Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $72 million in case linking baby powder to ovarian cancer
9 replies, posted
[quote]A Missouri jury has awarded $72m to the family of a woman who died from ovarian cancer, which she said was caused by using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder and other products containing talcum.
The civil suit by Jackie Fox of Birmingham, Alabama, was part of a broader claim in the city of St. Louis circuit court involving nearly 60 people. Her son took over as plaintiff following his mother’s October 2015 death at 62, more than two years after her diagnosis.
Marvin Salter of Jacksonville, Florida, said his late mother, who was a foster parent, used the brand of talcum powder as a bathroom staple for decades. “It just became second nature, like brushing your teeth,” he said. “It’s a household name.”
An attorney for Fox said the jury verdict Monday night, which came after nearly five hours of deliberations at the conclusion of a three-week trial, was the first such case among more than 1,000 nationally to result in a jury’s monetary award.
The jury said that Fox was entitled to $10m in actual damages and $62m in punitive damages. Attorney James Onder said he “absolutely” expects Johnson & Johnson – the world’s biggest maker of healthcare products – to appeal the verdict.[/quote]
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/24/johnson-johnson-72-millon-babuy-talcum-powder-ovarian-cancer[/url]
That is a lot of money
The ruling will be reversed at the next level of courts. Talcum powder is used so widely there would have to be some very substantial evidence to suggest it causes cancer.
[QUOTE=Perrine;49802276][URL]http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/24/johnson-johnson-72-millon-babuy-talcum-powder-ovarian-cancer[/URL]
That is a lot of money[/QUOTE]
They made 16 billion net profit in 2014, it's a pittance.
i wasn't aware of why this [I]could[/I] cause ovarian cancer till i googled it, but still with all the other stuff out there that is known to cause it, there isn't very much correlation. sure a woman used it for 30 years, but in that time there have been dozens of other products that have been definitively linked to ovarian cancer
[QUOTE=Sableye;49802417]am i missing something here, because i can't find anything in the article that would even begin to explain how talc could remotely be a carcinogen.
i would expect that maybe there is some form of lung cancer with enough inhalation but ovarian cancer from what is essentially a ground up mineral?
seems bunk
[editline]23rd February 2016[/editline]
oh wow i didn't think they used talc powder for that.[/QUOTE]
Back before the 70s talc commonly contained asbestos because they had similar mineralisations. Since then though talc has had to be asbestos free.
They appear to be implying it's the talc causing it rather than a contaminant. I'm curious how talc could get all the way to the ovaries to cause the cancer.
[QUOTE=download;49802444]Back before the 70s talc commonly contained asbestos because they had similar mineralisations. Since then though talc has had to be asbestos free.
They appear to be implying it's the talc causing it rather than a contaminant. I'm curious how talc could get all the way to the ovaries to cause the cancer.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.drugwatch.com/talcum-powder/ovarian-cancer/[/url]
apparently it can, and its also been used in a lot of contraceptives over the years as a coating, so there's also that
[QUOTE=Sableye;49802454][url]http://www.drugwatch.com/talcum-powder/ovarian-cancer/[/url]
apparently it can, and its also been used in a lot of contraceptives over the years as a coating, so there's also that[/QUOTE]
[quote]The information provided by Drugwatch.com is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. The views and opinions expressed on the site do not necessarily represent those of Drugwatch. [I][B]Sponsored by The Peterson Firm, LLP[/B][/I] with offices at 1050 30th Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20007.[/quote]
Yeah, I'm not trusting that as a source.
I'm suprised this wasn't the daily mail reporting this
[URL="http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-jury-orders-health-care-giant-to-pay-million/article_26e6046c-f97d-5a6d-a879-a97535dd78bc.html"]Here is a different article.[/URL]
It talks about an element of the case being that J&J were aware or believed, internally, that their products posed a serious risk of causing ovarian cancer and that they knowingly spent time preparing for potential litigation along that route.
So that does seem like good grounds to award damages on.
[QUOTE=helifreak;49802344]They made 16 billion net profit in 2014, it's a pittance.[/QUOTE]
Yep. Always pisses me off in these cases - on average, a $72M fine only sets them back by 39 hours. It's maybe a light tap on the wrist.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.