Preview Newsletter
Cosmetic Talc Litigation Media Coverage November 04, 2016
-
Third Woman With Ovarian Cancer Wins Lawsuit Against Johnson & Johnson Over Baby Powder Safety
Nov 3, 2016 | Cure
By Katie Kosko
A third woman won a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, alleging that years of using its baby powder caused her ovarian cancer. A jury awarded her more than $70 million. -
Woman says using Johnson & Johnson powder caused her ovarian cancer
Nov 4, 2016 | New York Post
By Emily Saul
A Long Island woman is suing Johnson & Johnson, claiming that 50 years of using its talcum powder gave her ovarian cancer. Sylvia Fisher says in her Brooklyn federal suit that she had been applying the powder on her intimate areas since 1960. She was diagnosed with cancer in November 2013. She has undergone debilitating treatments, says the suit, which claims the manufacturing giant ignored studies suggesting a link between talcum powder and cancer. Johnson & Johnson is reportedly facing some 2,000 suits claiming talcum powder gave users cancer. A rep did not respond to a request for comment. -
St. Louis Jury Returns Another Jaw-Dropping Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson
Nov 3, 2016 | Mondaq
By Evan M. Tager and Miriam R. Nemetz
In recent years, St. Louis has done much to earn a place on the American Tort Reform Association's list of judicial hell holes.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
-
Third Woman With Ovarian Cancer Wins Lawsuit Against Johnson & Johnson Over Baby Powder Safety
Nov 3, 2016 | Cure
By Katie Kosko
A third woman won a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, alleging that years of using its baby powder caused her ovarian cancer. A jury awarded her more than $70 million.
Deborah Giannecchini of Modesto, California was diagnosed with the cancer in 2012. Her lawsuit accused Johnson & Johnson of “negligent conduct” in the making and marketing of its baby powder. Her trial, which began Sept. 26, was heard in St. Louis where Onder Law Firm, the firm representing her, is located.
Jim Onder, an attorney for Giannecchini, said he is pleased that the jury did the right thing. However, Johnson & Johnson plans to appeal the jury’s verdict, maintaining that its product is safe.
“We are guided by the science, which supports the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder,” Carol Goodrich, a spokesperson for Johnson & Johnson, said in a statement. “In fact, two cases pending in New Jersey were dismissed in September 2016 by a state court judge who ruled that plaintiffs’ scientific experts could not adequately support their theories that talcum powder causes ovarian cancer, a decision that highlights the lack of credible scientific evidence behind plaintiffs’ allegations.”Earlier this year, two other lawsuits in St. Louis ended in jury verdicts worth a combined $127 million. About 2,000 women nationwide have filed similar lawsuits.
What is talc? Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder, which has been used for more than 120 years, contains cosmetic talc. Talc is a naturally occurring mineral made up of the elements magnesium, silicon, oxygen and hydrogen.
In addition to baby powder, talc widely used in cosmetic products such as makeup, deodorant, diaper rash cream, bar soaps, flea and tick powders and even arts and crafts products. Talc absorbs moisture, helps cut down on friction, may prevent the caking of makeup or even make a product feel better. People who have used talcum powder often do so to keep skin dry and help prevent rashes.
VThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that talc may be found in close proximity to asbestos in the earth. Therefore, in its natural form, some talc may contain asbestos. Asbestos is a known carcinogen that causes cancers in and around the lungs when inhaled. All talcum products used in homes in the United States have been asbestos-free since the 1970s
The American Cancer Society (ACS) does not consider talc to be a known carcinogen, however, the World Health Organization (WHO) calls it a possible carcinogen.
This debate has been going on for decades. Studies examining the specific link between talcum powder use and ovarian cancer have been mixed. In 1971, a study of ovarian cancer patients revealed talc particles in ovarian tissue.
According to the ACS, many case-control studies have found a small increase in risk. The organization also states that these types of studies can be biased because they often rely on a person’s memory of talc use many years earlier. Two prospective cohort studies — which do not have the same potential for bias — have not demonstrated a link to increased risk.
“Studies have been inconclusive at best,” said Stephanie Blank, M.D., Director, Gynecologic Oncology Fellowship at NYU Langone Medical Center in an interview with CURE. “What happens in court does not necessarily reflect science or reality.”
