Using Talcum Powder Around Genitals Linked to Ovarian Cancer

Using Talcum Powder Around Genitals Linked to Ovarian Cancer

Introduction

Johnson & Johnson is grappling with over 50,000 lawsuits related to its Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower products, which are alleged to have caused ovarian cancer in women who used the talc-based powders around their genitals.

Recently, a significant new study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has added weight to these claims, finding that the use of genital talcum powder is associated with a 17% increased risk of ovarian cancer. The study, however, did not find any connection between talcum powder use and uterine or breast cancer.

Previous studies have suggested a link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer, but questions about the quality of the data have prevented a definitive conclusion. Despite the growing body of evidence, Johnson & Johnson has been fighting these lawsuits for nearly a decade. The company has faced several large damage awards from juries who found that Johnson & Johnson either knew or should have known about the risks of talcum powder but continued to market it to adult women without warning them.

Instead of settling out of court, Johnson & Johnson has tried to handle the litigation through the U.S. bankruptcy system. The company transferred all its liability to a subsidiary, which then declared bankruptcy to seek protection. This strategy has been rejected twice by the courts, but Johnson & Johnson recently proposed a new $6.5 billion settlement offer, which the plaintiffs’ lawyers have rejected.

The NIH study reviewed data from The Sister Study, which included 50,884 women who had sisters with breast cancer. The study, conducted between 2003 and 2009, investigated the association between the use of genital talcum powder and the incidence of ovarian cancer, as well as breast and uterine cancers. Among the participants, 41-65% douched, and 35-56% used genital talc. The researchers found a positive association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer, indicating a 17% increase in risk. While there was also a small association noted between douching and ovarian cancer, neither practice was linked to an increased risk of breast or uterine cancers.

The study's findings support prior research published in medical journals. For instance, a 2019 study in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine found talc in the tissue of nine out of ten ovarian cancer patients who had used Johnson & Johnson products. Another study from the same year reported a statistically significant 9% increased risk of ovarian cancer among talcum powder users. Despite this, Johnson & Johnson has consistently disputed these findings, asserting that their talc-based products do not cause ovarian cancer.

Due to the large number of similar cases, pretrial proceedings for the talcum powder litigation were centralized in 2016 under a U.S. District Judge in New Jersey. However, delays ensued when Johnson & Johnson's bankruptcy attempts slowed the process, and the judge overseeing the case retired. A new judge has since taken over, and preparations for bellwether trials are underway.

These bellwether trials, set to begin on December 30, 2024, aim to establish how juries might respond to evidence and influence potential settlement values. Earlier this year, the new judge allowed Johnson & Johnson to hold Daubert hearings to challenge the admissibility of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, despite a previous judge’s decision to allow the testimonies. The plaintiffs requested reconsideration, but the judge upheld the ruling on April 30, 2024, and issued an amended scheduling order for the first trial.

Johnson & Johnson then sought to delay the litigation further by requesting extensions for defense expert deadlines. However, the judge issued a text order on May 20, 2024, rejecting this request, emphasizing adherence to the established schedule. The judge reminded the parties that no extensions for Daubert or dispositive motion schedules would be entertained.

The outcomes of these bellwether trials, while not directly binding on other cases, are expected to significantly influence the settlement negotiations. If juries continue to award substantial damages, it could pressure Johnson & Johnson to agree to higher settlements to avoid the time and expense of individual trials. This new NIH study adds to the mounting evidence and is likely to bolster the plaintiffs’ claims as they prepare for these pivotal trials.