The FDA Must Be Held Accountable For Failing Baby Powder Victims And Others
Evidence from a number of different angles is starting to point the blame at the US Food and Drug Administration for failing to more thoroughly regulate the cosmetics industry
Tuesday, March 19, 2019 - Over the last fifty or more years, possible health problems have been met with an "it's not my job" attitude by the FDA. Such a cynical statement is backed up by the recently uncovered internal Johnson & Johnson memos that show that Johnson & Johnson executive knew as early as 1956 that their asbestos supply contained asbestos. When the FDA sought to regulate talc in the early 1970s the FDA proposed the strict regulation that no more than one-tenth of one percent of a container of talc could contain asbestos. Johnson & Johnson countered by demanding a threshold ten times as great. There was never any resolution of the conflict and to this day the cosmetics industry is yet to come to a decision. Since the 1950's the cosmetics industry has been "self-regulating" as it pertains to testing talc for asbestos. And it looks as if all the industry has done is to rubber stamp investigations and cover-up what they knew about the quantity of asbestos in talc. The industry continues to use the old threshold of one percent in spite of the fact that the mere presence of asbestos in any quantity no matter how small can cause cancer. People affected and harmed by the regular use of Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder proven to have asbestos are seeking help from national talcum powder cancer attorneys.
In addition to the FDA failing to regulate the presence of asbestos in talc-based cosmetics, incriminating events at the FDA included the sudden resignation in March 2019 of chairman Scott Gottlieb. Mr. Gottlieb has come under fire for not doing enough to require dangerous drugs and medical devices to undergo sufficient pre-market human testing before being approved for sale. Gottlieb oversaw the agency's controversial 501 (k) fast-track program that allows drug and medical device makers to bypass pre-market human testing and advance a product for immediate sale. The company has only to show that the drug or device is substantially similar to one already on the market. There is no oversight, however, to see whether or not the device being compared is still on the market, has been recalled, or even the subject of lawsuits for malfunctioning. One device could be approved based on a failed device, which was approved on a failed device, and on and on. It is this sort of leave well enough alone attitude that has failed to hold cosmetic companies accountable for containing cancer-causing asbestos. Gottlieb also has been held accountable for failing women that have had the Essure birth control device implanted in them and that the agency has looked the other way when tens of thousands of women complained over the years that the device was making them ill. Social media and consumer watchdog groups have long held that Essure should have been taken off of the market so that the product could be tested further yet the FDA did nothing.
On the heels of Gottlieb's resignation, the FDA has tested certain talc-based cosmetic products and found that they contain asbestos. The companies that manufactured the cosmetic have pulled them from the market. Since the FDA has no authority to regulate the cosmetics industry, nor the authority to issue a recall, the government watchdog had to settle for merely issuing a "security alert," to warn consumers.
OnderLaw, LLC -