{"id":918916,"date":"2025-12-04T16:04:35","date_gmt":"2025-12-04T13:04:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=918916"},"modified":"2025-12-04T16:04:35","modified_gmt":"2025-12-04T13:04:35","slug":"i-hate-to-break-it-to-you-but-we-never-had-mandatory-asbestos-testing-for-talc-to-begin-with","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=918916","title":{"rendered":"I Hate to Break It to You, But We Never Had Mandatory Asbestos Testing for Talc to Begin With"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

I Hate to Break It to You, But We Never Had Mandatory Asbestos Testing for Talc to Begin With<\/h1>\n<\/div>\n
\n
The FDA\u2019s withdrawal of a proposed asbestos testing rule isn\u2019t as straightforward as it seems.<\/div>\n
\n
\n
By <\/span>Marci Robin<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n

\n
\n
<\/p>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

Photo: Adobe Stock<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/header>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

In the current political climate, it can be hard to divorce feelings and fear from facts. So when it was announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had withdrawn a rule it had previously proposed for testing and identifying potential asbestos contamination in cosmetic products that contain talc, social media inevitably erupted with misinterpretations suggesting the FDA had outright ended testing for asbestos in talc. And that would be<\/em> very concerning\u2014if it were true.<\/p>\n

The mineral talc has been a historically common ingredient in cosmetics and personal care products, but it\u2019s faced a lot of scrutiny in recent years. \u201cTalc has been a workhorse ingredient for decades because of its softness, translucency, especially in pressed powders,\u201d cosmetic chemist Kelly Dobos tells Allure<\/em>. However, \u201cTalc and asbestos often occur near each other in the earth, so contamination can happen if mining and testing aren\u2019t rigorous.\u201d<\/p>\n

You may recall the slew of lawsuits issued against Johnson & Johnson in recent years regarding its baby powder and its alleged link to ovarian cancer. (Despite the brand\u2019s insistence that thousands of tests show no presence of asbestos and no proven causation between their product and cancer, Johnson & Johnson no longer formulates its baby powders with talc.) You might even remember when some Claire\u2019s cosmetics products, like the JoJo Siwa Makeup Set, were recalled for alleged asbestos contamination.<\/p>\n

In response to the concern these examples caused, numerous companies have reformulated their products to remove talc. \u201cMany brands include it on their \u2018clean\u2019 list or \u2018no no\u2019 list as it has a negative consumer reputation,\u201d cosmetic chemist Julian Sass says, and that reputation has contributed to the sometimes misinformed reaction to this testing rule withdrawal. So let\u2019s get the facts straight.<\/p>\n

Is the FDA ending talc testing for asbestos?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

In a word, no. That\u2019s because the FDA never mandated this kind of testing to begin with. \u201cCurrently, there is no mandatory federal requirement for asbestos testing in talc-based cosmetics,\u201d Dobos clarifies. \u201cThe proposed rule aimed to close this gap by making testing mandatory and uniform.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mandatory, uniform asbestos testing in talc-containing products certainly sounds like a good idea. However, it appears that the idea may not be a feasible reality yet.<\/p>\n

Why did the proposed testing rule get withdrawn?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

\u201cThe proposed FDA rule, published in late 2024, would have required manufacturers of talc-containing cosmetics to test each batch of talc or finished product for asbestos contamination using two methods, Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM),\u201d Dobos says. These are imaging techniques that allow for a clearer look at the structure of a specimen under a microscope.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

The FDA withdrew this proposal, citing public comments that brought up scientific, technical, and legal complexities of asbestos testing, including unintended impacts on other products like over-the-counter drugs containing talc. \u201cSome of the public comments noted the potential for false positives that could lead to recalls and lawsuits as well as increased testing costs that would especially impact small manufacturers,\u201d Dobos adds.<\/p>\n

