47
submitted 2 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago
[-] the_wizard_of_0Z@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Chais@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

Bleed the bastards dry! Financially speaking.

[-] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is after a decade of litigation. They probably already made 10x more.

[-] RejZoR@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago

Is talc itself the issue? Isn't talc still being used widely in cosmetics?

[-] czarcasm@kbin.earth 11 points 2 weeks ago

Yes talc. And the problem is that talc gets contaminated with Asbestos. J&J knew they were using contaminated talc. There is a documentary on this investigation. I boycotted J&J years ago.

[-] leftOverLife@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

What's the name of this documentary, if you remember?

[-] czarcasm@kbin.earth 2 points 1 week ago

I don't recall the exact one, but "The Weekly" had an episode in their first season about it and Bloomberg did a show on it. YouTube has a few of these, maybe not full episodes.

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

No. It's talc contaminated with asbestos.

[-] hexdream@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

They couldn't of course pool their payouts to pay for an ongoing international advertising campaign exposing what happened. That would just be a horrible idea...

this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2026
47 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

9416 readers
400 users here now

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS