Document Qd7RGw1LmVX2ZG67M2Lda5E7

FILE NAME: Johnson & Johnson (JAJ) DATE: 1971 Sept DOC#: JAJ052 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Report - Preliminary Report on Examination of Grantham Ore, Medicated Talcum Powder and Shower to Shower Talcum Powder - with Cover Letter m tS A D , MBDXCBD, ORHHAM TALC ,b Vim Ri R o llo ' o f ila J Pw teftlMl D oeuiM iit-C u^M tto PreteeBv Ord*r JNJAZ*S_0000Q88S3 RESEARCH ANO DEVELOPMENT WALTER C. McCRONE ASSOCIATES. INC. SMALL PARTICLE PROBLEMS SOLID STATE CHEMISTRY ULTRAMJCRO ANALYSIS CRYSTALLORAPHY MICROSCOPY GENERAL OFFICE; 4 9 3 EAST 31 tt STREET LABORATORIES. 449-493 EAST 31 it STREET CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60414 PHONE: 312) 842-7100 CABLE: CHEMICRONE 3 September 1971 Dr. A. Goudie Johnson and Johnson Research Center SOI George Street New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 Dear D r. Goudie : Enclosed are two copies of oar preliminary report on the Grantham ore and the Shower to Shower and medicated powders. We have other photographs of the Gran tham ore if you find that you need more of any particular type. Please let us know what type you wish and we will sedd them to you. There are three sets of photo graphs, and I will send a fourth set with a copy of our final report. I am sorry that It took the extra time, but our microscope was down for over two weeks while we got service on it. We were also trying to refine our techniques in selected area electron diffraction sim ilar to Dr. Pooley's technique. I think we have done rather well, and I believe that our detection linpts are ae^low as possible. The fiber of ehrysotile in die G - ll sample was about 800A by 2000A, ,,and the pattern was very clear. H It is necessary, we can probably go to fibers 200Atry 500-1000Along. I believe this gives us an edge in future dismissions with Langer o r anyone else. I do not believe he knows what he is talking about. These fibers do not decompose in the beam, and you can identify them clearly with selected area electron diffraction. I think it is possibly the only way. The tube characteristic is not always very clear in ehrysotile, but you generally have some indication. With trem olite, you generally have lines running parallel to the axis and not the mottled appearance of rolled talc with subgrain boundaries. I marvel at Dr. Pooley's abdify to look a t photographs and decide what they were. Two'months la te r, I am beginning to do that now. The little characteristics of each fiber are beginning to fit into place. Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNilAZS5_000008894 Dr. A. Goodie page two I have just re-examined the G -ll sample and find no ohrysotfls in die second sample. There was one fiber, but it gave a different diffraotion pattern from that of chxysotile. Well, I am now headed for northern Michigan for a week. When I get baok, we oan exchange stories on the big one that got away. Good look. Very truly yours, GRGsrit Enclosures Ref: MA2347 t Research Physicist Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNJAZSSJWW08SM Report to: Johnson and Johnson Research Center 501 Qeorge Street New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 Project No. MA.-2347 PRELIMINARY REPORT ON EXAMINATION OP GRANTHAM ORE, MEDICATED. TALCUM POWDER AND'SHOWER TO SHOWER TALCUM POWDER Submitted by: Walter CJ MeCrone Associates, Me. 493 East S lat Street . Chicago, Illinois 60816 No. imi Coptes Walter C . McCrona Associates, Inc. protected Docuntent-Gutijeetto Protectiv* Ordef September 1971 JN>IAZ5f_OOOOD88K Project No, MA-2347 PRELIMINARY REPORT ON EXAMINATION OP GRANTHAM ORE, MEDICATED TALCUM POWDER AND SHOWER TO.SHOWER TALCUM POWDER An examination lias been made of the following samples submitted by Johnson and Johnson Research Center: (1) Grantham ore, i i (2) Grantham ore composite, (3) Vermont ore (Raymond m ill, unconditioned), (4) ' Johnson's medicated talcum powder, and (5) Johnson's Shower to Shower talcum powder. The results of this examination a re summarized below. The Grantham ore was ictmd to contain about 0 .0i-6;l% trem oltte; this is ' reduced hy a factor of between 2-4 by benefiolatlon, The ore is also believed-to con 1 tain ohxysotile in the range of 0.001-0.01%, reduced by &factor of between 5-10 by 1 benefit:latton. Both the trem oltte and th e ohxysotile were in sufficient quantities' to be IiI identified electron diffraction. There axe also much larger quantities