Yahoo India Web Search

Search results

  1. Dec 14, 2018 · Facing thousands of lawsuits alleging that its talc caused cancer, J&J insists on the safety and purity of its iconic product. But internal documents examined by Reuters show that the company's...

    • Did Johnson & Johnson's baby powder cause cancer?1
    • Did Johnson & Johnson's baby powder cause cancer?2
    • Did Johnson & Johnson's baby powder cause cancer?3
    • Did Johnson & Johnson's baby powder cause cancer?4
    • Did Johnson & Johnson's baby powder cause cancer?5
  2. May 18, 2024 · New research published this week lends credence to the more than 50,000 lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson that allege its talc-based baby powder caused ovarian cancer.

    • Aria Bendix
    • Health Reporter
    • Overview
    • Company stands by its product
    • J&J’s ubiquitous powder
    • Is J&J covering up?
    • Analyzing the studies
    • Consumer reaction to lawsuit
    • What are the alternatives?
    • Getting on with life

    A jury awarded more than $4 billion to women who say Johnson & Johnson’s talc-based baby powder gave them ovarian cancer. Should you be concerned?

    Johnson & Johnson, the world’s largest maker of healthcare products, faces more than 9,000 cases involving alleged harm done by its talc-based powder.

    But the products remain on the shelf.

    And the company continues to insist its talc-based products are safe and don’t cause cancer.

    In a statement last week, the company said it “remains confident that its products do not contain asbestos and do not cause ovarian cancer and intends to pursue all available appellate remedies.”

    Alex Gorsky, chief executive officer of Johnson & Johnson, said Tuesday that the baby powder doesn’t contain asbestos and that every jury verdict from the St. Louis courts that the company has appealed has been overturned.

    During a second-quarter earnings call on Tuesday, Gorsky reportedly said he will fight the St. Louis court decision.

    Johnson & Johnson is a multinational company whose total second-quarter sales this year were more than $20 billion, according to a report in Reuters.

    The company is known for products such as Tylenol, Acuvue contact lenses, and Band-Aid bandages.

    J&J also has a pharmaceutical drug wing that researches and manufactures monoclonal antibodies, immunotherapies, and other types of treatments for cancer and other diseases.

    While J&J’s talc-based powder has been a mainstay in the United States for more than a century, in recent years it’s been the center of multiple lawsuits.

    Other juries have also ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but several lawsuits — including court cases in South Dakota and California — have been overturned on appeal.

    When asked why judges are overturning jury decisions, Lanier said it’s in part because those cases weren’t focused on asbestos.

    Among the most compelling pieces of evidence for Lanier’s team presented in court were several J&J internal documents that Lanier said showed the asbestos testing procedure the company was using was intentionally sub-par.

    “They rigged the tests,” Lanier said. “Internal documents showed that they knew asbestos was present. Together with that, the most rigorous studies used by the most prestigious cancer institutes all indicated there was no safe level of exposure to asbestos and that it was a clear cause and accelerant for ovarian cancer.”

    Lanier told Healthline that J&J has been aware since 1973 that if the talc was concentrated before testing for asbestos, the asbestos more readily shows up.

    Lanier said the Colorado School of Mines told J&J that pre-concentrating the powder was essential to doing the test correctly and finding any asbestos.

    “J&J not only refused to do this test, but pushed an alternate, less sensitive testing procedure on the authorities,” Lanier said. “This concentration approach was deemed ‘not in J&J’s worldwide interests.’”

    Furthermore, Lanier said, “J&J played a name game with asbestos, so every time it did show up in testing — and well over 100 tests showed it — they would call it something else.”

    An extensive analysis of multiple studies done by the Cancer Prevention Research journal concluded thatexposure to genital powder is associated with “small-to-moderate increases in risk of most histologic subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.”

    The journal summarized in a paper published in 2013 by the National Institutes of Health that its large analysis of case-controlled studies “shows a small-to-moderate (20 to 30 percent) increased risk of ovarian cancer with genital-powder use, most clearly pertaining to non-mucinous epithelial ovarian tumors.”

    The journal went on to note that “more work is needed to understand how genital powders may exert a carcinogenic effect, and which constituents (e.g. talc) may be involved. Since there are few modifiable risk factors for ovarian cancer, avoidance of genital powders may be a possible strategy to reduce ovarian cancer incidence.”

    The American Cancer Society notes on its website that for any individual woman, “If there is an increased risk [of ovarian cancer], the overall increase is likely to be very small. Still, talc is widely used in many products, so it is important to determine if the increased risk is real. Research in this area continues.”

    Meanwhile, consumers are left wondering what to do and who to believe.

    Joy Stephenson-Laws is an author and founding partner of Stephenson Acquisto & Colman, a healthcare law firm, as well as founder of Proactive Health Labs, a national health nonprofit.

    She said that from a consumer’s perspective these verdicts will go a long way to deter similar future conduct by manufacturers of consumer products.

    “However, they do not solve the dire issues these plaintiffs had to deal with,” she said. “So, it is really important that as consumers we take a more proactive approach when we purchase products. We cannot assume we will get a warning if a product is unsafe for our use.”

    For example, she said consumers need to learn about the ingredients identified on the labels and not assume they’re safe.

    “This includes cosmetic items, as well as cleaning and other products used in the home,” Stephenson-Laws told Healthline. “If we are not sure about how a particular ingredient may affect our health, we should seek advice from our doctors or a competent healthcare professional.”

    So, what can you do if you don’t feel comfortable using a talc-based powder on yourself or your baby?

    Healthline has provided a list of suggestions on its website.

    For starters, there are alternatives to talc-based powders.

    Among them are those made with corn starch, arrowroot starch, tapioca starch, oat flour, and baking soda.

    If you do use talc-based powder, here some recommendations:

    •Don’t put the powder directly on the genitals. Instead, put it on skin around the genitals.

    Meantime, Krystal Kim and her co-plaintiffs in this high-profile lawsuit try to get on with their lives.

    Kim’s cancer is in remission, but her resentment is still there.

    When she first learned about the alleged link between the powder and ovarian cancer, Kim became upset.

    “I was caring for my friend’s one-year-old daughter and reached for the powder when I went to change her,” she said.

    • Jamie Reno
  3. May 1, 2024 · Johnson & Johnson is moving forward with a proposed settlement of tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging its baby powder and other talc products cause ovarian cancer.

  4. Jun 23, 2020 · An appellate court in Missouri upheld more than $2 billion in damages against Johnson & Johnson, saying the company knew there was asbestos in its baby powder.

  5. Aug 12, 2022 · J&J faces tens of thousands of lawsuits from women who allege its talcum powder contained asbestos and caused them to develop ovarian cancer. But the company reiterated its view that decades...

  6. Mar 14, 2019 · A woman in California who says Johnson & Johnson baby powder caused her to develop mesothelioma was awarded $29 million by a jury Wednesday. J&J says it will appeal the judgment.