Talc in cosmetics

[cedge]

Plenty of products still have talc in their ingredients list. Many blushers and bronzers are largely talc based.

As with baby powder, there could be a risk of asbestos contamination - not something you want to putting on your face.

Better to seek non talc cosmetics IMO.

I thought the risk was if it was dusted near your fanjo.

What exactly are you doing with your blusher?

It is actually probably more dangerous on your face. Asbestos causes cancer of the lungs.

All talc-containing products sold in the UK have been free of asbestos since the 1970s. So as long as you don't use the blusher your mum's had sitting in her dressing table for the past 40 years, you'll probably be ok.

use to - not all talc contains asbestos - This is still unproven through research - & I have said this before - in the past when going into hospital the top of the list of things to take in was....talcum powder. It was used by the nursed to rub pressure areas & believe me it was used massively in the NHS - so if the stuff did in the past contain asbestos wouldn't you think there would be a massive amount of nurses with asbestos related diseases & yet I have checked & I can find nothing.

The industry regulated itself since the 1970's and talc is supposed to be asbestos free. However, Johnson & Johnson are losing case after case regarding their talc causing cancer. A German study also found that 25% of talcs they analysed contained asbestos, albeit at low levels. Not worth the risk IMO.

Google 'Asbestos in talc powders - DGUV'

Liz Earle and many other big name cosmetic companies still use talc as the main ingredient in their bronzers.

Many of the 'talcs' in talcum powders have been replaced with corn starch.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/29124998/

Evaluation of the presence of asbestos in cosmetic talcum products.

Pierce JS, et al. Inhal Toxicol. 2017.

Abstract

Talc has been used for over a century in a variety of cosmetic products. While pure cosmetic talc (free of asbestos) is not considered a risk factor for mesothelioma, it has been recently suggested that inhalation of cosmetic talc containing trace levels of asbestos is a risk factor for mesothelioma.

Bulk analyses of cosmetic talcum products were performed in the 1960s and 1970s, however, the analytical methods used at that time were incapable of determining whether asbestos minerals were present in the asbestiform versus non-asbestiform habit. The distinction between these two mineral habits is critical, as non-asbestiform amphibole minerals do not present an asbestos-related cancer risk via inhalation.

As such, we evaluated six historical talcum powders using modern-era analytical methods to determine if asbestos is present, and if so, to identify the mineral habit (asbestiform versus non-asbestiform) of the asbestos.

Based on their labels, the products were produced by four manufacturers and sold between 1940 and 1977. The products were analyzed in duplicate by two laboratories using standard protocols.

Laboratory A analyzed samples using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and polarized light microscopy (PLM), and Laboratory B analyzed samples using PLM and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) with energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX) and selected area electron diffraction (SAED).

No asbestiform minerals were found in any of the products.

Nonetheless, even if some historical cosmetic talcum products contained trace amounts (≤0.1%) of asbestiform minerals, any resulting asbestos exposure would be expected to be exceedingly low, and comparable to exposures from breathing ambient air.

We're safe.

We've been safe for decades.

Get away with your scaremongering.

Johnson & Johnson have a cornstarch baby powder but still persist with their main talc brand. It would also be much better if corn starch was used in makeup rather than talc. Even Lush have talc in 16 of their products.

I have just spent half an hour googling talc and asbestos, and every site I have read has stated that talc has been asbestos free since the 1970s.

The cases you mention probably date back to when people used talc before they removed the asbestos..
You seem to be on a crusade to ban talc.

So the German study was lying? Johnson & Johnson are losing millions in compensation for no reason? OK then.

Mesothelioma is caused by asbestos. This quote is from the Cancer Research website:

"Over the last decade, mesothelioma incidence rates have increased by more than a twentieth (7%) in the UK. Rates in males have remained stable, and rates in females have increased by almost a sixth (16%)".

Why would rates increase in females when it was mainly men who worked with asbestos? Women must have been breathing it in somewhere.

