The multi-million pound baby powder case

0:00This is The Guardian.

0:08Today, why cancer survivors are going to court over baby powder.

0:26My earliest memory is very, very early. I mean, I remember lying on a bed with my mum leaning over me and using baby powder on me, so I must have been a toddler. It's one of those things which was there all my life. Sue Rosello's memories of her childhood, like for many of us, include talcum powder. It was just always there. It was always called baby powder. and because of that it carried with it overtones of safety, of security, of kindness, of gentleness and all of those wonderful things. Soft, absorbent with that lovely comforting smell, chances are it's been in your life as well. For almost 100 years it's helped stop newborns getting nappy rash.

1:20It's been shaken into swimming hats at local pools, patted onto skin after a warm bath. A bottle of baby powder has been a comforting presence in bathroom cabinets around the world. When I was a child, there was only one baby powder and that was Johnson & Johnson's. Steal a moment to baby yourself with soothing Johnson's baby powder. Johnson & Johnson used images of mothers and babies. It was all lovely and ethereal. So it's very deeply embedded in the psyche that this was a gentle, safe product. You know, it's good for your baby, it's good for you.

2:04But decades later, Sue now believes that inside that bottle, lurking in the soft white baby powder was something far more sinister.

2:19When I was diagnosed, it was really a complete bolt from the blue. In her late 40s, Sue was diagnosed with stage 3 ovarian cancer. She was given a 20 % chance of surviving. It was a very aggressive treatment. It was absolutely exhausting. I mean, all your dignity goes out of the window when you have a gynecological cancer anyway, but that really added a certain something to it. Against the odds, she survived. But now, Sue has become one of thousands of women in England and Wales who believe that their cancers could be linked to baby powder.

3:01Johnson & Johnson vigorously deny the claim that their product, used by millions around the world, has been dangerous all along. But a class action lawsuit that's just been filed in a UK court will force the multi-billion dollar company to defend itself. From The Guardian, I'm Annie Kelly. Today in Focus, the cancer survivors taking on a pharmaceutical giant.

3:32Esther Adley, you're a reporter at The Guardian and you've been following the story of the Johnson and Johnson case. Can you tell me a bit about the company Johnson & Johnson? How big are they? What kind of a presence do they have in the pharmaceutical market? I'm sure most listeners or many listeners will know the company Johnson & Johnson. It's a ubiquitous presence, certainly on British chemists and supermarket shells. It's been something that many, many people have used at home for years and years. And the company is a really massive US pharmaceuticals company, one of the biggest companies on the Fortune 500 list.

4:07And it makes so many things, pharmaceutical products, medical devices, some over the counter medicines as well, and skincare products. But one of its flagship lines, you might say, has been its range of baby products. So Johnson's Baby Oil, Baby Lotion, No More Tears, shampoo, I'm sure they're all familiar things to many listeners, and particularly Johnson's Baby Powder, which is the product that is the subject of this case. Yeah, I mean, I myself, I think I've used all of those products that you just talked about. I even remember sprinkling talcum powder into my baby's nappies right at the beginning.

4:41Talcum powder is, as you said, one of their most famous products. how kind of important is that one product to the company it's a huge product and it's very important to johnson and johnson one thing i didn't realize until i started looking at this story is that it's been making baby powder for more than 100 years since the 1890s and generations of people have used it after a bath after a shower someone said to me on all the all the damp bits and also and this is how it was explicitly marketed to be used on baby's bottoms to prevent nappy rash. And this is one of the reasons why this case is potentially very significant, because were it to be successful, it would have huge implications.

5:22We're talking about already a very large group of people, around 3 ,000 people. They're not in all women, but overwhelmingly women. And these are often middle-aged women who've been using talc all their lives as children, as teenagers, and then potentially as they became parents using it on their own children. And so That's why this case has the potential to feel very personal to the claimants who say that using this product is what caused their cancers or caused the cancers of their loved ones. Of course, important to say Johnson & Johnson completely disputes this. There's two forms of cancer that are being tested in this case, ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, which is a type of cancer that can affect a range of organs, but is commonly a cancer that affects the lungs.

6:08and these papers have now been filed at the High Court in London and they're seeking damages from Johnson & Johnson and this could be one of the largest class actions for a pharmaceutical product in a British court in history. Wow, so the implications for this are huge then? Potentially, if it were to be successful.

6:34And why do the people who've launched this legal action, Why do they think that their cancer was caused by talcum powder? So there's a specialist law firm that has brought this case on behalf of this group of claimants. And they've made some very serious allegations against Johnson & Johnson. They're saying that J &J knew about asbestos contamination. What that means is that talc, which is a form of naturally occurring mineral, is mined from the ground. and they're saying that J &J knew that in that mining process, the product that was produced was contaminated by trace elements of asbestos. And they said that J &J knew this and that they concealed the risk to the public for decades.

7:18And they say that J &J suppressed information that might show it was contaminated with asbestos. They lobbied regulators to let them keep selling it. and they sponsored studies to downplay the dangers of this risk to human health. And so they're saying Johnson & Johnson acted in bad faith to protect their own reputation and their profits. J &J, of course, as we've said before, denies this emphatically. So there's two things really. They're claiming there is asbestos or there could be asbestos in the talcum powder, but also that the company knew this and marketed and sold this product that is marketed specifically also to babies anyway.

7:59That's right, yeah. Some of the claimants argue that it was through kind of patting it on and inhaling sort of little bits of talc over many years that that might have been enough to cause them this lung condition mesothelium. So that's one of the other things that will be tested. What Johnson & Johnson say about that is that their talc was made from what they are calling cosmetic grade talc. They say that's a purer form. It's a higher grade talc and it's produced from ores that do not have asbestos contamination. So they also say that they've consistently been passed by the UK Food Standards Agency and other kind of regulatory authorities.

8:38So that's their response to that. Johnson & Johnson have put out a statement in response to the news that these papers have been filed at the High Court in London. And they say they're very sympathetic to anybody living with cancer and they understand why their families want answers. But what they've said is the safety of Johnson's baby powder is backed by years of testing by independent and leading laboratories, universities and health authorities in the UK and around the world. The high quality cosmetic grade talc that was used in Johnson's baby powder was compliant with any required regulatory standards, did not contain asbestos and does not cause cancer.

9:21And those two differing opinions that talc is contaminated by asbestos and J &J saying their talc wasn't contaminated by asbestos is what this court is going to have to test. But this isn't the first time that Johnson & Johnson has faced legal action over allegations that their talc caused cancer. Johnson and Johnson stopped tanking this week after new court documents claimed the company knew for years its baby powder was tainted with asbestos. It's an ugly headline. You use the word asbestos, you don't want to anywhere near you. Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay more than$400 million in a case tied to one of its most well-known products, baby powder.

10:02It's not the first verdict against the company and this product, but it is the largest and it may not be the last. Johnson & Johnson is being ordered to pay nearly$5 billion in a class. Johnson & Johnson is offering to settle its baby powder lawsuits for nearly$9 billion. That's an increase from the$2 billion originally set aside.

10:26So, Esther, what is the background to all of this? You say that this isn't the first time that they face legal action, but how long has this all been going on? For some time, more than a decade, Johnson & Johnson has faced thousands of claims through various courts in the United States alleging similar things. And they have been heard at different courts, different state level courts often across the US, where obviously there's a very different legal system to England and Wales. In some cases, Johnson & Johnson have been ordered by juries to pay very large payouts, hundreds of millions of dollars in some cases.

11:06In some cases, they have successfully appealed and those rulings have been overturned on appeal. And in other times, Johnson & Johnson has offered many billions of dollars to settle claims. But in all of these cases, the company continues to deny any liability. It always says that its products do not cause cancer. So can you tell me about a recent case? Yes, there's a case very recently, actually. Topping your money news, a California jury has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay$966 million in its latest talcum powder lawsuit. It comes after the company was found liable. A jury in Los Angeles ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay$966 million to the family of a woman aged 88, May Moore, who died in 2021 from mesothelioma.

11:57And that jury said the company was liable and ordered to pay almost a billion dollars to the family of this woman. J &J have said that's egregious and unconstitutional. That's what they described with the ruling, and they're appealing that. But that gives you a sense of the scale of some of these potential judgments against them. Wow. So they've had to pay out almost a billion dollars in one case. Johnson & Johnson are still saying there's no asbestos in their talcum powder and that there's no link to cancer. Are they still continuing to sell it? They do still sell baby powder. It's not quite the same as it was.

12:36The company says it was always safe, but they have changed what it's made of. Johnson & Johnson says it is getting ready to clean up its baby powder. Starting next year, the company will remove the talc from its product all over the world. While the company says the baby powder is... It's not made of talc anymore. It's not made of this mineral that was mined from the ground. And baby powder is now made of cornstarch. That's been the case globally since 2023 in the UK included. And it already done that in the US and in Canada.

13:11Coming up, could this be the biggest product liability case in British history?

13:29Sue, you were diagnosed with ovarian cancer at just 48 years old. Can you tell me what that was like? I remember a nurse, a clinical nurse specialist in ovarian cancer sat on the edge of the bed later that day and she said, you know, she patted me on the hand, she said, never mind, some women do survive. Oh gosh, I mean how was it then kind of digesting that news and sharing that news with your husband? Well my husband was there when the oncologist gave us the bad news. So we both had to swallow it together. And after she left, we just looked at each other and had a bit of a cry. And I'm quite a bolshie person.

14:14I very quickly moved into a no refusal mode. I'm not going to let this beat me. And when did you start to think that talcum powder might be involved? When I was diagnosed, I made contact online with what turned out to be a very large and very closely knit community of other women with ovarian cancer. And it was in that group that became aware of the class action suit in the US. And in the absence of any explanation, when I learned of the class action suits against Johnson & Johnson in the States, it was as if a light bulb went off. I was immediately convinced that given my lifelong usage of baby powder, that this was likely to be a significant contributory cause.

15:09And can you tell me how you went from that moment to deciding to come together with other claimants, many of them women, to launch this action against Johnson & Johnson? I kept my eyes open from that point onwards to see whether any kind of action was going to be launched in the UK. I saw some press coverage announcing that there would be a UK-based high court claim and contacted KP Law, the legal firm which is bringing the class action lawsuit. At the time, they were actively engaging with as many women as they could who had experienced ovarian cancer to find out if any of them were likely to be interested to join this claim.

15:56And what made you decide that it was important for you to join this legal action? In the winter of 2012, when I was undergoing my treatment, I met up with a group of 25 women for dinner in London. And we had an amazing time. We were all in various states of ill health and treatment and baldness. That was fun. But it was the most wonderful evening. By the time this class action suit was launched in the UK, there are only about eight of us left. So I lost a lot of good friends along the way. It's a very unforgiving disease. It does claim a lot of lives. I'm doing it for them because I'm sure that for some of them, the cause was similarly likely to be talcum powder.

16:53And J &J have vigorously insisted all of their products comply with all regulations, that they've denied that there are any traces of asbestos in their products. Their products do not cause cancer. What's your response to that? The law firm has amassed an extraordinary stack of evidence, which seems to indicate that the knowledge of the possible link between ovarian cancer and the baby powder goes back a very long way. They also have suggested that there is evidence that people internally were aware of the issue and deliberately tried to downplay it, prevent it from becoming public knowledge. There is a huge stack of internal documentation from Johnson & Johnson, which the lawyers are going through, have gone through with a fine tooth comb, and I believe this is the basis for the claim.

17:57the fact that they knew. I'm not going into it with any expectations, but I am going into it with real conviction that there is a case to answer here.

18:16Esther, at this point, I think it's worth reading out something that Johnson & Johnson have said to us in response to the claims about a cover-up. And they said,

18:37So let's look at this UK case that's just been launched. How similar is this case to the other cases you've already talked about being played out in the US? Certainly, Johnson & Johnson would say there's no read-across from the UK. You might say they would say that, would they? But there are very important differences. And the main one of those would be that in the US, many of these cases have been heard in front of a jury. That is just not how it works in the British High Court, in the England and Wales High Court, which sits in London. Here it would be heard in front of an expert judge. And we can expect it to be a very technical, scientific case.

19:13So it's very unclear how long that could take, but we obviously have a huge number of claimants, each with an individual story and some very, very detailed and contested science. And it could potentially take months and years for this to come to a judgment. And what's at stake for Johnson & Johnson if they lose this case? Well, the lawyers who've brought this case have estimated that the damages they're seeking could amount to hundreds of millions of pounds. in Britain. And they say it could be the largest product liability case in British history. That doesn't account, of course, for any reputational damage that might accrue to Johnson & Johnson if this were to be the case.

19:55And of course, this is 3 ,500 claimants, but there are many, many more people who will have used this product over the years. So the stakes are pretty high. Potentially, yes. The stakes are very high.

20:14You seem like a person that is very determined and is very clear about what it is that you want to do with your own life and be in control of your own recovery. I was just wondering what you think is next for you and how a successful outcome to this case, what that might mean for you. I hit 60 this year and it's something that I, by all rights, should never have made. I should never have even made it to 50 based on my diagnosis. It was unlikely. I only had a 20 % chance at the time of surviving for five years, according to the statistics. It has improved a little since then. So I am now looking at the next however long of my life.

21:03I may or may not ever see the conclusion of this. It could drag on into appeal after appeal after appeal. that doesn't mean that it's not important to pursue it. We'll just have to see what comes out of the other end. Sue, thank you so much for talking to me. I know it's not easy to go back and recount these painful moments. I really, really appreciate it. You're welcome.

21:33That was Sue Rosello and Esther Adley. My thanks again to them. You can follow all of Esther's reporting on this case at theguardian.com. And if you're after something to listen to next, I'd like to recommend a new mini-series from our sister podcast, Science Weekly, A Scottish Tea Mystery. Ten years ago, while writing a quirky story about tea, science correspondent Nicola Davis met Tam O 'Brien, a dapper entrepreneur who was selling the dream of a new Scottish tea industry. His award-winning homegrown teas were being sold in some of the fanciest hotels and shops in the UK. And he was helping others set up their own plantations.

22:13But the whole thing left a very strange taste in her mouth. Now she finally knows why. To find episode one, just search Science Weekly wherever you're listening to this. Your host has been me, Annie Kelly. The producers have been Tom Glasser and Eleanor Biggs. The sound design is by Ross Burns. And the executive producer is Courtney Youssef. We'll be back again tomorrow

22:47This is The Guardian