of rolled I talc in this ore than in the previously examined samples of Vermont ore, although this too is reduced by benefiolatlon. There are large quantities of extraneous materisds such a s calotte -and chlorite, some of whioh decompose in-the beam into a gas phase and a fine deposit. Other minerala present decompose into a spherical hall,' and some. J of these have been tentatively identified fay eleotron diffraction as follows: Compound ASTM Card .. Relative Abundance I ' i -' NaJB bo. 8-245 I 2 3 rare- Ni^AlFg 1-1273 common KC10g 2-1320 medium II Electros microprobe studies showed sotne asbestos'present,- some potassium feldspar-with inclusions of pyrites and iron, oxides, considerable amounts, of calotte $nd traces of graphite. ! ' i i Protected Documont'-Subjocito Protective Order .--I-.' Walter C. McCrone Associate, Inc. JNJAZS6_00608897 In the sample of. Vermont ore (Raymond mill, unconditioned), we found no asbestos; however, there was more rolled talc and extraneous minerals than in the Vermont ore previously studied (MA-2330-2). In the medicated powder, we found one fiber of chrysotile, and we estimate that this powder contains less than 0.001% asbestos; the correct order of magnitude is probably 0.0001% since much of the sample rem ains at the bottom of the test tube. The tricalcium phosphate added as a buffer to this powder does form clusters of needle-like crystals which tn some cases have the tube appearance of chrysotile. The electron diffraction pattern, however, is not sim ilar to that of chrysotile. In the Shower to Shower sample we found several fibers which do not show the coring typical of chrysotile. These may be fine fibers of talc or of Ca{PO4)6nHO which also occur as needles. There was one very small fiber which could have been chrysotile in a field of fine talc flakes. We were unable to obtain a diffraction pattern from the sample, but we feel strongly that it may be chrysotile. Again, the percentage of chrysotile is very low. In Che range of p. 0 0 i-0 .0001%. hi running the standards of the additives to the medicated powder and to the Shower to Shower powder, we did find two fibers of chrysotile, positively identified both by morphology and diffraction patterns in the G -ll sample; These two fibers were very close together and may have come-from the same source. Again, the p e r- . centage was> low, 0.005-0.001%, but. this may be a potential source of contamination of it* end product". The tricalcium phosphate and the.M icrocele showed no contamina tion by ashesti form minerals. Our final report on this project will follow shortly. In the meantime, we are enclosing the photographs relevant to this work. 2 - Walter C. McCrone Associates, Inc. Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNJAZS6_000008898 FINAL REPOBT ON SHOWER TO SHOWERs MEDICATED POWDER AND FEMININE-SPRAY Summary We have examined samples 6f three Johnson & Johnson tale products, Slower to Shower, Medicated Powder and Feminine Aerosol Spray. These products all seem to be quite clean, and we did not find any fibers of the asbesttform m inerals in any of them: In particular, there are; no bundles of ohrysotile fibers and only in r a r e oases did we find any fibers suspect on the basis of morphology. The maximum number of suspect fibers which we found in any sample was two, in the Shower to Shower. There is a possibility of contamination by approximately one fiber in our lab and probably some contamination in the processing just from, airborne fibers which get into the.product during the grinding and mixing procedures. / . W all' C. McCrone Associates, Inc. Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNJAZ8S 000MM99 Introduction McCrone Associates lias examined the appearance and fiber content of samples of Johnson & Johnson Shower to Shower, Medicated Talc Powder and Feminine'Aerosol Spray. The electron microscopy and electron diffraction methods used are described in a previous report to Johnson & Johnson, MA2330-1, Final Results of Examination Feminine Spray The Feminine Spray sample showed talc plate sizes which are considerably sm aller than those particle sizes in the other talo products. The fiber sontent .in this sample of Feminine Spray seems to be Quite low, and we found very few examples of roiled talo o r other fibers, We found one unknown m ineral fiber which we considered at fir s t to be chrysotile, but, after a careful comparison of our standard chrysotile electron