And those aren\u2019t the only potential issues with the now-withdrawn proposed testing rules. \u201cThe problem with these tests is that there is no standardized way of detecting asbestos in talc,\u201d Sass says. \u201cThe U.S. government did not seem prepared for the technical line of questioning around these particular analytical methods. It’s important that any new testing methods put in place are standardized and agreed upon with both the government and industry scientists. Otherwise, we’re just throwing an ineffective solution at a problem.\u201d<\/p>\n

Why are people so concerned about talc?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

As Dobos mentioned, talc and asbestos often naturally occur near each other, so contamination is a concern, as asbestos is classified as a carcinogen by the World Health Organization, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.<\/p>\n

Although asbestos contamination is the primary concern, and asbestos-free talc is a thing, the European Union isn\u2019t taking any chances with it. \u201cBecause of the lack of standardization around how to detect asbestos in talc, the EU is temporarily banning all talc until standardized methods are in place,\u201d Sass says.<\/p>\n

Should you avoid cosmetic products with talc?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

While Sass says he doesn\u2019t believe talc poses much of a threat, it\u2019s understandable that its public reputation has become so closely tied to the threat of cancer. And brands are well aware of that. \u201cMany brands, including J&J, have reformulated to remove talc from their products, and new formulations are being designed without talc,\u201d Dobos says. \u201cWe have substitutes like sericite mica, starch derivatives, and kaolin clay, though none are perfect replacements for talc\u2019s unique properties and can add significant cost.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

If a product you already use and love has talc, you don\u2019t need to toss it or stop buying it. \u201cAll reputable brands that are using talc are already testing for asbestos in their talc, and the level of asbestos is included in their COA (certificate of analysis) for each batch,\u201d Sass says. But he reiterates that there is no standardized testing method across all manufacturers and ingredient suppliers.<\/p>\n

Does this mean there will be no asbestos testing for cosmetics?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

This withdrawal is not the end of the line for future asbestos testing in talc products. Under the Modernization of Cosmetic Regulations Act (MoCRA), the FDA is legally required to issue this rule. That said, the administration will eventually propose another and hopefully better one\u2014that\u2019s the good news. The bad news? \u201cThe timeline is totally unclear,\u201d Dobos says.<\/p>\n

In the meantime, there\u2019s no need to panic because nothing has changed. This isn\u2019t a withdrawal of a pre-existing regulation. But if you\u2019re truly concerned about the presence of talc\u2014and, by extension, the potential presence of asbestos\u2014in your cosmetics, Dobos recommends waiting to buy talc-based products (patiently) until we have mandatory, standardized testing. \u201cCautious consumers may want to shop for talc-free options, especially in loose powders where inhalation risk is higher.\u201d With so many products that already fit that bill, it\u2019s easy to find what you need without any seemingly worrisome ingredients.<\/p>\n

\n

More beauty news and opinions:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  • The Hair and Makeup in Wicked: For Good Is a Masterclass in Subtle Storytelling<\/li>\n
  • Now Can We Talk About the Real Problem with Shay Mitchell’s Sheet Masks for Kids?<\/li>\n
  • A Kinder, Gentler Boob Job May Be Upon Us<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n
    \n
    \n
    \n
    \n

    Now watch Laufey’s 10-minute makeup routine:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Follow<\/em> Allure on<\/em>\u00a0Instagram<\/em>and<\/em>\u00a0TikTok, or<\/em>\u00a0subscribe to our newsletter<\/em>to stay up to date on all things beauty.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n

    Source URL: https:\/\/www.allure.com\/story\/fda-asbestos-testing-talc-cosmetics<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY I Hate to Break It to You, But We Never Had Mandatory Asbestos Testing for Talc to Begin With The FDA\u2019s withdrawal of a proposed asbestos testing rule isn\u2019t as straightforward as it seems. By Marci Robin December 4, 2025 Photo: Adobe Stock In the current political climate, it can be […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":918917,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[52],"class_list":["post-918916","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-allure-com"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/918916","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=918916"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/918916\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/918917"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=918916"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=918916"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=918916"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}