A new Reuters investigation charges that Johnson & Johnson knew for decades that its iconic talcum baby powder "was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos," but concealed the information.
Borrowing From Big Tobacco's Playbook, Johnson & Johnson Knew About Asbestos in Baby Powder for Decades: Reuters
One attorney said 1970s memos that have surfaced due to recent lawsuits are "on par with key docs uncovered in the tobacco litigation."
by
Published on
by
A Reuters investigation published Friday charges
that Johnson & Johnson, a multi-billion dollar
knew for decades that its iconic talcum baby
powder "was sometimes
tainted with carcinogenic asbestos," but concealed
the information from regulators and the public.
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
regulators or the public.problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to
The documents also depict successful efforts to influence U.S.
regulators' plans to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products
and scientific research on the health effects of talc.
While, over the past two decades,
some legal challenges claiming that
Johnson & Johnson products were tainted
with asbestos and caused
cancer have been unsuccessful,
three recent developments seem to
signal a shift. A pair of cases in New
Jersey and California saw
significant awards for mesothelioma patients,
and a "watershed"
verdict in St. Louis expanded the company's
potential liability.
Outlining the St. Louis case, Reuters explained:
The 22 plaintiffs were the first to succeed with a claim that
asbestos-tainted Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talc, a
longtime brand the company sold in 2012, caused ovarian
cancer, which is much more common than mesothelioma.
The jury awarded them $4.69 billion in damages. Most of the
talc
cases have been brought by women with ovarian cancer who
say they regularly used J&J talc products as a perineal
antiperspirant and deodorant.
"When people really understand what's going on,"
said Mark Lanier, an attorney for one of the
plaintiffs, "I think it increases J&J's exposure a
thousand-fold."
Johnson & Johnson, as Reuters noted, "has
dominated the talc powder
market for more than 100 years, its sales
outpacing those of all
competitors combined... And while talc
products contributed just $420
million to J&J's $76.5 billion in revenue last
year, Baby Powder is
considered an essential facet of the
healthcare-products maker's
carefully
tended image as a caring company—a
'sacred cow,' as one 2003 internal
email put it."
Another attorney who's not tied to the cases
against Johnson &
Johnson concluded on Twitter
that the 1970s memos mentioned
in Reuters' report are "on par with key
docs uncovered in the tobacco
litigation."
Journalist Eoin Higgins, also responding
on Twitter, simply said: "What a
story. What the fuck."
Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile,
has vowed to appeal all verdicts against
it and maintains that its products are safe.
The company's vice president
of global media relations, Ernie Knewitz,
wrote in an email to Reuters:
Plaintiffs attorneys out for personal
financial gain are distorting
historical documents and intentionally
creating confusion in the
courtroom and in the media...
This is all a calculated attempt to
distract from the fact that thousands
of independent tests prove
our talc does not contain asbestos
or cause cancer. Any
suggestion that Johnson & Johnson
knew or hid information
about the safety of talc is false.
Following the report, the publicly traded
company's shares plummeted by
more than 11 percent.
No comments:
Post a Comment