Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit

Johnson & Johnson's Racial Audit Designed To Appease Shareholders Who Called For a World-Wide Ban on Selling Baby Powder

Johnson & Johnson's blatant disregard for racial, human, and corporate ethics makes their upcoming racial audit a farce

Friday, May 13, 2022 - Johnson & Johnson shareholders last week approved the racial audit of its employment, marketing, and advertising practices to make sure they are up to code with today's inclusive, liberal standards. On the surface the move makes the company look like they are placing ethics above profits but nothing could be further from the truth. The audit does little more than placate shareholders who called for Johnson & Johnson to discontinue selling talcum powder worldwide, not only in North America. The audit is probably nothing more than a public relations event if the facts about the company's history of ethics violations are taken into consideration. For example, The National Association of Negro Women (NCNW) last year filed a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson citing evidence that indicates that J & J knew asbestos-contaminated talc was being marketed to Black women specifically. "Internal documents demonstrate J&J targeted those advertisements to Black women, knowing that Black women were more likely to use the powder products and to use them regularly," according to the LA Times. These documents were uncovered in previous talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits and show the company has been involved in racially-discriminative and deceptive sales practices for more than the last 50 years by targeting African American women with Johnson's Baby Powder after the media learned that asbestos was carcinogenic and asbestos miners and those living nearby asbestos mines were dying. Johnson & Johnson allegedly handed out free samples of Johnson's Baby Powder to Black Women and purchased radio and magazine advertising targeted at that demographic.

The upcoming racial audit may not acknowledge or punish the company for its past bad deeds that are so cringeworthy a Missouri Appellate Court judge branded the company's corporate conduct reprehensible. Conforming with the acceptable standards of the day was the excuse a Johnson & Johnson spokesperson gave when it was made public last month that they funded scientific experiments that injected black prisoners with asbestos the World Health Organization had officially declared was "probably carcinogenic," and then injected them with talc to compare the different reactions to their both minerals. According to MedCityNews, "Bloomberg said that the company also noted that the tests did not violate research standards at the time." Johnson & Johnson told Bloomberg, "We deeply regret the conditions under which these studies were conducted, and in no way do they reflect the values or practices we employ today. As the world's largest healthcare company, our transparent, diligent approach to bioethics is at the heart of all we promise our customers and society." MedCity News notes the interesting angle that J & J's involvement in the human talc experiments may play in upcoming talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits. One law professor, a legal expert that closely follows the talcum powder cancer litigation said that he thinks that the revelation about Johnson & Johnson's funding of human experiments could change the way juries view the corporate health care giant when awarding punitive damage.

Information provided by TalcumPowderCancerLawsuit.com, a website devoted to providing news about talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits, as well as medical research and findings.

More Recent Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuit News:

View all Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit News

No-Cost, No-Obligation Baby Powder Lawsuit Case Review for Persons or Families of Persons Who Developed Ovarian Cancer After a History of Perineal Baby Powder Use

OnderLaw, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The Onder Law Firm has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others. The firm has represented thousands of persons in these and other products liability litigation, including DePuy hip replacement systems, which settled for $2.5 billion and Pradaxa internal bleeding, which settled for $650 million. The Onder Law Firm won over $300 million in four talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits in St. Louis to date and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.

Privacy Notice: This site uses cookies for advertising, analytics and to improve our site services. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. For more information, see our cookie and privacy policy.