Thousands sue Johnson & Johnson over alleged asbestos-contaminated baby powder

A sweeping legal action has been launched in the United Kingdom against Johnson & Johnson (J&J), accusing the American pharmaceutical giant of knowingly selling talcum-based baby powder contaminated with asbestos.

The case, involving more than 3,000 claimants, centers on internal company memos and scientific studies obtained by the BBC. The documents allegedly show that as far back as the 1960s, J&J was aware that its talc products contained fibrous minerals such as tremolite and actinolite, both of which — in fibrous form — are classified as asbestos, a known carcinogen.

The lawsuit contends that J&J concealed evidence of asbestos contamination while continuing to market its baby powder as a symbol of “purity and safety.”
Despite the alleged internal findings, the company did not issue warnings on product labels. Instead, the claim asserts, J&J launched aggressive marketing campaigns promoting the powder for use on babies and women.

In its defense, J&J has denied all wrongdoing, stating that its products have always met regulatory standards, did not contain asbestos, and do not cause cancer. The company stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the UK in 2023.

The UK case parallels extensive litigation in the United States, where J&J has faced thousands of similar lawsuits. American juries have awarded billions of dollars in damages to cancer patients, although the company has succeeded in overturning some verdicts on appeal.

Lawyers representing the UK claimants estimate potential damages could reach hundreds of millions of pounds, possibly making it the largest product liability case in British history.

Court filings reference several internal communications from the 1970s, allegedly showing company executives acknowledging that traces of asbestos were present in talc samples.
One 1973 memo reportedly reads:

Another document suggests company officials discussed whether to keep research confidential to avoid public disclosure, stating:

J&J, however, maintains these memos were taken out of context and reflect internal regulatory discussions, not proof of contamination. The company says its attempts to develop purification patents were scientific innovations, not cover-ups.

Many claimants in the case are women diagnosed with ovarian cancer or mesothelioma, both linked to asbestos exposure.

Among them is Siobhan Ryan, a 63-year-old mother from Somerset, who says she trusted the company’s branding and used its baby powder for decades.