{"id":124349,"date":"2018-12-17T12:00:53","date_gmt":"2018-12-17T12:00:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=124349"},"modified":"2018-12-17T09:04:48","modified_gmt":"2018-12-17T09:04:48","slug":"johnson-johnson-knew-about-carcinogens-in-baby-powder-for-decades-reuters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2018\/12\/johnson-johnson-knew-about-carcinogens-in-baby-powder-for-decades-reuters\/","title":{"rendered":"Johnson & Johnson Knew about Carcinogens in Baby Powder for Decades: Reuters"},"content":{"rendered":"

The company reportedly has known about the asbestos in its signature product since the early 1970s.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a>

In this photo illustration, a container of Johnson’s baby powder made by Johnson and Johnson sits on a table on July 13, 2018 in San Francisco, California.
CREDIT: Justin Sullivan\/Getty Images<\/p><\/div>\n

15 Dec 2018 – <\/em>Was there a carcinogen in the baby powder, all this time?<\/p>\n

According to an investigation by Reuters<\/a>, \u201cJohnson & Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its baby powder.\u201d<\/p>\n

Some of the 11,700 plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the company \u2014 including thousands of women with ovarian cancer \u2014\u00a0claim that the company\u2019s talc caused their illness.\u00a0The investigation relied upon trial testimony, depositions, and \u00a0\u201cthousands of pages of company memos, internal reports and other confidential documents,\u201d the wire agency said.<\/p>\n

Reuters found that \u201cfrom at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company\u2019s 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 problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe documents also depict successful efforts to influence U.S. regulators\u2019 plans to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products and scientific research<\/a> on the health effects of talc,\u201d according to the report published on Friday.<\/p>\n

Asbestos is frequently found underground near talc, the primary ingredient in baby powder. It was a source of worry within Johnson & Johnson as early as 1957, when reports by a consulting lab mentioned tainted talc.<\/p>\n

There is no safe level of exposure to asbestos, according to the World Health Organization. Even trace amounts are dangerous. That asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma has been widely understood since the early 1970s; in 1972, the first ruling of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration \u2014 a new creation courtesy of President Nixon \u2014 was a limit on workplace exposure to asbestos dust.<\/p>\n

The New York Times also analyzed hundreds of documents<\/a> in the Johnson & Johnson cases. Based on those corporate documents, government records, and interviews with lawyers and scientists, the Times found that \u201cexecutives proposed new testing procedures or replacing talc outright, while trying to discredit research suggesting that the powder could be contaminated with asbestos.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tactics to keep this potentially product-killing information from the public included \u201cdemand[ing] the government block unfavorable findings,\u201d the Times reported. To that end, an FDA official promised Johnson & Johnson that the damning findings would only be revealed to the world \u201cover my dead body.\u201d<\/p>\n

Johnson & Johnson stands by its signature product. The official line is that the baby powder has never contained asbestos; allegations to the contrary are rooted in \u201cjunk science.\u201d<\/p>\n

In recent years, Johnson & Johnson has been on the receiving end of a wave of lawsuits over its baby powder. As the Times points out, this summer saw 22 women with ovarian cancer sue Johnson & Johnson, arguing that the company knew about the talc-asbestos link and did nothing about it. Their reward \u2014 $4.69 billion \u2014 was one of the largest personal injury verdicts in history.<\/p>\n

The company lost two other cases this year, in California and New Jersey, brought by people with mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of internal organs that is associated with asbestos.<\/em><\/p>\n

The prospect of asbestos \u201cputs the defense in a much more difficult position,\u201d said Nathan Schachtman, a lawyer who has defended asbestos companies. \u201cYou get a much higher degree of indignation from juries.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But in some cases, Johnson & Johnson has prevailed. As Reuters reports, \u201cat least three juries have rejected claims that Baby Powder was tainted with asbestos or caused plaintiffs\u2019 mesothelioma. Others have failed to reach verdicts, resulting in mistrials.\u201d Johnson & Johnson has announced plans to appeal the verdicts against the company.<\/p>\n

Perhaps surprising to the public, which associates Johnson & Johnson primarily with its baby powder, the powder isn\u2019t even the company\u2019s highest-selling product \u2014 far from it. But the brand\u2019s image is inextricably linked to the company.<\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 thinkprogress.org<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

15 Dec 2018 – Was there a carcinogen in the baby powder, all this time? The company reportedly has known about the asbestos in its signature product since the early 1970s.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":124350,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[52],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-124349","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-health"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/124349","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=124349"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/124349\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/124350"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=124349"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=124349"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=124349"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}