The FDA's surprising decision to withdraw a rule requiring asbestos testing in talc-based makeup has sparked both concern and debate. This move has left many questioning the safety of everyday cosmetics, especially considering the well-documented risks associated with asbestos exposure. Let's dive into why this decision was made and what it means for you.
Over the years, the issue of asbestos contamination in talc products has become increasingly complex. The lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson, which resulted in substantial payouts like the $4.96 billion settlement to a group of women and their families in 2018, and $966 million to a family in October of this year, highlighted the potential dangers. These cases found that the company's popular baby powder caused cancer in many consumers. This led to calls for stricter regulations on talc, an ingredient found in numerous products, including eyeshadows, face powders, and blush.
However, on November 28, 2025, the FDA announced it was withdrawing its proposed rule requiring asbestos testing in talc-containing products. The FDA stated that "good cause exists to withdraw the proposed rule at this time." This decision was based on the 'Make America Healthy Again' priorities, the technical issues raised in public comments, and the complexities of asbestos testing and legal considerations. The FDA plans to reconsider the best approach to address the issues and reduce asbestos exposure.
The initial rule, proposed in December 2024 as part of the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022, aimed to standardize asbestos testing in talc. Krupa Koestline, founder and chief cosmetic chemist of KKT Labs, explains that while most brands already test for asbestos, the quality of testing varies. This means that some companies may be cutting corners, and the new development creates uncertainty about consumer safety.
Koestline clarifies that the issue isn't whether asbestos contamination is hazardous—the FDA has long acknowledged the risk. Instead, the withdrawal is related to regulatory logistics. The FDA is stepping back from mandating a specific testing method because there's no consensus on which method to use. The science is clear, but the lack of agreement on the testing process has stalled the rule.
However, others are more skeptical. Tasha Stoiber, PhD, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), believes this announcement could lead to Americans being needlessly exposed to asbestos in personal care products.
According to the EWG's Skin Deep database, over 3,000 products contain talc, with almost 60% being powder products. The problem lies in contaminated talc. Talc deposits often sit near asbestos deposits, and contamination can occur if mining and refinement processes aren't tightly controlled. The risk isn't from talc itself, but from inconsistent testing and sourcing practices.
Fernando Carnavali, MD, associate professor at Mount Sinai Hospital, emphasizes that asbestos, a known human carcinogen, is not safe at any level of exposure. Asbestos can cause asbestosis, mesothelioma, and lung and ovarian cancers. When products containing asbestos are applied, microscopic fibers can become airborne and lodge in the lungs or other tissues.
Dr. Stoiber adds that even minimal exposure can trigger diseases years later. Studies show that over 60% of mesothelioma cases in women are linked to non-occupational asbestos exposure, such as using contaminated talc products.
Despite withdrawing the testing rule, the FDA says it's still committed to making talc as safe as possible. The FDA will submit a new proposed rule that offers a more comprehensive approach to reducing asbestos exposure, including identifying safer alternatives.
So, what can you do? Koestline suggests looking for brands transparent about their testing protocols or with certifications for asbestos-free talc. EWG recommends avoiding products containing talc altogether, especially powders. Dr. Stoiber advises examining children's makeup kits, as they may contain cheaper, potentially hazardous ingredients.
To help you make safer choices, resources like the EWG's Healthy Living app, which allows you to scan product barcodes, and EWG's Skin Deep database, where you can search over 90,000 personal care items, can be invaluable. Koestline also notes that many effective talc-free alternatives are available. Modern talc-free formulas can perform just as well.
But here's where it gets controversial: Some might argue that the FDA's decision prioritizes industry interests over consumer safety. What do you think? Do you trust the FDA's new approach, or are you concerned about the potential risks? Share your thoughts in the comments below! And, if you have a beauty or wellness trend you're curious about, send Vogue's senior beauty and wellness editor an email at beauty@vogue.com.
