The Personal Care Products Safety Act Expands The FDA Role In Regulating Cosmetics Including Talcum Powder (Part Two)

The FDA is recommending that the most advanced asbestos testing method be used to regain consumer confidence in cosmetics

Wednesday, December 28, 2022 - (Continued) People whose personal beauty rituals included using talcum powder have every right to be concerned about the safety of Johnson's Baby Powder. Thousands look forward to their day in court after consulting with a talcum powder cancer lawyer. A few years back, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) purchased bottles of Johnson's Baby Powder from retailers CVS, Walmart, and Rite Aid drug stores, tested them for asbestos using state-of-the-art talc/asbestos testing methods and found they contained the deadly mineral. Particles of talc do not break down and bio-accumulate over time, causing sufficient oxidative stress that may lead to ovarian cancer. In December 2019, Dr. Jaqueline Moline, Ph.D. testified under oath before Congress about her research into the link between using talcum powder for feminine hygiene and the likely risks of developing ovarian cancer. " More evidence is coming to light to support the proposition that cosmetic talcum powder is causing some women's ovarian cancer as well. The scientific evidence is clear that asbestos causes ovarian cancer. Recent studies that have looked at perineal talc exposure and ovarian cancer risk have found elevated cancer risk, particularly for the most common type of ovarian cancer: serous carcinoma of the ovary," she said.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) was quick to praise the end-of-year spending bill passed by Congress that gives teeth to the FDA's authority over the cosmetics industry. Most consumers would be shocked to know that The FDA until now, had no authority to regulate cosmetics products including those that might contain talcum powder asbestos. Even though the FDA is not required to test talcum powder products for the presence of asbestos, consumer health outcry forced the agency to take action to help ensure the safety of cosmetics in the U.S. marketplace. "We have become aware that methods employed by some industry members to test for asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products may not always detect the presence of asbestos," said Susan Mayne, Ph.D., director of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition." Of critical importance, according to the EWG was a provision in the bill that requires companies that manufacture talc-based cosmetics to test them for asbestos using state-of-the-art talc/asbestos testing methods. The FDA recommends that companies use both Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) to test every sample," Asbestos.com wrote. Advanced asbestos detection technology is also used by Dr. William Longo, a Georgia-based microscope researcher and a frequent plaintiff's expert witness alongside Dr. Moline. Dr. Longo blames the poor asbestos detection testing methods used by the cosmetics industry and endorsed by the Personal Care Products Council and Johnson & Johnson for the misleading opinion that asbestos talc was pure and asbestos-free. According to Asbestos.com, "Dr. Longo uses the Heavy Liquid Separation (HLS) technique, which is more sensitive than the testing methods used by Johnson & Johnson. Overall, Dr. Longo discovered 65% of all samples tested positive for asbestos."

Information provided by TalcumPowderCancerLawsuit.com, a website devoted to providing news about talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits, as well as medical research and findings.