Facts about Talc

滑石粉诉讼

-是关于什么的?

You may have heard about juries awarding large verdicts in lawsuits alleging that talc-based Johnson’s Baby Powder can cause ovarian cancer or mesothelioma and that, in relation to this, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, LTL Management LLC (LTL), voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

johnson-baby-powder.jpg

But you may not know this: in the majority of jury trials, including six out of eight trials that happened in 2021, juries have concluded that Johnson & Johnson’s product was not responsible for the plaintiffs’ cancer. In other instances, judges have dismissed cases outright based on their own review of the facts, and many of the verdicts against Johnson & Johnson that have been through the appellate process have also been overturned.

Despite the evidence presented in court, and the fact that Johnson & Johnson discontinued the sale of Johnson’s Baby Powder in the United States and Canada in 2020, there continue to be more lawsuits filed and a few extraordinary verdicts in state courts that have contradicted the science. That’s why last year, Johnson & Johnson began a process to resolve these lawsuits in a way that would be reasonable for all involved, including anyone who may have legal claims against Johnson & Johnson currently or in the future. To achieve this goal, LTL voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, following an established and legal process for resolving these cases. You can learn more about this here.

The stories of anyone suffering from any form of cancer are tragic. We sympathize deeply with these patients and their families, and we appreciate that they seek answers. The science and the facts, however, show that their illnesses were not caused by their use of our talc-based products.

我们是一家致力于让每一个人健康长寿的公司。就像您一样,我们也是儿子和女儿,兄弟和姐妹,父母及祖父母。我们在我们自己、我们的孩子及我们的孙子孙女上使用我们的产品。我们知道,我们身负重任,并且非常认真地对待这种责任。

Decades of independent scientific testing have confirmed that our products are safe, do not contain asbestos and do not cause cancer.

我们知道,这些案件引起了不少的焦虑和困惑,而且世界各地许多使用过和继续使用含滑石粉产品的人都心存疑虑。We also know there will be more discussion. This site is designed to share the facts about talc and these cases, and to help you and your family understand the steps we have taken and why we continue to stand behind the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder.

事实真相

  • 我们的安全承诺从选择滑石矿开始

    我们在我们工艺的每一个阶段都保持非常谨慎的态度,以确保我们的产品中所使用的化妆品级滑石粉不含石棉。只有大约 5% 的滑石粉用于化妆品中。其他则用于屋面材料、建筑材料或陶瓷等工业材料中。我们在决定任何滑石矿是否可以作为我们的滑石粉矿源之前,会与地质学专家一起对其进行评估,他们了解矿床形成过程和地点的各个方面。

    有关强生婴儿爽身粉中所用滑石粉在美国和加拿大的矿源的政府和学术报告证实,我们的产品中所使用的滑石矿石不含石棉。

  • 关于我们的滑石粉中含石棉的指控在数十年前就已被证明是错误的

    在 20 世纪 70 年代,媒体报道了基于不可靠的检测方法得出的初步错误报告,声称我们的滑石粉中可能存在石棉污染。来自世界各地的科学家(包括 FDA 的科研人员)花费了多年的时间来研究这个问题,最终得出结论——强生公司的滑石粉未被石棉污染。

    随着技术的进步,科学家们和监管机构共同规范了准确可靠地检测滑石粉中石棉的方法。强生公司不仅满足这些标准,而且超越了这些标准,通过使用最先进的方法来可靠准确地检测滑石粉中的石棉。这意味着,我们不仅通过传统显微镜来检查我们的滑石粉,还会使用高倍电子显微镜来进行检查。

    在 20 世纪 70 和 80 年代,我们每隔 1 小时从我们的滑石粉加工厂收集一次样品,以检测是否含石棉。磨碎的滑石矿石样品至少每月收集并检测一次。加工完成准备封装的滑石粉的样品至少每周收集并检测一次。作为额外的审核,我们还会每个季度再次对这些样品进行检测。

    所有这些检测在过去以及现在都为表明:检测的次数越多,从检测中获得的确定性和保证性就越高。如果只检测一次,您只能获得一定程度的保证。而多年来周复一周的检测得出的相同结果让我们充分相信,我们的产品中绝不含石棉。

  • 主流的科学家和监管机构检测并证实我们的滑石粉安全可靠

    强生公司非常重视关于我们的滑石粉可能会对消费者造成伤害的指控,并邀请了多家独立机构、实验室和大学对我们的滑石粉进行了检测,以证明其不含石棉。这些检测充分证明了我们的滑石粉中不含石棉。检测机构包括:

  • FDA 参与滑石粉安全性评估

    FDA 的使命是保护公众健康,包括确保化妆品的安全,确保正确标识。几十年来,FDA 反复参与调查和检测化妆品滑石粉,包括强生公司的滑石粉。20 世纪 70 年代,FDA 对化妆品级滑石粉产品(包括强生公司的产品)是否被石棉污染的问题进行了长达四年的深入调查。作为这项调查的结果,FDA 得出结论:“这些产品[包括强生公司的产品]中使用的滑石粉都不含石棉污染物。”

    1986 年,FDA 根据其研究和持续监测的结果,表示没有理由在化妆品级滑石粉上贴上警告标签。FDA 甚至表示,“在最糟糕的情况下,一生中……从化妆品滑石粉中接触石棉的预估风险比从环境背景中接触石棉的风险还低。”

    2009 年至 2010 年,FDA 检测了四家滑石粉供应商的原料滑石(包括强生公司的婴儿爽身粉和以前淘汰的优润佳沐浴产品中所用滑石粉的供应商)以及强生公司的婴儿爽身粉和优润佳沐浴产品,并证实这些产品均不含石棉。

    2014 年,在调查滑石粉与卵巢癌之间的潜在关系时,FDA 再次表示,没有确凿的证据表明使用滑石粉与癌症有任何因果关系。

    2019年10月18日 年,FDA 数十年来首次对强生公司的滑石粉进行了测试,FDA 告知强生公司对一个批次的一瓶强生的婴儿爽身粉进行测试后发现温石棉污染物含量低于痕量(0.00002%)。同时,FDA 指出,当它抽样另一批滑石粉时,检出石棉。出于谨慎考虑,Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. 自愿召回 FDA 测试中有争议的批次。Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. 立即开始对此事进行彻底调查,并与 FDA 合作,回答有关测试的问题,包括测试样品的完整性和测试结果的有效性。

  • 研究表明使用我们的滑石粉是安全的

    最可靠的科学研究证明,使用强生公司的滑石粉产品是安全的,包括强生婴儿爽身粉和以前的优润佳沐浴产品。

    卵巢癌:Four major independent cohort studies that followed more than 80,000 women who used talcum powder over a period of at least 6 to 24 years to determine if talcum powder use for feminine hygiene causes ovarian cancer concluded that the use of talc is not associated with increased risk of ovarian cancer. 前瞻性定群研究是一种广为接受、高度可靠的研究方法,通常用于研究使用或接触某种产品与特定疾病之间是否存在关联。在这类研究中,研究人员会对一组特定人群提出与不同的可能危险因素有关的问题,包括使用某些产品,然后进行一定时间的随访研究来收集相关数据。Cohort studies have helped scientists understand the link between smoking and lung cancer, high cholesterol and heart disease, and many other health topics we consider common knowledge today.The most recent cohort study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, pooled a number of these high-level epidemiological studies and found no statistically significant increased risk of ovarian cancer with talc use.

    一些病例对照研究显示卵巢癌与使用滑石粉之间存在微弱的统计学联系,但其他类似的病例对照研究表明,使用滑石粉与卵巢癌之间并无关联。专家对这些病例对照研究持怀疑态度,因为研究结果不一致,某些研究显示的微弱“阳性”结果可能是因研究设计的局限性所导致。这些研究的局限性包括“回忆偏倚”,即患有某种疾病的人比未患病的人更容易记起过去的事情。在这些病例对照研究中,知道自己患有卵巢癌的女性会努力去记忆任何可能对解释她们的患病原因十分重要的事情。这可能会使结果看起来好像患癌症的女性使用过更多的滑石粉,而这实际上是因为她们更能记起她们多年来的女性卫生习惯。相比病例对照研究,大型前瞻性研究被认为更可靠,部分原因是没有女性知道自己以后会患上卵巢癌——因此她们不会有任何回忆偏倚,这些研究发现,使用滑石粉与卵巢癌之间总体上并无关联。

    间皮瘤:间皮瘤是一种主要因接触石棉引起的癌症。石棉是一种天然矿物质,存在于环境中,空气中到处存在少量石棉纤维。

    目前并无可靠的科学研究表明吸入化妆品级滑石粉会导致间皮瘤。事实上,对数千名因开采和研磨滑石粉而每天接触滑石粉的工人进行的数项研究显示,接触高含量的滑石粉不会增加人患间皮瘤的风险。

    此外,为患者实施滑石粉胸膜固定术时,会将滑石粉直接注入肺部,但是大规模的患者报告显示,无任何人患上间皮瘤。

法庭审判

gavel-blue.png

The first high profile trial related to these claims was in 2013, where plaintiffs’ counsel alleged that use of talc-based Johnson’s Baby Powder and Johnson & Johnson’s former product Shower to Shower caused a woman to develop ovarian cancer. 虽然陪审团作出了不利于强生公司的裁决,但并未判处任何赔偿金。

Since then, there have been several additional trials where juries have awarded significant verdicts against Johnson & Johnson, but many of those verdicts have been overturned on appeal.

