In recent years, J&J has faced thousands of lawsuits — more than 38,000 — alleging that consumers of the product contributed to the development of ovarian cancer.
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has filed a lawsuit against four doctors who authored studies linking long-term use of the company’s talcum powder to the development of cancer.
Doctors Richard Gradin, Teresa Emory and John Maddox are the latest targets of the American pharmaceutical company, which in May of this year launched a lawsuit against doctor Jacqueline Molin, the author of a study published in 2019, in which 33 patients participated. Asbestos exposure resulted from the company’s use of talcum powder.
It was precisely this article by Molin that served as the starting point for an investigation by Gratin, Emory and Maddox, who followed 75 patients in 2020.
Following these investigations, Johnson & Johnson decided to suspend sales of the baby powder worldwide, citing a “business decision” based on “misinformation” being spread about the product’s safety.
In recent years, J&J has faced thousands of lawsuits – more than 38 thousand – alleging that it contributed to the development of ovarian cancer in consumers of the product, which leads the company to deny this situation and spend millions of dollars every year. In court cases.
Now, J&J’s subsidiary LTL Management wants the authors of the respective studies to “retract and/or publish” their studies, alleging that they omitted certain information about the participants in their studies. Asbestos is exposed through other sources unrelated to its products. The manufacturer filed an appeal in federal court in New Jersey to compel the researchers to reveal the identities of the participants in their respective studies.
Adam Zimmerman, a law professor at the University of Southern California, confirmed to Reuters that it is extremely rare for companies to file lawsuits against the authors of studies they disagree with. The expert agrees that it will be very difficult for LTL management to prove in court that the investigators intentionally damaged J&J’s reputation. But it suggests the drugmaker may view the lawsuits as a way to discourage other researchers from doing similar studies, or as a way to reinforce the narrative that its products are safe.