FOLLOW US

In addition to the scientific research, there is other evidence that J&J knew about the potential dangers of its talc-based products for years and hid their findings from consumers. Reuters conducted an investigation into the safety of J&J’s Baby Powder and the company’s misleading marketing schemes, publishing their findings in 2018. The investigators determined that J&J knew of several studies stating its talcum powder contained asbestos fibers, but continued to assert that their products were safe and did not pose a cancer risk. As of July 2019, the U.S. Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into J&J’s deceptive marketing practices. Investigators plan to examine documents associated with what Johnson & Johnson officials “knew about any carcinogens in their products.” They also hope to find out whether or not J&J lied to the public about the potential cancer risks of its talc-based products. Despite conflicting evidence over the safety of talcum powder and whether or not long-term use can lead to ovarian cancer or mesothelioma, thousands of individuals suffering from cancer have come forward to plead their cases against Johnson & Johnson.

Notable Case Happenings

In the past, Johnson & Johnson has been reluctant to settle any product liability lawsuits. Recently, there have been a number of verdicts in favor of plaintiffs claiming years of using the company’s flagship talcum powder products has led to their cancer diagnoses. The first talcum powder lawsuit was filed in 2009 by Deane Berg, a 49-year-old from South Dakota who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2006. Johnson & Johnson initially offered Berg $1.3 million to settle in court, but with a confidentiality clause attached. Rather than taking the money, Berg rejected the award and instead chose to inform others of the dangers associated with J&J’s talc products. In 2013, Berg received a unanimous verdict in her favor, but unfortunately did not receive compensation. Since this court decision, Johnson & Johnson has lost several high-profile cases. A brief trial timeline illuminating these cases and their initial settlement rewards is listed below.

• 2016: Gloria Ristesund ($55 million); Jackie Fox ($72 million); Deborah Giannecchini ($70 million).
• 2017: Lois Slemp ($110.4 million); Eva Echeverria ($417 million).
• 2018: Stephen Lanzo ($117 million); 22 Women in Missouri ($4.69 billion).
• 2019: Donna Olson ($325 million); Teresa Leavitt ($29 million).

Johnson & Johnson was recently granted a new trial against Eva Echeverria after the jury originally ordered Echeverria a $417 million settlement. The Los Angeles-based court found that there was “conflicting evidence about [J&J’s] product’s cancer links.” Despite this, the jury has acknowledged that J&J failed to warn users, including Echeverria, about the dangers associated with using its talc products.