Talc is rather off-topic to drying books, so maybe this entire tangent needs to be split off, but here goes anyway.
Quote:
Given that talcum powder is used in papermaking and is chemically inert I would love to hear some science behind the objections to using it near stamps
In short, there is a considerale difference between talc embedded/captured within the structure of the paper versus loose talcum powder.
Any meaningful conclusions should be built on actual and repeatable testing and measurement, rather than anecdotal "I had a problem or I didn't have a problem" etc. Toward that end, I did a quick test:
1. Several pieces of the margin area were cut from a Bicentennial souvenir sheet (Scott 1686) to use a 48-year old example of printed stamp paper.
2. A commercial healthcare brand of talcum powder was applied to the selvage, shaken loosely back and forth, and the excess shaken off, thus leaving a light coating of the residual powder.
3. A second piece of (untalced) stamp paper was laid ink side down (thus ink-to-ink), and the two pieces of paper rubbed back and forth 20x with very gentle pressure. (To be more scientific and repeatable, I should have made a sled-block of known weight to calculate/report a true psi.)
4. The talced stamp was wiped off with a towel and examined with very oblique light. The presence of light surface scratching was evident.
Unfortunately, I don't have an easy way to represent this with a micro-photo. I would also note that many of us have our albums in dust cases to keep the dust out, so why apply talcum powder?
The other major use of talcum is to treat the back of self-adhesive stamps. Proper and complete removal of the self adhesive layer makes talcum use unnecessary.
Add: I make this post built on an ACS-accredited degree in chemistry and a Master's in packaging technology, so I have some familiarity with this topic.