The FDA Withdraws Rule Requiring Asbestos Testing in Talc-Based Makeup

Source: Vogue
Category: Fashion
Originally Published: 2025-12-05
Curated: 2025-12-05 16:18

Asbestos contamination in talc products is a complicated topic. Since the monumental Johnson & Johnson lawsuits over the years (which resulted in historic payouts: $4.96 billion to a group of 22 women and their families in 2018 and $966 million to a family of a woman who died from mesothelioma in October of this year) found that the company’s popular baby powder was responsible for causing cancer in many consumers, many have pushed for better regulations on an ingredient that is used in eyeshadows, face powders, blush, and other everyday products. But the fight for safe talc use took several steps back when, on November 28, 2025, the US Food & Drug Administration announced that it would withdraw its proposed rule that requires the testing of asbestos in talc-containing products.

“Good cause exists to withdraw the proposed rule at this time,” writes the FDA in its announcement of the withdrawal. “On the basis of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) priorities to ensure safe additives in the American food and drug supply, the highly scientific and technical issues addressed in public comments the Agency has received, and the complexity of asbestos testing and legal considerations under the Administrative Procedure Act, we are withdrawing the proposed rule to reconsider best means of addressing the issues covered by the proposed rule and broader principles to reduce exposure to asbestos.”

The rule, which was first proposed in December 2024 as part of the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022, brought the industry closer to setting up standardized testing of asbestos in talc. Krupa Koestline, founder and chief cosmetic chemist of KKT Labs, explains that while most brands already conduct asbestos screening in talc products through third-party labs, the quality of testing can vary widely. “It basically creates a system where good actors continue doing the right thing and bad actors can cut corners without immediate consequence,” Koestline tells Vogue. “Anytime regulation lags behind consumer safety, it creates uncertainty.”

Krupa adds that the new development does not question whether asbestos contamination in talc is hazardous (“The FDA has been clear for years; [it] is a real risk, and companies should be testing proactively,” she says), but more about regulatory logistics. It still leaves the responsibility on brands and manufacturers on how they test for it, if at all. “It simply means the agency is stepping back from mandating a standardized method because there isn’t a consensus yet on which test should be required,” she says. “In other words, the science isn’t the issue; the lack of agreement on which specific testing method should be enforced is what stalled the rule.”

This article was curated from Vogue. All rights belong to the original publisher.