Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $417m in lawsuit linking baby powder to cancer

[Independent voter]

How does talc cause cancer, I thought talc was about as inert as you can get?

Some women who have used baby powder for hygiene have gotten ovarian cancer. More than a 1,000 people have filed suit and juries have awarded zero dollars to this $417 million and everything in between.

There was a scientific study that linked talk to cancer but there were flaws with the study like they would ask women "have you used talc?" and the women had to rely on their memories. I think most legit science people would say that they just don't know if talc causes cancer.

Johnson & Johnson are going to appeal of course.






http://www.hindustantimes.com/busine...LAe5VAUwO.html

A Los Angeles jury on Monday ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay a record $417 million to a hospitalised woman who claimed in a lawsuit that the talc in the company’s iconic baby powder causes ovarian cancer when applied regularly for feminine hygiene.

The verdict in the lawsuit brought by the California woman, Eva Echeverria, marks the largest sum awarded in a series of talcum powder lawsuit verdicts against Johnson & Johnson in courts around the US.

Echeverria alleged Johnson & Johnson failed to adequately warn consumers about talcum powder’s potential cancer risks. She used the company’s baby powder on a daily basis beginning in the 1950s until 2016 and was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2007, according to court papers.

Echeverria developed ovarian cancer as a “proximate result of the unreasonably dangerous and defective nature of talcum powder,” she said in her lawsuit.

Echeverria’s attorney, Mark Robinson, said his client is undergoing cancer treatment while hospitalised and told him she hoped the verdict would lead Johnson & Johnson to put additional warnings on its products.

“Mrs. Echeverria is dying from this ovarian cancer and she said to me all she wanted to do was to help the other women throughout the whole country who have ovarian cancer for using Johnson & Johnson for 20 and 30 years,” Robinson said.

“She really didn’t want sympathy,” he added. “She just wanted to get a message out to help these other women.”

The jury’s award included $68 million in compensatory damages and $340 million in punitive damages, Robinson said. The evidence in the case included internal documents from several decades that “showed the jury that Johnson & Johnson knew about the risks of talc and ovarian cancer,” Robinson said.

“Johnson & Johnson had many warning bells over a 30 year period but failed to warn the women who were buying its product,” he said.

Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Carol Goodrich said in a statement that the company will appeal the jury’s decision. She says while the company sympathises with women suffering from ovarian cancer that scientific evidence supports the safety of Johnson’s baby powder.

The verdict came after a St. Louis, Missouri jury in May awarded $110.5 million to a Virginia woman who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2012.

She had blamed her illness on her use of the company’s talcum powder-containing products for more than 40 years.

Besides that case, three other trials in St. Louis had similar outcomes last year — with juries awarding damages of $72 million, $70.1 million and $55 million, for a combined total of $307.6 million.

Another St. Louis jury in March rejected the claims of a Tennessee woman with ovarian and uterine cancer who blamed talcum powder for her cancers.

Two similar cases in New Jersey were thrown out by a judge who said the plaintiffs’ lawyers did not presented reliable evidence linking talc to ovarian cancer.

More than 1,000 other people have filed similar lawsuits. Some who won their lawsuits won much lower amounts, illustrating how juries have wide latitude in awarding monetary damages.

Johnson & Johnson is preparing to defend itself and its baby powder at upcoming trials in the US, Goodrich said.

[InfernalDark]

Damn yanks are stupid

(Infracted)

[Fat Mac]

i got Johnson&Johnson shampoo it my eyes. i felt some discomfort.

you think i have a case?

[Daedius]

Sounds like people trying to find a scapegoat for their misfortunes...

[Fat Mac]

I'm confused. Why are they stupid? J&J have been advertising the many uses of baby powder for years, which included putting it on your private parts to keep it dry. Hell, do you know how many parents used/use it on their babies?

as an adult, this is the only thing i use it for. works great.

its also makes my taint smell nice

[Slirith]

Giggling at how the courts are falling for this nonsense. What's next, someone suing(and winning) cigarette companies for getting lung cancer?

[Strangewayes]

Giggling at how the courts are falling for this nonsense. What's next, someone suing(and winning) cigarette companies for getting lung cancer?

Did you know Johnson&Johnson own the companies that produce nicotine patches, nicotine gum, nicotine inhalers? It's a big business.

[cparle87]

Giggling at how the courts are falling for this nonsense. What's next, someone suing(and winning) cigarette companies for getting lung cancer?

Yeah. They used talcum powder, like millions of women. They got cancer, like millions of woman. Omg, the talcum gave me cancer, pay me!

[Aggrophobic]

Seems odd.
Would be nice if they could atcually do a more thorough study befor they jumped to conclusions.

You americans do love your lawsuits though. Maybe something good will come of it however. I am sure the medical company will put some more money into research after this.

[Kaleredar]

The evidence in the case included internal documents from several decades that “showed the jury that Johnson & Johnson knew about the risks of talc and ovarian cancer,” Robinson said.

The only interesting part of the article, as it's the only one that speaks of any corroborative evidence.

I wonder what exactly those internal documents stated.

[Aggrophobic]

It's not nonsense, though: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer...nd-cancer.html

It is not but we are also not really sure yet.
It might but so far it does not seem likely unless you inhale insane amounts of it, like working in a mine. Seems a bit too early to start blaming people then, does it not?

[Tomyris]

When I gave birth I had this with me in my bag at the hospital. The nurses advised me not to use it. I asked my mother who is a nurse as well and she said they got the same advice a long time ago to say to mothers to stop using talc powder but she did not know exactly why, she is retired now. I wonder if it is related. We are in EU btw.

[msdos]

My mother uses baby powder (J&J) religiously and she had to have her ovaries removed years ago. Maybe a coincidence? Who knows.

[Independent voter]

In summary, we did not observe an overall association between epithelial ovarian cancer and ever use of talc, and there was no apparent dose response, although we lacked information on duration of talc use. In analyses stratified by histologic subtype, we observed a modest positive association between invasive serous cancer and ever talc use. Our results provide little support for any substantial association between perineal talc use and ovarian cancer risk overall; however, perineal talc use may modestly increase the risk of invasive serous ovarian cancers.

https://academic.oup.com/jnci/articl...Ovarian-Cancer

I think this is the study it's based on. Huge amount of text at the link, this is just the summary.

[Aggrophobic]

Except, that link doesn't say "insane amounts". It's shown to increase the risk for lung and ovarian cancer, and this woman had been using it for many years.

Also, as quoted above you: "The evidence in the case included internal documents from several decades that “showed the jury that Johnson & Johnson knew about the risks of talc and ovarian cancer,” Robinson said."

If they knew and had evidence, yet didn't have some kind of warning on the product, they are to blame.

The link does not but studies do and they are not great studies at that.
I get what you're saying, it might not be safe but it might also be nothing. There is just not enough data yet.

If you skipped using it, that would be fine but blaming people for it now?

I am not saying that you should let the medical company off the hook if it turns out they had indications of this for years but again, it is too early to point fingers.

[medievalman1]

It's not nonsense, though: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer...nd-cancer.html

From your website:

Ovarian cancer

It has been suggested that talcum powder might cause cancer in the ovaries if the powder particles (applied to the genital area or on sanitary napkins, diaphragms, or condoms) were to travel through the vagina, uterus, and fallopian tubes to the ovary.

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.

For any individual woman, if there is an increased risk, the overall increase is likely to very be 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.

I wasn't aware that tiny particles like asbestos could travel up the vagina, through the uterus, through the Fallopian tubes to high five the ovaries with some kind of independent motility, like, you know, sperm...

Speaking of asbestos, from the same website:

The major health problem caused by asbestos exposure, aside from cancer, is a lung disease called asbestosis. When a person breathes high levels of asbestos over time, some of the fibers lodge deep in the lungs. Irritation caused by the fibers can eventually lead to scarring (fibrosis) in the lungs.

Its not necessarily that the mere presence of asbestos is carcinogenic, but the long term irritation of a great number of particles in the lungs that cause it. Consequently, I could see if there was an increase in vaginal, or say, cervical cancer. But ovarian cancer? Yeah, no.

[ItachiZaku]

When I was 12, I used baby powder to jerk off and got a little in my pee hole and it stung a little... where's my fucking money!?

[Deleted]

When I was 12, I used baby powder to jerk off and got a little in my pee hole and it stung a little... where's my fucking money!?

Still do that on a daily basis, maybe I could sue and you can use my case to be back paid for damages caused to you when you were 12.

[ItachiZaku]

Still do that on a daily basis, maybe I could sue and you can use my case to be back paid for damages caused to you when you were 12.

Sounds like a ripe plan to me, mate!

[Ahovv]

This is bullshit.

Should people sue farmers for selling red meat since it can slightly increase your risk of cancer? I've never noticed a cancer warning on my beef packages.

It's frankly not the responsibility of the seller to warn people of this *unless* they held special, secret knowledge on the issue. It is the responsibility of government to force warning labels when they are warranted.