Johnson baby powder causes cancer. Johnson & Johnson and cancer
Johnson & Johnson, one of the world's largest manufacturers of cosmetics and personal care products, will pay $72 million to the family of a woman whose death was linked to years of using talc-based products. This decision, CNBC reports, was made by a Missouri court.
Jacqueline Fox, who lived in Birmingham, Alabama, used Baby Powder and another talc-based product, Shower to Shower, daily for intimate hygiene for 35 years. Three years ago she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Fox died in October 2015, she was 62 years old.
The civil suit on behalf of Fox was part of a lawsuit brought by 60 people against Johnson & Johnson, and the first of more than a thousand such cases in US courts. The result was a verdict of monetary compensation.
The company is accused of knowing since the 1980s that talc increased the risk of cancer of the female reproductive organs, but not warning customers about the danger. In particular, the Fox family's lawyers referred to an internal company document dated September 1997. In it, a medical consultant for Johnson & Johnson pointed out that "anyone who denies a link between the 'hygienic' use of talc and ovarian cancer looks the same as those who deny a link between cancer."
The dangers of talc powders for women have been confirmed by a number of recent studies. Thus, scientists from Brigham and Women's Hospital published in 2013 in the journal Cancer Prevention Research the results of their study, according to which regular use of cosmetics with talcum powder for intimate hygiene increases the risk of ovarian cancer by 25%. And in 2010, another group of American scientists found that powders with talc increase the risk of uterine cancer by a quarter. Researchers suggest that tiny particles of talc penetrate the internal genital organs and cause chronic inflammation in them, which creates favorable conditions for the development of cancer.
Meanwhile, Johnson & Johnson representative Carol Goodrich, commenting on the court verdict, said that it runs counter to scientific data proving the safety of talc as an ingredient in cosmetic products.
The fact is that any products must undergo a series of safety tests before entering the market. Including carcinogenic safety. This system operates in both the USA and Russia. Without passing such tests, the product does not receive approval for subsequent use. Everything is strict with this. It is necessary to study this woman's case in more detail: when we are talking about cancer, it is technically difficult to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. These are different factors: environment, nutrition, stress and much more, and not just specific talc.
This lawsuit is not the first for Johnson & Johnson. In 2015, a California court ordered a division of the company - Ehticon - that suffered from a vaginal implant. Later, another division of the company, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, was ordered to pay a fine of $25 million, and the FBI initiated an audit of surgical equipment that was withdrawn from the market.
The well-known cosmetics manufacturer Johnson & Johnson was found guilty of negligence due to the absence of a warning about the risk of ovarian cancer on its product packaging. The company had previously been sued for similar claims, but this was the first time compensation was awarded. Lawyers are confident that the courts will soon receive thousands of complaints.
A court in the US state of Missouri accused the company of negligence, failure to warn and conspiracy. Johnson & Johnson will now be forced to pay $10 million in actual damages and $62 million in punitive damages. This is the first verdict in 66 cases brought against Johnson & Johnson in a class action lawsuit.
A company spokesman said Johnson & Johnson “extremely dissatisfied with the result” hearings, and what is the court verdict “contradicts the results of many years of scientific research that have proven the safety of talc as a cosmetic ingredient in a variety of products”.
Jeri L. Beasley, the principal and founder of the Beasley Allen law firm representing the plaintiff, told Chemical Watch that it is difficult to say at this point whether similar damages will be awarded in other cases. He also noted that the amount of compensation established by the court turned out to be higher than that which the plaintiff insisted on.
The law firm has already been contacted by more than six thousand people wishing to file personal claims related to the use of talc powder and the occurrence of ovarian cancer. According to Mr. Beasley, after the court decision was announced, his company began to receive inquiries from women from different cities of the United States and from around the world who had previously not seen a connection between cosmetic products and their disease.
The US Food and Drug Administration has not banned the use of talc despite the fact that non-governmental organizations have already filed a number of petitions against it. The European Commission does not regulate its use in the cosmetics industry, and the Canadian List of Cosmetic Ingredients contains only a warning about the danger of inhalation for children. The American Cancer Society says studies on the relationship between talcum powder use and ovarian cancer have produced mixed results: “If there is an increased risk, it is only a small increase.”.
According to representatives of Johnson & Johnson, “ovarian cancer is a complex disease, the causes of which are still unclear”. The company states that the US Food and Drug Administration's National Cancer Institute and the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Committee have concluded that there is insufficient evidence of a link between talc use and ovarian cancer.
However Ted Meadows, a spokesman for Beasley Allen, says the company "has known for decades that talc in its products can cause cancer."
The plaintiffs cite a number of studies conducted, in particular, by the International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC; International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) and the National Toxicology Program (NTP). These studies link the use of talc to cases of cancer development , and Johnson & Johnson was aware of the establishment of such a connection.
According to case documents, Imeris Talc America began publishing its safety data sheets in 2006 and used the IARC 2B classification of “possible carcinogen” to characterize talc. The court did not find the company guilty.
Talc is the main ingredient in talc powder found in Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products. Both of these products are mentioned in the case.
Johnson & Johnson has been ordered by a Missouri jury to pay $110 million to a woman suffering from cancer.
A woman has accused the company of causing her to develop ovarian cancer after using Johnson & Johnson talc-based feminine hygiene products for decades.
Johnson & Johnson denies any link between cancer and its products.
Korrespondent.net I was looking into whether talc could really cause cancer.
What is Johnson & Johnson accused of?
In total, about 2.4 thousand similar lawsuits have been filed against the company, alleging that Johnson & Johnson ignores research on the threat of talc and does not warn on packaging about the risks of cancer.
Last year, the company was already forced to pay tens of millions of dollars in similar lawsuits.
Thus, the family of Jacqueline Fox, who died of ovarian cancer, received $72 million, Gloria Ristesund, who suffered from ovarian cancer, received $55 million, and Deborah Ghinezini, who suffered from ovarian cancer, received $70 million.
The lawsuit was filed by Virginia resident Lois Slemp on May 5. In 2012, she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, and recently metastases went to the liver. The woman is now continuing chemotherapy.
For 40 years, she used the company's talc-containing products, including J&J's Baby Powder and Shower to Shower Powder.
The jury awarded the woman $5.4 million in compensatory damages and $105 million in punitive damages for the companies.
Moreover, the jury found Johnson & Johnson 99 percent guilty, and the manufacturer of talc, Imerys Talc, which is used by the company, will have to pay only 50 thousand dollars.
J&J said it sympathizes with the sick woman but plans to appeal.
Scientific research linking talc to cancer
Johnson & Johnson says the verdict flies in the face of scientific evidence for the use of talc as a cosmetic ingredient.
"Ovarian cancer is a complex disease for which the cause has not yet been identified. The US Food and Drug Administration, National Cancer Institute and Cosmetic Ingredient Review have concluded that the evidence linking talc to ovarian cancer is insufficient," says J&J.
The website of the American TV channel provides the results of two scientific studies.
One of them involved 200 thousand women, of whom 721 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Another study examined 12 thousand women.
In both cases, scientists came to the conclusion that there is no direct connection between the use of talc and cancer.
However, in 2014, scientists from Brigham and Women's Hospital published the results of their study on this topic. It stated that frequent use of talc powder for genital hygiene increases the risk of developing ovarian cancer by 24 percent.
The study involved 8.5 thousand cancer patients and ten thousand healthy women.
Brigham and Women's Hospital claims that talc particles can penetrate into the genital organs and remain there for several years. This causes chronic inflammation, which in turn provokes the development of cancer.
However, oncologists do not consider talc to be a unequivocally harmful substance.
The American Cancer Society says on its website that there is a link between cancer and talc containing asbestos. However, it is not used in modern cosmetics production.
The European Association of Talc Manufacturers, as stated in the Mineralogical Encyclopedia, as a result of tests, confirmed the safety of using talc for health.
Talc is a mineral used to prevent friction between surfaces. It often becomes the basis for baby powders, as well as a source of magnesium and calcium in dietary supplements and medicines.
Johnson & Johnson is an American holding company that leads a group of more than 250 subsidiaries worldwide, producing pharmaceuticals, hygiene products and medical devices (the latter being the world's leading company). Part of the Dow Jones Global Titans 50 Index.
Recently, a Missouri court upheld a California woman's claim against Johnson & Johnson. Unfortunately, the huge amount exceeding $70 million will not be able to compensate for the damage to the health of the victim who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer.
About the dangers of baby powder
Johnson & Johnson is a global leader in the development of medical devices and the distribution of pharmaceutical and consumer products. Its products are known in every corner of the globe. It’s all the more scary to hear shocking news about the dangers of seemingly harmless products. Many of us are accustomed to them in daily use. Using the example of Deborah Giannechini and hundreds of other women, we learn about the carcinogenic properties of talc, which is the basis for baby powder. This is just one of several cases that is causing serious concern. 
Huge number of lawsuits
It is known that baby powder is used not only in caring for babies. Many women use Johnson & Johnson products for intimate hygiene. According to the victim, regular use of talcum powder provoked ovarian cancer. To date, approximately one thousand lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturer in Missouri and two hundred lawsuits in New Jersey. Probably, all these figures show us only the tip of a giant iceberg. 
The won trial began on September 26
The jury returned a guilty verdict in a trial that began on September 26, 2016. The lawsuit was brought by Deborah Giannechini, who lives in Modesto, California. The woman learned about the terrible diagnosis in 2012. She accused Johnson & Johnson of negligence in the production and concealment of information in the distribution of baby powder. 
Reply word
Carol Goodrich, representing the defendant, pleaded not guilty. Here's what she said in a statement to the press in response: “We deeply sympathize with the families of women affected by ovarian cancer. We will appeal today's verdict because we are guided by the scientific evidence that Johnson & Johnson powder is safe." However, it is obvious that if a lawful court makes guilty decisions, it means that the jury had good reason to doubt the safety of the company's products. Apparently, there are a sufficient number of research experiments that have revealed a correlation between long-term use of talc and the occurrence of ovarian cancer. 
Another similar case
Earlier this year, a Missouri court issued another guilty verdict against Johnson & Johnson. Family members of Jacqueline Fox, who died in September 2015, received compensation for actual damages in the amount of $10 million, as well as $62 million for moral damages caused. And in this earlier case, we see a similar picture: a woman's long-term use of baby powder led to ovarian cancer. And in this case, representatives of the largest American manufacturer hastened to declare their innocence. People were misled into believing that the products of a well-known company were safe. But in reality everything turned out differently. 
Marketing efforts of the 90s
In the 90s of the 20th century, Johnson & Johnson focused its efforts on attracting more potential customers. Thus, the sphere of interest included blacks (like Jacqueline Fox) and Hispanic residents of the United States of America. A huge marketing campaign was in full swing. On the other hand, a lucrative agreement was signed with the largest supplier of talc in the country, Imerys Talc America, which was also sued. However, the manufacturer of the main component of baby powder was not found guilty. 
On the veracity of scientific evidence
The “scientific evidence” that unscrupulous product manufacturers love to cite is most often financed from their pockets. It will not be difficult for interested members of the public to refute the honesty and impartiality of laboratory pharmacological experiments. However, there is an emerging alarming trend where large corporations, in pursuit of fabulous profits, are able to falsify the results of real tests or keep silent about some side effects. Therefore, many disinterested people tend to trust only their own, alternative research. 
What will the medical experts say?
As we can see, real scientific fraud, financed from the pockets of large manufacturers of consumer goods and drugs, has been flourishing in the field of healthcare and personal care products lately. It is no secret that prominent medical experts around the world have at various times opposed the use of talc as a personal hygiene product. For example, the current editor-in-chief of The Lancet, Dr. Richard Horton, has publicly and unequivocally condemned the scientific community for negligence and deliberate fraud. 
Inconsistency with reality
When it comes to research on experimental samples, the tests are usually small and have tiny effects. A small sample or a single experiment conducted in the scientific community is never accepted as absolute truth. Only in the case of repeated studies with a much larger volume of samples can we talk about any potential effects. In this regard, most of the tests cited by manufacturers can be considered untrue.
Unfortunately, employees of large corporations stand up for their products. For the sake of profit, they are ready to turn a blind eye to the potential dangers of the product. In case of unforeseen situations, they always have a fabricated cover in the form of the results of pseudoscientific experiments. The more people who oppose the current total trend, the greater the chances of putting an end to this. 
Toxic products are everywhere
We also note that many household products that we use on a daily basis are toxic. For years, disinterested researchers have been sounding the alarm and pointing out the dangers of using deodorants, bug sprays, cleaning products, cosmetics and more. All of these products may contain dangerous carcinogens that cause cancer. Researchers from King's College London believe that this group of household products is potentially responsible for 100,000 deaths each year in Europe alone.
