Johnson & Johnson faces $417m payout in latest talc case

Johnson & johnson has been ordered to pay $417m (£323.4m) to a girl who says she evolved ovarian cancer after using merchandise inclusive of toddler powder.
The california jury's decision marks the most important award yet in a string of lawsuits that declare the firm did now not appropriately warn about cancer dangers from talc-based merchandise.
A spokeswoman for johnson & johnson defended the products' protection.
The firm plans to attraction, because it has in previous cases.
"we will attraction ultra-modern verdict due to the fact we are guided with the aid of the science," carol goodrich, spokesperson for johnson & johnson purchaser inc, stated in a announcement.
The evidence round any link between talc use and cancer is inconclusive.
Blood tests spot ovarian cancer early
Johnson & johnson, established in new jersey, faces thousands of claims from girls who say they advanced most cancers due to the usage of the company's merchandise to deal with issues about vaginal odour and moisture.
Johnson & johnson has misplaced four of five previous instances tried earlier than juries in missouri, that have led to more than $300m in consequences.
The california lawsuit was introduced with the aid of eva echeverria, a sixty three-12 months-old woman who said she started using baby powder whilst she became 11 years vintage. She was identified with ovarian most cancers 10 years ago; the diagnosis is terminal, in keeping with lawyers operating at the case.
The lawsuit alleged that the agency became aware of cancer risk related to talcum powder, but hid that facts from the public.
The decision covered $70m in compensatory damages and $347m in punitive damages.
Gray line
Analysis: james gallagher, health editor, bbc news internet site
Is talc secure?
There had been issues for years that the use of talcum powder, especially at the genitals, may additionally boom the threat of ovarian cancer.
However the proof is not conclusive. The global corporation for studies on most cancers classifies talc used on the genitals as "probably carcinogenic" due to the blended evidence.
Why is there any debate?
The mineral talc in its natural form does comprise asbestos and does reason most cancers, however, asbestos-unfastened talc has been utilized in infant powder and different cosmetics because the Seventies. However the research on asbestos-unfastened talc give contradictory effects.
It's been connected to a cancer threat in some studies, but there are issues that the studies can be biased as they frequently rely on humans remembering how a great deal talc they used years in the past. Different research have argued there may be no hyperlink in any respect and there's no link between talc in contraceptives including diaphragms and condoms (which could be close to the ovaries) and most cancers.
Also there does now not appear to be a "dose-response" for talc, unlike with recognised cancer causing agents like tobacco where the extra you smoke, the greater the hazard of lung cancer.
What should women do?
The charity ovacome says there's no definitive proof and that the worst-case state of affairs is that using talc increases the chance of cancer through a third.
However it adds: "ovarian cancer is a rare ailment, and growing a small chance by way of a third nevertheless gives a small threat. So even if talc does increase the risk slightly, very few ladies who use talc will ever get ovarian cancer."