FDA Withdraws Talc Asbestos Testing Rule

Key Facts

• FDA withdrew proposed rule requiring asbestos testing in cosmetic talc
• HHS Secretary RFK Jr. signed the withdrawal on November 28, 2025
• FDA 2019 testing found asbestos in 9 of 52 cosmetic products (17% contamination rate)
• Rule was mandated by the 2022 Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act
• Public health advocates called the withdrawal “dangerous”

On November 28, 2025, the FDA formally withdrew its proposed rule that would have required cosmetics manufacturers to test talc-containing products for asbestos contamination. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. signed the withdrawal, citing “Make America Healthy Again” priorities as rationale for reconsidering the approach.

The withdrawal reverses a requirement mandated by the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA) of 2022, leaving consumers without standardized safety testing for talc cosmetics.

What the Rule Would Have Required

The December 2024 proposed rule would have mandated:

• Standardized testing methods for detecting asbestos in talc
• Use of Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) for initial screening
• Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) for confirmation
• Manufacturer responsibility for testing before products reach consumers

These validated methods would have provided consistent, reliable detection of asbestos contamination across the cosmetics industry.

Why This Matters

Without enforceable testing standards:

• Contaminated products can remain on shelves: No requirement to test before sale
• No standardized detection methods: Testing varies by manufacturer
• Consumers bear the risk: No federal assurance of talc purity
• Asbestos exposure continues: Even trace amounts pose health risks

The FDA has previously stated there is no safe level of asbestos exposure.

FDA’s Own Testing Found Contamination

The urgency behind the proposed rule stemmed from the FDA’s own 2019 analysis, which found asbestos in 9 out of 52 talc-containing cosmetic products tested (17% contamination rate). These included products marketed to children and teens:

• Claire’s makeup products (recalled)
• Justice brand cosmetics (recalled)
• Various other retail cosmetics

Public Health Response

Public health advocates reacted sharply to the withdrawal.

Dr. Philip Landrigan called it “a serious mistake” that will “unnecessarily expose consumers, and especially women and their babies, to a powerful human carcinogen.”

Linda Reinstein of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization warned that the decision “removes basic protections for consumers, especially women and children.” She noted that microscopic asbestos fibers from talc-based makeup can be “inhaled or ingested, potentially causing serious illness decades later.”

Without enforceable testing standards, contaminated talc products can continue reaching consumers, perpetuating risks of:

• Mesothelioma
• Ovarian cancer
• Lung cancer
• Other asbestos-related diseases

What MoCRA Required

The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 gave the FDA authority to:

• Establish standardized testing methods for asbestos in talc
• Require good manufacturing practices for cosmetics
• Mandate adverse event reporting
• Regulate fragrance allergen disclosures

The FDA had already missed multiple MoCRA deadlines before withdrawing the talc testing rule.

Possible Future Action

The FDA indicated it may “reexamine and reissue” the rule, suggesting the withdrawal may not be permanent. However, no timeline has been announced.

What Consumers Can Do

Until federal testing requirements are in place:

• Check product labels for talc (listed as talc, talcum, or magnesium silicate)
• Choose talc-free alternatives when available
• Note that “asbestos-free” claims are not federally verified
• Consider cornstarch-based products as alternatives

Products Potentially Affected

Talc is commonly found in:

• Baby powder (though major brands have switched to cornstarch)
• Body powders and dusting powders
• Face powder and foundation
• Blush and bronzer
• Eye shadow
• Dry shampoo

Timing and Context

The withdrawal came amid significant related developments:

• Ongoing Talc Litigation: Weeks later, a Baltimore jury awarded $1.56 billion to a mesothelioma patient, the largest individual talc verdict ever
• EU Action: The European Union classified talc as a carcinogen, with a potential ban anticipated around 2027