An Illinois couple has added their claim to the talcum powder cancer litigation now proceeding against Johnson & Johnson.

Plaintiffs Maureen and Keith A. say that Maureen’s ovarian cancer was caused by the talc-based powders she used, powders made by defendant Johnson & Johnson.

The couple alleges Maureen used Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower in her perineal area on a regular basis. She was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2007.

Based on decades of scientific studies, the couple now believes Maureen’s cancer could have been prevented had she been properly warned about the risk of cancer associated with talc-based products. They accuse Johnson & Johnson and other defendant members of the talc industry of failing to adequately warn consumers about that risk.

Talcum Powder Cancer Litigation Draws More and More Claimants

Maureen and Keith’s talcum powder cancer lawsuit is one of many similar claims that will be heard as part of a multidistrict litigation, or MDL. These claims have been consolidated under the supervision of a single federal court to make pretrial processing more efficient.

According to the master complaint for the MDL, the defendants continued to market talcum powder to women as a daily genital hygiene tool in spite of having information regarding its usage link to ovarian cancer.

The talcum powder cancer litigation cites many studies, the earliest of which is dated back to 1971, linking usage of talcum powder or magnesium trisilicate on the female genital region to a higher incidence of ovarian cancer.

As studies continued to uncover mounting evidence supporting the connection between daily use of talcum powder on the sensitive tissues of the vulva, the defendants supposedly did nothing to label their product to warn their female consumers.

According to plaintiffs, the defendants did exactly the opposite of what they should have done by providing warning.

Instead, they consistently drove sales of their baby powder and other talcum powder products by encouraging women to dust genital regions for freshness, the plaintiffs say. Marketing campaigns were undertaken that told women they would experience optimum freshness and reduce chafing and discomfort from friction and excess moisture if they would only use talcum.

The talcum powder cancer litigation states that the defendant’s advertising campaigns gave the impression that talcum powder was a totally benign product to use despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Female patrons were even encouraged to apply daily and even after bikini waxes to soothe the area.

In early 1990, as the body of evidence was growing to support a significant connection between talcum powder and human health risks, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested that manufacturers of latex surgical gloves remove all traces of talcum powder which had routinely been added.

In 1996, the condom industry volunteered in response to a similar volunteer request on the part of the FDA and stopped using talcum powder with their products.

Overall, the relationship between talcum powder and health issues were become widely recognized. The defendants, however, failed to acknowledge the data being released by accumulated studies and even attempted to counter said information with assurances of safety to their patrons.