Colloids & emulsions Published physics Educational models Planned capability

An emulsion lasts only while its droplets do not rise, cluster, merge or ripen; small droplets alone prevent none of these

How nanoemulsions differ from microemulsions, the five ways an emulsion changes on the shelf, and the physics that sets each rate.

Status. EUTECNIQ has no laboratory, homogenizer, formulation or stability data; formulation work is planned for the Phase I laboratory (facility plan, October 2026). Every curve is an educational model or a published value.

3.5–7.3×slower Ostwald ripening when 40% of the Tween 20 was replaced (curcumin–MCT nanoemulsions)

≈66%β-carotene bioaccessibility in vitro with long-chain oil, against ≈2% with medium-chain oil

100×slower creaming for a droplet ten times smaller (Stokes' law)

2–2.5 °Ctemperature rise per 10 MPa in each homogenizer pass

Kim et al., Prev Nutr Food Sci 2016, Table 2; Qian et al., Food Chem 2012; Stokes' law (McClements, Food Emulsions, 2015); Patrignani et al. 2019; Romano et al. 2021.

Ostwald ripening, simulated

Left alone, an emulsion coarsens as small droplets dissolve into larger ones and the mean radius cubed climbs

Lifshitz–Slyozov–Wagner ripening of 130 droplets, simulated: shrinking droplets in rose, growing ones in steelSimulation, model output

Droplets left 130 of 130Mean radius 1 × startTime τ 0.0Oil volume kept 100.0%

Growth law dr/dτ = k(1/r)(1/r̄ − 1/r), the mean-field form of Lifshitz–Slyozov–Wagner (LSW) theory (Lifshitz & Slyozov 1961; Wagner 1961; Taylor 1998), with r in units of the starting mean radius and k = 1 or 0.01 for the two oils. LSW theory predicts that r̄³ eventually rises linearly at 4k/9; over the time shown this small population has not reached that regime, so its trace is steeper, and each step marks a droplet disappearing. 130 droplets, log-normal start (σ = 0.22), fixed positions, total oil volume held constant. A teaching simulation, not a prediction for any product.

Ripening speed scales with the oil's solubility in water: with a 100-fold less soluble oil, the same droplets barely change over the same time.

Explanation, details and sources

Oil dissolves slightly into the water around each droplet, more so around small, strongly curved ones (Laplace pressure). Oil therefore diffuses from droplets smaller than the mean to larger ones; the small ones vanish and the number of droplets falls while the total oil volume stays the same. In the mean-field theory the critical radius equals the number-mean radius, which conserves volume exactly. The rate constant k stands for c(∞)γV_mD/(ρRT); its physical value for a chosen oil is computed in the calculator further down this page, and measured ripening rates for a published nanoemulsion are charted beside it.

Limits: dilute emulsion, no coalescence, creaming or flocculation, no micelle-assisted transport. Real emulsions are measured (see the measurement section).

What this page answers

Delivery claims for oil-soluble botanicals rest on emulsion physics that can be measured long before any human study

Four rungs of a delivery claim can be measured in a laboratory; only the top one needs peopleEvidence hierarchy

After McClements DJ. Soft Matter. 2011;7(6):2297–2316 (nanoemulsions can increase bioavailability and may change the biological fate of components) and McClements 2007 (several complementary stability methods). Digestion models rank formulations; human pharmacokinetic studies establish systemic exposure (see evidence and pharmacokinetics).

Text version of the evidence ladder

Physical stability of the droplets: size, charge, cream layer and free oil tracked over time and under stress. It does not show that the active itself survives.
Chemical stability of the active: a validated assay of the active over the same storage. A stable laboratory batch is not a validated commercial shelf life.
Dispersibility in water: a fine, stable dispersion of an oil-soluble active. It is not solubility in water, and not absorption.
Bioaccessibility: release into a digestion model, which ranks formulations. It is not systemic bioavailability.
Systemic bioavailability: exposure in the blood, shown only by human pharmacokinetic data. It is not clinical efficacy.

Nanoemulsion stability≠demonstrated bioavailability
Dispersibility in water≠solubility in water
Droplet radius below 100 nm≠a microemulsion
Bioaccessibility in a digestion model≠systemic bioavailability
Physical stability≠chemical stability of the active
A stable laboratory batch≠a validated commercial shelf life

Explanation, details and sources

A lipophilic active, one that dissolves in oil rather than water, can be carried in oil droplets dispersed in water. Each rung of evidence below needs its own measurement.