Keeping Yourself Safe
The National Ovarian Cancer Coalition (NOCC) says that while talc is found in many products used in the United States, there are alternatives out there.
“There are a variety of talc-free products on the market that contain safe ingredients like baking soda, clay powders and cornstarch,” said Anitra Hunt, communications and digital marketing manager of the NOCC. “You can even make your own DIY formulas right at home by mixing these items along with essential oils, flours and more.”
More than 22,000 women in the U.S. are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year, and over 14,000 women die from the disease. Currently, there is no early detection test for ovarian cancer.
The NOCC hopes to educate communities and increase awareness about the symptoms of ovarian cancer, which are often subtle. “Many studies in women have looked at the possible link between talcum powder and cancer of the ovary,” said David Barley, chief executive officer of the NOCC. “Findings have been mixed, and opinions vary. If you have a fear of ovarian cancer due to usage, consult your physician or choose talc-free products as an alternative. We encourage you to be your own best health advocate and consult your physician.”
http://www.curetoday.com/articles/third-woman-with-ovarian-cancer-wins-lawsuit-against-johnson--johnson-over-baby-powder-safety?p=2
-
Woman says using Johnson & Johnson powder caused her ovarian cancer
Nov 4, 2016 | New York Post
By Emily Saul
A Long Island woman is suing Johnson & Johnson, claiming that 50 years of using its talcum powder gave her ovarian cancer.
Sylvia Fisher says in her Brooklyn federal suit that she had been applying the powder on her intimate areas since 1960. She was diagnosed with cancer in November 2013.
She has undergone debilitating treatments, says the suit, which claims the manufacturing giant ignored studies suggesting a link between talcum powder and cancer.
Johnson & Johnson is reportedly facing some 2,000 suits claiming talcum powder gave users cancer. A rep did not respond to a request for comment.
https://nypost.com/2016/11/04/woman-says-using-johnson-johnson-powder-caused-her-ovarian-cancer/
-
St. Louis Jury Returns Another Jaw-Dropping Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson
Nov 3, 2016 | Mondaq
By Evan M. Tager and Miriam R. Nemetz
In recent years, St. Louis has done much to earn a place on the American Tort Reform Association's list of judicial hell holes. Not content to rest on its laurels, the St. Louis circuit court grabbed the headlines again last week with a draw-dropping $70 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson ($67.25 million, including $65 million in punitive damages) and Imerys Talc America ($2.75 million, including $2.5 million in punitive damages) in a case alleging that J&J talcum powder caused the plaintiff's ovarian cancer.
This is the third massive punitive exaction imposed against J&J by a St. Louis jury in the on-going talcum powder litigation—even while courts in New Jersey have thrown out similar cases on the ground that the science does not support them.
We explained in a prior post why the first two punitive awards are unconstitutionally excessive. What we said in that post applies to the most recent verdict as well.
The nearly 29:1 ratio of punitive to compensatory damages is unconstitutional on its face under State Farm. Indeed, in the 13-plus years since State Farm was decided, there are no cases outside the terrorism context upholding ratios of this magnitude when the compensatory damages are over $1 million.
More importantly, the fact that there are more than 1,000 other plaintiffs raising the same claims means that even a 1:1 ratio would be unconstitutionally excessive, because if each of those plaintiffs were to receive an identical amount of punitive damages—$2.25 million—no one could credibly deny that the aggregate punishment—over $2.25 billion—would be excessive.
That is more—not less—true because J&J may wind up being exonerated in many cases. Allowing a plaintiff to collect punitive damages in excess of what would be permissible if every other plaintiff were to receive the same amount would deprive the defendant of the benefit of its exonerations in violation of the Due Process Clause.
Being included on ATRA's hell hole list had the salutary effect of causing courts and/or legislatures in West Virginia, Mississippi, and elsewhere to begin to rein in the abuses that were occurring in the trial courts of those states. Hopefully, the same will be true of Missouri, and the appellate courts of that state will bring the punitive awards against J&J in the talcum powder litigation back within constitutional bounds—if not throw them out entirely.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
US Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested