Johnson & Johnson Proposes $6.5 Billion Settlement Over Talc-Related Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits

New Jersey, United States United States of America
Company has prevailed in 95% of ovarian cases tried to date, including every case tried over last six years, but some large verdicts awarded to plaintiffs.
Company maintains products are safe and denies presence of asbestos in talc.
Johnson & Johnson discontinued sales of baby powder in North America in 2020, worldwide in 2023, but continues to sell cornstarch-based formula.
Johnson & Johnson proposes $6.5 billion settlement over 25 years to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging talc-based baby powder caused ovarian cancer.
Settlement allows resolution of all current and future ovarian cancer claims against Johnson & Johnson's products.
Settlement covers about 99.75% of pending talc lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates in US.
Johnson & Johnson Proposes $6.5 Billion Settlement Over Talc-Related Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits

Johnson & Johnson, a leading healthcare company, has proposed a new settlement worth $6.5 billion over 25 years to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging that its talc-based baby powder caused ovarian cancer. The company maintains that its products are safe and do not contain asbestos, but courts have rejected two previous attempts to resolve the lawsuits through bankruptcy filings.

The proposed settlement would cover about 99.75% of the pending talc lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates in the US. The company discontinued sales of its baby powder in North America in 2020 and worldwide in 2023, but continues to sell a cornstarch-based formula.

The settlement comes as Johnson & Johnson faces over 34,000 lawsuits linking its baby powder to ovarian cancer and other illnesses. Talc is a naturally occurring mineral that can appear alongside asbestos in mines, and investigations have found that Johnson & Johnson worried about the presence of asbestos in its talc for decades but worked to keep the information from the public.

The deal would allow Johnson & Johnson to resolve all current and future ovarian cancer claims against its products. The company has prevailed in 95% of ovarian cases tried to date, including every case tried over the last six years. However, some large verdicts have been awarded to plaintiffs, including a $2.12bn award in favor of 22 women who blamed their ovarian cancer on asbestos in Johnson & Johnson talc.

Johnson & Johnson maintains that its products do not cause cancer or contain asbestos, but the lawsuits allege otherwise. The company has recorded an incremental charge of $2.7bn in the first quarter of 2024 to account for recent talc-related settlements.

The proposed settlement would be a significant step towards resolving these long-standing lawsuits, but it remains to be seen whether it will receive the necessary approvals from claimants and courts. The company continues to defend itself against the remaining lawsuits while trying to gather votes on the settlement.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

90%

Doubts
  • Are all pending talc lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates included in the settlement?
  • Is it confirmed that Johnson & Johnson's talc-based baby powder directly causes ovarian cancer?

Sources

82%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Johnson & Johnson proposes $6.5bn settlement of talc cancer lawsuits

theguardian.com Article URL: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/13/ pakistan-·coalition-·agrees-to-form-government Wednesday, 01 May 2024 12:25
  • Unique Points
    • Johnson & Johnson (J&J) proposed a $6.475 billion settlement for tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging its baby powder and other talcum-powder products were contaminated with asbestos and caused ovarian cancer.
    • The proposed settlement would allow J&J to resolve the lawsuits through a third bankruptcy filing of a subsidiary company if 75% of claimants approve the deal.
    • Johnson & Johnson maintains that its products don’t cause cancer or contain asbestos, but calls the cases against it ’meritless litigation’.
  • Accuracy
    • Johnson & Johnson proposes a $6.5 billion settlement offer for tens of thousands of claims related to its talcum powder products causing ovarian cancer and mesothelioma.
    • The company maintains that its baby powder and other talc products don’t cause cancer or contain asbestos, but courts have rejected two previous attempts to resolve the lawsuits through bankruptcy.
    • Johnson & Johnson faces over 34,000 lawsuits linking its baby powder to ovarian cancer and other illnesses.
  • Deception (30%)
    The article does not explicitly make false claims or omit important details, but it does present the settlement as a resolution for all talc-related lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson without disclosing that the company continues to deny any wrongdoing. This can be misleading to readers who are not aware of the ongoing legal battle and potential future lawsuits. Additionally, while the article mentions previous bankruptcy attempts, it does not disclose that J&J's settlement with plaintiffs over mesothelioma cases included a non-disclosure agreement that prevented them from pursuing separate lawsuits for ovarian cancer. This is an example of selective reporting.
    • Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is moving forward with a $6.475bn proposed settlement...
    • The deal would allow J&J to resolve the lawsuits...
    • While the company heralded the benefits of the proposed plan, it also asserted that the cases against it are
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The author makes an appeal to authority when stating that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has prevailed in 95% of ovarian cases tried to date and every ovarian case tried over the last six years. This is a fallacious argument as it does not account for the possibility of bias in the selection of cases that went to trial or other factors that may have influenced the outcome.
    • ]The company said it had prevailed in 95% of ovarian cases tried to date, including every ovarian case tried over the last six years.[
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

85%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Johnson & Johnson Proposes $6.5 Billion in New Talc Settlement Offer

