A pathologist recent answered juror questions in a Johnson and Johnson baby powder trial, providing expert insight into the issue.

Dr. Jerrold Abraham spent over an hour answering juror questions about the facts of the case and considering what role asbestos in talc may have played in a plaintiff Teresa L.’s mesothelioma. According to her lawsuit, Teresa was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017. The condition has no cure, and her doctors reportedly expect her to die this year.

Abraham said that the size and amount of asbestos fibers found in Teresa’s lungs and lymph nodes indicates that her asbestos exposure more aggressive than regular, cumulative exposure to the fibers in ambient air.

“The fact that there are these long fibers indicates she had exposure beyond background [exposure],” Abraham told jurors, according to Law360.

According to Abraham, the average individuals have asbestos in their lungs, but it is usually a small amount and that 95 percent of these fibers are less than 5 microns long (one micron being one millionth of a meter). In Teresa’s lungs, many asbestos fibers were longer than 5 microns and several were even larger than 20 microns.

“It doesn’t mean for sure they all came from cosmetic talc,” Abraham testified. “It’s possible that some could come from other sources, but I haven’t seen those other sources identified.”

Industrial forms of asbestos including amosite and crocidolite were reportedly not found in Teresa’s lymph nodes, which can store minerals for longer than lung tissue. However, chrysotile, another type of asbestos reportedly known to be found in cosmetic talc, was allegedly in her lymph nodes.

Abraham’s testimony was part of a high profile Johnson and Johnson baby powder jury trial which began on Jan. 7. The trial concerns Teresa’s claims against Johnson and Johnson and several talc companies now owned by Imerys Talc. She argues that the companies knew for decades that the talc used in many Johnson and Johnson products was contaminated with asbestos. Despite allegedly knowing about the asbestos in their talc, Johnson and Johnson allegedly chose not to warn consumers to replace their toxic talc with cornstarch.

Johnson & Johnson has uniformly denied claims that their talc contains asbestos, even dedicating a “Facts About Talc” website to the issue. The website informs consumers that “talc is safe” and that “talc does not cause cancer”.

“We continue to use talc in our products because decades of science have reaffirmed its safety. Your trust in Johnson’s Baby Products and your confidence using them every day is a huge responsibility – that’s why we only use ingredients that are deemed safe to use by the latest science,” the company’s website states.

“Recently, there have been questions raised as to whether the talc used in consumer products is contaminated with asbestos. The weight of the science does not support any claim that our talc products cause cancer.”

The Johnson and Johnson Baby Powder Lawsuit is Case No. RG17882401 in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda.