Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $417m in Latest Talc Cancer Case

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday August 23 2017, @03:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the chalk-up-another-win dept.

takyon writes:

Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay $70 million in compensatory damages and $347 million in punitive damages to a woman who claimed to have developed ovarian cancer as a result of using J&J powder products. Baby/talcum powder contains talc, a clay mineral:

Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay $417m (£323.4m) to a woman who says she developed ovarian cancer after using products such as baby powder. The California jury's decision marks the largest award yet in a string of lawsuits that claim the firm did not adequately warn about cancer risks from talc-based products.

A spokeswoman for Johnson & Johnson defended the products' safety. The firm plans to appeal, as it has in previous cases. "We will appeal today's verdict because we are guided by the science," Carol Goodrich, spokesperson for Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc, said in a statement.

The evidence around any link between talc use and cancer is inconclusive. Johnson & Johnson, headquartered in New Jersey, faces thousands of claims from women who say they developed cancer due to using the firm's products to address concerns about vaginal odour and moisture. Johnson & Johnson has lost four of five previous cases tried before juries in Missouri, which have led to more than $300m in penalties.

Also at NYT and CNN.

Previously: The Baby Powder Trials: How Courts Deal with Inconclusive Science

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $417m in Latest Talc Cancer Case | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 33 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23 2017, @06:03PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23 2017, @06:03PM (#558094)

    this is like saying that the industrial waste in toothpaste causes brain damage and suing for that. oh wait, that's different.

    This is like saying that gargling with hydrogen peroxide causes mouth cancer and then suing the manufacturer of hydrogen peroxide because they mentioned that you could use it for gargling. it's too much responsibility. the user should be the one to decide whether they use it "on label" or "off label", when it's OTC. we are not talking about prescription drugs here. people have been using talcum powder for hygene for a long time. now it's johnson & johnson's fault you've been cramming it up your beaver?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23 2017, @08:40PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23 2017, @08:40PM (#558161)

    As quoted above

    One juror in the $55 million case, Jerome Kendrick, told a St. Louis newspaper that the company's internal memos "pretty much sealed my opinion." He said, "They tried to cover up and influence the boards that regulate cosmetics." He added, "They could have at least put a warning label on the box but they didn't. They did nothing."

    So no, it's not J&J's fault you've been cramming up your beaver, but it is their fault they tried to prevent knowledge of the risk from being disseminated and acted upon so that you continued cramming it longer than you would have.