An investigation of internal Johnson & Johnson documents allegedly reveals that the company knew about the hazards of baby powder asbestos for decades.

The documents surfaced after Johnson & Johnson was compelled to release them in the course of a lawsuit, according to a Reuters report. Almost two decades ago in 1999, a Texas woman filed a baby powder asbestos lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson after developing mesothelioma. Plaintiff Darlene C. knew mesothelioma was linked with asbestos to exposure, but as a mother of two running a massage school she was unsure how she had become exposed to the carcinogen.

After seeking the services of a personal injury lawyer, Darlene came to believe that baby powder asbestos may have been to blame for her condition. After this realization, Darlene went on to become one of the first plaintiffs to file a baby powder asbestos lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson.

Unfortunately, Johnson & Johnson was able to evade Darlene’s claims at first and was not forced to release documents such as talc tests and company reports.

“When you are the plaintiff, you have the burden of proof,” Darlene’s attorney told Reuters. “We didn’t have it.”

Almost two decades later, Johnson & Johnson faces baby powder asbestos claims from around 11,700 plaintiffs alleging that the company’s talc based powder products caused them to develop cancer.

The documents which Darlene sought from Johnson & Johnson have been revealed in recent litigation. Reuters examined the documents which reportedly show that the company’s talc occasionally tested positive for asbestos from at least 1971 to the early 2000s. The documents allegedly reveal that executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors, and lawyers for Johnson & Johnson fretted over the problem for years but did not warn the public or alert regulatory authorities.

Many of the documents revealed by the baby powder asbestos lawsuit have remained hidden, since they are classified as confidential. However, details from these documents have emerged which may shed light on the issue of asbestos contamination in talc products.

Some plaintiffs in baby powder asbestos lawsuits claim that Johnson & Johnson aimed to influence regulator action regarding asbestos in talc and scientific research investigating the potential side effects of talc usage. According to Reuters, company documents reveal that these schemes were successful.

In the 1970s, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was considering limiting the use of talc in cosmetics due to asbestos concerns. Johnson & Johnson allegedly assured the FDA that there was no asbestos “detected in any sample” of talc between December 1972 and October 1973. These assurances were allegedly false, as three tests by different labs between 1972 and 1975 reportedly showed the presence of asbestos in talc. Allegedly, one test even reported levels which were “rather high”.

Although Reuters reports that many Johnson & Johnson internal reports do not show signs of asbestos, the company allegedly tests only a small fraction of its talc, so asbestos may go undetected. Additionally, limitations in testing methods may allow small amounts of contaminants like asbestos to go undetected. However, even a small amount of asbestos may be able to do damage and cause debilitating, life-threatening conditions such as mesothelioma and other types of cancers.