but also leads to the continual infiltration of illegal products into the market, posing serious health

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

Molecules 2024, 29, 411 tography a suitable method for their separation and removal, which is particularly9 of
(compound 8) is permitted at a maximum concentration of 0.3%, whereas 1,2-pentanediol
(compound 10) can reach up to 21.29% in the highest historical usage for residency category
from several professional websites (Table 1).
0.4% (as acid) for
0.8% (as acid) for 0.345–6.25% (e)
Cetyl palmitate 3–20% (d) ;
Propylparaben (2) 0.14% (as acid) for Triethanolamine (25) 8% (c) Tween 60 (46) 25% (e) 12.5% (e) Sorbitan esters
0.8% (as acid) for Propylene 89.493% (d) ;
Stearyl alcohol Hexadecylbetaine 69% (d) ;
Succinic acid (28) 10% (d) ; 1% (e) 1.7% (d)(e) 30.4% (d) Fillers
Potassium Polyglycerol-10 83.333% (d) ;
DMDMH (7) 0.6% (a) 0.88% (d) 3.5% (d) ; 3% (e) Alginic acid (75) 0.33915% (e) Kaolin
2-phenoxyethanol (9) 1.0% (a) 5% (e) Montanov™ 82 (53) 3% (113) Solvents Talc
Sorbic acid (11) 0.6% (as acid) (a) Phosphoric acid (33) 2.55% (d) ; 0.6 (e) Glycerin (54) (e) Ethanol 5% (a) Pearl
Potassium sorbate (12) 0.6% (as acid) (a) Fragrances 1,2-butanediol (55) 8% (d) ; 6% (e) Ethyl acetate N.D. Nylon
2.5% (as acid) for
Sodium benzoate (13) Linalool (34) 1.25% (d) ; 1% (e) 1,3-butanediol (56) 87.98% (e) Toluene 33% (116) Colorants
1.7% for oral care
Levulinic acid (14) 5% (e) Vanillin (35) 1.2% (e) L-pyroglutamate 20% (e) Propellants Iron oxides
Cinnamaldehyde 58.7% (d) ; non-nano
Anisic acid (15) 0.96% (e) 0.016% (d) Panthenol (58) 40% (e) Propane Zinc oxide
0.036% (d) ; 0.031 51.46% (d) ; 70.045% (d) ; 56% Titanium
mouthwash; 0.01% Betaine (60) 20% (e) Isobutane 81.522% (e) Mica
Tertiary- Sodium hyaluronate 74.993% (d) ;
0.1% (123) Petrolatum (39) 75.175% (d) Nitrogen 40.476% (e) Carnauba 5% (e)
8.0854% (d) ; 1.5% Isopropyl palmitate
Propyl gallate (19) (e) 79.69% (e) Ceramides (63) 22.5% (e) Binders Candelilla 30% (e)
Vitamin C (20) N.D. (f) (e) Lauryl alcohols (64) 15% (d) ; 3.5% (e) Beeswax 50% (e) Jojoba 5% (e)
Hyaluronic acid (21) 2% (124) 71.4% (e) 12% (d) ; 7.02% (e) Keratin 1% (d) Bees 50% (e)
Vitamin E (22) 33.702% (e) Lecithin (43) (e) Linolenic acid (66) 13.3% (e) Liquid paraffin 99.788% (e) Japan waxes 8% (e)
Squalene (23) 82% (c) ; 2% (e) Squalane (44) 48.98% (e) monoethanolamide 1.24% (d) Silicone oils N.D. (f)
techniques. This extraction method exhibited an excellent linear range from 0.25–50 ng/mL
tion, with a recovery rate ranging from 98% to 102%. Additionally, co-precipitation-assisted
concentration of 0.8% (w/w) in products. Traditional SPE suffers from low selectivity, often
strating an over 86.15% recovery rate, showed greater selectivity, stability, and improved
114.9%. Compared with traditional pretreatment methods, this novel approach employed
the sample and the extraction efficiency of the analytes (ranging from 64.0% to 128.4%).
Table 2. The advantages, disadvantages, and applicable matrices of the pretreatment techniques.
1. Rahate, A.R.; Nagarkar, J.M. Emulsification of vegetable oils using a blend of nonionic surfactants for cosmetic applications.

Methods (brief)

of pretreatment techniques is not strictly constrained by the type of sample matrix, each
the sample and incorporate additional processing steps by which to circumvent issues such
the sample with dispersing and solid-phase extraction agents, followed by physical grind-
method is primarily applicable to solid and semi-solid samples, rather than liquid cosmet-
Mass spectrometry (MS) identifies molecular mass and composition by measuring the
(HPLC) uses a liquid as the mobile phase under high pressure to separate components, is
vitamins, and other components in cosmetics (131). Atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS)
cotton filtration effectively eliminates interference from complex sample matrices in ana-
latanoprost through high-resolution mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance
(R2 > 0.9992), with notably low detection (LOD) and quantitation limits (LOQ) of 0.01 and
achieves rapid partition equilibrium, and integrates seamlessly with HPLC analysis. CPE,
solvents with MMWCNTs, not only optimizing the sample processing procedure but also
by analysis using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). This method, demon-
and cadmium—in various cosmetic products using flame atomic absorption spectroscopy
(FAAS). Microwave digestion involves heating a sample with a strong acid inside a closed
vessel using microwave radiation. This process significantly speeds up the digestion
process, allowing for the efficient breakdown of the sample matrix. Expanding on this
technique, Bocca et al. (132), in 2013, employed a similar acid digestion method followed

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

Verification notes

Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.

Commit	Date	Change	Description
b01ec52c	2026-08-04	major	2 sections added
d49e450f	2026-08-03	major	5 sections added; narrative text revised