HP vs. CP nutrient question

SoapMakingForum

Help Support SoapMakingForum:

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
Something I'm wondering: Do you think the nutrients in the fats are reduced somewhat during the HP cook? Or does the lye bath (in either CP or HP) "kill" whatever nutrients will inevitably be killed and I shouldn't worry about more loss in the cook.

I'm obviously not asking about the nutrients in EOs or the luxury fats which I put in only after trace (CP) or cooling (HP).
 

kchaystack

Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
2,080
Location
Monroe, LA
I am not sure why the nutritional value of your soap oils makes any difference once they are chemically turned into fatty acid salts by saponification.

Also adding things to your CP soap at trace makes not one bit of difference in what is left after the soap has finished saponifing. Trace is the barest start of the process, and there up to another 24 - 48 hours to go - so the fats and/or EO/FO added at trace are exposed to lye that entire time.

Dr. Kevin Dunn did many tests on this and verified fats at trace at trace are not present is any greater amounts than if it is added before the lye is introduced.
 

galaxyMLP

Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
Messages
1,838
Reaction score
1,332
Location
Florida
Pretty much all the "nutrients" (I'm assuming you mean vitamins here) are going to be inactivated by the soaping process. It doesn't matter whether it's CP or HP. Some things like the metals (ex: magnesium, calcium, iron) survive the process but, you don't want those in soap anyway. Plus, they're going to be bound up by the soap. Vitamin E also apparently survives saponification. Rosemary oleoresin will also survive the process.

Things like vitamin A and C will not survive. In fact, they are very sensitive and require certain conditions to retain their activity. Even if they did survive the initial process, they would be inactivated very soon into cure.

Adding extra fats in at trace does not give that fat as the sole superfat. Saponification has just begun at that point so adding extra in at that point will do nothing more than make it more likely to forget it! You can control the SF in HP though.

Adding things after the cook likely won't make a difference to nutirent survival. You're still looking at an alkaline environment and that will make most vitamins or other antioxidants degrade. Soap is not a good substrate to preserve nutrient quality. Some components in EOs will also change during saponification and form different compounds. Soap making is a very harsh process and it is difficult to say a soap will do anything but clean.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
kchaystack: Dr. Kevin Dunn did many tests on this and verified fats at trace at trace are not present is any greater amounts than if it is added before the lye is introduced.
is this also true in HP though? when you SF after cooling?
and i'm getting his book, it's exactly what i need to read.
galaxyMLP, thank you.
1. What did you meant by: Saponification has just begun at that point so adding extra in at that point will do nothing more than make it more likely to forget it!
Why/how would the soap "forget" the fat by adding it in at trace.
2. You said I can control the SF in HP--how so? Especially if you continued on to say that soap is basically a harsh process that doesn't allow for any true superfatting.
3. What about dead sea mud...something super rich in skin loving properties, does that also die??
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kchaystack

Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
2,080
Location
Monroe, LA
kchaystack: Dr. Kevin Dunn did many tests on this and verified fats at trace at trace are not present is any greater amounts than if it is added before the lye is introduced.
is this also true in HP though? when you SF after cooling?
and i'm getting his book, it's exactly what i need to read.
HP is different. If you add your superfat after the cook, when there is no zap, then most of the SF is going to be what you added.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
So isn't that a fantastic thing! Why doesn't everyone HP then?? Or because they aren't as concerned re moisturizing properties? P.s. I'm an avid HP fan and don't get why everyone doesn't do it;)
 

penelopejane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
5,459
Reaction score
4,247
Location
Sth Coast, NSW, Australia
So isn't that a fantastic thing! Why doesn't everyone HP then?? Or because they aren't as concerned re moisturizing properties? P.s. I'm an avid HP fan and don't get why everyone doesn't do it;)
Because HP is a horrible involved process of cooking up goop that results in an ugly bar of soap.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
ugly is in the eyes of the beholder, because i have never seen a more beautiful bar than the HP one. that's first. second, why is it any more "involved" than CP--because of the cook? but isn't that worth it if you can truly superfat it? i think so.
 

kchaystack

Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
2,080
Location
Monroe, LA
So isn't that a fantastic thing! Why doesn't everyone HP then?? Or because they aren't as concerned re moisturizing properties? P.s. I'm an avid HP fan and don't get why everyone doesn't do it;)
Because I do not like the way HP looks. You can not do as many fun designs. It is more difficult to color. In addition to having my plastic buckets that I use I have to clean a crock pot.

HP is great for FO that accelerate to soap on a stick, shaving soap becasue of the high amount of stearic acid it uses, pine tar because it also accelerates so badly.

And soap does NOT moisturize your skin. It cleans it by stripping away the natural oils in your skin that have trapped dirt and stuff in it. Your SF does not stay behind an any great amount, it is there to help stop the soap from stripping too many of your skins natural oils away.

If you want oils applied to your skin you need to make a lotion, salve, body butter, etc.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
yes but for people with eczema it matters a lot in how gentle the soap is. and SF contributes greatly to the gentleness. me and my baby have eczema, trust me.
 

lenarenee

Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
3,309
Nourishing the skin from the outside is not as easy as so many internet sources claim. The skin doesn't absorb everything, nor does it absorb everything as easily as these sources think. It's an extremely complex process with many variables. The best way to feed your skin is with diet.
 

penelopejane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
5,459
Reaction score
4,247
Location
Sth Coast, NSW, Australia
yes but for people with eczema it matters a lot in how gentle the soap is. and SF contributes greatly to the gentleness. me and my baby have eczema, trust me.
DH and my boys have eczema. CP soap seems to be less of an irritant for them. DH even uses some of my scented stuff and doesn't have to stick to 100% Castile at the moment. Spring may bring other problems. It fluctuates. He reverts to Castile then.

