Mesothelioma Asbestos Lawyer, DuBose Law Firm, PLLC

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for Personal Injury / Cosmetics

Cosmetics

Talc Safety Topic of Congressional Hearings

By

Talc safety has been a concern for years. More recently, the clear possibility of asbestos contamination in talc has led to heightened concern about critical diseases, such as mesothelioma and ovarian cancer being caused by use of talc based products.  

Why is asbestos connected to talc safety?

Both talc and asbestos are minerals found in underground mines. Geologists know that these two minerals are often found intertwined in veins, making cross-contamination a real risk.

Talc everyday uses

Aside from baby powder, talc is used in a wide range of cosmetics for its moisture absorption and silkiness. Recently asbestos was found in four cosmetic products from Claire’s and Justice – both catering to makeup for children. It was also used for feminine hygiene, crayons, children’s toys, chewing gum, and a plethora of common products. There is no safe level of asbestos as its microscopic fibers can infiltrate lungs and harbor the potential for developing into lung cancer, asbestosis, and the deadly mesothelioma for fifty years or more.

Congressional hearings on talc safety

Concerns recently grew when the FDA found asbestos in several products, including baby powder. An initial hearing was conducted in March of 2019 over cosmetic talcum powder’s safety. This hearing specifically focused on talc’s connection with ovarian cancer.

The second hearing was launched when the FDA found asbestos in a sample of Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J) baby powder in October 2019. Under consideration may be the use of warning labels or regulation of talc products.

Congress speaks

The hearing questioned the testing methods used.  William Longo, founder of Materials Analytical Service, stated, “Independent labs throughout the country and over the course of several decades have documented the presence of asbestos in consumer talc products, including Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder. The methods used in the past and today by the industry are not sensitive enough to detect trace levels of asbestos.”

While Longo once denied the presence of asbestos in talc, he stated there is now more sensitive testing. He also received access to thousands of internal J & J documents showing their knowledge of small amounts of asbestos in their talc for decades. There is no safe level, yet J&J kept this information from regulators and the public. Protecting the J&J brand and the public trust of their products was their focus. They now have paid out billions of dollars in thousands of lawsuits with thousands more in process.

The House of Representatives Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy tried to convince the CEO of Johnson & Johnson, Alex Gorsky, to testify at the hearing. He turned down the invitation.

Charles M. Elson, director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, said Gorsky’s refusal made sense as the “CEO and his advisers probably figured that the downside was greater to testifying than not.”

Claire’s Finally Pulled Their Products Containing Asbestos

By

Claire’s finally pulled their products containing asbestos when the FDA affirmed the presence of asbestos after testing in 2017 and 2018. Though the removal was voluntary, it occurred only after the FDA issued a warning against the three contaminated products. Since the FDA does not have jurisdiction, they believed this was warranted since Claire’s initially “refused to comply with the FDA’s request, and the agency does not have authority to mandate a recall.” Claire’s steadfastly refuted the FDA’s findings, asserting “the products were “extensively tested by multiple independent accredited laboratories” and “all products were found to be compliant with all relevant cosmetic safety regulations.”

Meanwhile, Frank Pallone, Jr, Energy and Commerce Chairman, stated, “Examples like Claire’s’ refusal to voluntarily recall their asbestos-tainted products demonstrates the need to modernize the current regulatory framework for cosmetic and personal care products to ensure that the FDA can act to protect consumers when industry fails to do so.”

Claire’s finally pulled their products

Claire’s sold the affected products between October 2016 and March 2019. While they are no longer in the stores, some households possibly continue to harbor the three products pinpointed. To check your home, the products are:

• Claire’s Eyeshadows, UPC #888711847165, SKU #84716, Lot No. 08/17
• Claire’s Compact Powder, UPC #888711839153, SKU #83915, Lot No. 07/15
• Claire’s Contour Palette, UPC #888711401947, SKU #40194, Lot No. 04/17

The identifying numbers are found on the price stickers on the product. Batch numbers are found beneath the ingredient lists on the back panels.

The original products pulled from stores in December of 2017 were Ultimate Mega Make Up Set, Metallic Hot Pink Glitter 48-Piece Makeup Set, Bedazzled Rainbow Heart Makeup Set, Rainbow Bedazzled Star Make Up Set, Rainbow Glitter Heart Shaped Makeup Set, Mint Glitter Make Up Set, Rainbow Bedazzled Rectangle Make Up Set, and Pink Glitter Palette with Eyeshadow & Lip Gloss. Again, if these still remain in your home, dispose of them or return the item to the Claire’s store.

For more information

If you want more information, contact Claire’s at 800-252-4737, option 2, from 9:30 AM – 7 PM EDT.

FDA Affirms Asbestos Found in Cosmetics Targeting Teens

By

Asbestos found in cosmetics targeting teens and preteens continues to be a problem in a statement from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) this week. This affirmation is the result of testing performed by U.S. PIRG, a consumer advocate group, in both 2017 and 2018. These three branded cosmetic products from Claire’s and one sold by Justice, were among those tested in 2017 and again in 2018. The Claire’s products tested positive for tremolite asbestos in 2018 as did the Justice product.

Why is asbestos found in cosmetics harmful?

After years and decades of testing, it is proven than there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. Asbestos that is in solid form, such as shingles, left untouched is a potential danger, but asbestos that is loose, as found in powders and other cosmetics, is definitely dangerous. These products are easily inhaled or ingested which can lead to lung cancer and even mesothelioma – a deadly disease. In addition, these products targeted young girls, still growing and developing.

Claire’s rebuttal

In all testing, Claire’s contends there is no danger and that the U.S. PIRG report is faulty and misleading. In their independent testing, no asbestos fibers were found, however they have not disclosed their testing methodologies or results.

Claire’s spokeswoman, Melanie Berry said in a statement, “The FDA test reports have mis-characterized fibers in the products as asbestos, in direct contradiction to established EPA and USP criterion for classifying asbestos fibers.” “Despite our efforts to discuss these issues with the FDA, they insisted on moving forward with their release. We are disappointed that the FDA has taken this step, and we will continue to work with them to demonstrate the safety of our products.”

Claire’s filed for bankruptcy in the US in March 2018 and came out of it in October of 2018

FDA response

“Our lab is accredited by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology NVLAP program. The FDA used a lab on this accredited list for their cosmetics testing for asbestos (AMA Analytical Services) as well as another lab on the list, STAT Analysis Corporation.”

Why are cosmetic companies allowed to sell these products?

The FDA cannot force a company to remove asbestos-laden products because there are no laws requiring testing cosmetic products for safety. “The FDA is today announcing the results of these tests. Those tests confirmed the presence of asbestos in three of the product samples collected from Claire’s and one of the product samples collected from Justice. All suspect Justice products, including the one testing positive for asbestos, were previously recalled from the market in 2017. The FDA issued a Safety Alert today warning consumers to discontinue use of three Claire’s products: Claire’s Eye Shadows – Batch No/Lot No: 08/17; Claire’s Compact Powder – Batch No/Lot No: 07/15; and, Claire’s Contour Palette – Batch No/Lot No: 04/17 because they tested positive for asbestos.

In an FDA press release published on March 5, 2019, the following statement was made, “The FDA requested that Claire’s recall the products because they should not be used by consumers. Claire’s has refused to comply with the FDA’s request, and the agency does not have authority to mandate a recall. The FDA is therefore warning consumers not to use these products and will continue to communicate our safety concerns about them.“

Until laws requiring testing are enacted, the FDA requests cosmetic firms to take voluntary measures to register in the FDA’s Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program (VCRP.) The FDA also asks manufacturers to voluntarily report any negative effects involving cosmetic products.

While the FDA was told there are no more asbestos-tainted products in the Claire’s stores, they caution anyone who has them in their homes should stop using them.

Teen Cosmetics Tested Positive for Asbestos

By

Danny Katz of U.S. PIRG, a consumer advocate group, says after testing over a dozen products at the American accessories chain Claire’s, the group found that teen cosmetics tested positive for asbestos in three of the samples. In The Netherlands, Dutch health and safety authorities also found asbestos in two types of Claire’s cosmetics for young girls – a face powder and a contouring powder. Dutch authorities pulled the products from the shelves.

Katz elaborated by saying that it is unacceptable to have asbestos in these products. Asbestos, when inhaled, can lead to lung cancer and even to mesothelioma. “We need Claire’s to remove these products from the shelves and we need them to figure out how asbestos got in their products to begin with. We need Congress and the FDA to take action. We need to ban asbestos from beauty care products and makeup.”

Not the first time

Late in 2017 there were similar allegations concerning Claire’s carrying cosmetics containing asbestos in their stores. If they sell asbestos-containing products, many thousands of people could be exposed. The chain has 7,500 locations in 45 countries with approximately 17,000 employees.

Claire’s reply

In the current tests and in 2017, the Claire’s chain contracted additional testing facilities, which found no asbestos in the products cited. Claire’s maintains that the testing by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) is outdated and inaccurate.

“At Claire’s, customer safety is of paramount concern, and we pride ourselves in providing our customers with quality products that we stand by, so we wish to address a recent report that cosmetics sold by Claire’s may contain asbestos. We want to assure our customers that all of our products are safe and asbestos-free.”

