Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Does talcum powder cause ovarian cancer when used for 2 years?

  1. #1

    Does talcum powder cause ovarian cancer when used for 2 years?

    Hi,

    I have a 2-year-old baby girl. We used to use talcum powder since she was born. Last day one of my friends came to my house. She said that talcum powder can lead to ovarian cancer if used continuously. She added that her friend was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Later it was proved that it's due to the continuous use of talcum powder. They have consulted a talcum powder lawsuit lawyers to solve the case and it's only because of them they got the verdict in favor of them.

    Does talcum powder cause ovarian cancer when used for 2 years? Is there any need to consult a doctor, to have a complete checkup? Please share your opinion.

    Thank You!



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    It is hard to say. I would stop using it, nevertheless.

    I have known people who have used the Johnson & Johnson's baby powder over the years. My concern would be that using it, people were breathing in the powder that had asbestos in it.
    Last edited by donnay; 08-21-2019 at 09:01 AM.
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post
    It is hard to say. I stop using it, nevertheless.

    I have known people who have used the Johnson & Johnson's baby powder over the years. My concern would be that using it, people were breathing in the powder that had asbestos in it.
    Wow I did not know that J&J baby powder has asbestos in it.
    Truth is Fallacy, Fallacy is Evil.

  5. #4
    https://slate.com/technology/2018/12...on-cancer.html

    How Freaked Out Should We Be by the Possibility That There Was Asbestos in Baby Powder?


    Recent blockbuster investigations from Reuters and the New York Times allege that for decades, there was asbestos lurking in bottles of Johnson & Johnson baby powder, that the company knew about it, and that it did not share that information with the public. It sounds terrible: A cover-up, a mineral that can cause cancer after even tiny amounts of exposure, and a contaminated product that is marketed for use on infants. And it is terrible. But none of the reports answered the fundamental question for consumers: If you’ve used Johnson & Johnson baby powder on yourself or your children, just how scared should you be?

    Over the last six days, I talked to two experts in the fields of environmental and occupational health, and consulted a slew of papers and fact sheets from independent sources. And while they all agree that the news reports are concerning, the topline takeaway is that individual consumers don’t have to worry as much as the terrifying word salad of “asbestos baby powder” would suggest.

    Let’s back up. The Reuters investigation is pegged to the story of Darlene Coker, who sued Johnson & Johnson in 1997, and alleged that the company’s baby powder had given her a rare form of cancer, mesothelioma, which is closely linked to asbestos. Coker lost her case due to a lack of evidence to support the claim that the company’s baby powder contained any amount of the dangerous mineral. She died from mesothelioma in 2009. But now, new suits from thousands of plaintiffs alleging that the company’s products caused their cancers (not just mesothelioma) has forced Johnson & Johnson to share more documents, including a set the company had kept internal during the entire Coker suit. Some of these suggest that the company knew that some samples of baby powder contained trace amounts of asbestos from the 1970s, when the harms of asbestos were clear, into the early 2000s. That’s the cover-up, and it’s bad.

    But why would baby powder contain asbestos to begin with? Because it’s made from talc, a natural mineral that is found in the earth, sometimes alongside asbestos. Knowing that, it’s easy to see how some asbestos could wind up in baby powder, and these new documents make clear that it did at least sometimes. But that still doesn’t make it certain that baby powder caused Coker’s cancer. We don’t know how much made its way into how many bottles, and in turn, how much of that contaminated powder Coker used. We don’t know if Coker had other exposures to asbestos.

    Has baby powder been proven to cause mesothelioma more generally? We simply don’t know. “You couldn’t even design a study,” says Marc Schenker, founding director of the Center for Occupational and Environmental Health at the University of California–Davis. His stance on baby powder that is known to contain asbestos is clear: “I wouldn’t touch it.” And yet, even among those who do interact with asbestos, like miners and factory workers, mesothelioma remains a rare cancer, which is why multiple experts I spoke to noted that individuals who have used baby powder on their kids should not be too alarmed by this news.

    Basically, what we do know is a paradox: Asbestos shouldn’t be in baby powder. And most people will not be affected in the least by the fact that it was. (There’s also no evidence that Johnson & Johnson baby powder currently contains asbestos.)

    Mesothelioma is hard to study, both because it’s exceedingly rare, and it tends to take decades after exposure to develop. Each year, there are 14 deaths per 1 million people over the age of 25; more people die in car accidents in a single day than from mesothelioma per year even though, like cars, asbestos is to some extent ubiquitous in our environment—in the air, in car brakes, and in older buildings. We’re all exposed to asbestos “just from living,” says James Kelly, manager of environmental surveillance and assessment at the Minnesota Department of Health. “Obviously, it doesn’t cause everyone to become sick.” Even most asbestos miners do not get mesothelioma: the risk of the disease can increase a hundredfold for miners (the exact number depends on the specific conditions), but the number of people who actually get it is a small percentage of those exposed. In one cohort of 903 miners in Finland, for example, just four got the disease. (It further complicates things that there are different kinds of asbestos, and the type that made those four miners ill—a type also linked to an ore deposit that supplied talc for Johnson & Johnson—was a bit less inclined to cause mesothelioma, researchers concluded.)

