Johnson & Johnson Reportedly Knew of Asbestos

Johnson & Johnson directed research in order to protect its Baby Powder brand

Johnson & Johnson directed research in order to protect its Baby Powder brand Credit Jeff Chiu AP

In a statement posted on its website, Johnson & Johnson described the Reuters report as "one-sided, false and inflammatory".

"This is not a simple matter, as there are more than 10,000 pending cases".

A few years later, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considered putting limits on asbestos in cosmetic talc products, according to the publication J&J assured them that no asbestos had been "detected in any" talc sample produced between December 1972 and October 1973, although at least three tests had produced contrary findings.

Documents produced, as part of the trials and reviewed by Reuters, revealed that from at least 1971 to the early 2000's, the firm's internal tests sometimes found small amounts of asbestos in its raw talc and finished powders.

In the report, Reuters claimed documents show consulting labs as early as 1957 and 1958 found asbestos in Johnson & Johnson talc.

Johnson & Johnson, as Reuters noted, "has dominated the talc powder market for more than 100 years, its sales outpacing those of all competitors combined".

VR rift: Gaming firm settles VR lawsuit with Facebook-owned Oculus
Carmack had even gone to sue ZeniMax asking for the $22.5 million he was owed after the id acquisition in 2009. In 2017, ZeniMax was awarded $ 500 million in damages for copyright infringement and breach of contract.

The proposed ruling never came to be and although the FDA did eventually set asbestos limits on talc used in drugs, it never issued a similar ruling for cosmetic talc, according to Reuters. However, in July of this year, J&J was ordered to pay some $4.7 billion in damages to 22 women who claimed its products caused them to develop ovarian cancer, according to the BBC.

Shares in the company plunged 12 per cent following the release of the report by news agency Reuters, wiping £37bn ($47bn) off the company's value. Juries in those cases awarded big sums to plaintiffs who blamed the talc products for causing their mesothelioma, a type of cancer.

The company also said Baby Powder was asbestos-free and added it would continue to defend the safety of its product.

Plaintiffs attorneys out for personal financial gain are distorting historical documents and intentionally creating confusion in the courtroom and in the media.

But a 2017 verdict in California, as well as other verdicts in Missouri, have been overturned on appeal, while challenges to another five verdicts are pending.

However, the Reuters report indicated that most testing reports did not find the presence of asbestos in J&J products. The judge said J&J had engaged in "misrepresentation by omission". 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.

Latest News