The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced a proposed rule aimed at improving the methods for testing, detecting, and identifying asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products. Talc, a common ingredient in products such as baby powder and makeup, has come under intense scrutiny due to its potential contamination with asbestos, a known carcinogen, as well as recent research classifying talc itself as a carcinogen. The FDA’s proposal seeks to establish standardized testing methods to ensure greater consumer safety.

Details of the Proposed Rule

The FDA’s proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, outlines specific testing methods to identify and quantify asbestos in talc products. These methods include transmission electron microscopy (TEM), which is highly sensitive and capable of detecting even trace amounts of asbestos. The rule also requires manufacturers to use qualified laboratories and maintain detailed records of their testing processes.

According to the FDA, the goal is to eliminate variability in asbestos detection methods currently used by the cosmetics industry. “Standardized methods will provide greater assurance that talc-containing cosmetics are safe and free from harmful contaminants,” the FDA stated in its announcement. The agency opened the proposal for public comment, encouraging stakeholders to contribute insights before finalizing the rule.

Research Linking Talc to Ovarian Cancer and Mesothelioma

While the FDA’s efforts focus on consumer safety, decades of research have raised concerns about the health risks associated with talc use. Studies have linked talc-containing products to serious illnesses like ovarian cancer and mesothelioma.

Ovarian cancer has been a particular focus of concern. Research suggests that talc particles, when used in the genital area, may travel through the reproductive tract and cause inflammation, leading to cancer. In fact, a 2020 study published in Cancer Epidemiology found that women who regularly used talc in this manner faced a significantly increased risk of developing ovarian cancer.

Similarly, mesothelioma, a rare but deadly cancer affecting the lining of the lungs, is strongly associated with asbestos exposure. Since talc and asbestos often occur together in nature, contaminated talc can serve as a source of exposure. Numerous case studies have documented mesothelioma cases among individuals who used talc-based products.

Adding further weight to these concerns, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified talc as a “probable carcinogen” when used in the genital area, even if it does not contain asbestos. The IARC’s findings underscore the inherent risks of talc and have fueled calls for stricter regulation. “The IARC’s conclusion is a game-changer,” said Attorney Chris Tisi. “Even talc that is supposedly asbestos-free can pose serious health risks. This reinforces the need for accountability and comprehensive consumer protection.”

Litigation Against Johnson & Johnson

The health risks associated with talc have led to thousands of lawsuits against manufacturers, including Johnson & Johnson. Plaintiffs in these cases allege that the company’s talc and talcum powder products, such as Johnson’s Baby Powder, were contaminated with asbestos and caused them to develop ovarian cancer or mesothelioma.

The talc litigation has been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL), where Levin Papantonio attorneys Chris Tisi and Cameron Stephenson represent plaintiffs. Both attorneys have been outspoken about the importance of holding corporations accountable.

“For decades, Johnson & Johnson knew about the risks associated with their talc products but chose profit over people,” said Attorney Chris Tisi. “Our goal is to ensure that victims and their families receive the justice they deserve.”

Attorney Cameron Stephenson emphasized the human impact of these cases. “Behind every lawsuit is a person who has suffered unimaginable loss. These cases aren’t just about compensation; they’re about forcing change so no one else has to endure this pain,” he stated.

In recent years, Johnson & Johnson has faced mounting legal and financial pressure. Although the company continues to deny that its talc products are unsafe, these denials have not stopped juries from awarding significant verdicts to plaintiffs, including one case where a Missouri jury ordered the company to pay $4.7 billion to 22 women who developed ovarian cancer.

Moving Forward

The FDA’s proposed rule represents a critical step toward addressing the health risks of talc-containing cosmetics. However, as litigation continues, advocates stress the need for stricter oversight and greater transparency from manufacturers.

“We commend the FDA for adopting the testing we’ve long advocated for,” Stephenson said. “This is a significant step toward better protecting consumers from harmful products.”

With research linking talc to severe illnesses and ongoing litigation highlighting corporate negligence, the stakes are higher than ever. The voices of plaintiffs like those represented by Levin Papantonio attorneys serve as a powerful reminder of the human cost of inaction. As regulatory efforts evolve, the hope is that no one else will have to pay that price.