Johnson & Johnson Claims That Real Science Is In Their Favor

Plaintiff attorneys are using legal tactics that aim to force Johnson & Johnson to agree to a mass settlement rather than lose their iconic brand of baby powder altogether

Saturday, May 4, 2019 - Sometimes winning a lawsuit or settling one out of court has more to do with preserving brand loyalty and controlling adverse publicity than it does with simply paying money. Lawyers know this is especially true when dealing with large companies with a stock market capitalization in the billions. They know that them more adverse publicity they can heap on a company the more they may be able to drive down the stock price down and encourage a quick but lucrative settlement. As they say, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Negative articles such as the one recently published in Reuters, in conjunction with recent large jury awards, contributed to Johnson & Johnson losing over 10% of its stock market value in a single day. One attorney suing Johnson & Johnson say that is precisely his strategy. Talcum powder cancer lawsuit attorneys offer a free consultation to families and individuals seeking advice from top national lawyers.

According to the Washington Examiner, Johnson & Johnson's chief legal adversary Mark Lanier has built his cases against Johnson & Johnson on junk science and health scares. The Examiner quotes Lanier as saying that his strategy is to "get their attention" and nothing does so more effectively than a dramatic stock plunge. On the one hand, big media has focused on the internal company memos that claim that executive knew over 50 years ago that Johnson's Baby Powder talc contained asbestos. What is not being stressed in the media is that Johnson & Johnson knew about the product potentially being contaminated and did everything they could to prevent it. The company stands by its claim that Johnson's Baby Powder contains less than 1% asbestos, below the threshold set by the cosmetics industry. Rather than roll over and settle all lawsuits against them, Johnson & Johnson has focused on what they call the real scientific evidence that proves Johnson's Baby Powder is harmless.

Johnson & Johnson attorneys are getting angry at what they call "junk science" that plaintiffs are relying upon when they allege Johnson's Baby Powder gave them ovarian cancer or mesothelioma. Johnson & Johnson cites such scientific studies of talc as that conducted by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Food and Drug Administration, and The Nurses Health Study (NHS) in particular. In the largest scientific study of talc ever conducted on talc, the NHS came to the following conclusion. "The talc-use portion of the NHS included 78,630 women who were followed for as long as 24 years in total. They were asked whether they had ever used talcum powder on their genital area or on sanitary napkins. About 40 percent of women answered yes and were included in the talc-user group. The study data showed no increase in the overall rate of ovarian cancer among the talc users, regardless of how often they used talc. There was no difference in the rate of ovarian cancer among women who used the powder directly on their bodies or on sanitary products."

Information provided by TalcumPowderCancerLawsuit.com, a website devoted to providing news about talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits, as well as medical research and findings.