Chemical ingredients

[flirty41]

Tocopheryl acetate, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Glyceryl polymethacrylate are just some of the ingredients in a moisturiser. Who discovers and names all of these things, and how do they decide what they should be used for? Or am I looking at it from the wrong angle? Is it a case that a chemical is needed for a purpose, so one is created? And how do they do that?

[j2buttonsw]

Chemistry is odd when it comes to nomenclature: there is a "proper" way to describe a chemical (compound) with regard to it's structure and functionality but most chemists find this too tiresome and make up "trivial" names. In other cases they mix up part "proper" and part "trivial" names. For example: methyl, ethyl, propy, butyl are "proper" words meaning CH3, C2H5, C3H7, C4H9 alkyl chain additions, respectively. Whereas paraben is the "trivial" name for hydroxybenzoic acid. The proper names are tightly controlled and there are rules as to how you name a new compound whereas the trivial name can come from anywhere (although they usually allude to their origin eg aflatoxin A comes from Aspergillus flavis (A. flavis)). As for what chemicals go in what products a chemist will know that he wants his concoction to have certain effects and will add compounds with a known action ie to feel soapy, add a surfactant; to be good for the skin, add vitamin E (tocopheryl acetate); to be at a particular pH, add a buffer etc etc What is the most important is that all of these compounds have passed stringent toxicological tests to show they are safe to use on humans.

[flirty41]

Thanks j2! :-)

[xyzzyplugh]

Quite an articulate outburst J2 - Magnus Pyke would be impressed :-)

[j2buttonsw]

I'm glad 6 years studying Biochemistry wasn't wasted!

[Hamish]

Just to add to j2's great answer. Many chemicals have proper names but have named based on their trivial name in order to make the chemistry clear and easier to use in conversation. For example 6 Azauridine is much easier to say than 2-beta-D-ribofuranosyl-1,2,4-triazine-3,5(2H,4H)dione. Te differance is you have to know what the structure of the first one is, but the name of the second one should allow you to draw the structure. As far as chemias go this is not a particularly complicated one!

Hope this adds a bit more to the discussion.

[flirty41]

Thanks for that, Hamish! :-)