Did Johnson and Johnson Know About Asbestos in Its Baby Powder?

Before you sprinkle baby powder on your body, baby, shoes or anything else, keep reading. While the self-proclaimed “Family Corporation” continues to state that its talc is safe and free of asbestos, a new report showcasing the results of a Reuters investigation suggests otherwise.

Sign the Petition: Johnson and Johnson Knew Their Baby Powder Had Toxic Asbestos and Did Nothing

Independent investigators at Reuters suggest that the company has known for decades that its talc contains cancer-causing asbestos and did nothing. Perhaps worse than that the company continues to manufacture, market and distribute the potential silent killer while assuring the safety of the product. Even after the release of this news report, Johnson and Johnson Chairman and CEO, Alex Gorsky appears on the company’s site in a video message declaring the product is made from the purest and safest talc on earth, free from asbestos.

According to the report, J&J’s internal documents show that the company knew that sometimes its baby powder was contaminated with asbestos but it kept the information from both regulators and the public. The report indicated that the company had results from at least 3 laboratories which showcased the results of tests finding “rather high” amounts of asbestos in their talc between 1972 and 1975.

As a result of thousands of lawsuits against the company, it has been forced to share thousands of pages of internal memos, company documents and internal reports with the 11,700 plaintiffs suing the company for allegedly causing their cancers. According to Reuters, many of these documents show that between 1971 and the early 2000s Johnson and Johnson’s talc tested positive for small amounts of asbestos and that executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers knew about the problem and did not know how to address it.

The documents also suggest that the company influenced US regulators about the supposed health effects of using talc. One such document from March 3, 1975 quoted one executive as stating:

“Our current posture with respect to the sponsorship of talc safety studies has been to initiate studies only as dictated by confrontation,” the memo said. “This philosophy, so far, has allowed us to neutralize or hold in check data already generated by investigators who question the safety of talc…we minimize the risk of possible self-generation of scientific data which may be politically or scientifically embarrassing.”

Not only does such a comment demonstrate a level of disdain for the public and their right to avoid using potentially harmful products, it shows a clear lack of concern for public safety. What’s more, it shows that the company knew about safety issues over its Baby Powder and continued to mislead and potentially endanger the public for the sake of profit.

The report falls on the heels of legal losses as multiple lawsuits were decided in favor of the plaintiffs. In one landmark lawsuit, a St. Louis jury decided in favor of 22 women suffering from ovarian cancer who claimed their illness was caused by use of the company’s powder. The women won $4.69 billion against the corporate giant. While the company continues to cite an alleged lack of scientific evidence linking talc to cancer and their product’s supposed safety, clearly the court isn’t buying the claims.

That’s not surprising because scientific evidence linking talc to cancer is piling up. Researchers at Harvard University published the results of their study in the medical journal Epidemiology, in which they identified a link between talc use and ovarian cancer. Other research published in the International Journal of Cancer found an increased rate of ovarian cancer in women who regularly used talc over those who did not.

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared talcum powder as a class 3 carcinogen as early as 2006 which indicates that there is sufficient evidence to suggest a link between perineal exposure to talcum powder and cancer, but the agency recommended further research. But, I guess Johnson and Johnson executives know more than the World Health Organization, Harvard scientists and other researcher. Like the jury in the multi-billion dollar decision against J&J, I’m not buying Johnson and Johnson’s story either.

In another lawsuit the court ordered Johnson and Johnson to pay $472 million to a woman who has now died from ovarian cancer, linking her cancer to use of the company’s talc, but the decision was later reversed.

Other research published in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, found a link between talc and mesothelioma, which is an aggressive lung or abdominal cancer.

Thousands of cancer sufferers continue to engage in a battle for their lives while battling the corporate giant in the courtrooms over the possible link between talc use and their cancer. While we await the verdicts of these lawsuits and whether talc use is behind their cancer, many people have decided to forego use of talc. I suspect many more will do so after learning of the potential coverup at Johnson and Johnson.

It’s unacceptable that Johnson and Johnson potentially subjected millions of babies, children and adults to asbestos through the use of their baby powder. Voice your opinion by signing the Care2 petition now.

Related Stories:

 

 

Dr. Michelle Schoffro Cook, PhD, DNM is the publisher of the free e-newsletter World’s Healthiest News, the Cultured Cook, co-founder of BestPlaceinCanada, and an international best-selling and 20-time published book author whose works include: Cancer-Proof: All Natural Solutions for Cancer Prevention and HealingFollow her work.

 

51 comments

Jack Y
Jack Y6 months ago

Thanks.

SEND
Jack Y
Jack Y6 months ago

Thanks.

SEND
John J
John J6 months ago

thanks for sharing

SEND
John J
John J6 months ago

thanks for sharing

SEND
Peggy B
Peggy B6 months ago

TY

SEND
Pietro M
Pietro Maiorana6 months ago

D'accordissimo!!

SEND
Mely Lu
Mely Lu6 months ago

Thank you for sharing.

SEND
Chad Anderson
Chad Anderson6 months ago

Thank you.

SEND
Lesa D
Past Member 6 months ago

#37141 petition signed...

SEND
Lesa D
Past Member 6 months ago

thank you Michelle...

SEND