“In addition, testing of more than 85 samples using the most up to date test methods has been conducted by independent laboratories both in the USA and Europe. In addition, several cosmetic products sold by Claire’s have been tested by Health Canada and the Dutch Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT). This extensive testing conducted by four separate laboratories has confirmed that these cosmetics products do not contain asbestos. In addition, all our powder-based cosmetics use the same base formulation, utilizing Merck certified asbestos-free talc, which is the same talc used in other well-known cosmetic brands.”

U.S. PIRG reply

“Claire’s incorrectly claims that our testing methods are unsound. Its accusations are misinformed at best, and seem to be designed to distract from the bottom-line: that Claire’s is selling makeup that contains asbestos to preteens. Claire’s has previously claimed that its products are free of asbestos, despite evidence to the contrary. While we have been transparent about our testing methods and results, Claire’s does not provide its own test results, or explain its own testing methodology. On balance, it is clear that Claire’s is trying to confuse the facts.”

“Our lab is accredited by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology NVLAP program. The FDA used a lab on this accredited list for their cosmetics testing for asbestos (AMA Analytical Services) and we used another lab on the list, STAT Analysis Corporation.”

“When Claire’s was previously accused of selling makeup contaminated with asbestos, it pulled the products from the shelves. Based on our new test results, it should do the same now.”

What now?

The Dutch NVWA (health and safety group) did not withdraw products in 2017 because of assurances by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that there was nothing wrong with the products cited. The products in the current tests were removed in The Netherlands as the Dutch inspectors found 2% to 5% asbestos in the face powder and .1% to 2% in the contouring powder. All products containing asbestos are banned in The Netherlands, and 55 other countries, because of the danger to health. The United States has not fully banned asbestos.

Claire’s filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection for its US stores in March 2018 but is not planning to close any US locations.

Effects of Cosmetics are More than Skin Deep

By

In the 16th century, a Swiss physician and philosopher, Paracelsus, stated that any substance applied to or in the body can cause harm, given the right circumstances. In other words, “the dose makes the poison.” This is true especially with the wide range of chemicals, nano particles, asbestos contaminated talc, and other substances used in the manufacture of cosmetics.

Revenue from cosmetics is projected at $265 billion worldwide in 2017 for an industry that has potential for harm, but very little oversight. The FDA has an office of Cosmetics and Colors within their Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. Yet, that group is seriously underfunded with a $13 million budget for fiscal year 2017 and has a very limited scope of authority.

Except for color additives, there is no legal requirement for pre-market approval of new products. There is no regulatory group that checks the safety or effectiveness of cosmetic products. In addition, there is no legal requirement for the cosmetic industry to collect or report adverse issues.

What ingredients could be harmful?

Dr. Robert M. Califf, former commissioner of the FDA, along with two other experts said, “For products that are used routinely, small effects over time within large populations can be almost impossible to detect without active surveillance. Even when health risks are substantial, as with tobacco products, the path to identifying and interpreting those safety signals clearly enough to justify regulatory action is often long and tortuous.”

However, that long scientific road has already been traveled with respect to asbestos – still an ingredient in some modern cosmetics. Decades of medical and scientific research long ago reached a consensus that asbestos is a human carcinogen. Yet, a recent investigation revealed asbestos contaminated cosmetics still being sold at a national retail chain that markets to teens. The retailer has since pulled the contaminated product from stores after one third-party found asbestos. A third-party lab hired by the retailer found none – possibly because various batches can contain different constituents. The message is that some asbestos, and other harmful ingredients, can find their way into these non-regulated cosmetics.

More about talc

Talc, a common cosmetics ingredient, is a mineral often mined in close proximity with asbestos and can be contaminated with asbestos. However, due in part to heavy lobbying in the 1970s and 80s, lax regulations allowed asbestos contaminated talc to still be utilized in cosmetics.

Are your cosmetics safe?

If you believe you have been harmed by a cosmetic, report the problem to the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition’s Adverse Event Reporting System (CFSAN) an FDA database for foods, dietary supplements, and cosmetics. When they notice a number of similar reports, they can investigate. This database is also open to the public, so is available to search for adverse health events from your current cosmetics. Unlike foods, there is little ingredient information on cosmetic packaging. Even when there is, dangerous chemicals can be disguised by using scientific names. This makes knowing exactly what you’re using difficult, but there are a few sites such as www.ewg.org with information on a limited number of products.

New legislation

Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine recently introduced legislation creating a mandatory registration of products and facilities. The bill would also increase FDA funding using industry fees, and give other tools to the FDA as protection from risks of personal care products. Making your congressional representatives aware of your support of this bill could help give consumers visibility to dangers.

Meanwhile, check websites for your cosmetics for possible ingredient lists. If no ingredients are shown, email or call the company for more information. If enough people let these companies know that we care about what is put on our bodies, perhaps there will be more effort to using clean ingredients in their products.