Andrew Barss writes:
In rec.crafts.woodturning Andy Dingley wrote:: On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:13:21 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Barss
: wrote:

: Talc and asbestos are both amphibole minerals (a whole lot of minerals
: are amphiboles - if it's a calcium / magnesium silicate, chances are
: that it's an amphibole). _Some_ talc deposits have associated asbestos
: deposits with them. _Some_ talc minerals have been mined from these
: deposits, leading to contamination with asbestos.

: If you're selecting talc to make cosmetic grade talcum powder, you
: didn't use these deposits anyway. You wanted something that milled
: finely, and the last thing you need is some tough old fibre in there.

Thanks for the correction.

I did a quick Google search, and found this:

http://www.preventcancer.com/consume...etics/talc.htm

Not necessarily an accurate or unbiased source. Calling asbestos
a "potent carcinogen" is disingenious at best.

Scaremongering of the worst sort ("Talc kills babies every year!").

http://www.doctorgeorge.com/article.php?sid=688

And this one is priceless.

"another research undertaken in 1988 showed that 52%
of respondents with ovarian cancer _regularly_ used
talc"

I'll bet 52% of respondents with ovarian cancer regular
drink water with breakfast too. But that has no correlation
with cancer risk.

Now it may indeed be that talc and ovarian cancer are
linked, but nothing on either of these two sites provides
convincing evidence thereof.

We do know now that the dangers of asbestos to the general
public (i.e. non-miners) is wildly overinflated.

More on asbestos available he http://www.jamesphogan.com/bb/content/111202.shtml


scott