Minkin points out that she is an outside observer here, she says that, ultimately, based on the facts currently available to us, the positive result may well be a “fluke.” “We certainly have no corroborating data to show that is real.” While Dr. “I don't know what to make of that positive test,” Mary Jane Minkin, M.D., a professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Yale University, tells SELF. With both the FDA and J&J defending the veracity of their testing and the investigation ongoing, we’re currently at an impasse. “Given this, we stand by our findings,” the agency says. It also points out that different methodologies of sample testing can add another element of variation to the results. The FDA adds that in its own testing of the bottle that yielded a positive result for asbestos, it divided that one sample into three portions, one of which tested negative and two of which tested positive. Different samples may provide different results.”
“Given the powdered nature of the product, we expect non-uniformity in the distribution of any contaminant fibers. “Sampling of talc-containing cosmetics is done on a small amount of product, 100 nanograms, which is a small proportion of a larger sample, in this case, a bottle,” the FDA tells SELF in a statement. It also explained how both the positive and negative test results may both be accurate. When we asked the FDA about the discrepancy, it, too, stood by its results. So what should you make of these conflicting test results? Is this baby powder potentially toxic or isn’t it? (Trust issues, much?!) When asked about the discrepancy between the FDA’s initial positive test results and the negative results from J&J’s investigatory follow-up, a J&J spokesperson directed us back to this statement in its October 29 release: “Rigorous and third-party testing confirms there is no asbestos in Johnson’s Baby Powder. The mineral asbestos, on the other hand, is a known carcinogen that can potentially contaminate products containing talc because it’s sometimes found near talc mining sites. Quick debrief for the uninitiated: Talc, a naturally occurring mineral used commonly in cosmetic products like baby powder and face makeup, is thought to be safe in its pure form, the FDA says.
Here’s what you need to know about the possibility of asbestos in baby powder and other talc products. Johnson & Johnson said in its own press release that the recall was initiated “out of an abundance of caution” after a sample from a single bottle bought online detected “sub-trace” levels of asbestos at no more than 0.00002%.Īll of that said, it can be confusing to know whether or not it's safe to use baby powder or other talc-based products-regardless of what company makes them.
“The FDA would like to assure consumers that this new finding associated with the J&J sample is specific to one J&J product lot only,” the agency tells SELF in a statement. Importantly, no one has reported adverse events from exposure to this lot of products to the FDA, according to a press release from the agency. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that a sample tested positive for asbestos. Now for the latest: On October 18, J&J voluntarily recalled a single lot of its talc-based baby powder after the U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
