Another lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina against Johnson & Johnson Inc., Imerys Talc America, and Personal Care Products Council on May 19, 2017.

The complaints surround the established link between the use of baby powder and ovarian cancer and the defendant’s efforts to allegedly conceal this connection.

According to plaintiff Michelle R., a resident of the State of South Carolina, Johnson & Johnson Inc. and other listed companies willfully and fraudulently hid burgeoning evidence associating use of talc-based baby powder and ovarian cancer.

Use of Baby Powder and Ovarian Cancer Linked

Talc, also known as magnesium trisilicate, is a mineral mined from the earth. It is the main ingredient in daily hygiene powders such as Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower.

Michelle R. accuses responsible parties as co-conspirators when they mined, packaged, sold, and then aggressively marketed products to women as safe, desirable feminine hygiene aids.

Michelle lists several studies linking use of baby powder and ovarian cancer. A sampling of these studies is listed below:

• Research published in 1961, “The Transport of Carbon Particles in the Female Human Reproductive Tract,” suggests that certain particles can move from outer genitalia to ovarian tissues.

• In a 1971 published study, “Talc and Carcinoma of the Ovary and Cervix,” researchers discovered talc particles in tissue of ovarian tumors.

• A 1982 epidemiologic study, “Ovarian Cancer and Talc, A Case Control Study, identified a 92% increase in risk of developing ovarian cancer if individual uses talcum powder daily.

• A 1989 case control study, “A Case-Control Study of Borderline Ovarian Tumors: The Influence of Perineal Exposure to Talc,” found a statistically significant risk of coming down with ovarian cancer if talc is used on the perineal area daily.

• A 1997 case control study, “Perineal Powder Exposure and the Risk of Ovarian Cancer,” found that subjects who applied powder to genitalia daily as part of hygiene regimen had a 50-90% increase in risk.

The Defendant’s Marketing Campaign and Focus

According to plaintiff Michelle R., Johnson & Johnson Inc. had a responsibility to warn the public about the growing data showing the connection between daily application of talc-based powders to the female genital region, but failed to do so.

The baby powder lawsuit indicates that Michelle R. used the brand-name talc-based hygiene powders for a ten-year period under the notion that the products were safe.

This notion was entirely bolstered by the lack of adequate warnings on the packaging of Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products, she claims.

The plaintiff holds these companies responsible for her development of ovarian cancer, which resulted in a full hysterectomy and follow-up cancer treatments as well as psychological pain and suffering.

She believes that they are liable for marketing a dangerous product as being safe when used as directed. Michelle R. claims to have used the talc-based powders according to directions as indicated on the packaging and in advertising campaigns directed at women.