Corn Starch A Known Safer Substitute for Talc

Corn Starch A Known Safer Substitute for Talc Powder 1

1820 – Colgate-Palmolive opens starch factory 1820 – Colgate establishes a starch factory in Jersey City, New Jersey https: //www. colgatepalmolive. com/en-us/about/history 2

1890 s – first use of corn starch baby powder (per J&J) JNJ 000564733 3

1964 – J&J began developing their first corn starch powder “The first development period which took place between February 1964 to March 1968 was centered on producing a medicated corn starch baby powder. ” JNJTALC 000423794 4

1964 - J&J says corn starch safely absorbed by vagina “Dry Flo - A low substituted Al salt of mildly treated cornstarch. ” “Ashton established the largest commercial uses of Dry Flo are … as a condom lubricant where it replaced talc because it was found to be absorbed safely in the vagina whereas, of course, talc was not. ” JNJ 000325399 5

1970 – J&J lab tests showed corn starch was more absorbent than talc “Starch powders, (Bio. Sorb, Purity 825, Melojel corn starch, Johnson’s Corn Starch with Hexachlorophene) absorbed more synthetic sweat than talc powders. ” JNJTALC 000423794 6

1970 – J&J prisoner testing found corn starch more absorbent than talc “Corn Starch and Corn Starch based powders have significantly higher sweat absorption capacities than Talc and Talc based powders. ” JNJTALC 000088512 7

1971 – J&J began next stage of developing corn starch baby powder alternative “During the second phase of development which began in July 1971 and is active presently. the effort was directed at duplicating Johnson’s Baby Powder (talc) with a biodegradable powder either as a replacement in. even[t] of a crisis or as an extension product. ” JNJTALC 000423794 8

1973 – J&J says corn starch more absorbent than talc “The properties of corn starch and other powders did not duplicate those of talc but had unique and desired properties of their own. Corn Starch Baby Powder is more absorbent, whiter, more flowable, apparently able to retain perfume better than the talc product. It is lubricious but has a different texture than talc. ” JNJTALC 000423794 9

1973 – J&J says corn starch is asbestos -free talc alternative “Corn Starch is obviously another answer. The product by its very nature does not contain fibers. Furthermore, it is assimilated by the body. ” 10

1973 – J&J animal testing found corn starch less reactive than talc “From the findings of gross pathology, it appears as though cornstarch is more readily degradable by the body than talc. However, it is possible that cornstarch may have migrated to other parts of the body rather than undergoing local disintegration. ” JNJTALC 000423794 11

1974 – J&J label design for new corn starch product claims “now more absorbent” JNJTALC 000423794 12

1975 – J&J says corn starch is best talc alternative “Cornstarch is probably the best alternate to talc at the present because of its low potential for residuals upon inhalation. ” BPC OVERALL STRATEGY PRIORITY: 1. Market-test corn starch as talc alternative. JNJ 000029542 13

1975 – J&J starts selling corn starch baby powder in test market “Test market of Formula 31 as a line extension (JOHNSON'S Cornstarch Baby Powder) began in August 1975 in the New Orleans area. …. In addition, JOHNSON ‘S Baby Powder containing cornstarch (Formula 31) was marketed as a replacement ·for the talc product in the Boise, Idaho area in five putups, including sample size, beginning August, 1975. ” JNJTALC 000423794 14

1975 – J&J says corn starch less reactive than talc, will not cause chronic harm when breathed “The data supports the conclusion that cornstarch is less reactive than talc and that there was a progressive loss of starch from the tissue with time. This latter observation would suggest that the accidental inhalation of cornstarch powder will not result in any chronic harmful effects. ” JNJTALC 000021513 15

1975 – J&J says corn starch is more absorbent than talc "JOHNSON’S* Corn Starch Powder is more absorbent then JOHNSON'S* Baby Powder (with talc)". Various laboratory studies have been conducted to determine the amount of water and synthetic sweat absorbed by both corn starch -based and talc-based powder. These studies have conclusively demonstrated that corn starch is more absorbent. JOHNSON'S* Corn Starch Powder has been found to absorb 60 - 70% more than JBP* (talc). JNJ 000245868 16

1975 – J&J says corn starch is more absorbent than talc “"JOHNSON'S* Corn Starch Powder is as safe for use on babies as our current talc product". ” Based on animal toxicity & irritation studies and human irritation studies. JNJ 000245868 17

1976 – J&J found corn starch could absorb a far greater volume “JCSBP* 31 [corn starch] can absorb significant quantities of synthetic excretion products--750 milligrams of synthetic urine per gram of powder and 781 milligrams of synthetic sweat per gram of powder. ” “When talc based JBP * 499 was tested with this method, it was found that it could adsorb about 450 milligrams of both synthetic sweat and urine per gram of powder. ” JNJTALC 000063694 18

1976 – J&J found corn starch powder had fewer respirable particles than talc JNJ 000231628 19

1977 – J&J tested corn starch marketing due to threat of cosmetic talc ban “In view of possible government legislation banning the cosmetic use of talcum powder, the Brand is test marketing JOHNSON'S Baby Powder with Corn Starch in Ft. Wayne, Indiana as a possible product replacement formula. ” “The rating of JOHNSON'S Baby Powder with Corn Starch was either parity or higher than the talc formula on all qualities which further supports the viability of corn starch as a product replacement. ” JNJ 000245678 20

1980 – J&J launches corn starch baby powder nationwide JNJ 000564733 21

1982 – J&J says corn starch more absorbent than talc “Body powders sold in the marketplace contain primarily talc or cornstarch and those containing more cornstarch are more absorbent. Laboratory studies conducted within J&J have consistently shown that cornstarch powders are dramatically more absorbent than talcum powders. ” “Aside from greater absorption capacity, cornstarch powder can absorb moisture at a faster rate than talcum powder because it is more hydrophilic. ” JNJ 000255617 22

1984 – J&J advertised corn starch as best for dryness JNJ 000060260 JNJ 000064709 23

1985 – J&J advertised corn starch as more absorbent 24

1990 – J&J tests ad claiming corn starch is safest powder “Doctors trust corn starch because it’s the safest powder you can use on your baby, ” JNJ 000227880 25

1990 – J&J tests ad claiming corn starch is most absorbent powder Because it’s the most absorbent powder there is. JNJ 000227880 26

1993 – J&J study found corn starch had 8. 5 times less respirable particles than talc “Cornstarch generates a much lower respirable content (10μ + below EPS) than talc based BP from the same contained, about 8 ½ times less. ” JNJTALC 000063694 27

1994 - J&J says FDA found corn starch more absorbent than talc “The FDA Review Panel stated that: * cornstarch affords protection to the skin by absorbing moisture, perspiration and noxious secretions * cornstarch is many times as absorbent as talc * absorbency by cornstarch probably surpasses that of any powder described in the official compendia” 28

1999 – J&J considered “accelerated shift from talc to cornstarch” “depending on how widely this [negative talc press] gets publicized, you may want to build this into your forecast thinking (e. g. , stay conservative on the total powder business, accellerated shift from talc to cornstarch. )” JNJ 000564377 29

2000 – J&J says corn starch more absorbent, costs more JNJ 000564733 30

2000 – J&J says corn starch costs more per pound than talc JNJNL 61_000119155 31

2009 – J&J study found mothers preferred corn starch for infants & toddlers “In households that do not have children 0 -5 years of age, cornstarch accounts for 60% of Johnson's Baby Powder volume and talc 40%. In contrast, cornstarch accounts for 80% of the volume in households with children 0 -5 and talc usage is at 20%. This implies that moms understand the difference between the cornstarch and talc products, and lean towards cornstarch. ” JNJ 000422800 32

2016 – J&J safety review found corn starch is safer than talc “In vivo experiments have demonstrated that cornstarch elicits a much more transient foreign-body response than does talc and that, unlike talc, cornstarch is capable of being removed by physiologic processes and rarely causes adhesions. In contrast to talc, cornstarch contains no asbestos and is capable of being removed from the peritoneal cavity, as demonstrated by in vivo studies on granuloma formation. ” JNJ 000526749 33