News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Johnson and Johnson hit with $55M damages in talc cancer ... by pessimizer on Tuesday May 03, 2016 @05:17PM (#11624317)
They knew talc caused cancer and not only covered it up, but turned their marketing to groups less likely to know about it. It's worse than the tobacco coverup, because everybody knew cigarettes were bad for you, just not how bad they actually were.
Re:Johnson and Johnson hit with $55M damages in talc cancer ... by ars on Tuesday May 03, 2016 @08:15PM (#11625277)
> but turned their marketing to groups less likely to know about it

It does appear that way, but it's not true. The marketing was simply toward those who buy it more often that's all.

Knowingly selling a dangerous product is bad enough (it says not to inhale the dust - how exactly are you supposed to use it without making dust?), but let's not criticize them for things that are not real.

Re:Johnson and Johnson hit with $55M damages in talc cancer ... by kazinator on Tuesday May 03, 2016 @07:09PM (#11624967)
How can J&J cover that up? Do they control that research? Were they interfering somehow (hush money, that sort of thing)?

Talc is an ancient, traditional material. They never hid the fact that their powder is made of talc. (And that is the selling point. I wouldn't buy some starch-based substitute myself.)

Alcohol turns to acetaldehyde, which is carcinogenic. Thus, sue the fuck everyone who produces wine, whisky, beer, sauerkraut or fermented anything. They are all covering it up by not mentioning cancer on their label!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talc#Food_grade : The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers talc (magnesium silicate) to be generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for use as an anti-caking agent in table salt in concentrations smaller than 2%.