New Research Supports Lawsuits Against Johnson & Johnson Over Talc-Based Baby Powder

Recent research published in the *Journal of Clinical Oncology* adds significant weight to the more than 50,000 lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson (J&J) alleging that its talc-based baby powder caused ovarian cancer. The study, released Wednesday, found that the application of talc powder to the genitals was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer. The risk was notably higher for those who used the powder frequently or over extended periods.

Study and Findings

Researchers from the National Institutes of Health based their findings on data from the Sister Study, which enrolled over 50,000 women in the U.S. from 2003 to 2009. Participants, aged 35 to 74, had a sister diagnosed with breast cancer, potentially increasing their own risk for breast or ovarian cancer.

According to the study, women who used talc powder on their genitals were more likely to develop ovarian cancer, a link that has been controversial for years. The study's lead author, Melissa Danielson, a statistician at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, highlighted the significance of these findings amid ongoing legal battles.

Legal Context and J&J's Defense

Lawsuits against J&J related to its talc-based baby powder date back to 1999. Initially, claims focused on mesothelioma, a rare cancer usually caused by asbestos exposure. Over the years, thousands of women have filed claims alleging that the talc products caused their ovarian cancer. J&J has consistently denied that its talc products contain asbestos and argued that studies have not convincingly linked their use to ovarian cancer.

Despite J&J's stance, the new research undermines their defense by presenting stronger evidence of the association between talc and ovarian cancer. Most lawsuits have been consolidated into a federal case in New Jersey, with a trial scheduled for December.

Industry and Public Reactions

Leigh O’Dell, co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs’ steering committee, welcomed the study, saying it affirms the position of the plaintiffs’ experts. Conversely, Erik Haas, J&J’s worldwide vice president of litigation, maintained that the study does not establish causality or identify a specific carcinogenic agent in talcum powder.

Earlier this month, J&J proposed a $6.48 billion settlement to resolve the lawsuits, contingent on moving the cases to bankruptcy court and obtaining approval from 75% of claimants. However, the company’s previous attempts to resolve talc lawsuits through bankruptcy filings have been dismissed, with courts ruling that J&J's subsidiary, created to assume liability, is not in financial distress.

Impact of the Study and Health Implications

The new study's findings may prompt women to reconsider using talc products. Katie O’Brien, the lead author and an epidemiologist at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, emphasized that there is no medically necessary reason to use talcum powder. Current J&J baby powder formulations use cornstarch instead of talc. The company stopped selling talc-based versions in North America in 2020, citing decreased demand and concerns about product safety, and discontinued the product internationally last year.

Talc and asbestos are naturally found close to each other, making contamination a risk during mining, according to the Food and Drug Administration. A 2018 Reuters investigation suggested J&J knew about asbestos contamination in its baby powder as early as the 1970s, which the company denies.

Broader Health Concerns

O’Brien noted that asbestos might not be the only cause of the cancer link. Talc products may also contain phthalates, chemicals known to disrupt hormones and potentially increase cancer risk. Additionally, talc itself can be abrasive and cause inflammation, which is associated with cancer development.

Scientific and Social Debate

The debate over the scientific evidence linking talc and ovarian cancer will likely feature prominently in upcoming litigation. J&J has referenced earlier studies, including one by O’Brien and Sandler in 2020, which did not find a significant association between talc use and ovarian cancer. However, the new study addresses limitations of previous research by considering lifetime use and the potential for recall bias.

Historical and Cultural Context

J&J began selling talc-based baby powder in 1894. Historically, many women used it for genital hygiene, although health experts advise against this practice. Alexandra Scranton, director of science and research at Women’s Voices for the Earth, criticized the marketing tactics that suggested a need for such products, calling it a perpetuation of body shaming myths.

Moving Forward

The new findings are expected to influence both the ongoing legal battles and public perception of talc-based products. As awareness of the potential risks increases, health professionals and consumer advocates continue to call for greater regulation and clearer warnings about the use of talc. The continued scrutiny and legal actions are likely to shape the future of consumer safety standards and corporate accountability.