Three Scientists Beat Johnson & Johnson’s Defamation Suit Over Talc Research
A US judge in Virginia has ruled that 3 researchers did not defame Johnson & Johnson by publishing research linking cosmetic talcum powder products to mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer.
- J&J sued Theresa Emory, John Maddox and Richard Kradin, alleging that they defamed the company in a 2020 scientific article.
- The article said it reviewed 75 patients who had mesothelioma and had no link to asbestos other than exposure to cosmetic talc products like baby powder.
- US District Judge Jamar Walker ruled in favour of the scientists, finding no evidence of “malice” in their article.
- The litigation revealed some “mistakes” in the data, but nothing that was obvious or ignored at the time of the study, according to the ruling.
- J&J said it would appeal, seeking a trial on its claims that the scientists made false statements about cosmetic talc and asbestos exposure.
- The 3 defendants are doctors who maintain pathology practices, and who have testified as plaintiffs’ experts in asbestos litigation.
- The scientists’ attorney, Liz Lockwood, said that the ruling vindicates her clients and strongly affirms the importance of protecting scientific speech.
- J&J has been facing a deluge of litigation over its talc products, and it sued the scientists before agreeing to settle those cases for at least $5.5 billion.
- The company showed that 8 of the 75 patients in the 2020 study had been included in a 2019 study by another researcher, even though the 2020 study claimed to have an entirely new set of patients. J&J has also sued the scientist who published the 2019 paper.
- The researchers were comparing anonymised data sets and information provided by lawyers, making it sometimes difficult to detect duplicates, the ruling said.
Source: Reuters (22 August 2026)