fbpx

Asbestos Find Causes Retailers to Pull Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder

Major retailers including Walmart, CVS and Rite Aid have pulled 22-ounce bottles of Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder after the FDA found traces of asbestos in a recently-tested bottle.

The presence of asbestos in Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder prompted Johnson & Johnson to initiate a voluntary recall on approximately 33,000 bottles of the talcum powder.

In recent years, Johnson & Johnson has fought lawsuits filed by people who allege that baby powder use led to their mesothelioma, a very rare cancer that is only caused by asbestos. Talcum powder and asbestos co-exist in the natural geologic formations, and plaintiff’s attorneys allege that asbestos has been present in talcum powder products such as Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder for decades, and that the company has privately fretted about it.

A couple weeks before the announcement that the FDA had found asbestos in Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder, CEO Alex Gorsky said in a taped deposition that the company “unequivocally” believes its talcum powder products do not contain asbestos. Plaintiffs’ attorneys allege that the company engaged in a concerted effort to cover up the presence of asbestos. So far, jury results have been mixed.

Talcum powder products have come under increased scrutiny. In October, a 33-patient case study was published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. It provided support to the contention that exposure to asbestos-tainted talcum powder can cause malignant mesothelioma, the rare and deadly asbestos cancer that affects tissues lining internal organs such as the lungs, intestines, testicles and heart.

The authors of the study profiled the cases of six individuals with mesothelioma, who underwent tissue testing that showed fibers consistent with the type of asbestos found in cosmetic talc, but not in other asbestos products like building supplies and insulation. Some of these people used products containing talcum powder daily for decades.

In addition to the legal battle over whether Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder causes mesothelioma, the company is also fighting lawsuits from women who allege that their use of talcum powder led to ovarian cancer.

RPWB represents talcum powder users nationwide who have developed mesothelioma or ovarian cancer from using Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower products. Give us a call or submit a message on this page to begin your free, no obligation case review.

Our Experienced Lawyers

How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

    Contact Us

    Case Types

    Related Posts

    First New Mesothelioma Treatment in 15 Years Approved By FDA

    By Ken Wilson

    It’s not often that we get to report new treatments for mesothelioma.

    While we do see a lot of clinical trials, the standard treatment plan for malignant pleural mesothelioma has been relatively unchanged for many years. Most patients go through surgery (if they are able to), radiation and chemotherapy.

    It can be an aggressive treatment plan. In many instances, doctors diagnose mesothelioma when patients are in the late stages, which means the treatment is challenging because the cancer has spread.

    That’s why recent news of the FDA approving the first new treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma in 15 years is so encouraging.

    In May 2019, the FDA approved utilizing Tumor Treating Fields for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma in combination with chemotherapy. The approved device is called the NovoTTF-100L System (manufactured by Novocure). It is a non-invasive method that works by delivering electric fields tuned to specific frequencies that disrupt solid tumor cell division. In other words, it hinders mesothelioma tumors from growing and spreading.

    The treatment is approved for mesothelioma patients who are not candidates for surgery. Only 10 to 20 percent of patients with pleural mesothelioma are candidates for surgery. The remaining 80 percent of patients typically receive palliative care to improve their quality of life. The use of Tumor Treating Fields is a promising development for those who cannot have surgery to remove the tumors as it may extend their lives and improve treatment outcomes. It was approved under the agency’s Humanitarian Device Exemption pathway, which was created to encourage the innovation of therapies for underserved patients with rare diseases.

    The FDA’s approval for the use of Tumor Treating Fields was based on a trial that included 80 pleural mesothelioma patients. Overall, the patients lived an average of 18.1 months, including 21.2 months for patients with epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma and 12.1 months for those with non-epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma.

    That might not seem like a long time, but for late-stage pleural mesothelioma patients who are not candidates for surgery, it can mean more time spent with their loved ones, which is priceless.

    As an attorney who has helped mesothelioma patients for over 30 years, the absolute worst part of my practice is seeing people who worked hard for the entire careers have their golden years cut short. Anything that can help extend the amount of time they have with loved ones and diminish their suffering is very positive news and should be celebrated as such.

    People who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma and their loved ones should discuss all treatment options with their oncologist in order to make an informed decision that is in the best interest of the mesothelioma patient.

    Let’s all hope that we continue to see more new treatments for mesothelioma in the years to come.

    Ken Wilson has devoted his career to helping mesothelioma victims. He represents asbestos cancer patients nationwide from his office in Aiken, South Carolina. Wilson is on the Best Lawyers in America list for Product Liability Litigation (Plaintiff). RPWB lawyers were among the first in the country to hold asbestos manufacturers liable for causing mesothelioma. To learn more about our 40-year history helping asbestos victims, please click here. You may contact us at 1-866-594-8765 or use the form on this page to begin a free, no obligation case review.