diffraction patterns and the unknown mineral pattern, we decided that it was not ohrysotUe. This fiber has a oentral coring sim ilar to chrysotile but shows a diffraction pattern different from chrysotile. This strong morphological sim ilarity might have led to confusion without the use of electron diffraction and chrysotile standards.. A few talc fibers and some other small mineral fibers were identified with electron diffraction. In addition, we found .a fiber from which We could not get an electron diffraction pattern. It did not appear to have a chrysotile structure but might possibly be calcium phosphate o r sodium sesquleltrate. Walter C. McCrone Associate, Inc. Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNJAZ Medicated Powder The Medicated Powder is very sim ilar in cleanliness to the Feminine Spray Powder. The additive "Microcell" appears to be a fine web-like struc ture, in some cases platy which appears very sim ilar to crinkled newspaper when viewed from the top. None of the several chemical additives which we found appeared to be fibrous: several orthorhombic, cubic, or perhaps tetraginal crystals might be calcium silicate. We found few examples of fibrous talc and only one fiber which could be considered suspect because of its central coring. This suspect fiber gave an excellent electron diffraction pattern which, in our opinion, differs from chrysdtile both in d values and intensify relationships. It could be hydromagnesite, halloysite o r .a rolled silicate. In addition to the suspect fiber we found examples of what appeared to be sodium sesquisitrate or a chemical very sim ilar to. it; the coring was not quite as obvious and it did give a slight electron diffraction pattern; there is a strong possibility that this is calcium phosphate or one of the ingredients added to the powder to give its medicated quality. Shower to Shower The fiber content of Shower to Shower is quite low in comparison to previous samples which we have investigated and Is predominantly rolled talc, I estim ate it to be on the order of 0.001% and definitely no greater than 0.005%. We found three suspect fibers. Of these, two w ere found, in one field and probably have the same source, very possibly contamination. Because they w ere covered by a talc plate, it was impossible to get electron diffraction -3- Waiter C. McCrone Associates, Inc. Protected Document-Subject to protective Order JNJAZSS_000008901 patterns from these two fibers; they appeared to be the same size and to have the same general characteristics, but it still is questionable whether they are V chrysotile. We have, however, found traces of chrysotile in G - ll, one of,the additives to Shower to Shower, and this might he a possible source of these contaminant fibers. Tbe third fiber is quite small and in a field surrounded by small plates of talc. We have compared its electron diffraction pattern with those of talc and chrysotile and it does not appear to be either of the two. It is sim ilar to chrysotile only insofar as it has an apparent coring of the sample. hi the remainder of the sample, we found few talc shards, i . e . , small fragments of talc broken from larg er plates which give talc patterns in most cases but which appear as fibers. There is some rolled talc and some other mineral fibers which we have not been able to identify with electron diffraction but which do not have any of the characteristics of amphiboles ox chrysotile. As in the other two Johnson & Johnson products, we found several examples of fibers which have all of the general characteristics of sodium sesquioitrate, although they do not produce electron diffraction patterns. They generally occur in bundles and are not limited to single fibers as is chrysotile. The bundles of fibers, however, are quite random in orientation and seem to be almost a woven or intertwined structure. Observation in-regard to the suspect fibers, many types of mineral fibers bave a core sim ilar to chrysotile, but their electron diffraction patterns identify them as other m inerals. However, we cannot always obtain electron diffraction patterns from suspect fibers because they may have slightly different mineralogical structures which do not lead to strong electron diffraction patterns and/or their pattern may be masked by th major mineral species p resen t in the sample. -4- Walter C. McCrone Associates, Inc, Protected Document-Subject to Protective Order JNJAZ55 000008902