FDA poised to kill proposal that would require asbestos testing for cosmetics

by hbicuche

12 Comments

  1. Freedom from asbestos not one of the valued freedoms in that much-vaunted most freest of places, then?

  2. Ok_Direction_7624 on

    RFK should be in jail for the damage he did with his antivaxx rhetoric, not doing his best to make sure we all get cancer.

  3. Thingmahbobber on

    Here I am worried that the house I might buy could have asbestos somewhere in it, meanwhile my government suggests it’s fine to put it on one’s face

  4. wow, nothing says healthy like finding out you have mesothelioma in 20 years.

    Feels like a good time for California to step in and push this through themselves. Generally other states/brands will automatically follow through to be able to sell in California

  5. Basically, you’re supposed to be rich (so you can afford to pay out of pocket for everything and fly to a different country to get vaccinated) or die.

  6. penned_chicken on

    Ironically, requiring asbestos testing would save cosmetics companies millions of dollars.

    Some people win asbestos contamination lawsuits from cosmetics companies, even when there is evidence that their homes with asbestos insulation are most likely leaking it and falling into their powders.

    If they tested all batches before selling them, they would have evidence that their products were not the source of contamination and can even recall the products before people are exposed to enough asbestos over time to get ill.

  7. Wintergloaming on

    I wonder what the regulations on cosmetic talc are like outside of the US? Because I own several Dasique blushes that have talc, and I remember the new YSL powder blushes were talc-based. Does it undergo small batch testing in the EU and Korea, or is everyone just shrugging at it?

  8. I fucking hate it here. I’m about this 🤏 close to pulling a 90 day fiancé and dipping from the US.

Leave A Reply