    Our Experienced Lawyers

    How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

      Contact Us

      Case Types

      Related Posts

      When Personal Vaporizers Explode: An Entire Industry Designed Around the Wrong Battery

      By Chris Moore

      Since the mid-2000s, we have become more reliant on lithium-ion batteries and the devices they power.  The batteries are extremely useful and serve an important function. Just a decade ago, it would have been inconceivable for a laptop computer or a smartphone to be used for an entire day on just one charge.

      This revolutionary technology is changing the way we live. But with such an intense energy source, the batteries also carry great risk if not handled and used properly. When lithium-ion batteries fail, the results can be catastrophic. The batteries can catch fire and explode, sometimes causing serious personal injury (think: second or third-degree burns) and property damage.

      The seriousness of that risk has gained recent attention in the world of e-cigarettes and personal vaporizers, also known as ‘mods’ or ‘vapes.’ Many of these devices require the use of a particular kind of lithium-ion battery called an 18650 (referring to its size, 18mm by 65mm), a lithium-ion battery that is slightly bigger than the AA battery.

      18650 lithium-ion batteries are manufactured by major corporations like Samsung, LG, Sony and Panasonic as well as a host of companies in China that produce batteries of varying degrees of quality. These batteries, and even similar, counterfeit batteries, are being sold throughout the world, including online.

      18650 lithium-ion batteries

       

      The problem is that 18650 lithium-ion batteries are designed to be used by manufacturers putting together battery packs for devices like power drills, cordless vacuum cleaners, or landscaping equipment. In those power packs, the individual 18650 batteries are packaged together with internal circuit protection and encased in thick rubber or plastic. Often both the charger and the application incorporate safety features to keep the battery within a safe operating or charging level. In order to prevent catastrophic failure, the charger keeps the batteries from being overcharged, and the device itself shuts off if the batteries are overheating due to a short circuit.

      Because most e-cigarettes and vaporizers that use 18650 batteries do not have such safety features, people who use them are putting themselves at risk every time they take a puff. 18650 lithium-ion batteries are generally not meant to be sold direct to consumers for use in mods, which often lack safety mechanisms to prevent the battery from exploding.  Of course, most people would never realize this when they find the batteries readily available in vape stores and online. And many in the retail business of the vape industry are ignorant of this danger as well.

      Absent safety circuitry in both the charger and the device, there is nothing to stop an individual 18650 battery from exploding. Sometimes the battery explodes while in use, but often they explode when being carried around in a person’s pocket. A thin plastic wrap is all that prevents the metal casing of an 18650 lithium-ion battery from being directly exposed to its outside environment. People who vape often will carry a spare, fully-charged battery with them to use during a long workday. Through natural wear and tear, the plastic wrap easily rips. It is only a matter of time before both terminals of the battery come into contact with something metal like a set of keys. When both terminals come into contact with the metal object, the battery rapidly heats up and explodes. Unfortunately, we regularly see people injured from this exact scenario.

      I have represented people throughout the country who have been seriously injured by the batteries used in many mods and vapes. The law allows us to seek compensation from all parts of the 18650 lithium-ion battery supply chain, including manufacturers, distributors and retailers.

      Of course, I hope that you will never need to use my services. If you do choose to vape, please make sure you use a device that does not use an 18650 lithium-ion battery.  Pick a device that has an internal battery or that has safety features that will prevent the battery from shorting.

      Chris Moore is a RPWB attorney who handles many product liability and personal injury cases throughout the country. He is a 2019 Super Lawyers Rising Star. In addition to working on personal vaporizer explosion cases, he has successfully litigated personal injury and property damage cases involving devices like cell phones, laptops and the battery packs used for remote-controlled cars, scooters and hover boards. To learn more about our lithium-ion battery explosion practice area, please click here. If you would like us to take a look at your case, please fill out the form on this page or give us a call.

      Our Experienced Lawyers

      How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

        Contact Us

        Case Types

        Related Posts

        RPWB Named To Leadership of 3M Combat Arms Ear Plug MDL

        RPWB member attorney Elizabeth Middleton Burke was named to the leadership of the 3M Combat Arms Ear Plug multidistrict litigation. Federal lawsuits filed against 3M for producing faulty military ear plugs have been consolidated in the Northern District of Florida.

        Burke was named as co-chair of the Plaintiff Steering Committee, which builds the national product liability case and manages the litigation on behalf of the thousands of current and former military personnel who have filed federal lawsuits. She and other RPWB attorneys represent hundreds of veterans and active duty service members throughout the United States.

        The dual-ended 3M Combat Arms Ear Plugs (version 2) were standard issued equipment for service members between 2003 and 2015. This included those who were deployed to combat zones, such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

        3M’s Combat Arms ear plugs were supposed to provide two levels of ear protection: one side to block all noise and the other to protect the eardrums from gunfire and explosions while still allowing military personnel to communicate freely.

