Article

2017-10-21 Economy

Judge tosses $417M award against Johnson & Johnson

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2017-10-21 02:45|| || Front Page|| [11137 views ] Top

#1 she developed ovarian cancer by using Johnson & Johnson talc-based baby powder for feminine hygiene

??????????????????

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-10-21 02:48|| 2017-10-21 02:48|| Front Page Top

#2 Study female anatomy and you'll see how it might be possible.

Posted by Seeking cure for ignorance 2017-10-21 05:12|| 2017-10-21 05:12|| Front Page Top

#3 (a) I been studying female anatomy for 50+ years.
(b) It's a question of biochemistry and not anatomy, seeker.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-10-21 05:24|| 2017-10-21 05:24|| Front Page Top

#4 "Do not take internally"

Posted by Frank G 2017-10-21 07:40|| 2017-10-21 07:40|| Front Page Top

#5 Sorry, I was referring that there is a physical path via the uterus to the ovaries that talc can work its way through.

But yes, I'm not sure what biochemistry role talc would have in cancer formation if there is in fact any.

Posted by Seeking cure for ignorance 2017-10-21 11:32|| 2017-10-21 11:32|| Front Page Top

#6 The only cancer path I can think of is talc irritating lung tissue (as asbestos does), then metastasizing to ovaries. Talc is not a chemically reactive mineral though its small partical size could conceivably make it physically reactive, but how to transport???

Posted by Glenmore 2017-10-21 12:40|| 2017-10-21 12:40|| Front Page Top

#7 ^:-)

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-10-21 13:18|| 2017-10-21 13:18|| Front Page Top

#8 Ooops. #5 not previous. Glen it's unsoluble in water

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-10-21 13:30|| 2017-10-21 13:30|| Front Page Top

#9 Glen it's unsoluble in water

Yeah, neither is asbestos in the lung(s).

"in its natural form, some talc contains asbestos"

Posted by Skidmark 2017-10-21 13:58|| 2017-10-21 13:58|| Front Page Top

#10 Slightly is the key word here. "Exposure to talc is unlikely to be a primary factor in most cases of ovarian cancer," writes John Whysner, MD, PhD, a researcher with the American Health Foundation in Valhalla, N.Y. He says there is not enough information to clearly say whether there is a causal relationship. Whysner reviewed over 50 papers on the subject, written over the past 30 years, for the analysis published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-10-21 14:45|| 2017-10-21 14:45|| Front Page Top

#11 A lot of gals powder their poozle. If baby powder was a cancer hazard, you would expect a *bleep*load of cases considering how prevalent exposure is.

Same sort of thing with cell phones causing brain cancer. With the number of people exposed, you'd expect an epidemic if there was anything to it.

Posted by SteveS 2017-10-21 15:15|| 2017-10-21 15:15|| Front Page Top

#12 Always difficult to bring these cases. Courts have standards for evidence, and you must prove your case by a preponderance of the evidence. "Might be possible" doesn't cut it.

Posted by Iblis 2017-10-21 15:59|| 2017-10-21 15:59|| Front Page Top

#13 Courts have standards for evidence, and you must prove your case by a preponderance of the evidence. "Might be possible" doesn't cut it.

Unless you're trying to overturn constitutional immigration laws, invalidate legal elections, or indict someone of supposed collusion with russkies for something or other.

Posted by Mullah Richard 2017-10-21 18:31|| 2017-10-21 18:31|| Front Page Top

21:37 Alaska Paul
19:41 M. Murcek
19:11 charger
18:47 Cheaderhead
18:34 Mullah Richard
18:31 Mullah Richard
18:24 Cheaderhead
18:14 swiss in there too
18:12 Skidmark
18:06 Skidmark
18:03 newc
18:03 Cheaderhead
17:48 Cheaderhead
17:37 Cheaderhead
17:08 AlanC
16:48 irishrageboy
16:46 AlanC
16:00 si vis pacem, para bellum
15:59 Iblis
15:57 Mike Kozlowski
15:36 Woodrow
15:32 Besoeker
15:25 newc
15:22 newc