening by Feng Zhang, Chongxue Wu, Ziyu Zhou, Jiaolong Wang, Weiwei Bao, Lina Dong, Zihao Zhang, Jing Ye, Lan Liao, and Xiaolei Wang. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng., Article ASAP DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.8b00548 Publication Date (Web): June 19, 2018

Copyright © 2018 American Chemical Society

This paper is behind a paywall.

Of course, there’s always the question of what happens as we pour more and more engineered titanium dioxide nanoparticles into our bodies and ultimately into the environment.

Cellulose and natural nanofibres

Specifically, the researchers are describing these as cellulose nanofibrils. On the left of the image, the seed look mores like an egg waiting to be fried for breakfast but the image on the right is definitely fibrous-looking,

Through contact with water, the seed of Neopallasia pectinata from the family of composite plants forms a slimy sheath. The white cellulose fibres anchor it to the seed surface. Courtesy: Kiel University (CAU)

A December 18, 2018 news item on Nanowerk describes the research into seeds and cellulose,

The seeds of some plants such as basil, watercress or plantain form a mucous envelope as soon as they come into contact with water. This cover consists of cellulose in particular, which is an important structural component of the primary cell wall of green plants, and swelling pectins, plant polysaccharides.

In order to be able to investigate its physical properties, a research team from the Zoological Institute at Kiel University (CAU) used a special drying method, which gently removes the water from the cellulosic mucous sheath. The team discovered that this method can produce extremely strong nanofibres from natural cellulose. In future, they could be especially interesting for applications in biomedicine.

A December 18, 2018 Kiel University press release, which originated the news item, offers further details about the work,

Thanks to their slippery mucous sheath, seeds can slide through the digestive tract of birds undigested. They are excreted unharmed, and can be dispersed in this way. It is presumed that the mucous layer provides protection. “In order to find out more about the function of the mucilage, we first wanted to study the structure and the physical properties of this seed envelope material,” said Zoology Professor Stanislav N. Gorb, head of the “Functional Morphology and Biomechanics” working group at the CAU. In doing so they discovered that its properties depend on the alignment of the fibres that anchor them to the seed surface

Diverse properties: From slippery to sticky

The pectins in the shell of the seeds can absorb a large quantity of water, and thus form a gel-like capsule around the seed in a few minutes. It is anchored firmly to the surface of the seed by fine cellulose fibres with a diameter of just up to 100 nanometres, similar to the microscopic adhesive elements on the surface of highly-adhesive gecko feet. So in a sense, the fibres form the stabilising backbone of the mucous sheath.

The properties of the mucous change, depending on the water concentration. “The mucous actually makes the seeds very slippery. However, if we reduce the water content, it becomes sticky and begins to stick,” said Stanislav Gorb, summarising a result from previous studies together with Dr Agnieszka Kreitschitz. The adhesive strength is also increased by the forces acting between the individual vertically-arranged nanofibres of the seed and the adhesive surface.

Specially dried

In order to be able to investigate the mucous sheath under a scanning electron microscope, the Kiel research team used a particularly gentle method, so-called critical-point drying (CPD). They dehydrated the mucous sheath of various seeds step-by-step with liquid carbon dioxide – instead of the normal method using ethanol. The advantage of this method is that evaporation of liquid carbon dioxide can be controlled under certain pressure and temperature conditions, without surface tension developing within the sheath. As a result, the research team was able to precisely remove water from the mucous, without drying out the surface of the sheath and thereby destroying the original cell structure. Through the highly-precise drying, the structural arrangement of the individual cellulose fibres remained intact.

Almost as strongly-adhesive as carbon nanotubes

The research team tested the dried cellulose fibres regarding their friction and adhesion properties, and compared them with those of synthetically-produced carbon nanotubes. Due to their outstanding properties, such as their tensile strength, electrical conductivity or their friction, these microscopic structures are interesting for numerous industrial applications of the future.

“Our tests showed that the frictional and adhesive forces of the cellulose fibres are almost as strong as with vertically-arranged carbon nanotubes,” said Dr Clemens Schaber, first author of the study. The structural dimensions of the cellulose nanofibers are similar to the vertically aligned carbon nanotubes. Through the special drying method, they can also vary the adhesive strength in a targeted manner. In Gorb’s working group, the zoologist and biomechanic examines the functioning of biological nanofibres, and the potential to imitate them with technical means. “As a natural raw material, cellulose fibres have distinct advantages over carbon nanotubes, whose health effects have not yet been fully investigated,” continued Schaber. Nanocellulose is primarily found in biodegradable polymer composites, which are used in biomedicine, cosmetics or the food industry.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Friction-Active Surfaces Based on Free-Standing Anchored Cellulose Nanofibrils by Clemens F. Schaber, Agnieszka Kreitschitz, and Stanislav N. Gorb. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2018, 10 (43), pp 37566–37574 DOI: 10.1021/acsami.8b05972 Publication Date (Web): September 19, 2018

Copyright © 2018 American Chemical Society

This paper is behind a paywall.

