Goat Milk Soap Skin Benefits?

So some of you (myself included) seem to feel that luxury oils in soap does not really do anything for skin and is an unnecessary expense because it washes off.

It would seem to me that the beneficial properties of milks would also be eradicated (except for the fat that saponifies, that is...) perhaps. But yet there are plenty of links like this one, that describe goat milk soaps as nourishing and being great for your skin:

http://www.goatmilkstuff.com/Goat-Milk-Soap-Benefits.html

That's something I would expect from leave-on products but not wash-off. :think: What do you guys think and why? This has been bugging me lately.

Anne Watson has written books about basic soap making and milk-soap making. Data from her testers showed some recipes were not improved by using milk vs. water, but other milk-based soaps were preferred by her testers. From my reading of her book, I took away the message that there's nothing to lose and some definite benefits to gain by substituting milk for water.

She also found her testers preferred fluid milk over powdered milk by a small margin, but they did not show a strong preference for goats milk vs. cows milk in blind testing. IMO if you want the sales "cachet" of goats milk, by all means use GM in your soap, but cows milk is just as good if not quite so sexy-sounding on the label.

As to what milk does to make a soap nicer to use, I'm not sure.

I really wonder what milk actually brings to the soap other than label appeal. It is liquid and we let our soaps dry out as long as possible. So I really wonder what is left in the soap other than the fat. Honestly I do not find a difference between gm, cows milk, buttermilk or yogurt and I use them all. I feel the same with oatmeal I just do not think fine ground oatmeal bring much to the party other than scrub to a soap. But cooked oatmeal, on the other hand, I do notice a difference.
Label appeal is what we want since we are out to sell the product, if the customer thinks goat's milk is the greatest thing in soap then I will certainly supply it!

I guess by benefits I'm trying to understand if it can retain any beneficial properties after saponification is complete - good point about the liquids evaporating. One friend told me his father had skin cancer, used goat milk soap and the skin cancer disappeared. But much of this seems to be hearsay. Perhaps the smell is nice, the feel is nice, but are there any actual skin benefits from the milk left in the soap after the soap-making process is complete? This I don't know, it just seems like there would not be except for the fats producing lather. I read that when people make tea for soapmaking any benefits are lost - so it would seem the same for milk maybe?

While I know that soap is a wash-off product, I do believe that some "special" oils and additives make for a soap that's more moisturizing (or less drying?) or that has a better lather or feel as you use it ...... So there may be non-saponifiables in some oils that are beneficial, and the beneficial properties of some additives may be retained in spite of the lye. But of course, there's no good evidence to support or contradict this!

I'm not 100% convinced that goats milk is better than, for example, yoghurt - as mentioned in earlier posts. And here in France, GM soaps are dime a dozen. But the milk that's now "in vogue" and in demand for soap (and other cosmetics) is donkey milk - which sells fresh at around €20-30 per liter, if you can get it! It's reported to be far more nourishing for the skin than any other milk, but I haven't tried it because there aren't any suppliers nearby and shipping (even within France) is expensive because it needs to be kept cold. Although the price of the milk alone is enough to make me think twice!


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

I agree with Saswede.

While I do use GM in my soaps, IMO lard does more to benefit skin than any milks. I know some are turned off by the use of animal oils. Thankfully where I live it is a non-issue. Point of interest: My local pharmacy sells all-lard soaps which tout benefits for excema and other skin issues. I have no desire to get into the legality of their claims, but found it interesting. And I do believe there is something to it.

The gm seems to make a creamier lather - and it's fabulous for label appeal in many markets. I use buttermilk in a couple of soaps and even though I can't tell a difference, they fly off my table. Lard is a great soap - and it doesn't even need to be 100%. I can tell a difference between my lard and all veg soaps and I prefer the lard ones.

Truth is, done right, you can make an amazing soap with olive, palm and coconut and no other additives. The more "exotic" oils, clays, silks, liquids will give you different hand-feels and different lathers, but since soap is meant to clean and we design soap to be gentle - that's pretty much all it does - no matter the recipe. The rest is really just to add to the uniqueness of OUR own soaps. That's my 2 cents anyway It's also 5:30am, so I hope I made sense.

I imagine with milk soaps there's more than just fat left in, proteins and sugar and perhaps some dead enzymes (?!), so the soap should have a better lather, and hence a more luxurious feel. I find I get a similar smoothness when I use soaked oatmeal or silk, or even seawater. Though overall I prefer my lard soaps for their feel.

