Jury Awards Woman $417M In Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Lawsuit

[dixiegrrrrl]

Three months after a Missouri jury ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay a record-setting $110.5 million to a Virginia woman who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer linked to the company’s talcum-based products, another jury in California has dwarfed that judgment, handing down a $417 million verdict in a similar suit.

Monday’s ruling is the first in California related to allegations that Johnson & Johnson ignored a possible link between cancer and its talcum-based products.
The case involves a California woman who was diagnosed with terminal ovarian cancer in 2007. According to lawyers for the woman, she began using Johnson & Johnson’s talcum-powder products when she was 11.

The jury found that the company failed to warn the woman about the increased risk of ovarian cancer caused by talcum-based powders, Reuters reports.

Johnson & Johnson has faced several lawsuits related to its talcum-based products and a possible link to cancer.

https://consumerist.com/2017/08/21/jury-awards-woman-417m-in-johnson-johnson-talcum-powder-lawsuit/



More interesting detail in the article...recommend checking it out....

[BigmanPigman]

1. I don't know about other cities and states but in CA

I have been seeing commercials constantly from law firms advertising this case and asking for other victims to call them.

[dhol82]

2. Am I alone in thinking this is ridiculous?

Ok, have a problem with the thought that talc could cause ovarian cancer. Did she blow it up her vagina on a daily basis? Would like more legitimate research.
But, $417 million??? That's way more than anything she or her family could expect as damages.

[Bettie]

4. I've wondered the same thing

Were they packing it in there or something?

[Glimmer of Hope]

5. Talc has been shown to migrate.

[JenniferJuniper]

6. But how would they know this caused her cancer?

[Glimmer of Hope]

7. Well the Ovarian Cancer Research Foundation has said recent studies do not show a link so

that is I why these case victories are so baffling.

[JenniferJuniper]

8. I guess the plaintiff's attorney wowed with junk science then

[pnwmom]

10. Other studies have shown a link, so it's debatable.

And that's what courts are for.

[kcr]

16. It's not the damages that bother me.

It's the fact that the link to cancer is pretty shaky.

[pnwmom]

17. The link of asbestos to cancer is well established.

And asbestos is a naturally occurring contaminant of talc, and was only banned in the late 1970's. And as recently as 2005, talcum from China was found to be contaminated.

So some of the women in these cases could have been exposed to asbestos in talcum powder decades ago -- and cancer often takes decades to develop.

[kcr]

29. From the American Cancer Society

Many studies in women have looked at the possible link between talcum powder and cancer of the ovary. Findings have been mixed, with some studies reporting a slightly increased risk and some reporting no increase. Many case-control studies have found a small increase in risk. But these types of studies can be biased because they often rely on a person’s memory of talc use many years earlier. Two prospective cohort studies, which would not have the same type of potential bias, have not found an increased risk.

[pnwmom]

30. The results have been mixed. And we KNOW that talcum often occurs in mineral deposits

alongside asbestos, which we know is a carcinogen. And we know that asbestos wasn't banned till the late 70's, and that there is no FDA regulation of cosmetics (lead in lipstick is another problem). And the only time the FDA tested talcum for asbestos, only 4 manufacturers voluntarily participated. Their products were all asbestos-free, but the FDA couldn't make any conclusions because of the low participation. IOW, they don't know what the results would have been from the non-volunteering companies.

Also, those prospective cohort studies you cite were done after asbestos was banned and at least some manufacturers began to process it out of talcum. If the studies used only asbestos-free talcum, then they wouldn't account for women who had been exposed to talcum that contained asbestos.

With all that, I don't think any woman should use it or use it on her children. It's an unnecessary product and not worth the risk.

[rusty fender]

19. Years ago

a chemist employed by Johnson & Johnson discovered that their talcum powder could cause a specific type of ovarian cancer; he suggested to higher ups that women should be warned about using it for feminine hygiene applications. Management was against issuing a warning.

The woman in this case had that specific type of cancer and had used the talcum powder for years.