Australian scientists say that sunscreens with zinc oxide nanoparticles aren’t toxic to you

The Australians have had quite the struggle over whether or not to use nanotechnology-enabled sunscreens (see my Feb. 9, 2012 posting about an Australian nanosunscreen debacle and I believe the reverberations continue even ’til today). This latest research will hopefully help calm the waters. From a Dec. 4, 2018 news item on ScienceDaily,

Zinc oxide (ZnO) has long been recognized as an effective sunscreen agent. However, there have been calls for sunscreens containing ZnO nanoparticles to be banned because of potential toxicity and the need for caution in the absence of safety data in humans. An important new study provides the first direct evidence that intact ZnO nanoparticles neither penetrate the human skin barrier nor cause cellular toxicity after repeated application to human volunteers under in-use conditions. This confirms that the known benefits of using ZnO nanoparticles in sunscreens clearly outweigh the perceived risks, reports the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.

A December 4, 2018 Elsevier (Publishing) press release (also on EurekAlert), which originated the news item, provides international context for the safety discussion while providing more details about this latest research,

The safety of nanoparticles used in sunscreens has been a highly controversial international issue in recent years, as previous animal exposure studies found much higher skin absorption of zinc from application of ZnO sunscreens to the skin than in human studies. Some public advocacy groups have voiced concern that penetration of the upper layer of the skin by sunscreens containing ZnO nanoparticles could gain access to the living cells in the viable epidermis with toxic consequences, including DNA damage. A potential danger, therefore, is that this concern may also result in an undesirable downturn in sunscreen use. A 2017 National Sun Protection Survey by the Cancer Council Australia found only 55 percent of Australians believed it was safe to use sunscreen every day, down from 61 per cent in 2014.

Investigators in Australia studied the safety of repeated application of agglomerated ZnO nanoparticles applied to five human volunteers (aged 20 to 30 years) over five days. This mimics normal product use by consumers. They applied ZnO nanoparticles suspended in a commercial sunscreen base to the skin of volunteers hourly for six hours and daily for five days. Using multiphoton tomography with fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy, they showed that the nanoparticles remained within the superficial layers of the stratum corneum and in the skin furrows. The fate of ZnO nanoparticles was also characterized in excised human skin in vitro. They did not penetrate the viable epidermis and no cellular toxicity was seen, even after repeated hourly or daily applications typically used for sunscreens.

“The terrible consequences of skin cancer and photoaging are much greater than any toxicity risk posed by approved sunscreens,” stated lead investigator Michael S. Roberts, PhD, of the Therapeutics Research Centre, The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, and School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Sansom Institute, Adelaide, QLD, Australia.

“This study has shown that sunscreens containing nano ZnO can be repeatedly applied to the skin with minimal risk of any toxicity. We hope that these findings will help improve consumer confidence in these products, and in turn lead to better sun protection and reduction in ultraviolet-induced skin aging and cancer cases,” he concluded.

“This study reinforces the important public health message that the known benefits of using ZnO nano sunscreens clearly outweigh the perceived risks of using nano sunscreens that are not supported by the scientific evidence,” commented Paul F.A. Wright, PhD, School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia, in an accompanying editorial. “Of great significance is the investigators’ finding that the slight increase in zinc ion concentrations in viable epidermis was not associated with cellular toxicity under conditions of realistic ZnO nano sunscreen use.

A November 21, 2018 University of South Australia press release (also on EurekAlert) provides some additional insight into the Australian situation,, Note: Links have been removed,

It’s safe to slap on the sunscreen this summer – in repeated doses – despite what you have read about the potential toxicity of sunscreens.

A new study led by the University of Queensland (UQ) and University of South Australia (UniSA) provides the first direct evidence that zinc oxide nanoparticles used in sunscreen neither penetrate the skin nor cause cellular toxicity after repeated applications.

The research, published this week in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology, refutes widespread claims among some public advocacy groups – and a growing belief among consumers – about the safety of nanoparticulate-based sunscreens.

UQ and UniSA lead investigator, Professor Michael Roberts, says the myth about sunscreen toxicity took hold after previous animal studies found much higher skin absorption of zinc-containing sunscreens than in human studies.

“There were concerns that these zinc oxide nanoparticles could be absorbed into the epidermis, with toxic consequences, including DNA damage,” Professor Roberts says.

The toxicity link was picked up by consumers, sparking fears that Australians could reduce their sunscreen use, echoed by a Cancer Council 2017 National Sun Protection Survey showing a drop in the number of people who believed it was safe to use sunscreens every day.

Professor Roberts and his co-researchers in Brisbane, Adelaide, Perth and Germany studied the safety of repeated applications of zinc oxide nanoparticles applied to five volunteers aged 20-30 years.

Volunteers applied the ZnO nanoparticles every hour for six hours on five consecutive days.

“Using superior imaging methods, we established that the nanoparticles remained within the superficial layers of the skin and did not cause any cellular damage,” Professor Roberts says.

“We hope that these findings help improve consumer confidence in these products and in turn lead to better sun protection. The terrible consequences of skin cancer and skin damage caused by prolonged sun exposure are much greater than any toxicity posed by approved sunscreens.”

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Support for the Safe Use of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticle Sunscreens: Lack of Skin Penetration or Cellular Toxicity after Repeated Application in Volunteers by Yousuf H. Mohammed, Amy Holmes, Isha N. Haridass, Washington Y. Sanchez, Hauke Studier, Jeffrey E. Grice, Heather A.E. Benson, Michael S. Roberts. Jurnal of Investigative Dermatology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2018.08.024 Article in Press Published online (Dec. 4, 2018?)

