Posted on 12/14/2018 1:12:40 PM PST by JonPreston
Internal documents show that the company's powder was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos and that J&J kept the information quiet.
J&J didn’t tell the FDA that at least three tests by three different labs from 1972 to 1975 had found asbestos in its talc — in one case at levels reported as “rather high.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
She knew that her cancer, mesothelioma, arose in the delicate membrane surrounding her lungs and other organs. She knew it was as rare as it was deadly, a signature of exposure to asbestos. And she knew that it afflicted mostly men who had inhaled asbestos dust in mines and industries such as shipbuilding that used the carcinogen before its risks were understood.
Everyone has known this for DECADES.
but lawyers lie, and the courts LOVE lawyers
who lie. THEY LOVE LYING LAWYERS.
The FDA did a study in 2009 of various cosmetic talc brands. They said no asbestos was found.
Regardless, it looks like the personal injury lawyers are going to be heading to this case like flies on shyte
Oh, and sell your J&J stock. This isn’t going away soon.
Not with Rooters and NBC News reporting on it. Evidently Johnson & Johnson has done something to offend the Deep Staters.
JNJ lost nearly $40 billion in market value today. Worst day since 2002.
The headline is accurate but misleading. It implies that, for decades, the powder has been tainted.
But in fact, the powder was only rarely tainted during a 3 year period from 1972 to 1975.
What the headline MEANS is that, for the last 3 decades, JNJ has known that there were tests on the powder in 1972-1975 that showed asbestos, and they never told anybody about it.
So this wasn’t about continuing a risk to the public, but appears to be a big big deal relative to the asbestos settlements.
A relative just got a nice job offer from them today. Hope it works out well for him.
I don’t buy this. NBC is known for their lying. Women and Men get cancer all the time. They only went after Johnson and Johnson for big money!!! Back in the 1980’s NBC for one of their so called hit pieces. Had this Chevy truck t boned with saddle tanks. The tanks were suppose to explode they didn’t so NBC redid their video and put a explosive charge in the pickup!
It is evil incarnate.
It is all about destroying large companies, their employees, and their contribution to society, to make a few lawyers rich.
If you look at the actual evidence, evidence of harm is extremely small, circumstantial, and unconvincing.
But put pictures of a sick baby to the Jury, and tell them someone needs to pay...
and Voila lawyers get rich and society gets poorer.
Yikes. I hope so too.
And when the asbestos was found, did they do nothing about it, like switching their talc suppliers?
OK, so if J&J had the powder market cornered to the extent that it outsold all other brands combined, that would roughly mean that over 50% of all the babies born during that period would be affected.
Then wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that 50% of those in later life would get cancer related to asbestos? My point is there should be many, many more cases thus making the media and lawyers happier yet.
In that era asbestos was literally all over the place, especially in plumbing and HVAC applications. I recall my Dad had two asbestos blankets he used as welding shields. When shaken to remove welding slag one could see all the fibers floating in the sun light. Once we realized the danger, probably in the 80’s, they were thrown away.
And J&J should have used the famous Micronite filter; readily available even back in the 1950’s.
In the mid-eighties when our daughter was a baby we used cornstarch instead of talcum powder. Worked great and was as benign as you could get. Also had no scent. Which is very important in our household.
here is a site created by J&J to defend the safety of their product......
www.factsabouttalc.com
it appears to be very comprehensive and very transparent as it provides over 5000 company documents used in litigation and facts / sources.
The irritation(s) make lungs susceptable to infections that become carcenogenic.
“The irritation(s) make lungs susceptable to infections that become carcenogenic.”
False. Asbestos finds its way out of the lungs and into the outer cover of the lungs, the mesothelioma. The mesothelium virtually never gets infected. The cancer results from the irritation of the asbestos needles.
Some things directly cause cancer, often in limited cell types. Asbestos is one of these.
I might have gotten the exact target wrong, but I was countering the statement in the article that asbestos was cancerous .... it's not.
But the asbestos particles, which are like needles DO irritate .... SOMETHING inside us and THAT irritated area is susceptable to becoming cancerous
and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
I worked in the NYC courts, and I heard about the evils of baby powder in a case I was working when my daughter was maybe six, born in 1971. I threw it all out, never used the stuff again. I had younger kids, too. I tried to warn friends, but they thought I was nuts. Look how many years it took for this info to finally hit the mainstream. I also worked a case where GM decided that it wasn’t worth a 25 cent part to keep kids safer in the back of station wagons. Manufacturers weigh the risks and decide they’d rather pay the claims. Really sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.