A lady who says that asbestos in Johnson Johnson products caused her incorrigible cancer was awarded $29 million by a California jury on Wednesday.
The California Superior Court in Oakland concluded that a company’s baby powder was a “substantial contributing factor” to her mesothelioma, a singular and assertive cancer caused by a inhalation of asbestos.
The woman, Terry Leavitt, told a jury that she used a baby powder and another, now dropped product with talc, Shower to Shower, via a 60s and 70s, according to Reuters. She was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017. After 9 weeks of testimony from Leavitt and other medical experts, a jury sided with her.
This lawsuit is one of over 13,000 that Johnson Johnson is now confronting over a talc baby powder. There are some-more than a dozen cases scheduled for 2019 alone.
The association pronounced in a statement, common with PEOPLE, that they devise to interest a ruling.
“We will pursue an interest since Johnson’s Baby Powder does not enclose asbestos or means cancer. We honour a authorised routine and echo that jury verdicts are not medical, systematic or regulatory conclusions about a product. Decades of tests by independent, non-litigation driven experts and institutions regularly endorse that Johnson’s Baby Powder does not enclose asbestos or means cancer. We trust these issues will aver a annulment on appeal.”
Leavitt’s counsel pronounced that a jury’s preference was serve explanation that a powder is unsafe.
“Yet another jury has deserted JJ’s dubious claims that a talc was giveaway of asbestos,” pronounced Moshe Maimon, a counsel for Leavitt, in a matter on Wednesday. “The inner JJ papers that a jury saw, once some-more laid unclothed a intolerable law of decades of cover-up, dishonesty and dissimulation by JJ.”
Reuters examined decades of inner association and justice documents, and dynamic that Johnson Johnson had been wakeful from 1971 to a early 2000s that a product spasmodic contained small amounts of asbestos, though never common that information outward of a company.
RELATED VIDEO: Woman Awarded $417 Million After Claiming Johnson Johnson Baby Powder Gave Her Cancer
A Mount Sinai researcher wrote in a association minute in 1971 that he had rescued a “relatively small” volume of asbestos in a baby powder. And in 1973, when a FDA deliberate a order that required all cosmetics to enclose no some-more than .01 percent asbestos, a scientist wrote in an inner note, “we might have problems,” a news alleged.
However, a Reuters news pronounced that many contrast found that there was no participation of asbestos in a company’s products.
Johnson Johnson vehemently denied these allegations and told PEOPLE that a news was “an absurd swindling theory.” They pronounced their baby powder “is protected and asbestos-free.”
“Studies of some-more than 100,000 group and women uncover that talc does not means cancer or asbestos-related disease. Thousands of eccentric tests by regulators and a world’s heading labs infer a baby powder has never contained asbestos,” a matter said.
The cases opposite Johnson Johnson over purported asbestos traces have been divided so distant — 3 cases went to a plaintiffs, 3 to a association and 5 finished with a separate jury.