As of Dec. 11, 2018, this article is open access.

Better hair dyes with graphene and a cautionary note

Beauty products aren’t usually the first applications that come to mind when discussing graphene or any other research and development (R&D) as I learned when teaching a course a few years ago. But research and development  in that field are imperative as every company is scrambling for a short-lived competitive advantage for a truly new products or a perceived competitive advantage in a field where a lot of products are pretty much the same.

This March 15, 2018 news item on ScienceDaily describes graphene as a potential hair dye,

Graphene, a naturally black material, could provide a new strategy for dyeing hair in difficult-to-create dark shades. And because it’s a conductive material, hair dyed with graphene might also be less prone to staticky flyaways. Now, researchers have put it to the test. In an article published March 15 [2018] in the journal Chem, they used sheets of graphene to make a dye that adheres to the surface of hair, forming a coating that is resistant to at least 30 washes without the need for chemicals that open up and damage the hair cuticle.

Courtesy: Northwestern University

A March 15, 2018 Cell Press news release on EurekAlert, which originated the news item, fills in more the of the story,

Most permanent hair dyes used today are harmful to hair. “Your hair is covered in these cuticle scales like the scales of a fish, and people have to use ammonia or organic amines to lift the scales and allow dye molecules to get inside a lot quicker,” says senior author Jiaxing Huang, a materials scientist at Northwestern University. But lifting the cuticle makes the strands of the hair more brittle, and the damage is only exacerbated by the hydrogen peroxide that is used to trigger the reaction that synthesizes the dye once the pigment molecules are inside the hair.

These problems could theoretically be solved by a dye that coats rather than penetrates the hair. “However, the obvious problem of coating-based dyes is that they tend to wash out very easily,” says Huang. But when he and his team coated samples of human hair with a solution of graphene sheets, they were able to turn platinum blond hair black and keep it that way for at least 30 washes–the number necessary for a hair dye to be considered “permanent.”

This effectiveness has to do with the structure of graphene: it’s made of up thin, flexible sheets that can adapt to uneven surfaces. “Imagine a piece of paper. A business card is very rigid and doesn’t flex by itself. But if you take a much bigger sheet of newspaper–if you still can find one nowadays–it can bend easily. This makes graphene sheets a good coating material,” he says. And once the coating is formed, the graphene sheets are particularly good at keeping out water during washes, which keeps the water from eroding both the graphene and the polymer binder that the team also added to the dye solution to help with adhesion.

The graphene dye has additional advantages. Each coated hair is like a little wire in that it is able to conduct heat and electricity. This means that it’s easy for graphene-dyed hair to dissipate static electricity, eliminating the problem of flyaways on dry winter days. The graphene flakes are large enough that they won’t absorb through the skin like other dye molecules. And although graphene is typically black, its precursor, graphene oxide, is light brown. But the color of graphene oxide can be gradually darkened with heat or chemical reactions, meaning that this dye could be used for a variety of shades or even for an ombre effect.

What Huang thinks is particularly striking about this application of graphene is that it takes advantage of graphene’s most obvious property. “In many potential graphene applications, the black color of graphene is somewhat undesirable and something of a sore point,” he says. Here, though, it’s applied to a field where creating dark colors has historically been a problem.

The graphene used for hair dye also doesn’t need to be of the same high quality as it does for other applications. “For hair dye, the most important property is graphene being black. You can have graphene that is too lousy for higher-end electronic applications, but it’s perfectly okay for this. So I think this application can leverage the current graphene product as is, and that’s why I think that this could happen a lot sooner than many of the other proposed applications,” he says.

Making it happen is his next goal. He hopes to get funding to continue the research and make these dyes a reality for the people whose lives they would improve. “This is an idea that was inspired by curiosity. It was very fun to do, but it didn’t sound very big and noble when we started working on it,” he says. “But after we deep-dived into studying hair dyes, we realized that, wow, this is actually not at all a small problem. And it’s one that graphene could really help to solve.”

Northwestern University’s Amanda Morris also wrote a March 15, 2018 news release (it’s repetitive but there are some interesting new details; Note: Links have been removed),

It’s an issue that has plagued the beauty industry for more than a century: Dying hair too often can irreparably damage your silky strands.

Now a Northwestern University team has used materials science to solve this age-old problem. The team has leveraged super material graphene to develop a new hair dye that is less harmful [emphasis mine], non-damaging and lasts through many washes without fading. Graphene’s conductive nature also opens up new opportunities for hair, such as turning it into in situ electrodes or integrating it with wearable electronic devices.

Dying hair might seem simple and ordinary, but it’s actually a sophisticated chemical process. Called the cuticle, the outermost layer of a hair is made of cells that overlap in a scale-like pattern. Commercial dyes work by using harsh chemicals, such as ammonia and bleach, to first pry open the cuticle scales to allow colorant molecules inside and then trigger a reaction inside the hair to produce more color. Not only does this process cause hair to become more fragile, some of the small molecules are also quite toxic.

Huang and his team bypassed harmful chemicals altogether by leveraging the natural geometry of graphene sheets. While current hair dyes use a cocktail of small molecules that work by chemically altering the hair, graphene sheets are soft and flexible, so they wrap around each hair for an even coat. Huang’s ink formula also incorporates edible, non-toxic polymer binders to ensure that the graphene sticks — and lasts through at least 30 washes, which is the commercial requirement for permanent hair dye. An added bonus: graphene is anti-static, so it keeps winter-weather flyaways to a minimum.