Looks like the jury found J & J libel for not warning customers about the danger

[Drahthaardogs]

22. She used it after every trip to the bathroom for decades

Yes, it probably did cause the cancer. It is a fluke

[Glimmer of Hope]

3. Wow. As an ovarian cancer survivor, I have been following these cases and I am surprised

Last edited Tue Aug 22, 2017, 10:18 PM - Edit history (1)

that women are still winning them. The ovarian cancer organizations that I follow have advised that research showing a link between talc and cancer is weak.

[pnwmom]

11. The question seems to be about possible contamination with asbestos or other contaminants.

Supposedly, "modern" talc doesn't contain asbestos. But what is meant by "modern"? Some of the women who've sued used talcum decades ago (cancer can take decades to develop).

Also, I read somewhere that talc from China was discovered as recently as 2005 to be contaminated with asbestos. If that's true, then women are still at risk.

[Drahthaardogs]

23. Talc probably has no genetic mechanism to alter DNA

But there is strong evidence constant irritation can lead to cancer. She used it every day multiple times a day.

[pnwmom]

28. Right. Irritation can be a problem and asbestos and talcum are often found in the same deposits

so talcum can be contaminated with asbestos.

Asbestos was finally banned in the late 1970's, but there's been little testing of talc since then to make sure it's being processed out. Since talc is considered to be a cosmetic it's not regulated as a drug. The FDA finally did one study decades later that didn't show asbestos, but they acknowledged that only four manufacturers voluntarily participated, so they couldn't be confident of the results for the industry.

I stopped using it in the 80's when I first heard about the issue, but since my mother started using it on me when I was a baby, it was hard to feel confident. At least I don't have to feel guilty about having used it on my own children -- that didn't happen.

[Jack-o-Lantern]

9. There are many substances that contribute to cancer. I do not think that baby powder is one of them.

[pnwmom]

12. Some talc has been shown to contain asbestos and/or other contaminants.

"Modern" talc is supposed to be safe, with the exception of some asbestos-contamination found in talc from China more than 10 years ago.

But many of the women who sued might not have used "modern" talc. Manufacturers didn't always test it for contaminants. That is a more recent development.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

13. Got a lot of research and laboratory time under your belt on this subject?

[obamanut2012]

21. This wasn;t baby powder, it was talc powder meant for women

And their nasty, stinky, gross vulvas and vaginas. Seriously, it was marketed as such, and women (like my grandmothers) were raised t use to after showers and when they urinated.

And, the talc had asbestos in it.

[pnwmom]

33. Unfortunately, there was overlap. The same talcum powder, often contaminated with asbestos,

was marketed both for use on babies and for women. So a girl would have it applied to her as a baby, and then just continue using it after baths throughout her childhood and into adulthood.

[pnwmom]

14. They didn't ban asbestos from talcum powder till the late 70's, when they banned asbestos

Last edited Wed Aug 23, 2017, 12:06 PM - Edit history (1)

from other products. And there is little doubt that asbestos applied to mucous membranes could be cancer-causing.

So that means that many women alive today could have been exposed, up till the late 1970's, to asbestos-contaminated talcum powder. And since cancers can take decades to develop, some of those women could have ovarian cancer related to that exposure.

I hope when they're doing the studies they are taking into account that the "modern" talc they think is safe today is not necessarily the same talcum powder people used for decades. Also, that there is no FDA regulation or required testing of "modern" talcum to make sure it isn't ever contaminated with asbestos.

Also, I read that some talcum from China about a dozen years ago was contaminated with asbestos. So, personally, I wouldn't use it. Talcum and asbestos often are found together, so unless you are certain that the product you are using was thoroughly purified, why take a chance?

[dixiegrrrrl]

15. You can find cornstartch baby powder now...

Mine says with Aloe and something something, it works just as well.
Happily, I did not use baby powder on the kids, back in the 70's...they were prone to skin rashes, I used "burnt flour",
my Grandmother's recipe, works fine.

