And the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has indicated they are currently exploring whether talc should continue to be used in cosmetics. Yet new evidence about its potential health risks continues to come to light. Image by Adobestock Talc is one of the most ubiquitous minerals used in personal care products. As of 2024, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified it as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” This designation is deeply alarming. Over the last few decades, studies have found that the use of talc around the genital area causes ovarian cancer.
Talc is often found in proximity to asbestos in mines. This co-occurrence is deeply concerning, especially given the cancer risk posed by. In December 2022, the FDA issued a proposed new rule. We agree that this rule would indeed require manufacturers to test and evaluate their talc-containing cosmetics for potential asbestos contamination. This announcement comes at a time of increasing pressure from the scientific community and public health advocates.
On May 20, 2024, the FDA held a public meeting of the External Scientific Meeting Panel to address these critical topics. FDA Commissioner Martin Makary, MD, MPH, and Principal Deputy Commissioner Sara Brenner, MD, MPH, hosted the meeting. Their purpose was to bring objective expert evidence to bear on the question of whether talc is safe. Makary stated that the purpose of the meeting was to understand what “the experts think we should be doing about it, if anything at all.”
There’s no doubt that the connection between talc and ovarian cancer is increasingly becoming understood. Information about its impact on the rest of the body is still murky. Nicolas Wentzensen, a cancer epidemiologist at the National Cancer Institute, commented on the current state of research: “There is a lot more that we do not know about talc than what we know.” He highlighted the need for careful studies to assess contaminated talc exposures, a process that would take multiple years.
The first step of the panel was led by Joellen M. Schildkraut, an epidemiologist at the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University. Schildkraut provided evidence showing an increased risk of ovarian cancer associated with body powder use but noted a critical limitation: her work could not definitively prove causality. She cautioned consumers, stating, “If you don’t need to use it, why use it, why take a chance?”
The scientific community has been sounding alarm bells over talc’s dangers for decades. Health experts are beginning to investigate the long-term effects of talc exposure. They argue that the risk of inflammation and increased cancer risk is exactly the type of risk that ought to spark debate. Makary highlighted this concern during the panel discussion, saying, “I’m not suggesting that talc is the driver of our chronic disease epidemic, but if we generally believe it’s pro-inflammatory, and kids are ingesting it, aside from the potential cancer-causing effects, shouldn’t there be reason for concern?”
Through a series of proposed regulations, the FDA seeks to address these concerns and provide safe consumer environments. Dr. Nicole Kleinstreuer underscored the importance for alternatives to talc to be developed. She further noted that these alternatives provide a much more favorable safety profile, in particular with regard to inhalation exposure, carcinogenicity, and body clearance rates.
The FDA is currently examining its regulatory framework with respect to talc and its potential health hazards. At the same time, public health advocates are telling everyone to be careful. Experts continue to have concerns regarding the safety of talc in cosmetics. Their continued conversation may affect future policy decisions and seek to clarify its safety profile.
Leave a Reply