{"id":15736,"date":"2020-02-25T15:17:30","date_gmt":"2020-02-25T15:17:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/?p=15736"},"modified":"2023-05-15T16:09:14","modified_gmt":"2023-05-15T20:09:14","slug":"johnson-and-johnson-rigged-asbestos-tests","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/blog\/johnson-and-johnson-rigged-asbestos-tests\/","title":{"rendered":"Johnson &#038; Johnson May Have Rigged Asbestos Tests"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Johnson &amp; Johnson may have altered contamination tests so that the company could declare its baby powder free of <a href=\"\/asbestos\/\">asbestos<\/a>. This is what the attorneys representing four mesothelioma victims argued to a New Jersey jury on February 5, 2020.<\/p>\n<p>This comes after a shocking Federal Drug Administration (FDA) discovery of trace amounts of cancer-causing asbestos in samples of Johnson\u2019s Baby Powder\u00ae, Johnson &amp; Johnson recalled around 33,000 bottles in October 2019.<\/p>\n<p>The pharmaceutical giant attempted to show its innocence by conducting its own tests on the baby powder. These tests indicated no detectable amounts of asbestos.<\/p>\n<p>However, the mesothelioma victims taking legal action against Johnson &amp; Johnson after exposure to its baby powder are far from convinced.<\/p>\n<h2>Four Johnson\u2019s Baby Powder Users Sued After Developing Mesothelioma<\/h2>\n<p>On September 11, 2019, a jury ruled in favor of four plaintiffs, awarding them a combined $37.3 Million in compensation against Johnson &amp; Johnson. All of them were exposed to asbestos in Johnson\u2019s Baby Powder as babies.<\/p>\n<p>Each eventually developed <a href=\"\/mesothelioma\/\">mesothelioma<\/a>, and with no other known asbestos exposure history, they argued that Johnson&#8217;s Baby Powder was to blame for their deadly cancer.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The jury in the case ruled that:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The victims were exposed to asbestos in the company\u2019s talcum powder products.<\/li>\n<li>Johnson &amp; Johnson failed to warn about the dangers of its products.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The pharmaceutical giant has faced a slew of <a href=\"\/legal\/lawsuit\/\">asbestos lawsuits<\/a> over the past few years from those who claim its baby powder leads to deadly diseases like ovarian cancer and mesothelioma.<\/p>\n<h2>Plaintiffs\u2019 Lawyers Say J&amp;J Rigged Tests to Hide Asbestos<\/h2>\n<p>Lawyers representing the mesothelioma victims are urging a new jury to also strike Johnson &amp; Johnson with punitive damages \u2014 money the corporation would have to pay as punishment for their actions.<\/p>\n<p>In response to Johnson and Johnson\u2019s asbestos-negative baby powder tests, the plaintiffs\u2019 lawyers argued that the company adjusted the detection limit of its tests to produce the results it wanted.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cThey fixed the tests so they can pass them.\u201d \u2014 Chris J. Panatier, plaintiffs\u2019 attorney<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In addition to this, the victims\u2019 attorneys made other claims concerning the corporate giant\u2019s negligence in this case.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The plaintiffs&#8217; attorneys argued that Johnson &amp; Johnson:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Demonstrated \u201creckless indifference\u201d because it was aware of small amounts of asbestos in its baby powder and the negative effects of \u201cbuildup over time.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Withheld information from the FDA, failing to provide any testing data to the government agency after 1973.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>However, Johnson &amp; Johnson consistently denies that its products contain asbestos and is fighting every claim the plaintiffs\u2019 lawyers have made.<\/p>\n<h2>J&amp;J Argues Tests Exceed Industry Standards<\/h2>\n<p>In response to the plaintiffs\u2019 attorneys\u2019 claims, Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s defense lawyers asserted that the company\u2019s <a href=\"\/products\/baby-powder\/\">baby powder<\/a> is asbestos-free and that its testing methods were sound \u2014 in fact, more rigorous than industry standards require.<\/p>\n<p>They further argued that detection limits are typical in order to avoid \u201cfalse positives\u201d when testing, and Johnson &amp; Johnson had no reason to believe that their talc products were likely to harm consumers.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cYou don\u2019t stay in business for 125 years doing the types of things that these lawyers have alleged,\u201d argued Brown, one of Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s defense attorneys. \u201cBy knowingly, deliberately selling products that you know can hurt people&#8230;\u201d<\/p>\n<h2>Did J&amp;J Put Customers At Risk?<\/h2>\n<p>A central question the prosecution has urged the jury to consider is: What was Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s mindset when it sold its allegedly dangerous baby powder? Were they truly considering the wellbeing of their clients, or did they fail to keep their customers safe?<\/p>\n<p>Many of Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s actions leave individuals uncertain of their intentions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>This skepticism is due, in part, to:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s failure to provide testing data to the FDA.<\/li>\n<li>The FDA\u2019s findings of trace asbestos contamination in bottles of Johnson &amp; Johnson\u2019s baby powder.<\/li>\n<li>The string of lawsuits involving cancer victims with no obvious exposure to asbestos or other carcinogens (cancer-causing agents).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p>\u201c[Johnson &amp; Johnson] chose the wrong path, a path that ended up placing innocent people at risk.\u201d \u2014 Christopher M. Placitella, plaintiffs\u2019 attorney<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Ultimately, the jury will decide whether Johnson &amp; Johnson recklessly put consumers at risk and, if so, how it should be held accountable in a civil court of law.<\/p>\n<p>Sadly, one plaintiff did not survive to hear the first asbestos lawsuit trial verdict, but hopefully the other three victims will feel a sense of justice from the outcome of their case.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Johnson &amp; Johnson may have altered contamination tests so that the company could declare its baby powder free of asbestos. This is what the attorneys representing four mesothelioma victims argued to a New Jersey jury on February 5, 2020. This comes after a shocking Federal Drug Administration (FDA) discovery of trace amounts of cancer-causing asbestos&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":35,"featured_media":17648,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[272],"tags":[72,174,73,131,168],"class_list":["post-15736","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal","tag-asbestos-exposure","tag-johnson-johnson","tag-mesothelioma-lawsuit","tag-mesothelioma-victims","tag-personal-injury-lawsuit"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15736","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/35"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15736"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15736\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17648"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15736"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15736"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mesotheliomahope.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15736"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}