Consumer talcums and powders: mineral and chemical characterization

Our plain-English summary of Consumer talcums and powders: mineral and chemical characterization, by A.N. Rohl, A.M. Langer, I.J. Selikoff, et al (Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, 1976).

The study

• Authors: A.N. Rohl, A.M. Langer, I.J. Selikoff, A. Tordini, R. Klimentidis, D.R. Bowes, D.L. Skinner
• Journal: Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health
• Published: 1976;2(2):255-84
• Cited by: 98 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 001119).

Abstract

Representative consumer talcums and powders, including 20 body powders, baby powders, facial talcums, and also one pharmaceutical talc, were analyzed to determine their mineralogical and chemical composition. Where known, all were formulated prior to 1973. Of the 20 products 10 contained detectable amounts of tremolite and anthophyllite, principally asbestiform, while some also contained fragmented forms of these minerals. The amounts ranged from tenths of a percent to over 14% by weight; two contained detectable amounts of chrysotile asbestos fiber. Eight contained quartz, seven ranging from 2 to 5%, with one as high as 35%. The analyses showed that the consumer products examined were rarely the pure mineral talc, but rather were mixtures of various minerals; some samples consisted of three to five minerals, only one of which was talc. Other common mineral phases included chlorite, platy serpentine, pyrophyllitem mica, and carbonate minerals. Kaolin additive was identified in two products. The single pharmaceutical talc examined contained only a trace amount of quartz. The chemical composition of these products, including both major oxide and trace element content, correlated with their mineral components. Four samples contained substantial concentrations of nickel, cobalt, and chromium, suggesting latice substitution or the presence of trace mineral phases. Geological provenance of the talcs may be ascertained on the basis of chemistry. Possible adverse health effects from intermittent use of these products, especially those that contain asbestiform and fragmented anthophyllite and tremolite, chrysotile, quartz, and trace metals, are presently unknown and warrnat evaluation.

In plain English

This laboratory study analyzed 21 consumer talcums and powders, including one pharmaceutical talc. They were bought in New York City area stores and studied in 1971-1975; formulation dates were unavailable for several, and known dates ran from 1968 to May 1973. The authors used X-ray diffraction, microscopy and chemical tests. Ten of the 21 contained tremolite, anthophyllite or both, which the authors call "asbestiform", some also in fragmented form. Amounts ranged from several tenths of a percent to over 14% by weight. Two samples contained traces of chrysotile, about 0.25 to 0.5%. Eight contained quartz, from 1.6 to 35.1% by weight. Four had notably higher nickel, cobalt and chromium. Most were mixtures of minerals rather than pure talc; one was entirely cornstarch. The authors concluded cosmetic grade talc was not used exclusively and called for a regulatory standard. They said possible adverse health effects from intermittent use of these products, especially those containing anthophyllite, tremolite, chrysotile, quartz and trace metals, were unknown and warranted evaluation. They described their X-ray mineral weight percentages as conservative, since other minerals can weaken the signals.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Laboratory mineralogical and chemical analysis of consumer products (no human or animal subjects)
• Who was studied: 21 consumer talcums and powders (baby, body and facial powders, plus one pharmaceutical talc) bought at retail stores in the New York City area, acquired and studied 1971-1975. Formulation dates were 'Not available' for several products. The known dates in Table 1 range from between January 1968 and July 1970 up to May 1973.
• Exposure: Mineral content of the products, with emphasis on tremolite, anthophyllite, serpentine minerals (including chrysotile) and quartz, plus major oxides and trace metals. Measured by optical microscopy, step-scan X-ray diffraction, transmission electron microscopy with electron diffraction, and chemical methods.
• Main results:
  • 10 of the 21 products contained amphibole minerals (asbestiform tremolite and anthophyllite, some also in fragmented form), in amounts from several tenths of a percent to over 14% by weight
  • Tremolite was found in 9 of the 21 products; anthophyllite occurred together with tremolite in 6 of the 21
  • Traces of chrysotile, about 0.25-0.5%, were found in samples 12 and 15 and verified by electron microscopy
  • Electron microscopy also found free chrysotile fibers and fibrils in a sample that was negative for asbestos by all other techniques
  • Quartz was present in 8 products, at 1.6 to 35.1% by weight
  • Four products (samples 1, 4, 9 and 16) had significantly higher cobalt, chromium and nickel than the other samples
  • Sample 8, labeled a talc, contained over 7% tremolite; its chemistry indicated it was not derived from a talc rock but from one rich in alumina and silica
  • The products were rarely pure talc but mixtures of minerals; one product consisted entirely of cornstarch
  • The single pharmaceutical talc contained only a trace of quartz
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that cosmetic grade talc was not used exclusively in these products. They said the presence of asbestiform anthophyllite and tremolite, chrysotile and quartz indicates the need for a regulatory standard for cosmetic talc. They recommended evaluating possible health hazards from use of these products, saying that possible adverse effects from intermittent use were presently unknown.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • X-ray diffraction alone could not tell asbestiform from fragmented amphibole, or asbestiform from platy serpentine. Electron microscopy was used for this but was not quantitative.
  • The authors state their reported X-ray weight percentages are conservative, because other minerals in the products weaken or obscure the asbestiform mineral signals
  • Optical microscopy was of limited use because most powders were too fine grained
  • Chlorite in the products may interfere with detection of serpentine minerals, including chrysotile
  • How to determine the relative proportions of fibrous and fragmented forms in the same sample (by mass versus by number) was unresolved

Mines named here

Asbestos mines this study is about. Each mine's page says who ran it, when it worked, and what it produced.

• Jeffrey mine, Asbestos, Quebec
• Santa Rita mine, Joaquin Ridge near Coalinga, California

All asbestos mines

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Talc and vermiculite.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Talc, Tremolite, Anthophyllite, Asbestiform, Chrysotile, Chlorite, Serpentine Group, Mica.

Related studies

• Characterization of talc and associated minerals — D.H. Hamer, F.R. Rolle, et al. (1976)
• Talc: occurrence, characterization, and consumer applications — R. Zazenski, W.H. Ashton, et al. (1995)
• Asbestos in commercial cosmetic talcum powder as a cause of mesothelioma in women — R. Lee, D. Van Orden (2015)
• Response to RE: Gordon R, Fitzgerald S, and Millette J. Asbestos in commercial cosmetic talcum powder as a cause of mesothelioma in women. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2014;20(4):318-332 — R.E. Gordon (2015)
• Letter concerning: Burns AM, Barlow CA, Banducci AM, Unice KM, Sahmel J. Potential Airborne Asbestos Exposure and Risk Associated with the Historical Use of Cosmetic Talcum Powder Products — M.M. Finkelstein (2019)
• Fibrous and mineral content of cosmetic talcum products — L.J. Cralley, M.M. Key, et al. (1968)

Browse more research in Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, or return to medical research.