SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Jacqueline Fox of Birmingham, Ala. was "among more than 1,200 women from across the country who were suing Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers of the dangers associated with talc, the mineral used in baby powder."
(Photo: Ikhlasul Amal/flickr/cc)
Healthcare Giant Ordered to Pay $72 Million Over Links to Ovarian Cancer
Case is evidence of "great extent that industry will go" to sell products even in the face of evidence of harm caused
Feb 24, 2016
Johnson & Johnson must pay $72 million in damages to the family of a woman whose death from ovarian cancer was linked to decades of use of the company's baby powder and Shower to Shower body powder, a Missouri jury said late Monday.
According to Alexandra Scranton, director of science and research at advocacy group Women's Voices for the Earth, this case exemplifies the "great extent that industry will go" to sell its product even in the face of evidence of the harm it causes.
Jacqueline Fox of Birmingham, Ala., died in October 2015 at the age of 62, 35 years after regularly using the products for feminine hygiene. As the Washington Post reports, she was "among more than 1,200 women from across the country who were suing Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers of the dangers associated with talc, the mineral used in baby powder."
At the end of the three-week trial, FairWarning reports, jurors in the circuit court of St. Louis "found Johnson & Johnson and a subsidiary, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc., guilty of negligence, failure to warn and conspiracy to conceal the risks of its products."
The jury awarded Fox's family $10 million in actual damages and $62 million in punitive damages. One of the lead attorneys, Jim Onder, said that roughly $31 million would go toward the Missouri Crime Victim Compensation Fund, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.
Among the evidence seen by jurors, according to the Associated Press, was a 1997 internal memo from a medical consultant to the company,
suggesting that "anybody who denies (the) risks" between "hygenic" talc use and ovarian cancer will be publicly perceived in the same light as those who denied a link between smoking cigarettes and cancer: "denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary."
Onder also said that:
the company spent 30 years preparing for litigation over the risk. He said one company internal document talks about declining product use because of increased awareness of the health risk, and how to grow the franchise by targeting blacks and Hispanics as the highest users of talcum powder. Fox was black.
Juror Jerome Kendrick said his decision was primarily based on internal memos. He said the company "tried to cover up and influence the boards that regulate cosmetics."
Scranton told Common Dreams that the company was trying to take advantage of the uncertainty regarding talc and its links to cancer and risks from vaginal exposure to chemicals. Yet, rather than taking the "clearly more ethical role, to take a precautionary approach," Johnson & Johnson "made the decision to defend the product" and risk women's health, and even "poured money over the years into defending talc," she said.
It also shows, Scranton said, how much research is needed into women's health, as many other products may pose similar risks.
The company is expected to appeal the verdict, news agencies report.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Johnson & Johnson must pay $72 million in damages to the family of a woman whose death from ovarian cancer was linked to decades of use of the company's baby powder and Shower to Shower body powder, a Missouri jury said late Monday.
According to Alexandra Scranton, director of science and research at advocacy group Women's Voices for the Earth, this case exemplifies the "great extent that industry will go" to sell its product even in the face of evidence of the harm it causes.
Jacqueline Fox of Birmingham, Ala., died in October 2015 at the age of 62, 35 years after regularly using the products for feminine hygiene. As the Washington Post reports, she was "among more than 1,200 women from across the country who were suing Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers of the dangers associated with talc, the mineral used in baby powder."
At the end of the three-week trial, FairWarning reports, jurors in the circuit court of St. Louis "found Johnson & Johnson and a subsidiary, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc., guilty of negligence, failure to warn and conspiracy to conceal the risks of its products."
The jury awarded Fox's family $10 million in actual damages and $62 million in punitive damages. One of the lead attorneys, Jim Onder, said that roughly $31 million would go toward the Missouri Crime Victim Compensation Fund, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.
Among the evidence seen by jurors, according to the Associated Press, was a 1997 internal memo from a medical consultant to the company,
suggesting that "anybody who denies (the) risks" between "hygenic" talc use and ovarian cancer will be publicly perceived in the same light as those who denied a link between smoking cigarettes and cancer: "denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary."
Onder also said that:
the company spent 30 years preparing for litigation over the risk. He said one company internal document talks about declining product use because of increased awareness of the health risk, and how to grow the franchise by targeting blacks and Hispanics as the highest users of talcum powder. Fox was black.
Juror Jerome Kendrick said his decision was primarily based on internal memos. He said the company "tried to cover up and influence the boards that regulate cosmetics."
Scranton told Common Dreams that the company was trying to take advantage of the uncertainty regarding talc and its links to cancer and risks from vaginal exposure to chemicals. Yet, rather than taking the "clearly more ethical role, to take a precautionary approach," Johnson & Johnson "made the decision to defend the product" and risk women's health, and even "poured money over the years into defending talc," she said.
It also shows, Scranton said, how much research is needed into women's health, as many other products may pose similar risks.
The company is expected to appeal the verdict, news agencies report.
Johnson & Johnson must pay $72 million in damages to the family of a woman whose death from ovarian cancer was linked to decades of use of the company's baby powder and Shower to Shower body powder, a Missouri jury said late Monday.
According to Alexandra Scranton, director of science and research at advocacy group Women's Voices for the Earth, this case exemplifies the "great extent that industry will go" to sell its product even in the face of evidence of the harm it causes.
Jacqueline Fox of Birmingham, Ala., died in October 2015 at the age of 62, 35 years after regularly using the products for feminine hygiene. As the Washington Post reports, she was "among more than 1,200 women from across the country who were suing Johnson & Johnson for failing to warn consumers of the dangers associated with talc, the mineral used in baby powder."
At the end of the three-week trial, FairWarning reports, jurors in the circuit court of St. Louis "found Johnson & Johnson and a subsidiary, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc., guilty of negligence, failure to warn and conspiracy to conceal the risks of its products."
The jury awarded Fox's family $10 million in actual damages and $62 million in punitive damages. One of the lead attorneys, Jim Onder, said that roughly $31 million would go toward the Missouri Crime Victim Compensation Fund, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.
Among the evidence seen by jurors, according to the Associated Press, was a 1997 internal memo from a medical consultant to the company,
suggesting that "anybody who denies (the) risks" between "hygenic" talc use and ovarian cancer will be publicly perceived in the same light as those who denied a link between smoking cigarettes and cancer: "denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary."
Onder also said that:
the company spent 30 years preparing for litigation over the risk. He said one company internal document talks about declining product use because of increased awareness of the health risk, and how to grow the franchise by targeting blacks and Hispanics as the highest users of talcum powder. Fox was black.
Juror Jerome Kendrick said his decision was primarily based on internal memos. He said the company "tried to cover up and influence the boards that regulate cosmetics."
Scranton told Common Dreams that the company was trying to take advantage of the uncertainty regarding talc and its links to cancer and risks from vaginal exposure to chemicals. Yet, rather than taking the "clearly more ethical role, to take a precautionary approach," Johnson & Johnson "made the decision to defend the product" and risk women's health, and even "poured money over the years into defending talc," she said.
It also shows, Scranton said, how much research is needed into women's health, as many other products may pose similar risks.
The company is expected to appeal the verdict, news agencies report.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.