equivalent to approximately 18.3 billion reais to 22 women who claim to have developed ovarian cancer using talcs produced by the multinational
more
A court in Missouri (US) initially awarded $ 550 million in compensation and added four pharmaceutical giant, who denies allegations and claims that its products do not cause cancer or contain carcinogens, faces about 9,000 lawsuits involving talc that it manufactures for infants. 19659004] The company stated that she was "deeply disappointed" with the outcome of the lawsuit and that she had the intention to appeal the decision.
Six weeks of trials were conducted in which 22 women and their families reported developing ovarian cancer.
Of the 22 women who went to court for compensation, six died of ovarian cancer
. Women 's lawyers say that Johnson & Johnson knew that talc had been contaminated with asbestos since the 1970s, but had not warned consumers.
Talcum is a mineral that can sometimes be found on neighboring soil with asbestos. J & J denies that its products contain asbestos and insists that talc does not cause cancer. The company added that several studies have shown that its talc is safe and said the verdict was the product of a "fundamentally unfair process."
The US agency that controls the production of food and The FDA's drug lawyer, the prosecution's attorney, told the court that both the FDA and the company had used ineffective test methods.
Analysis Philippa Roxby, health reporter for the BBC
Is Talcum Safe?
For years, it is feared to use talc, especially in areas near organs Genitals increase the risk of ovarian cancer – but the evidence is inconclusive.The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies the use of talc in the genitals as "possibly carcinogenic" due to evidence contradictory
Why there l a debate on the subject?
Talc in its natural form contains asbestos and causes cancer. However, asbestos-free talc has been used in baby products and other cosmetics since the 1970s. But studies on asbestos-free talc give contradictory results.
Other studies argue that there is no connection between the use of asbestos talc and cancer. They also point out that there is no association between talc in contraceptive methods, such as diaphragms and condoms (which approach the ovaries), and cancer.
There does not seem to be any relationship between illness and exposure time. unlike what happens with tobacco, for example
What should women do?
The charity Ovacome says that evidence of a link between the use of talc and the risk of cancer is low. And even though talc increases the risk of ovarian cancer, studies suggest that this increase is about one-third.
The entity points out that this increase is low and that ovarian cancer is a relatively rare disease [19659004] In addition, the risk of ovarian cancer is influenced by many factors – hereditary and environmental – and not just by the use of talc.
The entity adds, "Thus, even if the talc slightly increases the risk, very little In addition, if someone has ovarian cancer and uses talcum powder, it seems unlikely that this is the reason they developed cancer. "
Record Judgment
The value of compensation is the most significant that J & J has ever been ordered to pay.P punitive damages are often often reduced by the court of first instance or after appeal J & J has already been able to overturn several court decisions, some for technical reasons, by appeal.
A California precedent judgment in 2017 had granted $ 417 million dollars to a woman who claimed to have developed cancer after using the company's products, including talc, however, this decision was quashed and several other actions against J & J are still pending.
Most of the 22 women who have lodged a complaint against J & J do not come from Missouri, however the cases have been reunited in one action, and the company must use it in the action in which it seeks to ren
"Every verdict against Johnson & Johnson before this court was overturned after appeal and the multiple errors present at this trial were worse than those in the previous ones that were reversed," the company said.
<img alt = "BBC News: The BBC is not responsible for the content of external websites
