By Abdirahman Mohamed Idris
We should be careful because we might be deceived with how huge the company that we are using its product, believing that everything they produce is safe, otherwise, they would not be successful. Most of the companies are concerned with how they can boost their profit even if that would harm the consumers.
In February this year, Johnson and Johnson (J&J) was sentenced to pay 72 million dollars to a family of a woman who died last year because of ovarian cancer which was claimed to be a result of her using talcum powder, which is one of the most important products of J&J. The lawyer, Jere Beasley, who represented the affected woman and her family provided the jury with evidence which disclosed the J&J and accused the company of knowing the linkage between the ovarian cancer and the talcum powder, known also as baby powder since the 80s.
The evidence that was shown in the trial was a study done by a scientist in the 80s. The scientist is Dr. Daniel W. Cramer; he found in 1982 that there is a relationship between the use of talcum powder and the increase of the possibility of having an ovarian cancer. The doctor testified in the court and said that he had sent a report to the company pointing out the issue and recommending the company to either pull back their product from the market or at least provide a label in their talcum powder bottles warning consumers about the possibility of being vulnerable to ovarian cancer.
The lawyer said that the company had intentionally ignored and deliberately neglected that advice and continued selling its product to boost its income. The jury was emotionally moved when they saw the study and the report that was sent to the company by Dr. Cramer. They wondered saying that obviously this company knew that its product had a link to ovarian cancer, but chose to do nothing about it and refused to warn their customers. The jury foreman said, œAll J&J had to do was put a warning label on the box. But they didnt. They did nothing. Therefore, they suggest that the company must pay 10 million as an actual damage for the family of Jacqueline Fox, who died in October 2015 at the age 62 after battling ovarian cancer for almost three years. The verdict included also 62 million which has to be paid by the company to Fox family as a punitive. For every year Jacqueline has lived, J&J has to pay one million.
Immediately after the verdict, J&J provided information about the talcum powder and how safe the product is on their blog. Carol Goodrich, a Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman, said: œWe have no higher responsibility than the health and safety of consumers, and we are disappointed with the outcome of the trial. We sympathise with the plaintiffs family but firmly believe the safety of cosmetic talc is supported by decades of scientific evidence.
If they were concerned about their customers they would have warned them instead of keeping quiet for decades not to disturb the sale of the product. The company claims that they have no higher concern than the safety of their customers but in fact they have no more concern than the profit that they can make from us. Up to now the company did not pull back their powder from the market and no one from the company has contacted with the media. The company is trying to avoid saying anything about this issue. I think they are hoping that something would happen and make people forget about the issue.
I sent an e-mail to the companys vice president of media relations, Ernie W. Knewitz, asking him about the issue. He replied with, œyou can read an accurate account of our position here: http://www.safetyandcarecommitment.com. If the vice president of media relations cannot provide answers and defend his company why is he hired? Their website published an article on the same day they lost the case to the Fox family.
Even though J&J have provided information about their product on their blog that was not enough to help tackle the issue that they are having. People and media are looking for more clarification from the side of the company but J&J have failed to fulfil the need of information by its public and the media. The worst approach that would be taking to overcome a crisis is being silent. The companys silence and avoidance of communicating the issue with its consumers and the media gives the media and the public a chance to make their own conclusion, which is that J&J is guilty and “we are betrayed by them”.
Besides the information about the talc powder that was provided in the companys blog and the statement that was given from the companys spokesperson nothing have been received from the company.
According to Stempel (2016), Johnson & Johnson faces claims that in an effort to boost sales, it failed for decades to warn consumers that its talc-based products could cause cancer. About 1,000 cases have been filed in Missouri state court and another 200 in New Jersey. In line with these lawsuits, the Guardian says œthe popularity of talc is already waning and wont be helped by more lawsuits. When the company has lost its case with Fox family, other people were encouraged and motivated to sue the company for the fact that J&J knew about the harm of its powder but they didnt notify the customers.
What has made the issue worse for the company is that they were ordered by a U.S. jury on Monday 2 May, to pay $55 million to a woman who said that using the companys talc-powder products for feminine hygiene caused her to develop ovarian cancer. The company appealed for both cases and their spokeswoman, Carol Goodrich, said, œthe verdict contradicted 30 years of research supporting the safety of cosmetic talc. The company intends to appeal and will keep defending its product’s safety. One can infer from the companys effort to not pay back for what they have done and caused that they want to get your money, lie to you, and never will they pay back for their mistakes.
I think after losing the second case, the picture has become very clear to the consumers that the company’s position is very weak and their poor communication with the public can portray that they are guilty and do not know how to justify or explain their irresponsibility. The only reason they might have could be “we wanted to gain more money” but could they say that?***