EUTECNIQ would

Choose oil, emulsifier and process for an active
Measure size, charge and change over time
Stress-test dilution, pH, temperature, freeze–thaw
Transfer a working process to pilot scale

Proposed

Qualified partners would

Measure before EUTECNIQ's laboratory exists
Provide imaging such as cryo-electron microscopy
Run digestion models or human studies

External partner

EUTECNIQ does not claim

Formulation, droplet-size or stability data
That small droplets raise absorption in people
A proprietary delivery technology

Limits

Nano versus micro

Nanoemulsions and microemulsions can share a droplet size; thermodynamics is what separates them

Free energy of the dispersed state compared with separated oil and waterSchematic, not to scale

State 1: separated oil and water. State 2: dispersed droplets. In a nanoemulsion state 1 has the lower free energy, so state 2 survives only because the barrier slows breakdown; in a microemulsion state 2 is the minimum at its composition and temperature.

After McClements DJ. Soft Matter. 2012;8(6):1719–1729. The formation free energy is ΔG_formation = γΔA − TΔS_config: the interfacial tension γ times the new interface ΔA, minus the configurational entropy gained by dispersing the droplets. Curve shapes are drawn for explanation only.

McClements DJ. Nanoemulsions versus microemulsions: terminology, differences, and similarities. Soft Matter. 2012;8(6):1719–1729. The response row is an inference from the stability definitions, not a quoted result.

Explanation, details and sources

A microemulsion is thermodynamically stable and forms on its own at the right composition and temperature. A nanoemulsion is unstable and lasts only because breakdown is slow, called kinetic stability (McClements 2012). Both can have droplet radii below about 100 nm.

Property	Nanoemulsion	Microemulsion
Thermodynamic status	Unstable; persists because breakdown is slow (kinetic stability)	Stable at its composition and temperature
How it forms	Needs energy input, such as a high-pressure homogenizer or ultrasound, or a low-energy route that traps fine droplets	Forms spontaneously once the right components are combined
Droplet radius	Can be below about 100 nm	Below about 100 nm
Response to dilution or heating	Droplets persist for a time, then break down by the mechanisms below	Can change structure or break down once dilution or temperature moves it outside its stability region
How to tell them apart	Behavior over time and after perturbation, not droplet size

Instability mechanisms

Creaming can be undone by mixing; coalescence, ripening and phase separation cannot

Five ways an oil-in-water emulsion changes, starting from the same fresh emulsionSchematic

Mechanism classes after McClements DJ. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2007;47(7):611–649, and McClements DJ. Food Emulsions. 3rd ed. CRC Press; 2015. Ostwald ripening: Taylor P. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 1998;75(2):107–163. Droplet positions are drawn for explanation.

At droplet scale, four mechanisms have four different driving forces, and only two can be undonePublished mechanisms

McClements 2007; McClements 2015 (Stokes' law); Taylor 1998 (Ostwald ripening, LSW theory); ripening inhibitors: Pavoni L, et al. Nanomaterials. 2020;10(1):135. Laplace pressure Δp = 2γ/r. Droplets are drawn for explanation, not to scale.

Text version: the five mechanisms

Each mechanism has its own driving force and remedy. Kinetic stability is a rate, so it is measured at the conditions of use and over time.

Mechanism	What happens	Driving force	Reversible?	What slows it	How it would be measured
Creaming or sedimentation	Droplets move up (oil lighter than water) or down, but stay intact	Gravity acting on the density difference	Yes, by gentle mixing, if no droplets have merged	Smaller droplets, a smaller density difference, a more viscous water phase	Cream-layer height or backscatter along the container over time
Flocculation	Droplets cluster but keep their own interfacial films	Attraction between droplets exceeds electrostatic or steric repulsion	Often, for weak flocs	Surface charge or a thick adsorbed layer; control of pH and salt	Microscopy; apparent size growth; zeta potential as a guide
Coalescence	The film between two droplets ruptures and they merge	Lower total interfacial energy	No	A dense, well-anchored emulsifier layer; small droplets	Growth of the droplet-size distribution; free oil
Ostwald ripening	Oil dissolves from small droplets, diffuses through water and deposits on large ones	Higher solubility next to small, curved droplets (Laplace pressure)	No	Oils with very low water solubility, or an added insoluble oil	Mean radius cubed rising linearly in time (LSW theory)
Phase separation	A continuous oil layer forms, or the emulsion inverts	End point of coalescence	No	Preventing the mechanisms above	Visible oil layer; oil quantified after storage

