Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

So are those Johnson and Johnson Baby powder actually safe?

I remember reading J&J said only a batch in some years contains ultra small amount of some substance and less than certain % of it is safe.




One has to wonder about a lengthy article which refuses to cite any numbers and instead repeats endlessly that 'no level is known to be safe', which is irrelevant.


I'll probably get down voted to hell, but this seems to be quite overblown.

The FDA has posted their latest analysis of J&J talcum powder.[1] Of the 3 samples, 1 had "none detected" and 2 had 0.00002% or less by TEM (electron microscope). We're talking close to limit of detection.

The bigger issue is the link to ovarian cancer. The data is all over the place. This one paper [1] sums up the data nicely - when looking at talc use there was no correlation with ovarian cancer. Even outside of hygienic use (condoms, gloves), many women had high talc exposure and no ovarian cancer, while others had no talc exposure and ovarian cancer.

"It may be argued that the overall null findings associated with talc-dusted diaphragms and condom use is more convincing evidence for a lack of a carcinogenic effect, especially given the lack of an established correlation between perineal dusting frequency and ovarian tissue talc concentrations and the lack of a consistent dose-response relationship with ovarian cancer risk."

[1]


"The FDA has posted their latest analysis of J&J talcum powder.[1] Of the 3 samples, 1 had "none detected" and 2 had 0.00002% or less by TEM (electron microscope). We're talking close to limit of detection."

I do a bunch of mining and know the dangers of talc and its contaminants - it only takes ONE PARTICLE of tremolite or actinolite to start you on the road to mesothelioma. You just don't know which specific particle will trigger it.


> it only takes ONE PARTICLE of tremolite or actinolite to start you on the road to mesothelioma.

A completely unhelpful thing to say. Everything starts somewhere, there's nothing special about asbestos. 'It only takes ONE GAMMA RAY PARTICLE to start you on the road to terminal brain cancer' too, but does that mean you shouldn't live in Denver or ever take an airplane flight?


OSHA says....

Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for asbestos is 0.1 fiber per cubic centimeter of air as an eight-hour time-weighted average (TWA), with an excursion limit (EL) of 1.0 asbestos fibers per cubic centimeter over a 30-minute period. The employer must ensure that no one is exposed above these limits.


There's no such thing as 0.1 fiber. A small fiber is still one fiber.


This is correct. A single asbestiform fiber can trigger mesothelioma. There is NO SAFE EXPOSURE LEVEL.

Perhaps HN readers will understand that once they bother to get a career in surficial mineralogy.


A single butterfly can also trigger a hurricane. Therefore we must eliminate the Karner Blue[1] to save the planet.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karner_blue


I went through a hysterical moment in my life where i did some grinding on the concrete floor in the basement and the sheeting i put up to keep the dust from going through the home failed. This sent a large plume of fine particulate through my house and i was concerned for the health of my family. Trying to gauge how much of an issue this was turned out to be impossible as the regulatory agencies wouldn’t set some kind of lower limit on exposure.

Then of course you find all manner of skeevy companies leveraging that in scare marketing. Ultimately went with hepa vacuum, big fan to do a few air exchanges with the outside and upgraded furnace filters. Nobody’s died yet.


I wondered that as well. 0 tolerance means our entire planet should be condemned as uninhabitable, then. Clearly there must be some level of parts per 10 to the N that is no more dangerous than a walk on the beach.

300 parts per million is probably bad. 1 part per trillion is probably cleaner than a random meadow.


What’s to wonder? Cancer stories get clicks. Facts are optional.


I thought they switched the baby powder formula from Talc to Cornstarch many years ago. Maybe I'm mistaken?


Some quick googling shows that they did come out with a cornstarch based variety but you have to explicitly look and find that. The J&J website lists the ingredients for Baby Powder as "Talc, Fragrance".

https://www.johnsonsbaby.com/baby-products/johnsons-baby-pow...


Cornstarch works for some people, but many of us prefer talc. You can buy either one, they should be clearly marked.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: