Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $55 million in talc-powder trial – IOTW Report

Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $55 million in talc-powder trial

j&j baby powder

Reuters: Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) was ordered by a U.S. jury on Monday to pay $55 million to a woman who said that using the company’s talc-powder products for feminine hygiene caused her to develop ovarian cancer.

The verdict, which J&J plans to appeal, was the second straight trial loss for the company, which is facing about 1,200 lawsuits accusing it of not adequately warning consumers about its talc-based products’ cancer risks.  more here

17 Comments on Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $55 million in talc-powder trial

  1. what? didn’t j&j label the product “for external use only'”?

    must have been covering up some bad smell to use enough to give you cancer.

    for some reason “jigglypuff” pops into my mind.

  2. Just wondering: how many babies have been harmed over decades. Curious that NObody seems to address THAT. I’m (tinfoil hat) guessing that the answer is “no provable ones”. But the ambulance-chasing barristers have already been all over TV about the target issue. How conveeeeenient.

  3. I have esophageal cancer from eating all my life, who should I sue? The Colonel, Micky D’s, Beef industry, Popeyes Chicken, Budweiser, Wild Turkey, who? $55 million? How did they come up with that number? So $22.5 mil an ovary? We live in a sue happy nation.

  4. Hello? Bitch? You’re supposed to rub it on lightly, externally. Not snort it. Not use it as an anal or vaginal suppository.
    No wonder lawyers make big bucks writing silly instructions for common sense. “Remove clothing from body before ironing”.

  5. Phew, I knew there was a good reason to use food grade diatomaceous earth as an alternative. It scrapes your pipes, kills all internal parasites and external bugs. Even in, on, and around the crotch.

  6. Actually, it’s the jury I’m not liking in this story.

    That’s who thought 55 million was an appropriate number.

    Not one reasonable person on that jury? The sky’s the limit? They all think businesses are there for the raping and that it won’t harm anyone if a company may go out of business?

    I’ve had a few people like that on some of my juries. They went 10 times what the plaintiffs were asking for. I asked them: If we hit this company so hard they close up shop – how many innocent people (their employees) being out of work are you OK with to “punish” the managers of this company?

    Things got more reasonable after that.

  7. Forty-seven years ago, the Turkish born (Christian), Greek educated pediatrician who cared for my children told me absolutely NO powders should be used on baby’s bottoms nor anywhere near the kids. She said it will get into their lungs, and absorbed by body crevices.

    Why on earth would anyone think powder would be a good idea to use on baby? or even adult body parts anyway?

    She said corn starch is a more natural absorbing agent, but that should only be used sparingly if at all.

    People just succumbed to advertising and powder to substitute for common sense showers, baths or even PTA baths.

  8. How exactly can this claim be proved in a court of law? Especially when there is inconclusive research evidence? That’s like saying: forks make you fat, pencils make you misspell words and water makes you rust.

  9. Sylvia,
    “The word talc derives from Medieval Latin talcus, which in turn originates from Arabic: طلق‎ ṭalq which in turn was derived from Persian: تالک‎‎ tālk. In the ancient times the word was used for various related minerals, including talc, mica and selenite.[5]”

    (Wikipedia)

    Forgive me if you were being facetious.

    izlamo delenda est …

Comments are closed.