Gravity

Creaming speed rises with the square of droplet size, so a tenfold smaller droplet creams a hundred times more slowly

Stokes velocity · gravitational lengthv = 2 r² Δρ g9 η l_g = k_BT(4/3)πr³ Δρ g

Droplet diameter Density difference, water minus oil Viscosity of the water phase Liquid height in the container

Stokes velocity

Time for a cream layer across the height

Gravitational length l_g

l_g ÷ liquid height

Time to form a cream layer versus droplet diameterModel output

Stokes' law and sedimentation–diffusion equilibrium as presented in McClements DJ. Food Emulsions. 3rd ed. CRC Press; 2015. Water viscosity 0.890 mPa·s at 25 °C: Pátek J, et al. J Phys Chem Ref Data. 2009;38(1):21–29. Shaded: droplet sizes whose gravitational length exceeds the liquid height.

Schematic cross-section of one oil droplet in water, coated by a single layer of surfactant molecules whose water-loving heads face outward and oil-loving tails point into the oil core. Beside it, the Laplace pressure equation and Stokes' law for creaming, with worked examples showing why small droplets cream slowly but are prone to Ostwald ripening. — Schematic, not to scale. Nanoemulsion definition: McClements DJ. Soft Matter 2012;8:1719–1729. Laplace pressure and Stokes’ law with the inputs shown on the figure. Generated illustration, EUTECNIQ. Full-size SVG

Method, assumptions and limits

What it calculates: The rise (or settling) speed of one droplet, the time to cross the liquid height at that speed, and the gravitational length at 25 °C.
Equations: v = 2r²Δρg/(9η); t = H/v; l_g = k_BT/((4/3)πr³Δρg). The concentration of droplets at equilibrium falls with height as exp(−z/l_g).
Variables and units: r droplet radius (m); Δρ density difference (kg/m³); g = 9.80665 m/s²; η viscosity (Pa·s); H liquid height (m); k_B = 1.380649 × 10⁻²³ J/K; T = 298.15 K. Dimensions: (m²·kg/m³·m/s²)/(Pa·s) = m/s.
Assumptions: Dilute emulsion; rigid, non-interacting spheres; Newtonian water phase; no convection. A denser oil sediments at the same speed.
Valid range: Particle Reynolds number far below 1, true for every setting here. Droplet diameters 20 nm to 20 µm; viscosity 0.89 to 1,000 mPa·s.
What it does not establish: Concentrated emulsions cream more slowly than Stokes predicts; flocculated droplets cream faster as clusters; thickened or gelled water phases need measured rheology. It says nothing about coalescence, ripening or chemical stability.
Verification: Independent Python reference cases in tests/numerics/ref/technologies-emulsions-colloids.py, checked against the page by tests/e2e/numerics.js.

Explanation, details and sources

Stokes' law gives the speed of an isolated droplet in a still liquid. Below a certain size, Brownian motion spreads droplets faster than gravity collects them; the gravitational length marks that crossover.

Making small droplets

Three devices tear droplets apart with force; low-energy methods let chemistry do the work

How each method breaks oil into fine dropletsIllustrative schematics

Pressures of 50–200 MPa; size falls with pressure and passes; sonication can damage components, for example by lipid oxidation: Pavoni L, et al. Nanomaterials. 2020;10(1):135. Temperature rise of about 2–2.5 °C per 10 MPa downstream of the valve, with exposure under 1 s: Patrignani F, et al. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:246; Romano E, et al. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(18):9896. Low-energy methods need a high surfactant-to-oil ratio and usually synthetic surfactants: Choi SJ, McClements DJ. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2020;29:149–168.

Droplet size versus number of passes, at three pressuresIllustrative trend

Shape follows the trend reported for clove-oil nanoemulsions at 50, 100 and 150 MPa over 1–20 passes: size fell from pass 1 to 5, further reduction was negligible after 10 passes, and the smallest droplets (about 150 nm) came at the highest pressure (Majeed H, et al. Food Chem. 2016;197:75–83, as summarized by Pavoni et al. 2020). Curves are illustrative, not the measured data.

