Johnson's Baby Powder is Classified As A Cosmetic And Thus Escapes FDA Scrutiny

If the FDA had its way Johnson's Baby Powder asbestos would have been exposed years ago but instead the fact has been swept under the rug for decades

Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - Internal Johnson & Johnson memos show that company executive exerted influence on the FDA in order to keep the allowable levels of asbestos in talc as high as possible. At the core of the testing, deficiency is the fact that JNJ has been shown to have influenced the US FDA when the agency tried to force the company to use a more sensitive testing level and alert the public of the presence of asbestos. JNJ was successful in lobbying the FDA to get talcum powder classified as a cosmetic and thus escaping the FDA's testing mandates, recall power, and warning labeling requirements. Decades ago, the FDA urged the company to increase the sensitivity of their asbestos tests to threshold of "one-tenth of one percent" from the existing level of only one percent, a sensitivity increase of ten times which would reflect the health-threaten nature of asbestos. Since the cosmetics industry is "self-policing" Johnson and Johnson continue to use the one percent threshold to this day, a level that shows no presence of asbestos. Talcum powder asbestos cancer attorneys helping families and individuals suffering from asbestos cancer due to talcum powder.

Unfortunately for thousands of women with cancer that are suing Johnson & Johnson, the higher asbestos threshold has been shown in court to be too much. Brown University professor David Egilman is an expert in the science of testing for the presence of asbestos in talcum powder. According to Science Mag.org, David's testimony was central to the jury's decision to award 22 women a whopping $4.69 billion dollars. Most women claimed that they had used Johnson's Baby Powder on their small children while diapering them and had used the product regularly on themselves for their entire adult life for feminine hygiene. Studies have shown that particles of talc were present in the ovarian tissue samples of around 20 women who died from ovarian cancer and is thought to have contributed to the development of their cancer, with or without asbestos being present. Egilman estimated that a woman's risk of developing ovarian cancer doubled from their frequent use of talc-based on the amount of asbestos found in talc samples and the duration and frequency of a woman's talcum powder usage. Egilman supported his conclusions by citing internal JNJ company memos that demonstrated that JNJ's self-testing of talc samples for asbestos were not sensitive enough to detect its presence.

Expert witnesses testify on behalf of plaintiffs that claim that Johnson's Baby Powder contains asbestos and is the cause of their cancer. Johnson & Johnson's defense has yet to discredit their talc/asbestos conclusions that have found particles of asbestos in actual samples of Johnson's Baby Powder. It is a well-established fact that even the smallest particle of asbestos can "substantially contribute" to the development of mesothelioma, a form of cancer of the lining of the lungs or ovarian cancer. Juries have awarded billions of dollars to plaintiffs that have relied heavily on the testimony of these experts who have become the arch-enemy of the talcum powder and cosmetics industry.

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