Man wins $48M after blaming 30 years of talc use for his mesothelioma

Johnson & Johnson has lost another case in which a person has argued that they developed cancer after using talcum powder products for years.

A jury in New Jersey has just awarded a man called Stephen Lanzo US$30 million (AU$39 million) and his wife US$7 million after Lanzo developed mesothelioma, an aggressive cancer more commonly found in men who worked with asbestos. He had argued that he used J&J produces including its baby powder for more than 30 years, and that inhaling the powder caused his cancer.

The consumer goods giant has faced and continues to face thousands of such cases. For example, in Missouri in 2017  a woman was awarded US$110 million in compensation after claiming that she developed ovarian cancer after using talc products for feminine hygiene for 40 years. J&J had previously been hit by awards as high as US$417 million in other states. 

Talc, the world’s softest mineral, is often found near deposits of asbestos, another mineral that’s a known carcinogen, and  some studies had shown a risk of the talc being contaminated by asbestos during the mining process, particularly in processes used in the past. But J&J has long insisted that its talc doesn’t contain asbestos, as has been a legal requirement in the US since the 1970s.

“While we are disappointed with this decision, the jury has further deliberations to conduct in this trial and we will reserve additional comment until the case is fully completed,” a company spokeswoman told CNN after the Lanzo case compensation was revealed. J&J has appealed and won a number of cases involving large awards to claimants in the past.

The talc supplier that was named in the case alongside J&J, Imerys Talc, told CNN that the jury in the Lanzo case didn’t note the evidence that the man was exposed to asbestos in his childhood home and schools. 

On the company’s website, J&J says that it continues to use talc in its products because “decades of science have reaffirmed its safety”. It points to a notice issued by the US Food & Drug Administration after the department studied talc from four suppliers – J&J Baby Powder was among the products – and found no asbestos fibres or structures.

The FDA did add, however, that its study was limited because of the small number of suppliers that submitted products.

“For these reasons, while FDA finds these results informative, they do not prove that most or all talc or talc-containing cosmetic products currently marketed in the United States are likely to be free of asbestos contamination,” it said.

 In Australia, the Cancer Council says that “modern domestic talcum powder does not contain asbestos”. When inhaled, talc that does contain asbestos can cause cancer, it adds, but notes that the International Agency for Research on Cancer says only that talc is “possibly carcinogenic” when applied to the genital area. 

“In addition, there is no evidence to suggest that talcum powder increases the risk of other types of cancer,” the council’s experts say.

Did you stop using talcum powder after cancer fears were first raised? Or do you trust that the manufacturers wouldn’t sell a product that was harmful?