Johnson & Johnson knew for decades about toxic baby powder

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Darlene Coker knew she was dying. She just wanted to know why.

She knew that her cancer, mesothelioma, arose in the delicate membrane surrounding her lungs and other organs. She knew it was as rare as it was deadly, a signature of exposure to asbestos. And she knew it afflicted mostly men who inhaled asbestos dust in mines and industries such as shipbuilding that used the carcinogen before its risks were understood.

Coker, 52 years old, had raised two daughters and was running a massage school in Lumberton, a small town in eastern Texas. How had she been exposed to asbestos? “She wanted answers,” her daughter Cady Evans said.

Fighting for every breath and in crippling pain, Coker hired Herschel Hobson, a personal-injury lawyer. He homed in on a suspect: the Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder that Coker had used on her infant children and sprinkled on herself all her life. Hobson knew that talc and asbestos often occurred together in the earth, and that mined talc could be contaminated with the carcinogen. Coker sued Johnson & Johnson, alleging that “poisonous talc” in the company’s beloved product was her killer.

J&J denied the claim. Baby Powder was asbestos-free, it said. As the case proceeded, J&J was able to avoid handing over talc test results and other internal company records Hobson had requested to make the case against Baby Powder.

Coker had no choice but to drop her lawsuit, Hobson said. “When you are the plaintiff, you have the burden of proof,” he said. “We didn’t have it.”

That was in 1999. Two decades later, the material Coker and her lawyer sought is emerging as J&J has been compelled to share thousands of pages of company memos, internal reports and other confidential documents with lawyers for some of the 11,700 plaintiffs now claiming that the company’s talc caused their cancers — including thousands of women with ovarian cancer.

A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/johnson-and-johnson-knew-for-decades-about-toxic-baby-powder/ar-BBQX1AH?li=BBnbfcN

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. In American capitalism, this kind of thing is a feature, not a bug.

[Initech]

2. Yup, and their executives will probably take the money and run.

That's what happens when we don't regulate anything.

[whathehell]

3. Not if their asses are sued beyond all recognition..

[TheBlackAdder]

4. This probably isn't just baby power, but in sports talc used in bowling, gymnastics, weightlifting.

[Claritie Pixie]

5. We can't expect corporations to regulate themselves

They put selling products over safety. That's why we need the government to step in and regulate.

[Stuart G]

6. You are correct..We need government to step in.. But the Republicans say..."too much government in

our lives." That is what they have been saying for over 120 years. There is a great book about the government not being able to control meat production in the U.S. Upton Sinclair wrote, "The Jungle" in 1906 and it helped to get government regulations in the production and sale of the food we eat.

...It is a classic book that helped reform an industry.. Only about 10 real nauseating pages. Stock Yards in Chicago. (don't exist there any more ) Great book, not long. Worth the time. Yes now the food in cans is under regulations so we don't get what that book discusses. In fact almost all the food we eat is regulated..