File photo for reference only

 

A massive lawsuit involving 3,000 claimants has been launched in the UK against Johnson & Johnson (J&J). The pharmaceutical giant faces accusations of knowingly selling talc-based baby powder contaminated with asbestos, despite being aware of potential cancer risks as early as the 1960s. This legal action highlights internal memos and reports suggesting J&J concealed this information while aggressively marketing the product as safe.

 

The case draws similarities to ongoing lawsuits in the US, where J&J has faced billions in damages. The UK claimants argue they were never warned about the possible dangers and are seeking hundreds of millions of pounds in damages. Lawyers state this could become the largest product liability case in British history, challenging J&J’s reputation of purity in its baby products.

 

J&J denies the accusations, maintaining its talc products are asbestos-free and compliant with regulatory standards. However, allegations remain strong, citing internal discussions about asbestos in the 1970s. Documents reportedly reveal efforts by J&J to influence US regulators to lower testing sensitivity, allowing the company to continue its purity claims.

 

The UK lawsuit claims J&J's marketing targeted new mothers and later shifted focus to African American women. Reports suggest an evolving internal recognition of the product's risks, yet the company opted to keep information confidential. Claimants, many suffering from cancers related to asbestos exposure, demand justice for being misled.

 

Looking ahead, the case could significantly impact J&J, influencing regulatory practices and consumer trust. As court proceedings advance, these claims put pressure on J&J to address its past actions and their ongoing consequences. The company, already facing appeals in the US, may need to reassess its commitment to transparency and consumer safety.

 

Key Takeaways

 

• UK lawsuit accuses J&J of selling asbestos-contaminated talc, linked to cancer.
• Allegations include J&J's concealment of dangers while marketing the product as safe.
• The case could become the largest product liability lawsuit in British history.
   

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-10-16

 

 

Big Pharma is a pernicious influence on all of us. They certainly don't want to cure anyone and impact cash flow. Disclaimer: my son is a principal research at J&J, five years to retirement.

What in God's green earth is asbestos doing in baby powder?  They need to be sued in the billions and that money used to provide money for health care for those affected.  

2 hours ago, connda said:

What in God's green earth is asbestos doing in baby powder?  They need to be sued in the billions and that money used to provide money for health care for those affected.  

 

My guess is that asbestos is a by product of mining and processing talc.  Whether it's a natural contaminant in the ground or introduced by machinery, I don't know.  It was widely used in bearings, brakes, etc. for decades.

 

This could get spendy for J&J, given that they just got hit with almost a $billion settlement on just one California case.

 

From Forbes:  A Los Angeles jury has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $966 million to the family of Mae Moore, who died in 2021 from mesothelioma, a rare cancer linked to asbestos-contaminated talc exposure. This unprecedented agreement marks a significant moment in the intersections of public health and corporate accountability. For Black women, who were selected by J&J as “the right place” to sell more talc baby powder to, specifically targeting “under-developed geographical areas,” this is perhaps an opportunity for financial reciprocity along the path to racial health equity.

 

I wonder if J&J spun off their Baby Powder to Kenvue like they did their Tylenol (also in the news)?  And whether that would affect any future settlements.  Crafty bastards those Big Pharma boys...

 

BTW, the Cali case has all the fascinating elements...  Product liability, racist advertising, knowingly poisoning minorities...

It wouldn't surprise me if the powders being sold here are laced with asbestos also.....

I warned my wife and daughters about this more than a few times.....

7 hours ago, connda said:

What in God's green earth is asbestos doing in baby powder?  They need to be sued in the billions and that money used to provide money for health care for those affected.  

 

5 hours ago, impulse said:

 

My guess is that asbestos is a by product of mining and processing talc.  Whether it's a natural contaminant in the ground or introduced by machinery, I don't know.  It was widely used in bearings, brakes, etc. for decades.

 

This could get spendy for J&J, given that they just got hit with almost a $billion settlement on just one California case.

 

From Forbes:  A Los Angeles jury has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $966 million to the family of Mae Moore, who died in 2021 from mesothelioma, a rare cancer linked to asbestos-contaminated talc exposure. This unprecedented agreement marks a significant moment in the intersections of public health and corporate accountability. For Black women, who were selected by J&J as “the right place” to sell more talc baby powder to, specifically targeting “under-developed geographical areas,” this is perhaps an opportunity for financial reciprocity along the path to racial health equity.

 

I wonder if J&J spun off their Baby Powder to Kenvue like they did their Tylenol (also in the news)?  And whether that would affect any future settlements.  Crafty bastards those Big Pharma boys...

 

BTW, the Cali case has all the fascinating elements...  Product liability, racist advertising, knowingly poisoning minorities...

Talc and asbestos are both silicate minerals, and their co-location is a natural geological phenomenon, so contamination may occur during mining process.

 

https://www.asbestosclaims.law/asbestos-blog/why-the-asbestos-talc-problem-is-more-than-alarmism/

 

 

What few know is that asbestos is a wholly natural products found in rocks. Asbestos was used by ancient Egyptians for textiles and mummy wrappings. Romans called it the “magic mineral” for its fire resistance. It was proven to be carcinogenic in 1955, implying that J&J have very little to defend itself with.

... Are We Now Going To Create Nicknames For Multi-Billion Dollar Corporations ... (?)

On 10/16/2025 at 10:44 AM, webfact said:

This legal action highlights internal memos and reports suggesting J&J concealed this information while aggressively marketing the product as safe.

 

Safe and effective ™  ®  © 

pity (for them) they couldn't keep those memos secret for 75 years.

Even more of a pity that they don't have immunity from prosecution

for a defective product.