are the alternatives any good, now that the WHO have labelled it carcinogenic?

Why has talc been removed from many products?

Last year, the World Health Organisation upgraded its assessment of talc as “possibly” carcinogenic to “probably” due to its potential contamination with asbestos.

Cancer researcher at UNSW and scientific advisor for Cancer Council Australia Bernard Stewart says that while industrial talc is often contaminated, pharmaceutical-grade talc (used in cosmetics) is recognised in Australia as asbestos-free. However, concerns around the safety of talc in personal items remain, largely because of highly publicised litigation in the US and reams of published research exploring talc’s possible connection to ovarian cancer.

Pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson, has been embroiled in lawsuits since the 2000s after it was alleged some of its products contained asbestos. Last week, the company had its request for a settlement with tens of thousands of people who are suing the company over its talc products rejected. The company claims there is no proven link between its products and cancer. In 2023, it stopped selling talc-based baby powder in Australia.

Since cases like these, many brands have removed talc from their formulas. Cosmetic chemist and director of the Institute of Personal Care Science Belinda Carli says the European Union is nearing a talc ban, and there are significant restrictions over its use in Canada.

“We should follow the guidelines of other countries where a limit is not imposed [e.g. Australia] for safety reasons,” she says. “If the brand is reputable, they should be using a talc replacement or ensuring it’s highly pure – asbestos free.”

Stewart says it’s erring on the side of caution.

“I can’t unequivocally rule out the possibility that talc causes cancer,” Stewart says. “What I can say is that the risk, if it is there, is very low … There’s a subtlety between unsatisfactory evidence – evidence that doesn’t absolutely clear up the safety of talc – and the marketing decision that there’s enough community concern to warrant taking it off the market.

“Taking it off the market is not evidence it’s hazardous.”

How do the alternatives stack up?

There are several talc replacements already in use in the make-up industry. Some are better than others.

The verdict

Carli recommends avoiding any talc-based make-up, particularly products imported from other countries which may have looser regulations around ingredients.

“I wouldn’t personally formulate with it because of the regulatory restrictions elsewhere, and mica is an affordable and suitable replacement,” she says. “In any case, talc shouldn’t be used as a loose powder because of its respiratory irritant effect.”

Conversely, Stewart says Australian consumers should have the confidence that a huge body of legislators, including the Therapeutic Goods Administration, carefully consider the safety of these materials.

Loading

As a discrete chemical ingredient, talc is “extremely safe”, Pyle says. Some even argue that the risk of using talc is largely only associated with loose-powder products, aerosols or mists, since asbestos is problematic when it enters the lungs.

“The combination of increased industry awareness and legislative requirements – including a pharmacopoeial monograph that includes a test for the absence of asbestos – reduces the likelihood for any contact with asbestos. The overall risk of harm is extremely low. [But] it can never remove the risk entirely,” he says.

Make the most of your health, relationships, fitness and nutrition with our Live Well newsletter. Get it in your inbox every Monday.