Attorney Jessie Paluch, founder of TruLaw, has over 25 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
Were you diagnosed with mesothelioma?
Are you struggling to figure out the cause of your exposure?
You are not alone.
Mesothelioma websites and lawsuits concentrate on exposure to asbestos through work.
New studies and a successful talcum powder mesothelioma lawsuit point to an additional cause of this devastating cancer.
Exposure to asbestos through talc products.
TruLaw is filing lawsuits on behalf of mesothelioma victims claiming talcum powder-based products containing asbestos caused their mesothelioma diagnosis.
Mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer that affects the mesothelial cell.
The mesothelial cells are the protective layer of tissue around the lungs, heart, and stomach.
They cushion the organs, prevents friction, and allows for free movement of the body.
Mesothelioma is a serious diagnosis. 2,000 to 3,000 people die from mesothelioma each year in the U.S.
Asbestos exposure is responsible for nearly all cases.
On average, individuals live for less than one year after a mesothelioma diagnosis.
Exposure to asbestos dust is considered to be the main cause of mesothelioma.
Individuals currently suffering from mesothelioma were likely exposed to asbestos at least 20 years ago.
Talcum powder studies and lawsuits show individuals exposed to asbestos through talcum products used these products continuously throughout their lifetime.
For years, lawsuits filed by individuals who were exposed to asbestos in the workplace moved forward in the courts.
Individuals without any identifiable exposure to asbestos in the workplace were unable to find justice in the courtrooms.
Those individuals are now looking at their use of cosmetic products containing talc.
Several lawsuits have successfully compensated individuals who allege continuous exposure to talc powder was the cause of their mesothelioma.
Recent cases expose evidence that talc products such as baby powder contain asbestos.
Companies such as Johnson & Johnson and Imerys Talc America have been hit with multi-million dollar verdicts for acting with reckless indifference in selling the cancer-causing products that contributed to the development of mesothelioma.
Steven Lanzo, who was recently awarded a $117 million verdict, (including $80 million in punitive damages), was exposed to talcum powder products starting in the 1970’s when his mother used baby powder on him as an infant.
Lanzo continued this common practice through his adult life to 2003.
The jury found that this use of baby powder products played a substantial role in Steven’s mesothelioma diagnosis.
Johnson & Johnson used tests that detect asbestos only above a certain threshold and for that reason, did not report asbestos in talcum, according to the Lanzo case.
This same high standard was used by researchers that lawyers alleged were influenced by Johnson & Johnson in publishing biased scientific literature.
J&J continues to deny the existence of asbestos fibers in their talc products.
The jury in the Lanzo case awarded punitive damages because they found that J&J knew their talc powder products contained asbestos for over 50 years but kept that information hidden from the public.
In 2006, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a unit of the World Health Organization classified talc as “carcinogenic to humans”.
Despite this frightening classification talcum powder has been used for decades for a wide variety of purposes including as an ingredient in soap and baby powder, an industrial lubricant for precision machinery, and in the papermaking industry.
In 1973, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began to require that cosmetic products be tested for asbestos, and in 1989, the U.S. banned asbestos in certain products.
Although it was banned outright in more than 50 countries, talcum has not been banned in the U.S.
As a result, asbestos is still present in a number of consumer products.
New studies add common cosmetic products, body and baby powder, and talc used by barbers.
An explosive 2014 study published in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health found asbestos-contaminated talc in the lung tissue of a woman who died of asbestos-caused mesothelioma after years of using the product.
As a result of this study, many scientists, physicians, and lawyers attribute at least part of the increase in asbestos-related diseased to the presence of asbestos in consumer products.
There are currently no federal regulations requiring that cosmetic-grade talcum powder product be asbestos-free.
The FDA takes action to ban a product only if they have sound scientific evidence demonstrating that the product is harmful when used as it is intended.
Despite the lack of regulation, a number of organizations have released guidance regarding the use of talcum powder and its potential relationship with mesothelioma:
For years, ovarian cancer has been linked to talcum-based products and these talcum powder lawsuits continue to move forward in court.
Johnson & Johnson currently faces more than 6,600 talcum powder-related lawsuits.
Most allege that the products caused women to develop ovarian cancer.
Recently there have been a number of substantial verdicts in talcum powder mesothelioma litigation across the nation.
More individuals are expected to challenge the continued denial of talcum manufacturers in court.
Recent cases include:
An injured person who brings a talcum powder mesothelioma lawsuit is often eligible for compensatory damages.
These might include:
In some jurisdictions, the plaintiff may also be able to recover punitive damages intended to punish a company for misconduct and discourage others from engaging in similar conduct.
To recover punitive damages, a claimant must prove that the defendant acted recklessly with disregard to a known risk, or maliciously or intentionally harmed the plaintiff.
To recover damages in a mesothelioma claim a plaintiff must present evidence of the diagnosis and proof of asbestos exposure.
The person must prove specific legal claims asserting that the defendant was negligent and did not exercise reasonable care in manufacturing, selling, or using products containing asbestos.
Experienced Attorney & Legal SaaS CEO
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessie is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share reliable legal information with her readers!
You can learn more about the Talcum Powder Lawsuit by visiting any of our pages listed below:
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?