As for the topic more specifically, I discovered the formula of the original SeaFoam product many years ago. The product has been available since the 1930s. In some applications and some instances, it can provide some benefits. In a modern fuel system, it can just as easily cause more damage than it can ever solve. Fortunately for the owners of vehicles (and unintentionally, for the makers of such additive products) modern equipment is engineered to withstand some level of contaminants, solvents, and water. No fuel is completely clean, nor is it completely dry. These devices and components are necessarily tolerant of rogue materials.
Additionally, nowhere in my previous replies did I state that SeaFoam should not be used in any of its advertised or the manufacturer's suggested applications. Instead, I specifically suggested that:Anyone considering using any such product in a fuel system using injectors contact the injector manufacturer for their approval; Anyone considering using it in their crankcase contact a reputable engine bearing manufacturer for their input and approval. Bearings are the items most susceptible to damage and failure from contamination.
I would further advise that anyone considering using it in an automatic transmission contact Raybestos, Borg/Warner, Barnes, SPX, or any other reputable manufacturer of transmission components for their approval. That is hardly an attack, and is generally sound practice for any product potentially added to any other product.
As a pharmacy major, I suspect you would have considerable experience in investigating potentially harmful interactions of products and suitability for a desired result. I merely advocated exercising the same caution in pouring a $6 can of oily water into your crankcase or fuel tank. Granted, your vocation likely has made you aware of the considerably more significant risks of harmful interactions, and instead of your customer, if your vehicle dies, you can still get out and walk. I was only advising general caution in the interest of avoiding frustration.
You should be applauded for at least being astute enough to contact the manufacturer of the product prior to using it. I'd consider you among the few who care enough to want to understand what the product is supposed to do in its intended application. Nonetheless, I would fully expect the person(s) you contacted would inform you that the product is oil. Yes, it is mostly oil (pale oil). It is also partially naptha (a distillate of crude oil), as well as partially alcohol and water. As of about 1996, the approximate analysis of the formulation was as follows:
50% light hydrocarbon oil (pale oil);
30% petroleum naphtha;
10% isopropyl alcohol;
10% water.
While I seriously doubt they would comply, anyone curious or interested enough could contact the manufacturer to either confirm the analysis or supply a current formulation to disprove the analysis of their product in 1996. Simply denying that the previous analysis is correct would be insufficient evidence, since it could easily be denied if the actual formulation were only 9.45% isopropyl and 10.23% water. (Heat and vacuum fractionalization can only be accurate to a few percentage points.) I've performed my due diligence over a decade ago, and feel confident in the results. Someone else can carry it further