Laplace pressure: the smaller the droplet, the harder it is to breakYoung–Laplace equation

Δp = 2γ/r. Interfacial tensions of 5 and 20 mN/m are examples. In turbulent breakup the largest stable droplet shrinks with the energy dissipation rate to the −2/5 power (Hinze JO. AIChE J. 1955;1(3):289–295); scale-up of that rule is on the process engineering page, and power-per-volume and tip-speed rules for homogenizers and mixers are on scale-up and technology transfer.

Each pass through a valve homogenizer heats the product by about 2 to 2.5 °C per 10 MPa: 30 to 37.5 °C at 150 MPaPublished rates, computed per pass

Temperature rise of about 2–2.5 °C per 10 MPa downstream of the valve, with exposure under 1 s: Patrignani F, et al. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:246; Romano E, et al. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(18):9896. Operating range 50–200 MPa: Pavoni et al. 2020. Adiabatic line: ΔT = Δp/(ρc_p) with ρ = 1,000 kg/m³ and c_p = 4.18 kJ/(kg·K). Per pass, without cooling between passes.

Text version of the temperature rise

At 2–2.5 °C per 10 MPa, one pass raises the temperature by 10–12.5 °C at 50 MPa, 20–25 °C at 100 MPa, 30–37.5 °C at 150 MPa and 40–50 °C at 200 MPa. An adiabatic energy balance gives 2.4 K per 10 MPa for a water-like product (2.5 K with c_p 4.0 kJ/(kg·K)). Each pass and each step up in pressure buys a smaller droplet, with fast diminishing returns.

Explanation, details and sources

High-energy devices break droplets apart, and the emulsifier must cover the new interface before fragments merge. Low-energy methods form fine droplets when the right oil–surfactant mixture meets water.

High-pressure valve homogenizer

A sub-second burst of pressure and shear

Pressure: 50–200 MPa; size falls with pressure and passes
Heat: 2–2.5 °C per 10 MPa per pass (chart above)
Time: under 1 s in the valve

Pavoni et al. 2020; Patrignani et al. 2019; Romano et al. 2021

Microfluidizer

Two jets collide in an interaction chamber

Size: falls with passes and pressure
Chambers: Y- and Z-type designs are common

Choi & McClements 2020

Ultrasonication

Collapsing cavitation bubbles tear droplets

Size: set by time, intensity, emulsifier and viscosity
Risk: can denature proteins, depolymerize polysaccharides or oxidize lipids
Use: refines an emulsion or emulsifies in one step

Pavoni et al. 2020; Choi & McClements 2020

Low-energy emulsification

Chemistry instead of force

Heat: none for spontaneous emulsification; the phase-inversion temperature method warms, then cools
Cost: a high surfactant-to-oil ratio, usually synthetic
Watch: stability on dilution or changed conditions

Choi & McClements 2020; Pavoni et al. 2020

Ostwald ripening

Small droplets feed large ones, and the oil's water solubility sets the pace

LSW ripening rateω = dr³dt = 89·c(∞) γ V_m Dρ R T

Oil solubility in water, c(∞)

Starting droplet diameter

Ripening rate ω

Time to double the mean diameter

Mean droplet diameter over timeModel output

Lifshitz IM, Slyozov VV. J Phys Chem Solids. 1961;19:35–50. Wagner C. Z Elektrochem. 1961;65:581–591. Taylor P. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 1998;75:107–163. Equation form and remedies (oils of very low water solubility, or a second, insoluble oil): Pavoni et al. 2020. Limonene: PubChem CID 22311.

Method, assumptions and limits

What it calculates: The LSW ripening rate for a limonene-like oil of chosen water solubility, the mean diameter over time and the time for the mean diameter to double.
Equations: ω = (8/9)(c(∞)/ρ)(γV_m/RT)D; r³(t) = r₀³ + ωt; doubling the diameter needs t = 7r₀³/ω.
Variables and units: c(∞) oil solubility (kg/m³); ρ = 840.2 kg/m³ and M = 0.13623 kg/mol for limonene, so V_m = M/ρ (m³/mol); γ = 5 mN/m and D = 7 × 10⁻¹⁰ m²/s (examples); R = 8.314 J/(mol·K); T = 298.15 K. ω comes out in m³/s.
Assumptions: Steady-state ripening of a dilute emulsion; no coalescence, creaming or flocculation; interfacial tension and diffusivity fixed.
Valid range: Solubility 10⁻⁴ to 100 mg/L; starting diameter 60–300 nm. The curve is clipped at 1 µm.
What it does not establish: Absolute times depend on the example γ and D; real emulsions are measured. Mixtures of oils, surfactant micelles and polydisperse droplets can ripen faster or slower than LSW predicts.
Verification: Independent Python reference cases in tests/numerics/ref/technologies-emulsions-colloids.py.