“It’s similar to the difference between a wet paper towel and a tennis ball,” Huang explained, comparing the geometry of graphene to that of other black pigment particles, such as carbon black or iron oxide, which can only be used in temporary hair dyes. “The paper towel is going to wrap and stick much better. The ball-like particles are much more easily removed with shampoo.”

This geometry also contributes to why graphene is a safer alternative. Whereas small molecules can easily be inhaled or pass through the skin barrier, graphene is too big to enter the body. “Compared to those small molecules used in current hair dyes, graphene flakes are humongous,” said Huang, who is a member of Northwestern’s International Institute of Nanotechnology.

Ever since graphene — the two-dimensional network of carbon atoms — burst onto the science scene in 2004, the possibilities for the promising material have seemed nearly endless. With its ultra-strong and lightweight structure, graphene has potential for many applications in high-performance electronics, high-strength materials and energy devices. But development of those applications often require graphene materials to be as structurally perfect as possible in order to achieve extraordinary electrical, mechanical or thermal properties.

The most important graphene property for Huang’s hair dye, however, is simply its color: black. So Huang’s team used graphene oxide, an imperfect version of graphene that is a cheaper, more available oxidized derivative.

“Our hair dye solves a real-world problem without relying on very high-quality graphene, which is not easy to make,” Huang said. “Obviously more work needs to be done, but I feel optimistic about this application.”

Still, future versions of the dye could someday potentially leverage graphene’s notable properties, including its highly conductive nature.

“People could apply this dye to make hair conductive on the surface,” Huang said. “It could then be integrated with wearable electronics or become a conductive probe. We are only limited by our imagination.”

So far, Huang has developed graphene-based hair dyes in multiple shades of brown and black. Next, he plans to experiment with more colors.

Interestingly, the tiny note of caution”less harmful” doesn’t appear in the Cell Press news release. Never fear, Dr. Andrew Maynard (Director Risk Innovation Lab at Arizona State University) has written a March 20, 2018 essay on The Conversation suggesting a little further investigation (Note: Links have been removed),

Northwestern University’s press release proudly announced, “Graphene finds new application as nontoxic, anti-static hair dye.” The announcement spawned headlines like “Enough with the toxic hair dyes. We could use graphene instead,” and “’Miracle material’ graphene used to create the ultimate hair dye.”

From these headlines, you might be forgiven for getting the idea that the safety of graphene-based hair dyes is a done deal. Yet having studied the potential health and environmental impacts of engineered nanomaterials for more years than I care to remember, I find such overly optimistic pronouncements worrying – especially when they’re not backed up by clear evidence.

Tiny materials, potentially bigger problems

Engineered nanomaterials like graphene and graphene oxide (the particular form used in the dye experiments) aren’t necessarily harmful. But nanomaterials can behave in unusual ways that depend on particle size, shape, chemistry and application. Because of this, researchers have long been cautious about giving them a clean bill of health without first testing them extensively. And while a large body of research to date doesn’t indicate graphene is particularly dangerous, neither does it suggest it’s completely safe.

A quick search of scientific papers over the past few years shows that, since 2004, over 2,000 studies have been published that mention graphene toxicity; nearly 500 were published in 2017 alone.

This growing body of research suggests that if graphene gets into your body or the environment in sufficient quantities, it could cause harm. A 2016 review, for instance, indicated that graphene oxide particles could result in lung damage at high doses (equivalent to around 0.7 grams of inhaled material). Another review published in 2017 suggested that these materials could affect the biology of some plants and algae, as well as invertebrates and vertebrates toward the lower end of the ecological pyramid. The authors of the 2017 study concluded that research “unequivocally confirms that graphene in any of its numerous forms and derivatives must be approached as a potentially hazardous material.”

These studies need to be approached with care, as the precise risks of graphene exposure will depend on how the material is used, how exposure occurs and how much of it is encountered. Yet there’s sufficient evidence to suggest that this substance should be used with caution – especially where there’s a high chance of exposure or that it could be released into the environment.

Unfortunately, graphene-based hair dyes tick both of these boxes. Used in this way, the substance is potentially inhalable (especially with spray-on products) and ingestible through careless use. It’s also almost guaranteed that excess graphene-containing dye will wash down the drain and into the environment.

Undermining other efforts?

I was alerted to just how counterproductive such headlines can be by my colleague Tim Harper, founder of G2O Water Technologies – a company that uses graphene oxide-coated membranes to treat wastewater. Like many companies in this area, G2O has been working to use graphene responsibly by minimizing the amount of graphene that ends up released to the environment.

Yet as Tim pointed out to me, if people are led to believe “that bunging a few grams of graphene down the drain every time you dye your hair is OK, this invalidates all the work we are doing making sure the few nanograms of graphene on our membranes stay put.” Many companies that use nanomaterials are trying to do the right thing, but it’s hard to justify the time and expense of being responsible when someone else’s more cavalier actions undercut your efforts.

Overpromising results and overlooking risk

This is where researchers and their institutions need to move beyond an “economy of promises” that spurs on hyperbole and discourages caution, and think more critically about how their statements may ultimately undermine responsible and beneficial development of a technology. They may even want to consider using guidelines, such as the Principles for Responsible Innovation developed by the organization Society Inside, for instance, to guide what they do and say.

