Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JeepersFreepers

Bayer should have demanded a jury of its “peers” - scientists schooled in the best areas of science on the matter - in all its civil cases. Civilians know next to nothing on the matter and the majority are favorable to emotional sway of “victims” above proof of negligence.

J&J was stupid settling the Baby Powder cases - there was no proof that asbestos of a cancer causing level was in any particular whole batch of J&J Baby powder, and no empirical proof the any woman got cancer from using it.

Some women got cancer. Cancer is expensive to treat. Of course women treated for cancer wanted monetary relief from the treatments. Ahhh, minute traces of asbestos have been known on occasion to be found in talcum powder (they ARE chemical cousins). Ahh, some women who have gotten some cancers have used Baby Powder. Ahhh, the lawyers got a new business venture - claim Baby Powder causes cancer even though all any one has about the matter is correlation and not causation.

J&J should have stuck to its guns.

And how is it that the claims are that women got cancer from using Baby Powder but men who use it Baby Powder as a talcum powder did not??


17 posted on 07/08/2020 3:08:19 PM PDT by Wuli (Get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Wuli

And just so you know, the woman got ovarian cancer. Asbestos is linked to mesothelioma, not ovarian cancer. NO LINK WHATSOEVER. J & J had BAAAAAAD LAWYERS.


25 posted on 07/08/2020 4:52:00 PM PDT by originalbuckeye ('In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'- George Orwell..?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson