Related

• Friction. Thighs, under the breasts, the groin, the armpits, between the toes. Powder reduces skin-on-skin friction, and for anyone who chafes in summer it works better than a cream, which adds moisture.
• Moisture in skin folds. Intertrigo — the inflamed, macerated rash that develops in warm damp folds — is prevented by keeping the fold dry. This matters in obesity, in immobility, and in older and bedbound people, where it is a genuine nursing concern.
• Odour, through moisture control and often sodium bicarbonate.
• After a bath, the traditional use, overlapping with Dusting Powder.

The most consequential unresolved question in this catalogue.

Talc is a mined mineral and in some deposits occurs alongside asbestos. Cosmetic-grade talc is specified and tested to be asbestos-free; an asbestos-contaminated cosmetic is adulterated under FD&C Act sec. 601. What has never existed is a standardised, regulator-mandated test method — which is exactly what MoCRA directed FDA to create:

• MoCRA required FDA to promulgate standardised methods for detecting asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products.
• A proposed rule issued in December 2024.
• It was withdrawn in November 2025, leaving the requirement unfinalised.

Alongside that, litigation over talc-containing body powders — genital use and ovarian cancer, and occupational and consumer mesothelioma — has been extensive, has produced very large verdicts and settlements, and has changed the market: major manufacturers have reformulated to cornstarch or withdrawn talc powders entirely.

The proportionate reading: talc is not banned, asbestos is; the association is a contamination question rather than a property of talc; the testing framework is unfinished; public health guidance now generally advises against perineal talc use; and cornstarch, rice starch and tapioca starch alternatives work well.

Starch powders absorb well and avoid the talc question entirely. The occasionally repeated claim that starch "feeds" candida in a moist fold is weakly supported and is not a reason to avoid it for ordinary use — but if a fungal infection is present, the answer is an antifungal, not a change of powder.

A separate and genuine issue. Applying loose powder generates a respirable cloud, and that is not something to do daily in a small bathroom, for talc or for starch. Apply low to the body, press the puff rather than shaking it, ventilate, and never near an infant — aspiration of powder is a recognised paediatric emergency. See Baby Powder.

Cosmetic in the US — FDA primary categories (12) personal cleanliness and (05) fragrance preparations, which explicitly covers dusting and talcum powders. No premarket approval. Colour additives, where present, must be approved for the intended use.

It becomes an OTC drug with an antifungal or skin-protectant claim at monograph level. Powders containing zinc oxide with a protectant claim fall under the skin protectant monograph.

In the EU, talc is permitted under the general safety requirement, and asbestos is prohibited under Annex II — 1,766 entries. Named fragrance allergens must be individually declared.

Two to three years or more. A dry powder has essentially no microbial risk and its only enemy is moisture — a caked powder has been damp.

Do not share a puff, which is a used applicator that has been over skin repeatedly. Keep the container closed and out of the shower steam.

• Bath and Body — the shelf this sits on, and the rest of it.
• Cosmetics — what the label is legally allowed to say, and the full catalogue.
• Powders — this is the only entry in its group.
• Dusting Powder · Baby Powder · Foot Powder and Spray — the same question elsewhere.
• Regulatory statements here follow the FDA and EU sources listed on Cosmetics, read 16 August 2026.