For decades, people of all ages have used talc powder, also called talcum powder or baby powder, for a variety of reasons. They might sprinkle it into their undergarments or socks to absorb moisture and odor. They might even powder their arms and legs in humid climates to reduce the appearance and smell of sweat. People also use it in diapers to help babies avoid diaper rash. Some people have used this powder daily for the majority of their lives.
Unfortunately, the product may not be as safe as consumers believed it to be. Talc often occurs near asbestos in mineral deposits, and companies don’t always put the safety of the consumer above efficiency and profit. Many lawsuits in recent years have alleged that talcum powder contaminated by asbestos cause serious cancer.
These claims have recently started gaining additional traction because internal memos from big companies like Johnson & Johnson have shown that the businesses were aware of asbestos contamination and the risk that their products could pose to the public. However, simply using talcum powder isn’t always enough of a reason to convince a jury to rule against a huge business, as a recent New Jersey trial makes clear.
Jury rules against plaintiff in New Jersey case
Although many major lawsuits related to talcum powder against Johnson & Johnson have proved successful in recent months, not all plaintiffs win their cases. This recent New Jersey case is a perfect example. The plaintiff developed mesothelioma and claims that Johnson & Johnson baby powder was the method of exposure by which the plaintiff became sick.
Mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer of the organ lining that is strongly correlated with asbestos exposure. Research has also linked ovarian cancer to prolonged exposure to asbestos. In this case, the jury claimed they did not see proof that the baby powder use directly caused the mesothelioma in the plaintiff. As such, the jury found in favor of the corporate defendants.
Other asbestos suits wind up successful
A single loss in New Jersey does not mean that those who believe their cancer resulted from talcum powder use shouldn’t seek compensation. It just means they need to be careful about the legal tactic that they take and how their Salisbury attorney helps build their case. After all, many others have brought lawsuits successfully.
With the amount of evidence that Johnson & Johnson has had some awareness of contamination issues in their products, it is possible for an attorney to build a strong case against the company.
If you worry about connecting with the medical care you need after a cancer diagnosis you believe is related to asbestos-contaminated talc powder, it may be time to look into your options for compensation.