GM has a definite label appeal, donkey milk even more! The donkey milk soap on sale here comes from Mexico and it's 4x the price of any other soap. I did buy some in Mexico (where it's a normal price), and while I loved the idea, I didn't get too much of a special vibe from the bar I think the idea of pampering oneself is associated with milk soaps, after all there's a Cleopatra inside every one of us


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Donkey milk? We'll put anything in soap, won't we? Ha ha. I'm gonna milk a dog and see if that works - people around here LOVE their furbabies. I am totally kidding

I once did a blind test trial with my friend. I didn't tell her which soap contained what, and she picked up the ones with the pricier ingredients every time ( shea butter, cocoa butter, high percentage of olive, milk and oatmeal, honey). The exception is for my salt bar, which only contains salt and coconut oil. So, yes, I guess it makes some difference. At least to people with sensitive skin. I can feel the difference in lather from different recipes, but not the effect on my skin. My skin is as thick as a rhino, I guess.


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Hmmm. Well, do tell - what in milk (specifically goat milk) produces a creamier lather? Fat from the cream in raw milk?

How could protein, sugars, and dead enzymes produce any effect after going through saponification? It sounds as though none of us are 100% certain it is anything more than label appeal/perhaps superficial bar texture, mostly uncertainty. I have used GM soap and it felt smoother to me but I didn't notice anything particularly special about it, it could even dry me out more depending on the bar but that also could have depended heavily upon the recipe's ingredients and superfat percentage.

Now I'm going to want to try buttermilk soap, hah. Thanks, pamielynn, for that.

Lidyax, sounds like your friend has the luxury ingredient touch. Some of us just have a taste for the expensive! I know it all too well, and wish I didn't.

What is it that makes us prefer one recipe or bar over another? I think for me it's how it feels on my skin in the shower, then how my skin feels afterwards. If milk soaps make me happy in the shower with their creamier or smoother lather then that is more than just label appeal. Whether it washes off or not, I still get pleasure from the experience of washing with a richer feeling bar.

Saponification can't destroy the proteins and sugars surely? They are still there, perhaps not in the same form, but they still have to be there and that means something doesn't it :eh: if I bake a cake the sugar is still there though it's changed form, but it still brings something to the resulting cake. Can saponification be so terribly different? Obviously have to further research exactly what happens during saponification.

Not certain at all about what's special, except I know what I like and would prefer to use, and that's what's going to make me spend my money

Ancel said:

What is it that makes us prefer one recipe or bar over another? I think for me it's how it feels on my skin in the shower, then how my skin feels afterwards. If milk soaps make me happy in the shower with their creamier or smoother lather then that is more than just label appeal. Whether it washes off or not, I still get pleasure from the experience of washing with a richer feeling bar.

Saponification can't destroy the proteins and sugars surely? They are still there, perhaps not in the same form, but they still have to be there and that means something doesn't it :eh: if I bake a cake the sugar is still there though it's changed form, but it still brings something to the resulting cake. Can saponification be so terribly different? Obviously have to further research exactly what happens during saponification.

Click to expand...

You raise a good point about it feeling good on the skin. I'm sure some people rub the bar all over, others rub the bar onto a loofah scrubbie thing or washcloth, and some lather up their hands and then scrub themselves. We're all so different in the way we like our soap to feel, let alone how we apply it! So that may have a lot to do with the appeal. I certainly would just love to know how milk can produce creaminess.

From what I've been reading around I so far have deduced that it also may depend (or may not, not sure) on when the milk is added. If the lye is added to frozen GM it would seem to me all beneficial properties would be destroyed by the intensely high heat from the formed solution and the sensitivity of the milk, even if the solution container is placed in a bowl of ice water in an effort to cool, because the intense reaction must still take place.

Yet it seems some add milk at trace. Saponification is still underway at that point so I not only do not know how much you could add then but whether or not (since the mixture is still quite active) anything that could stay on your skin survives. Whether or not you gel also has to make a difference! Saponification is so different from baking a cake since even though the composition of sugar may change form, it doesn't exactly chemically react so harshly and drastically with the other ingredients of the cake in the same way. I struggled with the right way to put that but I think you should see what I meant. Maybe I need a chemist by trade to come in and explain if anything can remain to benefit the skin.

Many times I have read that, for example (only partially unrelated) superfatting will not produce "moisturizing" soap, because that is not a good word for it - "less stripping" is more accurate. :think:

Thinkativeone, as I said in earlier post on this thread, I do believe that some additives do provide beneficial effects - even after they're exposed to heat and lye .... So I would guess that it's the ingredients that are not saponified (only oils or fats react with lye in the saponification reaction), and those that are not sensitive to a high pH, that persist in the soap. Regarding the temperature to which GM is exposed if you add lye to frozen milk to make your lye solution, I try to ensure that mine never goes above 40 degrees C - so it takes ages to add the lye, but the milk stays creamy looking and I get an off-white soap.

I think that the only way to properly evaluate any additive (or even any soaping oil) in an unbiased fashion is to make exactly the same recipe with only 1 variation - the ingredient you're testing. Then give both your test soap and the comparison batch a good cure, and blind test ..... But I've never done this, and have to say that I do tend to use slightly different oils in my GM soap than I do in other soaps.

So perhaps we should approach this in a scientific way - and test the hypothesis that GM soap is better than the same soap made with water .....! If you're game, I'd be happy to take on the challenge!! Provided of course, it's OK with the SMF moderators ......


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Saswede said:

Thinkativeone, as I said in earlier post on this thread, I do believe that some additives do provide beneficial effects - even after they're exposed to heat and lye .... So I would guess that it's the ingredients that are not saponified (only oils or fats react with lye in the saponification reaction), and those that are not sensitive to a high pH, that persist in the soap. Regarding the temperature to which GM is exposed if you add lye to frozen milk to make your lye solution, I try to ensure that mine never goes above 40 degrees C - so it takes ages to add the lye, but the milk stays creamy looking and I get an off-white soap.

I think that the only way to properly evaluate any additive (or even any soaping oil) in an unbiased fashion is to make exactly the same recipe with only 1 variation - the ingredient you're testing. Then give both your test soap and the comparison batch a good cure, and blind test ..... But I've never done this, and have to say that I do tend to use slightly different oils in my GM soap than I do in other soaps.

So perhaps we should approach this in a scientific way - and test the hypothesis that GM soap is better than the same soap made with water .....! If you're game, I'd be happy to take on the challenge!! Provided of course, it's OK with the SMF moderators ......


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Click to expand...

Hi Saswede, I do recall you saying this. I suppose I am focusing in on the fats/oils as you said (the ones that do react during saponification) and not whatever else may remain in the soap. I also find it fascinating how you add your lye very, very slowly.

I think your idea sounds really fun! So how would this be done? You would make the same recipe (aside from one being water and one being GM) and a blindfolded tester would use both and evaluate, without the tester knowing one is GM? I know I'm game. Thanks for offering to do this!

Great discussion on milk soaps. I do not gel my milk soaps and prefer them over non-milk soaps, especially in the winter, because they leave my skin even more moisturized. I live in a high, dry desert where humidity is often in the single or lower double digits. Although I typically oil and then add lotion to my skin after a shower, if I forget to use these products, my skin is still soft and it doesn't itch at all after using my soaps but especially my milk soap. Maybe if there is a difference, it is dependent on where you live. Here, milk soaps rule in winter!

The last time I studied chemistry was in high school, so eons ago, but doing a google search this morning on saponification came up with this. Saponification is a reaction between alkali (lye) and fat (acids). That we all know. Proteins are 'denatured' by either very high temperatures, too high a ph, or too low a ph, so it seems it would make a difference when protein substances are added. It sounds like protein is denatured into amino acids which then react with the lye to produce sodium salts (ie soap), or are structurally modified (into what I can't tell). Sugar can be released from certain proteins. Sugar is destroyed by "hot aqueous alkaline solution".

I really hope a chemist jumps in at this point and explains this properly, or corrects me. I need to take a chemistry course, anyone recommend an online one?

So it appears, contrary to my hopes, that protein and sugar is destroyed. Bah. But nevertheless, regardless, in spite of etc., etc., I still prefer the feel, lather and aftereffects of soaps with added milk or silk.

Incidentally I read that silk protein is very strong and can make it through depending on strength of lye solution.

Interestingly when I was searching proteins and saponification a lot of ads came up for a nivea soap 'Passion fruit and milk proteins' which declares, "the caring formula with precious milk proteins gently cleanses and pampers your skin". :eh:

Ancel, I'm no chemist - but I am a pharmacist, so did study chemistry a LONG time ago!

You're absolutely right that proteins are denatured by heat or acid/alkali pH. There were just 2 points that you made that I'd like to weigh in on ....
The first is that amino acids are protein fragments (or the building blocks that make up proteins), not fats - so they won't be saponified. When we eat proteins, the acid in the gut breaks the proteins down into amino acids, which are small enough molecules to be absorbed ..... So perhaps breaking proteins down into amino acids isn't such a bad thing. What I'm less certain about is what exactly is the end product of an amino acid following exposure to lye, and what (beneficial or otherwise) properties the molecule may have.
The second observation is that, based on the pH level, it won't make much difference when you add the milk in CP - because even after a few weeks cure the pH of soap is still alkaline. So adding milk as the liquid for your lye solution or at trace won't make much difference in terms of the pH to which the proteins are exposed. Perhaps adding milk after the cook in HP might make a difference, but I don't know how strong the alkali needs to be to break down the protein.





Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Btw, thinkativeone, I should have some time next week to come up with a recipe that will best disguise the appearance of the milk vs water soaps ....... I'm thinking of adding a clay to both, but haven't decided yet!

And we'll need to find 10 or 12 volunteers to blind test the 2 soaps after a 6 to 8 week cure, and fill out a questionnaire to share their thoughts and preferences - so anyone wishing to volunteer, let me know. (For reasons of postal costs, I'd prefer to have most of the people in Europe though. And I'd guess that the soaps should be cured in Dec/Jan, if I can make them both next week.)


Sent from my iPad using Soap Making

Let me know when the game is on. I will replicate in Alaska with local blind testers!