The Name Of The NZ Prefix. I PWA NZI.P.Was Dropped. J. Edward Wednesday, 01 May 2024 16:30
  • Unique Points
    • Johnson & Johnson proposes a $6.5 billion settlement offer for tens of thousands of claims related to its talcum powder products causing ovarian cancer and mesothelioma.
    • The new deal will try to use an element of the bankruptcy system to settle the claims, similar to the previous two efforts.
  • Accuracy
    • Approximately 99% of the talc-related lawsuits filed against J&J involve ovarian cancer claims.
    • Johnson & Johnson maintains that its baby powder and other talc products don't cause cancer or contain asbestos.
  • Deception (50%)
    The author makes editorializing statements and uses selective reporting in this article. He states that 'Johnson & Johnson has been trying to end a more than a decade-long legal saga over its liability over baby powder' without providing any context as to the merits of the claims against the company or why it has been ongoing for so long. He also quotes Lindsey Simon making an opinionated statement about bankruptcy law and its benefits, which is not directly related to the article's topic. The author also selectively reports that 'Judges have rejected the two previous attempts' without mentioning why or on what grounds they were rejected.
    • Judges have rejected the two previous attempts
    • The ability of bankruptcy law to force that 25 percent to accept a deal impacting their rights – current and future claimants – that’s strong medicine.
    • The company has been trying to end a more than a decade-long legal saga over its liability over baby powder
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

80%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Johnson & Johnson proposes to pay $6.5B to settle talc ovarian cancer lawsuits in US

Fox Business Network Daniella Genovese Wednesday, 01 May 2024 17:54
  • Unique Points
    • Johnson & Johnson proposed a plan to pay nearly $6.5 billion to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits claiming its cosmetic talc-based powder causes cancer.
    • The settlement would cover about 99.75% of the pending talc lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates in the US.
    • Johnson & Johnson maintains that its baby powder and other talc products don't cause cancer or contain asbestos, but courts have rejected two previous attempts to resolve the lawsuits through bankruptcy.
    • As of July 2023, Johnson & Johnson was facing over 34,000 lawsuits linking its baby powder to ovarian cancer and other illnesses.
  • Accuracy
    • ,
  • Deception (30%)
    The author makes editorializing statements by stating that the plaintiffs' evidence is 'stronger than ever' and J&J's deceptive conduct to hide carcinogens in talcum powder has become clearer over time. The article also implies that the FDA testing finding chrysotile fibers in Johnson's baby powder is a definitive fact, but it does not disclose that this was from a single lot and does not mention if the company has responded to this finding or if it has been peer-reviewed.
    • Nearly all the suits the company is facing are related to ovarian cancer.
    • The truth of J&J’s deceptive conduct to hide the presence of carcinogens in talcum powder and mislead the medical and scientific communities has only become clearer over time.
  • Fallacies (80%)
    The author makes an appeal to authority by stating that 'independent experts, as well as governmental and regulatory bodies, have rejected the claims against Johnson & Johnson for decades.' However, this statement does not provide any specific information about who these independent experts are or which regulatory bodies have made these determinations. Therefore, it is an incomplete appeal to authority fallacy.
    • The claims are premised on the allegations that have been rejected by independent experts, as well as governmental and regulatory bodies, for decades.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

92%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

J&J agrees to pay $6.5B in ovarian cancer cases

Axios News Site: https://www.axios.com/2024/01-30/prior-authorization-gap-insurer-drug-decisions Nathan Bomey Wednesday, 01 May 2024 13:48
  • Unique Points
    • Johnson & Johnson reached a new settlement worth $6.5 billion over 25 years with people who allege its talc-based baby powder caused their ovarian cancer.
    • J&J discontinued the baby powder in 2022 but maintains it was safe.
  • Accuracy
    • Approximately 99% of the talc-related lawsuits filed against J&J involve ovarian cancer claims.
    • Johnson & Johnson maintains that its products do not contain asbestos and do not cause cancer.
  • Deception (80%)
    The author provides context and background information about the ongoing lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson (J&J) regarding their talc-based baby powder being linked to ovarian cancer. However, there are instances of selective reporting and emotional manipulation in the article. The author states that 'J&J faces tens of thousands of lawsuits over accusations that its baby powder was cancerous.' While this is true, it does not mention the number of lawsuits that have been dismissed or settled previously. This creates a skewed perception for readers by implying that all pending lawsuits are valid and will result in payouts. Additionally, the author uses emotional language when stating 'People suffering from cancer they believe was caused by J&J’s baby powder may soon get compensation.' This manipulates the reader's emotions and creates a sense of urgency without providing any factual evidence that these people will definitely receive compensation.
    • People suffering from cancer they believe was caused by J&J’s baby powder may soon get compensation.
    • The company faces tens of thousands of lawsuits over accusations that its baby powder was cancerous.
  • Fallacies (95%)
    No formal fallacies found. There are some inflammatory phrases such as 'Johnson & Johnson faces tens of thousands of lawsuits over accusations that its baby powder was cancerous' and 'the company tried filing LTL in bankruptcy twice before and both times the case was rejected as courts ruled the parent company was financially capable of paying the claims without bankruptcy protection.' There is also a dichotomous depiction with 'The company discontinued the baby powder in 2022 but maintains that it was safe.' However, these are not enough to significantly impact the score.
    • Johnson & Johnson faces tens of thousands of lawsuits over accusations that its baby powder was cancerous
    • the company tried filing LTL in bankruptcy twice before and both times the case was rejected as courts ruled the parent company was financially capable of paying the claims without bankruptcy protection.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication