Jury awards record-setting $110.5M in powder lawsuit
ST. LOUIS—A St. Louis jury has awarded a Virginia woman a record-setting $110.5 million in the latest lawsuit alleging that using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder caused cancer.
The jury ruling Thursday night for 62-year-old Lois Slemp, of Wise, Virginia, comes after three previous St. Louis juries awarded a total of $197 million to plaintiffs who made similar claims. Those cases, including the previous highest award of $72 million, are all under appeal. About 2,000 state and federal lawsuits are in courts across the country over concerns about health problems caused by prolonged talcum powder use.
Slemp, who was diag-
nosed with ovarian cancer in 2012, blames her illness on her use of the company’s talcum-containing products for more than 40 years. Her cancer has spread to her liver. Although she was too ill to attend the trial, an audiotape of her deposition testimony was played. In it she said: “I trusted Johnson & Johnson. Big mistake.”
Jim Onder, one of her attorneys, said Friday that Slemp was “thrilled” when the verdict was shared with her in a phone call and that she hoped it would “send a message.” He said she is too sick to talk to reporters.
Johnson & Johnson, based in Brunswick, New Jersey, said in a statement that it would appeal and disputed the scientific evidence behind
the plaintiffs’ allegations. The company also noted that a St. Louis jury found in its favor in March and that two cases in New Jersey were thrown out by a judge who said there wasn’t reliable evidence that talc leads to ovarian cancer.
“We are preparing for additional trials this year and we will continue to defend the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder,” the statement said.
The suit also named supplier Imerys Talc, which was held liable for $50,000. Imerys Talc, which has been held accountable in only one other talcum case, said in a statement that it is “confident in the consensus of government agencies and professional scientific organizations that have reviewed the safety of talc.”
Talc is a mineral that is mined from deposits around the world, including the U.S.
The softest of minerals, it’s crushed into a white powder. It’s been widely used in cosmetics and other personal care products to absorb moisture since at least 1894, when Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder was launched. But it’s mainly used in a variety of other products, including paint and plastics.
Much research has found no link or a weak one between ovarian cancer and using baby powder for feminine hygiene, and most major health groups have declared talc harmless. Still, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies genital use of talc as “possibly carcinogenic.”
Attorneys with Onder, Shelton, O’Leary & Peterson, the firm that handled the St. Louis cases, cited other research that began connecting talcum powder to ovarian cancer in the 1970s. They cite case studies showing that women who regularly use talc on their genital area face up to a 40 percent higher risk of developing ovarian cancer.
OTHER TRIAL RESULTS
Besides Slemp’s case, three other jury trials in St. Louis reached similar outcomes last year, awarding the plaintiffs $72 million, $70.1 million and $55 million, for a combined total of $307.6 million. The company says its product is safe, and it plans to appeal the latest verdict, as it has the other three.
Johnson & Johnson also has had some legal victories, including in March when a St. Louis jury rejected the claims of a Tennessee woman with ovarian and uterine cancer. Also, two cases in New Jersey were thrown out by a judge who said the plaintiffs’ lawyers hadn’t presented reliable evidence that talc leads to ovarian cancer.
The next baby powder trial is in June in St. Louis, and will be followed by another in July in California.
WHAT DO INVESTORS THINK?
Investors don’t seem worried that J&J is in financial trouble, even though the company faces an estimated 2,000 similar lawsuits. J&J shares fell 62 cents to $123.10 in late-afternoon trading Friday.
Johnson & Johnson, the world’s biggest maker of health care products, brings in about $72 billion a year selling prescription drugs, medical devices, diagnostic equipment and consumer products ranging from baby shampoo and Aveeno skin care items to Tylenol pain reliever and Band-Aids.
Because of its size and diversified product lines, J&J is sued frequently and investors don’t panic when it loses product liability lawsuits, so its stock price rarely drops much after losses. Also, the company clearly intends to keep fighting lawsuits alleging its iconic baby powder isn’t safe, rather than settling suits at this point.
WHAT IS TALC?
Talc is a mineral that is mined from deposits around the world, including the U.S. The softest of minerals, it’s crushed into a white powder. It’s been widely used in cosmetics and other personal care products to absorb moisture since at least 1894, when Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder was launched. But it’s mainly used in a variety of other products, including paint and plastics.
DOES IT CAUSE OVARIAN CANCER?
Like many questions in science, there’s no definitive answer. Finding the cause of cancer is difficult. It would be unethical to do the best kind of study, asking a group of women to use talcum powder on their genitals and wait to see if it causes cancer, while comparing them to a group who didn’t use it.
While ovarian cancer is often fatal, it’s relatively rare. It accounts for only about 22,400 of the 1.7 million new cases of cancer expected to be diagnosed in the United States this year.
Factors that are known to increase a women’s risk of ovarian cancer include age, obesity, use of estrogen therapy after menopause, not having any children, certain genetic mutations and personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer.
WHAT RESEARCH SHOWS
The biggest studies have found no link between talcum powder applied to the genitals and ovarian cancer. But about two dozen smaller studies over three decades have mostly found a modest connection — a 20 percent to 40 percent increased risk among talc users.
However, that doesn’t mean talc causes cancer. Several factors make that unlikely, and there’s no proof talc, which doesn’t interact with chemicals or cells, can travel up the reproductive tract, enter the ovaries and then trigger cancer.
One large study published in June 2016 that followed 51,000 sisters of breast cancer patients found genital talc users had a reduced risk of ovarian cancer, 27 percent lower than in nonusers. An analysis of two huge, long-running U.S. studies, the Women’s Health Initiative and the Nurses’ Health Study, showed no increased risk of ovarian cancer in talc users.
WHAT EXPERTS SAY
If there were a true link, Dr. Hal C. Lawrence III says large studies that tracked women’s health for years would have verified results of the smaller ones.
“Lord knows, with the amount of powder that’s been applied to babies’ bottoms, we would’ve seen something,” if talc caused cancer, said Lawrence, vice president of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
The National Cancer Institute’s Dr. Nicolas Wentzensen says the federal agency’s position is that there’s not a clear connection.
“It is very hard to establish causal relationships,” he said, adding, “A lot of ovarian cancers occur in women who have never used talc, and many women have used talc and not gotten ovarian cancer.”
On its website the American Cancer Society states: “The risk for any individual woman, if there is one, is probably very small.”