    More at link.

    So if even miners who work directly with asbestos all day long rarely get that cancer, what is the risk from occasionally using a product with a couple particles per billion in it going to cause cancer? Practically non-existent. But that will not stop lawyers from trying to make $millions off claims.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 08-21-2019 at 12:38 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  6. #5
    Johnson & Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder
    https://www.reuters.com/investigates...ohnson-cancer/

    Johnson & Johnson Hit with $325M Verdict in Talc-Mesothelioma Case
    https://www.asbestos.com/news/2019/0...-talc-verdict/

    Asbestos in Baby Powder Exposure Risks
    https://www.asbestos.net/asbestos/products/baby-powder/
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by SamuelDSavage View Post
    Hi,

    I have a 2-year-old baby girl. We used to use talcum powder since she was born. Last day one of my friends came to my house. She said that talcum powder can lead to ovarian cancer if used continuously. She added that her friend was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Later it was proved that it's due to the continuous use of talcum powder. They have consulted a talcum powder lawsuit lawyers to solve the case and it's only because of them they got the verdict in favor of them.

    Does talcum powder cause ovarian cancer when used for 2 years? Is there any need to consult a doctor, to have a complete checkup? Please share your opinion.

    Thank You!
    Are you Fire11?

    Anyway, +rep for the great first post.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    So if even miners who work directly with asbestos all day long rarely get that cancer, what is the risk from occasionally using a product with a couple particles per billion in it going to cause cancer? Practically non-existent. But that will not stop lawyers from trying to make $millions off claims.
    This thread is not about "lawyers from trying to make $millions off claims." The original post was from a parent with legitimate concerns about their child's health.

    So what is the purpose of your comment? To encourage parents to keep using Johnson and Johnson products on their young children?

    You deserve all those red marks under your name.

    A parent who chooses not to use J&J's products cannot be harmed by them. A parent who follows your advice could potentially be harmed.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    The original post was from a parent with legitimate concerns about their child's health.
    That's one possibility.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfluous Man View Post
    That's one possibility.
    What are the other ones?
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    What are the other ones?
    The most obvious one is to get people to click the link they give and sign up to be part of the class action lawsuit that the link is promoting.

    The way they add the claim that "it's only because of them [the lawyers being advertised] they [the OP's alleged friend] got the verdict in favor of them," reads like part of an ad itself.

    Do you find it at all strange that somebody would sign up to join the Ron Paul Forums, and their first post would be this?

  13. #11
    I'm still trying to figure out how the talcum powder gets into the ovaries. It's not like there is a direct open air connection between the outside world and the ovaries.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    I'm still trying to figure out how the talcum powder gets into the ovaries. It's not like there is a direct open air connection between the outside world and the ovaries.
    You should PM @Suzanimal
    Danke Awarded Top Rated Influencer

    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!


    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    This thread is not about "lawyers from trying to make $millions off claims." The original post was from a parent with legitimate concerns about their child's health.

    So what is the purpose of your comment? To encourage parents to keep using Johnson and Johnson products on their young children?

    You deserve all those red marks under your name.

    A parent who chooses not to use J&J's products cannot be harmed by them. A parent who follows your advice could potentially be harmed.
    Statistically a person is more likely to be harmed in an accident in their own home. More die every day in their cars than die in a year from mesothelioma from all causes including factory workers and miners who are exposed to large amounts all day long.

    . Each year, there are 14 deaths per 1 million people over the age of 25; more people die in car accidents in a single day than from mesothelioma per year even though,
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 08-21-2019 at 01:37 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    You should PM @Suzanimal
    Don't. She replies with dick pics.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Statistically a person is more likely to be harmed in an accident in their own home. More die every day in their cars than die in a year from mesothelioma from all causes including factory workers and miners who are exposed to large amounts all day long.
    Statistically, a person has ZERO percent chance of being harmed by a product they don't use.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfluous Man View Post
    The most obvious one is to get people to click the link they give and sign up to be part of the class action lawsuit that the link is promoting.
    You could be correct, but RPF is not exactly a high traffic site to make that a wise strategy....
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Statistically, a person has ZERO percent chance of being harmed by a product they don't use.
    Everything has risks. Is the risk level worth worrying about? You think nothing about getting in a car but you are hundreds of times more likely to die in one than by this form of cancer.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Everything has risks.
    There is ZERO risk in NOT using a product that is linked to side effects. ZERO.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Is the risk level worth worrying about?
    When it is a product used for babies and infants, DEFINITELY.
    Last edited by Created4; 08-21-2019 at 06:56 PM.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    There is ZERO risk in NOT using a product that is linked to side effects. ZERO.



