-
J&J Ceases Sale of Talc-based Baby Powder in the U.S. and Canada
Because of all the ‘litigation advertising’ and declining sales.
So now only the crappy awful useless cornstarch garbage powder will be available. -
8 Replies
-
Well, they’ve only stopped selling in US & Canada. They’ll sell it other places around the world.
Fearmongers win!
Incidentally, I don’t personally particularly care much about talc. I don’t use it so if they stop selling baby powder it won’t have much impact on me.
However, it’s very concerning that a specific ingredient is tied to causing cancer when the weight of the scientific evidence doesn’t support this claim. Look out ethoxylated ingredients, silicones, and pretty much all preservatives. Fun times ahead for formulators.
-
Import from Italy ‘talco non talco’… wait, if you’re going to import from Italy, you could as well import talc…Suppose the market wasn’t that great to begin with or they wouldn’t discontinue a product just because of bad publicity. Or they suspect that maybe, just maybe, their proof of innocuousness ain’t bulletproof.Here in Switzerland, you can only find one last wound powder (anthroposophical brand), everything else has been, well, not banned but err… disencouraged. For one, dry wound care is obsolete and indications point to mineral powders growing into skin may cause issues (cancer at the worst) a few decades later. Baby powder is still a thing but sales are declining from what I see. -
I think a big motivator for them getting out now is because of this…
Their primary supplier filed for bankruptcy and is selling their talc mines.
Add to that slowed sales and the unending lawsuits, I can see why a big Pharma company like J&J would cut and run. -
So they DID sell asbestos. Here in Europe, we got pamphlets from J&J stating that they could prove that no asbestos was present in their products and consumers are safe to use their powders.Guess I did miss something…
-
@Pharma - what makes you say they sold asbestos?
Settling a lawsuit doesn’t prove anything about the facts & I think they would still claim they didn’t sell asbestos.
-
‘Merica: The country of class-action lawsuits for bogus claims and people getting rich for spilling obviously hot coffee on obviously not heat-resistant thighs.Europe: Big pharma always wins.Seriously, I honestly haven’t heard that such a big corp is even bending the knee unless people died. Settling a lawsuit is being guilty but walk free. Not being guilty and staying that way is why they have layers on retainer, good layers, and they have insurances for the harder cases too. Now why would they settle if they didn’t do sell poison or could get a marketing benefit out of it? Or do I understand something wrong here?
-
In the US, big corps settle all the time. Whether they are guilty or not doesn’t play much of a factor. Here settling a lawsuit just means that it is more financially beneficial than going to trial. Companies do a calculation and typically take the less expensive route. You can either…
1. Take a gamble on the outcome of a trial - you can pay zero (except for big lawyer fees) or pay a big settlement (plus lawyer fees).
In the US, trials are settled by juries. Juries are made up of average citizens who in my view are particularly gullible. (Especially since somewhere around 2016). The average US citizen also has an anti-corporation attitude so when they get a chance to stick it to the big guys like on a jury, they often rule for the plaintiff (little guy).2. Settle and cut your losses - This option gives you a guaranteed outcome. You’ll have to pay some money but when added all together with lawyer fees, this option usually comes out as the cheapest. You also don’t have to admit to any wrong doing.
Dow Corning & others famously settled a lawsuit about silicon breast implants in which plaintiffs claimed it caused autoimmune disease. The science did not support that conclusion but over 12,000 plaintiff sued anyway. The company filed bankruptcy and paid over $4.75 billion to make the case go away. Over the years, when more published science came in the consensus was that “silicon implants did not cause autoimmune disease.” But the company already settled so the truth didn’t matter to the people involved in the court case.
Bottom line, in the US anyway, settled court case does not equal guilty plea. -
Thanks for the explanation!Wow… your system is weird, not just on TV.
Log in to reply.