[Demsrule86]

24. Cornstarch feeds yeast...so I could never use it...used a medicated powder or dilluted Athletes

foot medicine.

[dsc]

32. Thanks for this

I had no idea how this could be until I read your post. Now I see

[Xolodno]

18. I suspect....

...the amount will be greatly reduced on appeal or thrown out. Not saying their is or isn't a link from Talc and cancer... but look how long it took before cigarettes were recognized as cancer sticks.

[pnwmom]

20. This is an article from a legal site about the presence of asbestos in talc.

Asbestos is a known carcinogen.

http://virginiabeach.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/does-using-talcum-powder-raise-a-womans-risk-for-cancer/

More than 2,500 lawsuits across the United States aim to answer the question of whether a case of ovarian cancer, mesothelioma or other form of genitourinary cancer can be linked to the plaintiff’s lifelong use of a product like Johnson & Johnson’s talc-containing Baby Powder or Shower to Shower talc product. J&J is the defendant in most of the dangerous product and wrongful death cases, but other health and beauty product manufacturers like Colgate-Palmolive have also been sued over their talcum powder products. Colgate-Palmolive sold Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder until 1995. Several lawsuits assert that Colgate got its talc from mines contaminated with asbestos, resulting in some users of the talc powder contracting mesothelioma, a deadly cancer whose only known cause is inhaling microscopic asbestos fibers.

Colgate, Johnson & Johnson and other companies have asserted that their talc baby powder products have been free of asbestos since the 1980s. Attorneys for persons suffering mesothelioma and other asbestos-induced cancers have asserted, however, that the companies’ talc powder products remained adulterated or contaminated by asbestos far longer. It is well known that asbestos is a carcinogen that, when inhaled, can cause numerous types of cancers, like lung cancer or mesothelioma, which attacks the lining of the lung, as well as forms of throat cancers and others.

In a talc powder ovarian cancer case being tried in St. Louis, Missouri, a whistle blower came forward providing deposition testimony about the presence of asbestos in talc powders. The whistle blower worked on chemical testing of Johnson & Johnson baby powder products in the 1970’s which revealed a high percentage of samples were contaminated with asbestos. Did J & J issue a finding on these tests or alert consumers about the risk of asbestos exposure from using their talc products? No. The testing was actually halted, presumably on direction of J & J corporate leadership and the results were never published.

Older Talc Products Did Contain Asbestos

Until the mid-1970s, talc used in health and beauty products sold in the United States often came from the same mines that supplied asbestos for fireproofing and insulation. Companies like J&J have since pledged that all their talcum powders — both standalone products like Shower to Shower and combination products like makeup and skin cleansers — come from asbestos-free sources. Attorneys in several recent dangerous product cases have asserted that asbestos remains in various talc powder products. If this is true, it means that not only is talc a potential cause of ovarian cancer, but that asbestos fibers and talc fibers may be migrating into the female genital organs through the vaginal canal when women use talc-containing baby powders as a feminine dying agent.

The withdrawal of older talc products from the market and the long shelf life of bottles of talc certainly left people at risk for unrecognized asbestos exposure into the 1990s and possibly even into the present day. Lab tests and autopsies have shown that breathing in talcum powder during everyday use left traces of asbestos in the lung tissue of talc product users who would not otherwise have regular exposure to asbestos. It appears that asbestos must have been present at the microscopic fiber level when baby powder was merely applied.

SNIP

[Vinca]

25. I'm puzzled about the whole thing.

How does powder, which is applied externally, travel up the vagina, through the cervix, into the uterus and up the Fallopian tubes to the ovaries?

[democratisphere]

26. $417 million is absolutely absurd and ridiculous!

PERIOD!

[Calculating]

31. Seriously

Even if the stuff did cause cancer, it's not worth a $400M+ payout. It's not like J&J were hiding the danger like big tobacco. They were probably as shocked as anybody. I also don't see how the hell an external powder product could be proven to be causing ovarian cancer.

[malaise]

27. K & R for visibillty