A recent lawsuit argues that Johnson & Johnson should have included a baby powder warning on their products to inform customers about the risk of talc and ovarian cancer.

Plaintiff Kathy F. says that she used Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower powder from January 1975 through September 2014, when she was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. In her complaint, Kathy argues that her use of Johnson & Johnson’s powder products lead to her developing ovarian cancer, but she was unaware of the risk.

In 1971, the very first study regarding talc and ovarian cancer was completed in Wales. Over ten years later in 1982, the first epidemiologic study was performed by Dr. Daniel Cramer and several other researchers. Cramer’s study found that women who used talc powder products on their perineal area were at a 92 percent increased risk for developing ovarian cancer.

Following Dr. Cramer’s study, he and a Johnson & Johnson employee discussed the results, and Cramer allegedly recommended adding a baby powder warning to the company’s products.

Since Dr. Cramer’s study in 1982, there have been over 27 epidemiologic studies investigating the link between talc and ovarian cancer. According to Kathy, nearly all of the studies show that talc use in the genital area can increase the risk of developing ovarian cancer.

Despite the wealth of scientific evidence available, Johnson & Johnson allegedly refuses to include a baby powder warning on their talc powder products. Even worse, the company allegedly portrays their baby powder products as safe and targets women who may use the products for perineal use.

Plaintiffs like Kathy say the company uses a variety of slogans to promote the usage of their products, including: “For you, use every day to help feel soft, fresh, and comfortable;” “A sprinkle a day keeps the odor away;” “Your body perspires in more places than just under your arms;” “Use Shower to Shower to feel dry, fresh, and comfortable throughout the day;” and “Shower to Shower can be used all over your body.”

These representations, and the lack of any baby powder warning, allegedly induce women to believe that Johnson & Johnson talc powder products are safe and fit for use in the female genital area. Kathy argues that the consequences of these allegedly deceptive representations result in women, such as herself, developing ovarian cancer.

“The Johnson & Johnson Defendants, through the advertisements as listed above, made express warranties to Plaintiff and the public that the PRODUCTS were safe and effective when applied all over the body, including the female perineal area,” the baby powder lawsuit argues.

Kathy says she has experienced a variety of damages due to Johnson & Johnson’s failure to include a baby powder warning. Her injuries allegedly include: severe impairment to her ovaries and reproductive system; medical expenses; pain and suffering; mental anguish, anxiety, and discomfort; lost wages and income; fear of cancer or other related diseases; physical impairment; physical disfigurement; loss of enjoyment of life; and loss of consortium.

The baby powder lawsuit seeks exemplary damages, punitive damages, treble damages, general damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The Baby Powder Warning Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-02600 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.