Measured: replacing 40% of the Tween 20 with a second emulsifier cut the ripening rate of curcumin–MCT nanoemulsions 3.5- to 7.3-fold at every pressurePublished data

Data table (Kim et al. 2016, Tables 1 and 2)

Droplet size, polydispersity and Ostwald ripening rate of curcumin-loaded MCT nanoemulsions
Pressure	Emulsifier (wt%)	Day 1, nm (PdI)	Day 28, nm (PdI)	ω, × 10⁴ nm³/h (R²)
5,000 psi	Tween 20 (10)	106.97 (0.139)	121.80 (0.096)	9.07 (0.9808)
5,000 psi	Tween 20 : sorbitan monooleate (6:4)	89.13 (0.097)	94.71 (0.110)	2.54 (0.8446)
5,000 psi	Tween 20 : soy lecithin (6:4)	105.50 (0.135)	109.30 (0.124)	1.91 (0.8292)
10,000 psi	Tween 20 (10)	85.85 (0.160)	111.37 (0.104)	11.65 (0.9953)
10,000 psi	Tween 20 : sorbitan monooleate (6:4)	77.44 (0.098)	82.24 (0.106)	1.72 (0.8457)
10,000 psi	Tween 20 : soy lecithin (6:4)	77.21 (0.146)	86.33 (0.131)	3.16 (0.8972)
15,000 psi	Tween 20 (10)	89.08 (0.137)	109.23 (0.114)	9.68 (0.9876)
15,000 psi	Tween 20 : sorbitan monooleate (6:4)	73.43 (0.081)	77.38 (0.084)	1.32 (0.7879)
15,000 psi	Tween 20 : soy lecithin (6:4)	67.68 (0.143)	77.88 (0.141)	2.76 (0.9022)

Rate ratios (Tween 20 alone ÷ mixed system) are computed here: 3.6 and 4.7 at 5,000 psi, 6.8 and 3.7 at 10,000 psi, 7.3 and 3.5 at 15,000 psi. The linear fits for the mixed systems are weaker (R² 0.79–0.90). 5,000, 10,000 and 15,000 psi are 34.5, 68.9 and 103.4 MPa.

Kim SH, Ji YS, Lee ES, Hong ST. Prev Nutr Food Sci. 2016;21(3):289–295, Tables 1–2 (open access): 0.15% curcumin, 10% MCT oil, 10% emulsifier; microfluidizer, 4 cycles; dynamic light scattering after 1,000-fold dilution; stored 28 days at room temperature; mean of n = 3. A 28-day storage test ranks formulations; it is not a validated shelf life.

Explanation, details and sources

Oil dissolves slightly into the water around each droplet, more so around small ones. Oil therefore migrates from small droplets to large ones, and the cube of the mean radius grows linearly in time (Lifshitz–Slyozov–Wagner, or LSW, theory).

Self-emulsifying systems

A self-emulsifying mix must stay finely dispersed along its whole dilution path, and only a measured phase diagram shows it

Where a mix disperses into fine dropletsSchematic, not data

Mix A stays a fine dispersion along its whole dilution line; mix B, with less surfactant, crosses into the coarse region. Region shapes are schematic; real boundaries are measured. Lipid formulation types: Pouton CW. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2006;29:278–287 (see delivery systems).

Mix A stays fine all along its dilution line; mix B, with less surfactant, does not. Only a measured diagram shows which a real blend does.

Explanation, details and sources

Oil, surfactant and cosurfactant blends disperse into fine droplets when diluted, as in the gut. The region where they do so is mapped by titration for each pair.

Pick the oilLow water solubility resists ripening; the oil also has to dissolve the active.
Map the diagramTitrate oil–surfactant mixes with water and record where they stay clear.
Make and measureSize by light scattering, then track it over time and through dilution.
Test the claim separatelySmall droplets disperse an active; only human data show better absorption.

Measurement

No single measurement shows that an emulsion is stable, so size, charge, appearance and the active are tracked together

Six measurements, six different properties: a stability study needs several of them at every time pointQualitative summary of the table

Rows and limits as in the table below: USP ⟨429⟩, ⟨430⟩, ⟨776⟩; ISO 22412:2025; ISO 13320:2020; McClements 2007.