I am not on a crusade against anything. I thought that any sensible woman would not want to use potentially contaminated talc on their face. Feel free to keep using it if you don't care.

If you were really concerned about cancer from talcs in cosmetics (which seems a bit melodramatic IMO) then surely you just go without. Health is more important than looking pretty.

A Chinese study also found asbestos in talc, again at low levels:

pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/ay/c3ay41887a/unauth#!divAbstract

My point is not that all talcum powder contains asbestos, but that there is a risk of contamination. Studies show that contamination is still possible. Why use products containing talc when there is no need?

The study you've read demonstrates that there are minimal amounts of any kind of asbestos in talc or soapstone and there are robust protections in place for employees working with it.

Even the report (which is over 9 years old) states that one cannot conclusively say that asbestos is in all talc.

6 Conclusions

It can be basically concluded that no global statements can be made about whether talcum powders
or soapstone contain asbestos.

The analyses conducted as examples show that in many cases the established SEM-EDX analytical methods did not find asbestos in either talcum powders or soap-
stone.

However, in about one in four of the samples of both soapstone and talcum analysed in the last few years in the course of the statutory accident insurance institutions’ OSH work, extremely small shares of asbestos were found. Two of the 57 talcum powders and two of the 35 soapstone samples had asbestos contents that are prohibited under Annex IV, No. 1, GefStoffV (Hazardous Sub-
stances Ordinance).

Measurements of the asbestos fibre concentrations in working environments involving talcum powders showed that where talcum powders with low asbestos weight contents (< 0.1%) were employed,
asbestos fibre exposure up to the order of about 10,000 F/m3 can occur.

It is essential to request sellers of talcum powders and soapstone to furnish proof from a qualified body that no asbestos can be detected in the material with the specified analytical methods (according
to Appendix 2 of TRGS 517).

Even if no asbestos can be detected, protective measures must always be taken when talcum powders are used and soapstone is processed.

The minimum standards are described in the Technical Rule for Hazardous Substances 500 “Protective measures” [8]. This applies as much to the use of soapstone in schools or medical treatment centres as to industrial uses.

You are scaremongering and panicking over nothing.

LOL. So your position had changed from 'there has been no asbestos in talc since the 1970's' to 'there is minimal asbestos in talc'.

Anybody who reads the studies can see there is a risk - yet I am 'scaremongering'.

OK then.

Paragraph and bold fails, obviously. 😳

When working with talc and soapstone in bulk, PPE must be provided and used.

Talc and soapstone are minerals and masks/breathing gear to prevent fine particulate inhalation must be used.

Women are increasingly diagnosed with asbestos related diseases for a variety of reasons - entering the industrial workforce in greater number themselves, laundering their families' work clothes or greater levels of air pollution.

The report is in PDF format.

www.dguv.de/ifa/forschung/projektverzeichnis/bia_2016-2.jsp

Keep putting it on your face then. Ignore the fact that two recent studies show asbestos contamination.

I am sure others would prefer not to.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.dguv.de/medien/ifa/de/pub/grl/pdf/2009_108.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjE_cz49dHdAhXqCsAKHW63ASIQFjAAegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw225616DoAfxtzd03Y_m234" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Hang on, think this is it. PDF format

Basically, there is a legal undertaking for those who sell talc and soapstone to provide guarantees that the products contain no asbestos and that proof must come in the form of analytical results provided by audited laboratories.

The talc in our cosmetics is asbestos free.

Like I said - some studies have found contamination, some have not. Yet the industry still regulates itself.

The risk may be relatively low, but I am certainly not scaremongering by linking to relevant studies.

It is up to each person whether they want to risk it. I certainly will not be knowingly using talc cosmetics.

Johnson & Johnson are losing millions in compensation for no reason?

Losing a court case is categorically not the same as being scientifically proven.

Court cases..
There are hundreds of cases to be heard.

I have also linked to studies that show talc is sometimes still contaminated with asbestos.

If you feel OK using it then that's your choice.