If you have time, I encourage you to read Andrew’s piece in its entirety.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Multifunctional Graphene Hair Dye by Chong Luo, Lingye Zhou, Kevin Chiou, and Jiaxing Huang. Chem DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chempr.2018.02.02 Publication stage: In Press Corrected Proof

This paper appears to be open access.

*Two paragraphs (repetitions) were deleted from the excerpt of Dr. Andrew Maynard’s essay on August 14, 2018

Sunscreens: 2018 update

I don’t usually concern myself with SPF numbers on sunscreens as my primary focus has been on the inclusion of nanoscale metal particles (these are still considered safe). However, a recent conversation with a dental hygienist and coincidentally tripping across a June 19, 2018 posting on the blog shortly after the convo. has me reassessing my take on SPF numbers (Note: Links have been removed),

So, what’s the deal with SPF? A recent interview of Dr Steven Q Wang, M.D., chair of The Skin Cancer Foundation Photobiology Committee, finally will give us some clarity. Apparently, the SPF number, be it 15, 30, or 50, refers to the amount of UVB protection that that sunscreen provides. Rather than comparing the SPFs to each other, like we all do at the store, SPF is a reflection of the length of time it would take for the Sun’s UVB radiation to redden your skin (used exactly as directed), versus if you didn’t apply any sunscreen at all. In ideal situations (in lab settings), if you wore SPF 30, it would take 30 times longer for you to get a sunburn than if you didn’t wear any sunscreen.

What’s more, SPF 30 is not nearly half the strength of SPF 50. Rather, SPF 30 allows 3% of UVB rays to hit your skin, and SPF 50 allows about 2% of UVB rays to hit your skin. Now before you say that that is just one measly percent, it actually is much more. According to Dr Steven Q. Wang, SPF 30 allows around 1.5 times more UV radiation onto your skin than SPF 50. That’s an actual 150% difference [according to Wang’s article “… SPF 30 is allowing 50 percent more UV radiation onto your skin.”] in protection.

(author of the ‘eponymous’ blog) offers a good overview of the topic in a friendly, informative fashion albeit I found the ‘percentage’ to be a bit confusing. (S)he also provides a link to a previous posting about the ingredients in sunscreens (I do have one point of disagreement with regarding oxybenzone) as well as links to Dr. Steven Q. Wang’s May 24, 2018 Ask the Expert article about sunscreens and SPF numbers on skincancer.org. You can find the percentage under the ‘What Does the SPF Number Mean?’ subsection, in the second paragraph.

Ingredients: metallic nanoparticles and oxybenzone

The use of metallic nanoparticles  (usually zinc oxide and/or (titanium dioxide) in sunscreens was loathed by civil society groups, in particular Friends of the Earth (FOE) who campaigned relentlessly against their use in sunscreens. The nadir for FOE was in February 2012 when the Australian government published a survey showing that 13% of the respondents were not using any sunscreens due to their fear of nanoparticles. For those who don’t know, Australia has the highest rate of skin cancer in the world. (You can read about the debacle in my Feb. 9, 2012 posting.)

At the time, the only civil society group which supported the use of metallic nanoparticles in sunscreens was the Environmental Working Group (EWG).  After an examination of the research they, to their own surprise, came out in favour (grudgingly) of metallic nanoparticles. (The EWG were more concerned about the use of oxybenzone in sunscreens.)

Over time, the EWG’s perspective has been adopted by other groups to the point where sunscreens with metallic nanoparticles are commonplace in ‘natural’ or ‘organic’ sunscreens.

As for oxybenzones, in a May 23, 2018 posting about sunscreen ingredients notes this (Note: Links have been removed),

Oxybenzone – Chemical sunscreen, protects from UV damage. Oxybenzone belongs to the chemical family Benzophenone, which are persistent (difficult to get rid of), bioaccumulative (builds up in your body over time), and toxic, or PBT [or: Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances (PBTs)]. They are a possible carcinogen (cancer-causing agent), endocrine disrupter; however, this is debatable. Also could cause developmental and reproductive toxicity, could cause organ system toxicity, as well as could cause irritation and potentially toxic to the environment.

It seems that the tide is turning against the use of oxybenzones (from a July 3, 2018 article by Adam Bluestein for Fast Company; Note: Links have been removed),

On July 3 [2018], Hawaii’s Governor, David Ig, will sign into law the first statewide ban on the sale of sunscreens containing chemicals that scientists say are damaging the Earth’s coral reefs. Passed by state legislators on May 1 [2018], the bill targets two chemicals, oxybenzone and octinoxate, which are found in thousands of sunscreens and other skincare products. Studies published over the past 10 years have found that these UV-filtering chemicals–called benzophenones–are highly toxic to juvenile corals and other marine life and contribute to the fatal bleaching of coral reefs (along with global warming and runoff pollutants from land). (A 2008 study by European researchers estimated that 4,000 to 6,000 tons of sunblock accumulates in coral reefs every year.) Also, though both substances are FDA-approved for use in sunscreens, the nonprofit Environmental Working Group notes numerous studies linking oxybenzone to hormone disruption and cell damage that may lead to skin cancer. In its 2018 annual sunscreen guide, the EWG found oxybenzone in two-thirds of the 650 products it reviewed.