Schematic of the ions next to a negatively charged oil droplet surface in water: a compact Stern layer of adsorbed counter-ions, the slipping plane where zeta potential is defined, and a diffuse layer in which counter-ions thin out with distance. Below, computed potential profiles show the layer shrinking as salt rises. Beside it, the Debye length, Smoluchowski and Stokes-Einstein equations with worked values. — Debye–Hückel screening, Smoluchowski equation and Stokes–Einstein relation as in standard colloid texts (e.g., Israelachvili JN. Intermolecular and Surface Forces. 3rd ed. 2011); CODATA constants; water at 25 °C. Potential profiles computed from an assumed zeta potential. Generated illustration, EUTECNIQ. Full-size SVG

Show the table (6 rows)

Method	What it reports	Main limit	Standard
Dynamic light scattering	Hydrodynamic diameter (z-average) and polydispersity of droplets below about a micrometer	Intensity-weighted: a few large droplets or dust dominate	USP ⟨430⟩; ISO 22412:2025
Laser diffraction	Volume-weighted size distribution; catches the micrometer tail that signals coalescence	Model-based inversion needs refractive indices	USP ⟨429⟩; ISO 13320:2020
Electrophoretic light scattering	Zeta potential, a guide to electrostatic repulsion between droplets	Depends on pH and salt; it predicts, it does not measure, stability	Method-specific
Optical and electron microscopy	Direct images of droplets, flocs and crystals	Small fields of view; preparation can create artifacts	USP ⟨776⟩ for optical microscopy
Storage and stress tests	Cream layer, free oil and size change after storage, dilution, pH change, centrifugation or temperature cycling	Stress results rank formulations; they do not set a shelf life	Protocol-specific
Assay of the active	Chemical stability: whether the active itself degrades	A physically stable emulsion can still lose its active to oxidation	Validated chromatographic method

USP general chapters ⟨429⟩, ⟨430⟩ and ⟨776⟩ (USP–NF); ISO 22412:2025, Particle size analysis — Dynamic light scattering (edition 3, September 2025; replaced the withdrawn 2017 edition); ISO 13320:2020 (laser diffraction, about 0.1 µm to 3 mm); McClements 2007 for the use of several complementary stability methods.

Explanation, details and sources

Each method sees part of the picture. A sound stability study measures several of them at the same time points, under storage and stress conditions. Instrument principles are on the analytical page.

From droplets to a claim

A stable nanoemulsion improves how an oil-soluble active disperses; whether it improves absorption in people is a separate question

Same nanoemulsion size class, three carrier oils: β-carotene bioaccessibility ranged from about 66% to about 0%Published data

Data table

β-carotene bioaccessibility by carrier oil, Qian et al. 2012
Carrier oil	Bioaccessibility	Reason given by the authors
Long-chain triglyceride	≈66%	Mixed micelles formed that could solubilize β-carotene
Medium-chain triglyceride	≈2%	Mixed micelles too small to solubilize β-carotene
Orange oil	≈0%	No mixed micelles formed

Qian C, Decker EA, Xiao H, McClements DJ. Nanoemulsion delivery systems: influence of carrier oil on β-carotene bioaccessibility. Food Chem. 2012;135:1440–1447 (abstract values). Tween 20 nanoemulsions, d < 200 nm; in vitro mouth, stomach and small-intestine model. Bioaccessibility in a digestion model is not systemic bioavailability.

Droplet size did not decide the result; the oil's digestion products did. Bioaccessibility in a model is still not absorption in people.

Explanation, details and sources

McClements (2011) describes nanoemulsions as able to increase bioavailability and also notes possible risks from changing the biological fate of components. EUTECNIQ would therefore treat a delivery benefit as a hypothesis: digestion models can rank formulations, and only human pharmacokinetic data establish systemic exposure.

Where the evidence goes next. Pharmacokinetic study design and how exposure is measured are covered on evidence and pharmacokinetics; carrier choice for a given molecule is on delivery systems. Source: McClements DJ. Edible nanoemulsions: fabrication, properties, and functional performance. Soft Matter. 2011;7(6):2297–2316.

Discuss a delivery-system question

Partners with an oil-soluble botanical active can describe the problem; EUTECNIQ would respond with a proposed study plan and its limits.

Contact EUTECNIQ Drying and particle engineering