Document rpdYQa3rm8zRV8DyakkdNx3xe

FILE NAME: New York State & NY Times (NY) DATE: 1972 June 17 DOC#: NY042 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: NYT Article - Talc Warning Label is False n_v M t\/U i: i,iv .n i n i \ a I hiin New York Times (1857-Currentfile); Jun 17, 1972; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 20 Pg 31 Talc Warning Is L abeled Raise U y GRACE LICHTENSTEIN The medical researcher who did tests on asbestos in baby powder for the city's Environmental Protection Administration charged yes terday that the agency had misinterpreted his analyses and published false data. The researcher. Dr. Arthur M. hanger of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, said it was "absolutely un true" that samples of John son & Johnson and Landers baby powders tested in a -preliminary study contained from 5 to 25 per cent asbes to* fibers,, as reported by the city office. On the contrary, Dr. Lan ger said, further, more-de- , tailed analysis found that there were only "trace" amounts of asbestos In John- | son & Johnson powder. "0 f all the talcs we've looked at, Johnson & Johnson is the most pure," he said. `No Detectable' Asbestos Jerome Kretchmer, the En- , vironmental Protection Ad- | ministrator, who brought up ! the alleged danger of asbes- ' tos in talc a year ago, said | yesterday, "i concede the 1 tests results have changed." But he suggested that the talc manufacturers might have removed the asbestos from the products in the months since the issue was first raised. He said he had no evidence, however, to prove that the formulations had been changed. Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Food and Drug Ad ministration in Washington said yesterday that results from tests made in March snowed "no detectable con* lent of asbestos" in Johnson & Johnson baby powder, and only "minor" amounts -- about I per cent -- in the Landers product. . The city's environmental agency had warned parents not to use baby powder, espe cially on infants, until' the asbestos question was cleared up, since asbestos is known to cause lung cancer years after being inhaled. Kretchmer Cites Letter But Dr. Robert M. Schaff ner, director of the Office of Product Technology for the F.D.A., said that out of 40 talcum samples recently tested by the Federal agency, 3! contained only 1 per cent or less of asbestos. One sam ple is being re-tested. Dr. Schaffner said that in 1 light of this research, "we i would .not agree witli the 1 warning on talc." 1 Mr. Kretchmer said his ! agency had heard of the new lest results only after the Environmental Protection Ad ministration released a letter from James R. Marshall, di rector of public information, ' to a consumer. In the letter Mr. 'W -i'iell named Johnson & Johnson and Landers as being the two brands in which the E.P.A. had found 5 to 25 per cent asbestos more than a year ago. The letter was dated June 8. - Mr. Marshall said yester day he had not known about Dr. Langer's later analyses absolving Johnson & John son, when he wrote the letter.' But he contended that Dr. Langer's original report to the , E.P.A. on May 10, 1971, had clearly warned about possible danger in using baby powder. The report said m part: "The amounts of fiber pres ent in these samples, as de termined by light microscopy, ranges from 5 to 25 per cent . . . Please note that these results are preliminary in na ture and that some further investigations are warranted to delineate whether or not a health hazard exists with these materials . . . It is of interest to note that some recent observations do sug gest a hazard exists. Substi tute materials should be con sidered until the problem is clarified." Dr. Langer said yesterday that with' light microscopy "you see only the gross fibers." He said that what he thought to be mineral fibers turned out in later research to be talc itself. Harold Romer. consultant to the Commissioner of Air Resources, said Dr. Langer had spoken to him about the new findings but that he was led to believe that there was a difference of perhaps I per cent, rather than a drop to "trace" amounts. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner Further reproduction prohibited without permission.