CPC Wants Warning Label on Cosmetic Talc Goods

Some information is best spread quickly so people have all the facts and alleged facts on hand when making purchasing and usage decisions. Waiting for the FDA to act on the petition described below does not help anyone.

On May 13, 2008, the Cancer Prevention Coalition, endorsed by leading national authorities, submitted this Petition to the FDA. This updates scientific information detailed in a November 17, 1994, Citizen Petition which was denied by the FDA. It also documents prior knowledge of the FDA and industry on the cancer risks of cosmetic talc.

The scientific basis of the 2008 Petition is detailed in 11 reports in leading national and international scientific journals. These document the increased risks of ovarian cancer, ranging from 30% to 60%, from genital dusting with talc powder. In view of the strength of this evidence, a 1999 publication by a leading national expert urged that “formal public health warnings” should be made against the genital use of talcum dusting powder. Of further relevance is well-documented scientific evidence that ligation of the fallopian tubes or hysterectomy is protective against the dangers of talc by preventing its access to the ovaries.

It should further be emphasized that cornstarch, an organic carbohydrate, powder is a safe and effective alternative to talcum powder products.

As the Petition states, FDA Commissioner Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, former Director of the National Cancer Institute, is or should be aware, that the mortality of ovarian cancer for women over the age of 65, has escalated dramatically since 1975, by 13% for white and 47% for black women. There are now about 15,300 deaths from ovarian cancer each year. This makes it the fourth commonest fatal cancer in women after colon, breast and lung. Yet Dr. von Eschenbach has failed to mandate a cancer warning label on talc powder, let alone ban its continued use.

Information on the cancer risks of talc dusting powder is not new to the FDA, nor to the industry.

As stated in the Petition, J. Mande, Acting Associate Commissioner for Legislative Affairs of the Department of Health and Human Services, admitted in August 1993 that “We are aware that there have been reports in the medical literature between frequent direct female perineal talc dusting over a protracted period of years, and an incremental increase in the statistical odds of subsequent development of certain ovarian cancers . . . (However) at the present time, the FDA is not considering to ban, restrict or require a warning statement on the label of talc containing products.”

More reckless is the admission, in an August 12, 1982 New York Times article by Johnson & Johnson, the manufacturer and retailer of talc dusting powder, that frequent genital dusting with talc increases risks of ovarian cancer by three-fold. This risk was belatedly admitted this year by the industry’s Cosmetic Toiletry and Fragrance Association.

James Murray, a public relations officer for Johnson & Johnson, a talcum powder manufacturer, said the study was inconclusive because it had asked the women about current use of talc rather than about use over a period of years, when they would have been developing the cancers.

But he added: ”We agree more study is needed, and we are going to conduct appropriate new studies. We feel there is a vast amount of published research on talc in humans and animals that has shown no tendency of pure cosmetic-grade talc to cause cancer.”

Finally, Senator Edward Kennedy, in a 1997 statement to the Senate, requested the FDA to place a cancer warning on the label of talc products, besides other products containing known carcinogens. Nevertheless, over a decade later this warning remains ignored.

We may be seeing the tail end result of bad practices in before the late 1970′s when talc was often found to be contaminated with asbestos.

In the 1970′s talc, a mineral mined widely in Europe, Canada and the United States, was often found to be contaminated with asbestos, a known cause of cancer. For instance, researchers at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York found asbestos in 10 of 20 samples of cosmetic talc taken before 1973.

The industry was informed of these and similar findings and is believed to have changed its methods and sources of mining. Mr. Murray of Johnson & Johnson said, ”We can confirm that our talc doesn’t contain any asbestos.”

See: PROTECTING THE PRODUCT: A special report.; Company’s Silence Countered Safety Fears About Asbestos and the follow up letter to the editor “Exposed to Asbestos” by Joel Shufro, Executive Director, New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health.