The Hawaii ban won’t take effect until January 2021, but it’s already causing a wave of disruption that’s affecting sunscreen manufacturers, retailers, and the medical community.

For starters, several other municipalities have already or could soon join Hawaii’s effort. In May [2018], the Caribbean island of Bonaire announced a ban on chemicals sunscreens, and nonprofits such as the Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation, along with dive industry and certain resort groups, are urging legislation to stop sunscreen pollution in California, Colorado, Florida, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Marine nature reserves in Mexico already prohibit oxybenzone-containing sunscreens, and the U.S. National Park Service website for South Florida, Hawaii, U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa recommends the use of “reef safe” sunscreens, which use natural mineral ingredients–zinc oxide or titanium oxide–to protect skin.

Makers of “eco,” “organic,” and “natural” sunscreens that already meet the new standards are seizing on the news from Hawaii to boost their visibility among the islands’ tourists–and to expand their footprint on the shelves of mainland retailers. This past spring, for example, Miami-based Raw Elements partnered with Hawaiian Airlines, Honolulu’s Waikiki Aquarium, the Aqua-Aston hotel group (Hawaii’s largest), and the Sheraton Maui Resort & Spa to get samples of its reef-safe zinc-oxide-based sunscreens to their guests. “These partnerships have had a tremendous impact raising awareness about this issue,” says founder and CEO Brian Guadagno, who notes that inquiries and sales have increased this year.

As Bluestein notes there are some concerns about this and other potential bans,

“Eliminating the use of sunscreen ingredients considered to be safe and effective by the FDA with a long history of use not only restricts consumer choice, but is also at odds with skin cancer prevention efforts […],” says Bayer, owner of the Coppertone brand, in a statement to Fast Company. Bayer disputes the validity of studies used to support the ban, which were published by scientists from U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, the nonprofit Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, Tel Aviv University, the University of Hawaii, and elsewhere. “Oxybenzone in sunscreen has not been scientifically proven to have an effect on the environment. We take this issue seriously and, along with the industry, have supported additional research to confirm that there is no effect.”

Johnson & Johnson, which markets Neutrogena sunscreens, is taking a similar stance, worrying that “the recent efforts in Hawaii to ban sunscreens that contain oxybenzone may actually adversely affect public health,” according to a company spokesperson. “Science shows that sunscreens are a key factor in preventing skin cancer, and our scientific assessment of the lab studies done to date in Hawaii show the methods were questionable and the data insufficient to draw factual conclusions about any impact on coral reefs.”

Terrified (and rightly so) about anything scaring people away from using sunblock, The American Academy of Dermatology, also opposes Hawaii’s ban. Suzanne M. Olbricht, president of the AADA, has issued a statement that the organization “is concerned that the public’s risk of developing skin cancer could increase due to potential new restrictions in Hawaii that impact access to sunscreens with ingredients necessary for broad-spectrum protection, as well as the potential stigma around sunscreen use that could develop as a result of these restrictions.”

The fact is that there are currently a large number of widely available reef-safe products on the market that provide “full spectrum” protection up to SPF50–meaning they protect against both UVB rays that cause sunburns as well as UVA radiation, which causes deeper skin damage. SPFs higher than 50 are largely a marketing gimmick, say advocates of chemical-free products: According to the Environmental Working Group, properly applied SPF 50 sunscreen blocks 98% of UVB rays; SPF 100 blocks 99%. And a sunscreen lotion’s SPF rating has little to do with its ability to shield skin from UVA rays.

I notice neither Bayer nor Johnson & Johnson nor the American Academy of Dermatology make mention of oxybenzone’s possible role as a hormone disruptor.

Given the importance that coral reefs have to the environment we all share, I’m inclined to support the oxybenzone ban based on that alone. Of course, it’s conceivable that metallic nanoparticles may also have a deleterious effect on coral reefs as their use increases. It’s to be hoped that’s not the case but if it is, then I’ll make my decisions accordingly and hope we have a viable alternative.

As for your sunscreen questions and needs, the Environment Working Group (EWG) has extensive information including a product guide on this page (scroll down to EWG’s Sunscreen Guide) and a discussion of ‘high’ SPF numbers I found useful for my decision-making.

Nanofibrous fish skins for wrinkle-free skin (New Zealand’s biggest seafood company moves into skincare)

I am utterly enchanted by this venture employing fish skins and nanotechnology-based processes for a new line of skin care products and, they hope, medical applications,


For those who like text (from a May 21, 2018 Sanford media advisory),

Nanofibre magic turns fish skins into wrinkle busting skin care

Sanford partners with kiwi nanotech experts to help develop a wrinkle-busting skincare product made from Hoki skins.

New Zealand’s biggest and oldest seafood company is moving into the future of skincare and medicine by becoming supporting partner to West Auckland nanofibre producer Revolution Fibres, which is launching a potentially game-changing nanotech face mask.

The actiVLayr face masks use collagen extracted from fish skins as a base ingredient which is then combined with elements such as fruit extracts and hyaluronic acid to make a 100 percent natural and sustainably sourced product.

They have achieved stunning results in third party tests which show that the nanofiber masks can reduce wrinkles by up to 31.5%.*

Revolution Fibres CEO Iain Hosie says it is no exaggeration to say the masks could be revolutionary.

“The wayactiVLayr is produced, and the unique application method of placing it onto wet skin like a mask, means ingredients are absorbed quickly and efficiently into the skin to maximise the repair and protection of the skin.”

