Thousands sue company alleging it hid talcum powder cancer risks

A major lawsuit has been filed in the UK against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, accusing the company of knowingly selling baby powder contaminated with asbestos.

The claim involves 3,000 people and centers on internal memos and scientific reports seen by the BBC.

The lawsuit alleges that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) was aware in the early 1960s that its mineral-based talcum powder contained tremolite and actinolite, as well as fibrous forms of talc. Both minerals, when in fibrous form, are classified as asbestos and have been linked to potentially fatal cancers.

Court documents allege that J&J never issued a warning on its baby powder packaging despite knowing that minerals were directly linked to cancer. Instead, it launched aggressive marketing campaigns depicting the powder as a symbol of purity and safety, the lawsuit alleges.

J&J denies this claim and claims that it knowingly sold baby powder containing asbestos.

In a statement made on behalf of the company, it was stated that the baby powder “complies with the necessary regulatory standards, does not contain asbestos and does not cause cancer.”

Sale of baby powder containing talc in the UK will be stopped in 2023.

The UK case mirrors extensive litigation in the US, where multiple lawsuits have been filed and plaintiffs have been awarded billions of dollars in damages. The company successfully appealed in some cases.

Claimants’ lawyers estimate that damages sought in the UK could run into hundreds of millions of pounds and that the claim could be the largest product liability case in British history.

Claims of a link between talcum powder and cancer revolve around asbestos, a known cause of cancer.

The talc used in J&J talc powders is a naturally occurring mineral that is often mined near asbestos deposits. Asbestos minerals are fibrous, needle-like forms that are associated with cancer.

The claim alleges that J&J detected asbestos in baby powder in the early 1960s. A 1973 internal document allegedly states: “Our baby powder contains fragments of talc that can be classified as fibers. Traces of tremolite or actinolite can sometimes be identified…”

J&J said this letter discusses how regulation might change and therefore how talc fibers might be identified as asbestos. The company said this would be wrong.

That same year, executives discussed the value of a possible patent for a method aimed at removing asbestos fibers from talc. At the end of the letter he added: “We may wish to keep everything secret, rather than allowing it to be published in the form of a patent and thus let the whole world know.”

J&J said those discussions were confidential because a new patent could be extremely valuable if the new method was effective. Ultimately, it did not prove effective.

The lawsuit alleges that J&J acted for decades to hide the risk and maximize profits rather than put a warning on the bottle.

Allegedly, despite knowing that the baby powder contained carcinogenic fibers, the company’s marketing team discussed how to maximize sales.

In the 1970s and 1980s, U.S. marketing focused on selling pure, soft powder for newborn babies. In the 1990s and 2000s, the marketing focus shifted to African American women.

In 2008, an internal email seen by the BBC purporting to discuss branding said: “The fact that powder is not safe to use on/around babies is disturbing…” It continued: “I don’t think we can call it baby powder and keep hiding it in the baby aisle.”

J&J said this talk was about asphyxiation, which was a rare but known risk at the time with the use of whole body powders, but was not linked to cancer or asbestos and was warned about it on the bottle.

Documents cited in the UK lawsuit allegedly show that, starting in the early 1970s, J&J executives pressured the US regulator, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to accept lower sensitivity standards so that tests would not detect small amounts of asbestos fibers.

The claim cites internal documents that show J&J defended talc testing standards that tolerated up to 1% asbestos contamination, arguing that more sensitive detection methods were unnecessary.

This allowed the company to maintain product purity claims and mislead regulators and consumers about the presence of asbestos in talc products, the lawsuit alleges.

J&J says this misrepresents the contents of the document, which refers to a hypothetical calculation requested by the FDA.

Many UK claimants have suffered from or died from ovarian cancer, mesothelioma (a cancer often caused by exposure to asbestos) or other forms of cancer. The plaintiffs all allegedly used J&J’s baby powder for a long time.

Siobhan Ryan, 63, was a young mother who saw the ads and said she trusted J&J’s baby powder.

“My mum used it and so did I. It smelled nice and was soft and lovely. When my babies were born I used it on them. I thought I was doing the best I could for them,” she told the BBC from her home in Somerset.

“It was such a shock. We just hugged and cried. When the doctor told me I had stage 4 ovarian cancer, I couldn’t believe what I heard.”

It was unclear how long Siobhan would survive when she was diagnosed, but after three rounds of chemotherapy, a sepsis attack that nearly killed her and major surgery on her abdomen, she is alive and able to tell her story 18 months later.

Siobhan, like the other plaintiffs in this case, thinks her cancer was caused by her use of J&J’s baby powder.

The first rounds of treatment helped control the spread of her cancer, but a few months ago Siobhan noticed another lump in her groin. He is now back on chemotherapy and surgeons say his cancer is now inoperable.

“They knew it was dirty but they were still selling it to new mothers and their babies,” says Siobhan.

Ovarian cancer is caused by a combination of genetic, internal and external factors.

“The female reproductive system is open to the external environment so that women can become pregnant,” says Professor Christina Fotopoulou, a leading gynecological oncology surgeon at Imperial College London and a leader in the field of ovarian cancer.

“Cancer is often an accumulation of errors in the reproductive cycle of cells, and so any harmful factor (internal or external) that disrupts the balance of cells can contribute to these errors and ultimately lead to cancer.”

Common symptoms of ovarian cancer include persistent bloating, persistent pelvic or abdominal pain, feeling full or unable to eat quickly, and an increased or urgent need to urinate.

Those who experience such symptoms frequently (more than 12 times a month) should see a doctor. Extreme fatigue, changes in bowel habits such as constipation or diarrhea, and post-menopausal vaginal bleeding are also signs that you should see your doctor.

Earlier this month, a court in the US state of Connecticut ordered J&J and its successor companies to pay $25 million to a man diagnosed with terminal peritoneal mesothelioma after a lifetime of use of J&J baby powder. The jury at trial found that the pharmaceutical company was negligent in selling asbestos-contaminated talc products.

The hearing also included Dr. J&J’s former director of toxicology for consumer products. It included testimony from Steve Mann, who said he made safety claims without reviewing any test data. Dr Mann acknowledged receiving test results showing asbestos in the baby powder but chose not to inform management or regulators.

Safer alternatives such as cornstarch existed and were known to the company, but J&J continued to sell talc-based powder in the US until 2020 and three years later in the UK, the judge noted.

Following the Connecticut decision, J&J denied wrongdoing and is expected to appeal.

J&J has moved its consumer health arm into a new company called Kenvue. The company said in a statement: “We have deep sympathy for people living with cancer. We understand that they and their families want answers, which is why the facts are so important.”

It said the safety of the baby powder was backed by years of testing by “independent and leading laboratories, universities and health authorities in the UK and around the world”.

It was stated that J&J’s baby powder “complies with required regulatory standards, does not contain asbestos and does not cause cancer.”