Following those initial cases, trial lawyers have since shifted their theory, alleging that Johnson & Johnson’s talc contains asbestos. (第一起间皮瘤诉讼于 2017 年秋季审判)。

These latest claims go back to flawed news stories in the 1970’s that claimed to detect asbestos in talc based on unreliable methodology. After those reports, an investigation by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, as well as independent testing, contributed to the development of more reliable testing methodologies and confirmed that there was no asbestos in our talcum powder products. Plaintiffs’ attorneys seek to bring back an issue that has already been resolved.

在这些基于 20 世纪 70 年代的早期信息提出的指控中,部分已进行审判。In the majority of cases that reached a jury verdict, the juries have voted in favor of Johnson & Johnson; in others, juries have not been able to reach a verdict; in a small minority of others, the juries have voted in favor of the plaintiffs— including awarding some very large dollar amounts.

With all of the legal cases and the expectation that trial lawyers would continue to bring additional cases against Johnson & Johnson for years to come, the Company established a new subsidiary, LTL Management LLC (LTL), to hold the legal liabilities related to Johnson & Johnson’s cosmetic talc. LTL voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, activating a process designed to resolve all talc claims in a way that would be reasonable to all parties, including anyone who may have current of future legal claims against the Company. The Chapter 11 process is a well-established and lawful way to bring all parties together to negotiate a resolution to the litigation. LTL continues to work with plaintiffs’ lawyers and mediators to bring these cases to a conclusion. Reaching an agreement is in the best interests of all parties, and LTL remains fully committed to the mediation process in order to achieve this.

深度解析

  • 原告庭审律师依赖可疑事实来支持其指控

    Numerous leading independent institutions, laboratories, universities and governmental agencies have all investigated this issue since the 1970s and concluded that there is no asbestos in our cosmetic talc products.

    那么,面对这些检测结果,原告庭审律师如何声称我们的产品中含有石棉?

    他们基于与独立第三方的意见不一致的可疑事实,依靠雇佣的证人来支持他们的指控。

    These same witnesses include individuals who, before they were hired to testify against Johnson & Johnson, had testified under oath that that asbestos in cosmetic talc was "an urban legend."

    例如,证人可能使用有缺陷的科学方法来检测滑石粉。其中一位证人承认,他将“即使不是石棉”的东西也称为石棉。

    在另一个例子中,他们可能检测了可能在购买后被污染的瓶子。一名证人检测了四瓶从商店购买的强生婴儿爽身粉的瓶子。其中均检测到石棉。然而,在检测来自其他来源的瓶子时(许多直接由原告庭审律师在 eBay 购买得来),他声称在有些瓶子中检测到了石棉。A California court prevented this witness from presenting this evidence at trial because they could not confirm the samples were not contaminated.

    另一名目前被原告庭审律师雇佣来证明强生的滑石粉会引起间皮瘤的证人曾在早先的案例中证实,表明强生的滑石粉与间皮瘤无关的研究是完全可靠的。

  • 原告庭审律师误述历史文件

    我们在数十年中以高于政府和行业要求的标准反复进行了检测,得出的记录始终表明,强生的化妆品级滑石粉不含石棉。

    然而,原告庭审律师故意通过断章取义地陈述公司文件来制造混淆。在法庭上,原告庭审律师从历史文件中刻意摘取某些部分来表明这些文件显示过去曾发现过石棉,而无视我们大量的产品检测记录。通常,这些文件与强生的产品中所使用的滑石粉根本毫无关联。例如,他们指出某个文件表明存在石棉,但该文件明明指出了相关石棉仅针对工业材料中所使用的滑石粉。或者指出某个文件表明不明的商业滑石粉样本中存在石棉,而忽略另一个显示强生公司的所有样本均发现未被石棉污染的文件。又或者指出某个文件表明样本中存在石棉,而忽略这些样本是出于检测目的而被故意加入石棉的事实。

  • 原告庭审律师宣传阴谋论

    原告庭审律师声称强生公司有阴谋地故意销售含石棉的产品。这种说法毫无疑问是错误的。事实上,如果说这项指控是真的,那意味着对我们产品进行过检测的许多联邦和州政府机构、独立实验室、科学家和主要大学在过去 50 年中肯定也是同谋才会隐瞒这些信息。

在这些案件中,已有 5,000 多份文件被接收为证据。我们诚邀您查看这些证据并作出您自己的判断。

免责声明:

强生在本网站公开展示了由一家或多家强生公司提供的文件,这些文件已在审判中被用作证据。这些审判证物不属于机密文件,尽管有些可能仍然印有机密标志。我们尽量以审判中所使用的形式(例如突出显示和/或其他标记)提供这些证物,这可能并不反映本公司维护这些文件的方式。本网站将定期更新。

Powered by Translations.com GlobalLink OneLink Software