Sanford is delighted to support the work that Revolution Fibres is doing by supplying hoki fish skins. Hoki is a sustainably caught fish and its skin has some unique properties.

Sanford’s General Manager of Innovation, Andrew Stanley, says these properties make it ideal for the actiVLayr technology. “Hoki skins are rich in collagen, which is an essential part of our bodies. But their marine collagen is unique – it has a very low melt point, so when placed on the skin, it can dissolve completely and be absorbed in a way that collagen f rom other animals cannot.”

Sanford’s Chief Customer Officer, Andre Gargiulo, says working with the team at Revolution Fibres is a natural fit, because both company’s think about innovation and sustainability in the same way.

“We hope actiVLayr gets the global attention it deserves, and we’re delighted that our sustainably caught Hoki is part of this fantastic New Zealand product. It’s exactly what we’re all about at Sanford – making the most of the precious resources from the sea, working in a sustainable way and getting the most value out of the goodness we harvest from nature.”

Sanford’s Business Development Manager Adrian Grey says the focus on sustainability and value creation are so important for the seafood company.

“Previously we have been making use of these hoki skins, which is great, but they were being used only for fish meal or pet food products. Being able to supply and support a high tech company that is going to earn increased export revenue for New Zealand is just fantastic. And the product created is completely natural, harvested from a globally certified sustainable fishery.”

Sanford provides the hoki skins and then turns these skins into pure collagen using the science and skills of the team at Plant and Food in Nelson [New Zealand for those of us who associate Nelson with British Columbia]. Revolution Fibres transforms the Sanford product into nanofibre using a technique called electrospinning of which Revolution Fibres are the New Zealand pioneers.

During the electrospinning process natural ingredients known as “bioactives” (such as kiwifruit and grapes) and hyaluronic acid (an ingredient to help the skin retain moisture) are bonded to the nanofibres to create sheets of actiVLayr. When it is exposed to wet skin the nanofibres dissolve rapidly and release the bioactives deep into the skin.

The product is being launched at the China Beauty Fair in Shanghai on May 22 [2018] and will go on sale in China this month followed by Hong Kong and New Zealand later in the year.   Revolution Fibres CEO Iain Hosie says there is big demand for unique delivery systems of natural skin and beauty products such as actiVLayr in Asia, which was the key reason to launch the product in China. But his view of the future is even bigger.

“There are endless uses for actiVLayr and the one we’re most proud of is in the medical area with the ability for drug compounds or medicines to be added to the actiVLayr formula. It will enable a controlled dose to be delivered to a patient with skin lesions, burns or acne.”

Revolution Fibres is presenting at Techweek NZ as part of The Fourth Revolution event on May 25 [2018] in Christchurch which introduces high tech engineers who are building a better place.

*Testing conducted by Easy Care using VISIA Complexion Analysis

The media advisory also includes some ‘fascinating ‘facts’,

1kg of hoki skin produces 400 square meters of nanofibre material

Nanofibres are 1/500th the width of a human hair

Revolution Fibres is the only nanofibre producer in the world to meet aerospace industry standards with its AS9100d quality assurance certification

The marine collagen found in hoki skins is unique because of its relatively low melt point, meaning it can dissolve at a lower temperature which makes it perfect for human use

Revolution Fibres is based in West Auckland and employs 12 people, of which 4 have P hDs in science related to nanotechnology. There are also a number of employees with strong engineering backgrounds to complement the company’s Research & Development expertise

Sanford is New Zealand’s oldest and biggest seafood company. It was founded by Albert Sanford in Auckland in 1904

New Zealand’s hoki fishery is certified as sustainable by the London-based Marine Stewardship Council, which audits fisheries all over the world

You can find Sanford here and Revolution Fibres here.

For some perspective on the business side of things, there’s a May 21, 2018 article by Nikki Mandow for newsroom.co.nz,

Revolution Fibres first started talking about the possibility of a collagen nanofibre made from hoki almost a decade ago, as part of a project with Plant & Food’s Seafood Research Centre in Nelson, Hosie [Revolution Fibres CEO Iain Hosie] said, and the company got serious about making a product in 2013.

Previously, the hoki waste skins were used for fish meal and pet food, said Sanford business development manager Adrian Grey.

“Being able to supply and support a high tech company that is going to earn increased export revenue for New Zealand is just fantastic.”

Revolution Fibres also manufactures nanofibres for a number of other uses. These include anti-dust mite pillow coverings, anti-pollution protective face masks, filters for pumps for HRV’s home ventilation systems, and reinforcing material for carbon fibre for fishing rods. The latter product is made from recycled fishing nets collected from South America.

He [Revolution Fibres CEO Iain Hosie] said the company could be profitable, but instead has chosen to continue to invest heavily in research and development.

About 75 percent of revenue comes from selling proprietary products, but increasingly Hosie said the company is working on “co-innovation” projects, where Revolution Fibres manufactures bespoke materials for outside companies.

Revolution Fibres completed its first external funding round last year, raising $1.5 million from the US, and it has just completed another round worth approximately $1million. Hosie, one of the founders, still holds around 20 percent of the company.

He said he hopes to keep the intellectual property in New Zealand, although manufacturing of some products is likely to move closer to their markets – China and the US potentially. However, he said actiVLayr manufacture will remain in New Zealand, because that’s where the raw hoki comes from.

I wonder if we’ll see this product in Canada.

One other thing,  I was curious about this ” … the nanofiber masks can reduce wrinkles by up to 31.5%”  and Visia Complexion Analysis, which is a product from Canfield Scientific, a company specializing in imaging.  Here’s some of what Visia can do (from the Visia product page),

Percentile Scores

Percentile Scores

VISIA’s patented comparison to norms analysis uses the world’s largest skin feature database to grade your patient’s skin relative to others of the same age and skin type. Measure spots, wrinkles, texture, pores, UV spots, brown spots, red areas, and porphyrins.

Meaningful Comparisons

Meaningful Comparisons

Compare results side by side for any combination of views, features or time points, including graphs and numerical data. Zoom and pan images in tandem for clear and easy comparisons.

And, there’s my personal favourite (although it has nothing to do with the topic of this posting0,

Eyelash Analysis

Eyelash Analysis

Evaluates the results of lash improvement treatments with numerical assessments and graphic visualizations.

For anyone who wondered about why the press release has both ‘nanofibre’ and ‘nanofiber’, It’s the difference between US and UK spelling. Perhaps the complexion analysis information came from a US company or one that uses US spellings.

L’Oréal introduces new wearable technology (UV sensor) as nail art?

Downloaded from https://inhabitat.com/tiny-yves-behar-designed-wearable-warns-you-when-youve-had-too-much-sun/uv-sense-by-loreal-and-yves-behar-2

(I should have published this a while ago but I think the content holds up even if it is a bit dated.) What you see on the model’s thumbnail (in the image above) is L’Oréal’s latest wearable tech as Lucy Wang notes in her January 8, 2018 preview article for inhabitat. (Note: The article is posted in a slide show, which offers quite a bit of detail (some of it technical) including this (Note: Links have been removed),

A tiny piece of innovative tech wants to help you stay away from sun-induced skin cancer. Global beauty leader L’Oréal teamed up with prolific designer Yves Behar of fuseproject to create UV Sense, the first battery-free wearable electronic UV sensor. Soon to be unveiled at the 2018 Consumer Electronics Show [CES] kicking off tomorrow [January 9, 2018], this innovative technology collects and shares real-time data on individual UV exposure within a wearable so small and thin it fits on a fingernail.

Christina Bonnington in a January 28, 2018 article for Fast Company offers less technical detail while offering many other useful tidbits (Note: Links have been removed),

… in 2016, beauty brand L’Oreal entered the space with another solution: a stretchable UV-sensing skin patch developed by the company’s technology incubator. The My UV Patch was an experiment in giving beauty consumers access to their sun-exposure data. A heart-shaped design on the patch changed colors depending on your sun exposure, which could then be analyzed via photograph in its accompanying app. L’Oreal distributed more than 1 million of the patches to consumers for free and was surprised by the level of engagement and effectiveness of the project: 34 percent of users reported wearing sunscreen more often, and 37 percent tried to stay in the shade more frequently.

Now, L’Oreal has a new wearable device for people like me—people concerned with their long-term sun-exposure risks, people at risk for melanoma, and people who want to know if they should be wearing more sunscreen or reapplying more often. But calling it a device is a bit of a stretch. The UV Sense is a circular, nail-sized sticker that’s little more than a UV sensor and an antenna. Unlike most other wearables, it’s completely batteryless; the sensor is powered by near-field communications and only transmits data when you place your phone near the sensor. Developed in partnership with Northwestern University, UV Sense now boasts the title of world’s smallest wearable.

Guive Balooch, the global vice president of L’Oréal’s technology incubator, said that the company wanted to make sure the sensor was comfortable for longtime wear. My UV Patch, L’Oreal’s first tech-centric UV-sensing product, was a disposable: You wore it for up to three days, then threw it away. The UV Sense, by contrast, lasts as long as any other wearable on the market. And besides just being small, it’s notable for its unique form factor. Its tiny size—about as thick as a credit card and lighter than a Tic Tac—makes it ideal as a stick-on nail applique. “We knew that nail art was booming,” Balooch said. “We thought that could be really interesting.” However, it’s not exclusively a nail sticker—it can just as easily be positioned on a pair of sunglasses or on another accessory you typically wear outdoors, such as a watch. On a nail, the sensor lasts for two weeks, then it needs to be readhered. (“The reason is more for the nail than the sensor,” Balooch said. “The nail is a living part of your body. UV gel or nail art normally lasts about two weeks.”)

For anyone who’d like to bear down on the technical detail, there’s Daniel Cooper’s January 7, 2018 article for engadget (Note: Links have been removed),

L’Oreal is working with MC10, a medical technology wearables outfit established by professor John Rogers at Northwestern University. Rogers is famous for developing the “wearable tattoo,” circuit boards no thicker than a band-aid that attach to people’s skin. The eventual goal for such technology is that it will replace the bulky and invasive monitors strapped onto hospital patients.

Interesting, yes? And as the writers note it’s not L’Oréal’s first foray into wearable tech. For anyone interested in the 2016 version, there’s my January 6, 2016 posting about ‘my UV patch”  and its introduction a the 2016 CES.  As for John Rogers, one of my latest postings on him and his work is a May 15, 2015 posting.  You can find more using “John Rogers” as your blog search term.