I struggle with but like the creative side of soap making. I like the CP process and results and that I can play with colour. If you like HP go for it. But I don't personally think 1 tbsp of oil SF at the end of a mix is going to make a huge difference to my skin compared to using handmade or commercial soap.
I was trying to be funny in my earlier post about HP but I really hate cooking over a stove, it's just not fun for me. SBing oils and turning them into soap us!
 
Last edited:

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
Nourishing the skin from the outside is not as easy as so many internet sources claim. The skin doesn't absorb everything, nor does it absorb everything as easily as these sources think. It's an extremely complex process with many variables. The best way to feed your skin is with diet.
yes. OF COURSE. as someone who works in alternative health, i promise you that every point of healing for any ailment begins with diet. however, because this is a soaping forum and we are primarily discussing soap, i want to know what soap can do for the skin; since we are not eating soap.
 

The Efficacious Gentleman

Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
8,980
Reaction score
9,076
Location
Austria
By baby, I hope you mean your lover or your toddler, rather than an actual baby!

You asked why people don't only do hp and you had an answer - you might not agree with it, but you're getting the answers to your question!

A general point about superfats all round -
Do you put lotion on before you shower? No, that makes no sense. Would you put lotion on and then just have water running over your body? No, that's very silly indeed. So any oil from the soap will have the water running over it and yet it is supposed to have some dramatic affect or be absorbed in to the skin in a meaningful way......I just don't see it.

I see the superfat binding with the soap so that less of the oils on the skin is removed which then feels less cleansing.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
DH and my boys have eczema. CP soap seems to be less of an irritant for them. DH even uses some of my scented stuff and doesn't have to stick to 100% Castile at the moment. Spring may bring other problems. It fluctuates. He reverts to Castile then.


I struggle with but like the creative side of soap making. I like the CO process and results and that I can play with colour. If you like HP go for it. But I don't personally think 1 tbsp of oil SF at the end of a mix is going to make a huge difference to my skin compared to using handmade or commercial soap.
I was trying to be funny in my earlier post about HP but I really hate cooking over a stove, it's just not fun for me. SBing oils and turning them into soap us!
interesting...why do you think CP is less irritating for your husband/boys?
p.s. i love cooking:) but that still has nothing to do with why i love HP.
By baby, I hope you mean your lover or your toddler, rather than an actual baby!

You asked why people don't only do hp and you had an answer - you might not agree with it, but you're getting the answers to your question!

A general point about superfats all round -
Do you put lotion on before you shower? No, that makes no sense. Would you put lotion on and then just have water running over your body? No, that's very silly indeed. So any oil from the soap will have the water running over it and yet it is supposed to have some dramatic affect or be absorbed in to the skin in a meaningful way......I just don't see it.

I see the superfat binding with the soap so that less of the oils on the skin is removed which then feels less cleansing.
2.5 year old. but what's wrong with soap on a baby (after a month old)?
um, yes, i did get an answer--a few actually. nothing new. but that wasn't the focus of the conversation anyway.

As you said (and as kchaystack was implying as well): I see the superfat binding with the soap so that less of the oils on the skin is removed which then feels less cleansing.
but STILL this is important. because soap without SF is indeed more harsh.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

penelopejane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
5,459
Reaction score
4,247
Location
Sth Coast, NSW, Australia
interesting...why do you think CP is less irritating for your husband/boys?
p.s. i love cooking:) but that still has nothing to do with why i love HP.
I think handmade soap is less irritating for their skin. They use 100% Castile when it's bad. I don't like HP soap or the process. I do not believe it is more beneficial than CP in anyway and believe less heat is better. HP is just not for me.
 
Last edited:

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
I think handmade soap is less irritating for their skin. They use 100% Castile when it's bad. I don't like HP soap or the process. I do not believe it is more beneficial than CP in anyway and believe less heat is better. HP is just not for me.
oh sorry i was confused when you said CP was less irritant: i thought you were saying it was less irritant than HP...you were saying less irritant than regular soap.
ok.
 

lenarenee

Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
3,309
For those of use with skin issues in the family (and we have allergies, psoriasis and eczema) with many Dr. appointments under our belts, we've found that cp or hp soap is not a miracle for these conditions because of what it contains. It's far more about what's not in the soap. That's probably an idea that you're not going to want to hear.

I've been working with a pharmacist and cell biologist to understand what the skin actually does/doesn't absorb. They believe soap is not a treatment or medical tool unless it's about omitting allergen or trigger ingredients. Products like creams and ointments are things that can be designed to deliver chemicals through the skin/phospholipid bilayer in a form that can be utilized in the body instead of trashed as an invader.
 

Tribe

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
25
Reaction score
6
I think handmade soap is less irritating for their skin. They use 100% Castile when it's bad. I don't like HP soap or the process. I do not believe it is more beneficial than CP in anyway and believe less heat is better. HP is just not for me.
but then this goes back to my original question here: why do you believe less heat is better for the soap? in what way? if scientifically there is a true reason then i would indeed consider doing CP. this is my point.
 

Latest posts

Top