        However, design flaws and insufficient testing resulted in the failure of the dual-ended Combat Arms Ear Plugs (version 2) to protect service members’ ears. This has resulted in high incidences of tinnitus (ringing or buzzing of the ears) as well as partial or full hearing loss.

        A whistleblower came forward to the federal government to indicate that the design flaw had been known as early as 2000. The manufacturer had moved forward with selling the ear plugs to the military despite knowing they were flawed. In 2018, 3M settled with the federal government.

        Now, individual service members are seeking justice and compensation from 3M for their hearing loss and tinnitus. Current or former military personnel who suffer from hearing problems should seek immediate advice from an experienced attorney as statutes of limitation dictate the amount of time they have to file a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the Combat Arms Ear Plugs.

        To learn more about our work to help service members who continue to suffer from hearing problems as a result of these faulty ear plugs, please click here or give us a call at 1-888-855-9481. You may start a free, no obligation case review by filling out the form below.

        Learn More About Military Ear Plug Lawsuits

        Our Experienced Lawyers

        How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

          Contact Us

          Case Types

          Related Posts

          Supreme Court ruling will help asbestos victims

          By Dave Butler

          The United States Supreme Court delivered an unexpectedly good opinion for asbestos victims last week.

          For years, equipment makers (including those who make pumps, valves, turbines and boilers) have argued that they only make and sell metal products and cannot be held responsible for asbestos products made by third parties and later applied to their equipment (e.g. gaskets, insulation, etc.). This argument is known as the bare metal defense. As an asbestos attorney, this argument is particularly maddening because these companies know that the equipment they manufactured required asbestos to operate properly.

          However, in Air & Liquid Systems Corp. et al v. Devries, the Supreme Court ruled that in a maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when:

          • its product requires the incorporation of a part,
          • the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that the integrated product is likely to be dangerous for its intended uses, and
          • the manufacturer has no reason to believe that the product’s users will realize that danger.

          The opinion – written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh along with Justices Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan – will particularly help Navy veterans and others who developed mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure at sea. We also suspect the opinion may carry some weight on dry land as well.

          To read the full opinion click here.

          Dave Butler, who has worked as an asbestos attorney since 1993, helps people diagnosed with mesothelioma throughout the United States. For more information about our asbestos and mesothelioma work, please click here or fill out the contact form on this page.

          Our Experienced Lawyers

          How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

            Contact Us

            Case Types

            Related Posts

            RPWB is a 2019 U.S. News Best Law Firm

            CHARLESTON, S.C. – Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook & Brickman was named a 2019 Best Law Firm by U.S. News & World Report, recognizing the plaintiff firm for its work on mass torts and class actions, product liability, securities, healthcare law, medical malpractice and personal injury lawsuits.

            With 16 lawyers listed on the underlying Best Lawyers in America list, RPWB was the top-listed plaintiff law firm in the country for its work on mass torts and class actions. RPWB was the top-listed plaintiff law firm in South Carolina for mass torts, personal injury and product liability.

            Four RPWB attorneys were new to the list: Brady Thomas, Chris Tuck, Bobby Wood and Ken Wilson. RPWB founding member Ed Westbrook was named Lawyer of the Year for class actions and mass torts in the Charleston-area.

            Here are the RPWB attorneys named to the 2019 Best Lawyers list:

            Michael Brickman
            Litigation – Securities
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            Elizabeth Middleton Burke
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            David Butler
            Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Blair Hahn
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Greg Lofstead
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Christiaan Marcum
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Kim Keevers Palmer
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            Charles Patrick
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Terry Richardson
            Business Litigation
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs
            Railroad Law

            Tom Rogers
            Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs
            Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Hoyt Rowell
            Health Care Law
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            Brady Thomas
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs
            Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Chris Tuck
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            Ed Westbrook
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            Ken Wilson
            Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs

            Bobby Wood
            Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Plaintiffs

            About RPWB

            RPWB was formed in 2002 as a collective of talented legal minds who focus on complex litigation throughout the United States. The firm is well-respected for its work on mass torts and product liability cases, including mesothelioma lawsuits and pharmaceutical litigation. RPWB attorneys regularly hold leadership positions on class actions and other mass torts across the nation.

            RPWB founding member Terry Richardson was among the first attorneys in the nation to successfully hold asbestos manufacturers liable for causing mesothelioma cancer. Several attorneys at the firm played pivotal roles in the fight against tobacco companies in the 1990s that led to the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. Some of those same attorneys are currently assisting six Canadian provinces seeking to recoup public healthcare spending on smoking-related illnesses.

            In addition to national litigation, RPWB also represents individual people in many practice areas, including: catastrophic personal injury, truck accidents, railroad accidents, construction defects, medical malpractice, mesothelioma and other occupational lung disease, whistleblower & qui tam, nursing home abuse, pharmaceutical drugs and medical device cases.

            Our Experienced Lawyers

            How can we help? Fill out the form for a free case review.

              Contact Us

              Case Types

              Related Posts