    When it is a product used for babies and infants, DEFINITELY.
    Since they are more likely die in cars (hundreds of times more likely) do you recommend not getting into cars so no kids die that way? Ban all products actions with a one in a million chance of it killing or harming you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Since they are more likely die in cars (hundreds of times more likely) do you recommend not getting into cars so no kids die that way? Ban all products actions with a one in a million chance of it killing or harming you?
    Your typical straw man and non sequitur arguments. You really want to compare driving cars to using baby powder? Not driving a car would drastically alter one's life. Not using baby powder?

    It's not just risk. It is risk-benefit. There is almost NO loss of benefit from not using baby powder.

    Your original question was "is it worth it?" And the answer is very obvious to most seeking the truth without an agenda like yours as you try to prop up your tired old arguments with illogical premises.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Your typical straw man and non sequitur arguments. You really want to compare driving cars to using baby powder? Not driving a car would drastically alter one's life. Not using baby powder?

    It's not just risk. It is risk-benefit. There is almost NO loss of benefit from not using baby powder.

    Your original question was "is it worth it?" And the answer is very obvious to most seeking the truth without an agenda like yours as you try to prop up your tired old arguments with illogical premises.
    What percent of kids get that cancer from using baby powder? What is the real risk? For all people, even those using baby power and getting exposed to a few particles a day and those working with it all day in large concentrations, only 14 in a million get that type of cancer. (actually that is all people getting that type of cancer total- there could be additional causes beyond asbestos which makes baby powder cases an even rarer event). It is one of the rarest types of cancer.

    You want to avoid it because you feel it has some risk. Everything has some risk. Do you avoid everything?
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 08-21-2019 at 07:28 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  25. #22
    There is a current class action lawsuit regarding cancer from using talcum powder for down under hygiene.
    Do something Dodgers.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by SamuelDSavage View Post
    Hi,

    I have a 2-year-old baby girl. We used to use talcum powder since she was born. Last day one of my friends came to my house. She said that talcum powder can lead to ovarian cancer if used continuously. She added that her friend was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Later it was proved that it's due to the continuous use of talcum powder. They have consulted a talcum powder lawsuit lawyers to solve the case and it's only because of them they got the verdict in favor of them.

    Does talcum powder cause ovarian cancer when used for 2 years? Is there any need to consult a doctor, to have a complete checkup? Please share your opinion.

    Thank You!
    Can males get ovarian cancer from this as well?

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfluous Man View Post
    Are you Fire11?

    Anyway, +rep for the great first post.
    I repped it also . Now I know there are talcum powder lawyers . Learn something every day .
    Do something Danke



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    It is one of the rarest types of cancer.
    Just not going to stay away from those straw man arguments are you Zip?

    Try researching all the side effects to asbestos. It is not simply one kind of "rare" cancer. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/asbestos/h..._asbestos.html

    If you want to believe that the only risk for a baby or infant breathing in asbestos is simply a "rare form of cancer" and nothing to worry about, then you're probably qualified to head up the FDA.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    You should PM @Suzanimal
    I can’t help. I’ve never stuck power up there.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    I'm still trying to figure out how the talcum powder gets into the ovaries. It's not like there is a direct open air connection between the outside world and the ovaries.
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    You should PM @Suzanimal
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    Don't. She replies with dick pics.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    I can’t help. I’ve never stuck power up there.
    Guess I'll never know the answer.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Guess I'll never know the answer.
    My best guess is talc powder is like glitter (gets everywhere) and when a woman powders her vag (not sure why one would do that) that it creeps up the lady bits and settles in the ovaries.

    I don't really understand why one would use body powder. I never used it on my kids or myself. I know Mr A powders his balls sometimes because he says he gets hot beans but it seems to me that A & D (ass & dick ) ointment would protect the skin from chaffing better than powder.

    *dick pic incoming*
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    My best guess is talc powder is like glitter (gets everywhere) and when a woman powders her vag (not sure why one would do that) that it creeps up the lady bits and settles in the ovaries.

    I don't really understand why one would use body powder. I never used it on my kids or myself. I know Mr A powders his balls sometimes because he says he gets hot beans but it seems to me that A & D (ass & dick ) ointment would protect the skin from chaffing better than powder.

    *dick pic incoming*

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Dick pic for 3D

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-25-2017, 05:35 PM
  2. Frankincense Found to Trump Chemo in Eliminating Ovarian Cancer
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-06-2014, 07:39 PM
  3. Mayo : Diabetes drug may help with ovarian cancer
    By kpitcher in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-12-2013, 04:48 PM
  4. Woman Rejects Chemo, Overcomes Ovarian Cancer With Nutrition
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-13-2013, 01:22 PM
  5. Ovarian Cancer Screenings Are Not Effective, Panel Says
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-10-2012, 09:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •