We Can Help The costs of mesothelioma can be overwhelming. They can include income loss, expensive treatments that may not be covered by health insurance, plus pain and suffering for you and for your family. Because the disease is preventable – and because it is usually caused by someone else’s negligence – legal options may be available to help regain these costs.
Asbestos lawyers focus their practice on knowledgeably and effectively bringing to justice companies that exposed employees and the public to asbestos products.
A mesothelioma attorney can help you consider your options and file a claim against the company responsible for your asbestos-related illness. More than one company may be responsible. A mesothelioma attorney identifies all companies at fault.
Mesothelioma lawsuits have helped thousands of people receive financial assistance. A lawsuit can result in much-needed money to help reduce financial hardships during an illness and can also provide a more stable future for your loved ones. A lawyer specializing in asbestos litigation can help you seek compensation for expenses related to illness caused by asbestos exposure.
|
After four years of litigation, a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury has awarded a historic $966 million to the family of Mae K. Moore in a wrongful death lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson. The verdict, filed October 6, 2025 in Judge Ruth Ann Kwan’s courtroom, found J&J 100% responsible for Moore’s mesothelioma diagnosis, which led to her death.
Moore filed her personal injury lawsuit on February 9, 2021. The claim was amended to a wrongful death suit on February 18, 2022, following Moore’s death on December 29, 2021. Her three daughters became the plaintiffs in the amended filing.
Initially, the suit named companies like Avon, Chanel, Colgate-Palmolive, Dana Classic Fragrances, Lucky Stores and Johnson & Johnson as defendants. A settlement with Avon was filed April 13, 2023, the case against other defendants like J&J subsidiary Janssen Pharmaceuticals was dismissed without prejudice. Only J&J was named in the verdict.
The nearly $1 billion award is the largest talc verdict for an individual plaintiff since J&J began facing talcum powder lawsuits in the last 15 years. While multi-plaintiff cases have yielded larger total verdicts, this single plaintiff award is unprecedented.
Inside the Jury’s Record-Breaking Decision
The verdict document we obtained shows the jury’s responses to 25 questions. Their answers reveal how they viewed the testimony and evidence presented in the case.
The initial questions established the jury’s determination that J&J’s talc-based baby powder was contaminated and Moore was exposed to asbestos as a result. When asked specifically, “Was Mae Moore exposed to a product manufactured, distributed, supplied or sold by Johnson & Johnson (Johnson’s Baby Powder or Shower to Shower) that contained asbestos?” the jury responded yes.
The jury also answered yes to: “Was Johnson & Johnson negligent?” and “Was Johnson & Johnson’s negligence a substantial factor in causing Mae Moore’s mesothelioma?” They also answered yes to questions asking if J&J’s baby powder or Shower to Shower contained a “manufacturing defect” and if that defect was a “substantial factor in causing Mae Moore’s mesothelioma.”
Critically, the jury responded yes when asked, “Did Johnson’s Baby Powder or Shower to Shower have potential risks that were known or knowable in light of the scientific and medical knowledge that was generally accepted in the scientific community at the time of manufacture, distribution or sale?” They also answered yes to: “Did Johnson & Johnson intentionally fail to disclose a fact that Mae Moore did not know and could not reasonably have discovered.”
“Did Johnson & Johnson intend to deceive Mae Moore by concealing the fact?” and if that “concealment” was a “substantial factor in causing Mae Moore’s mesothelioma” were also both answered with yes. When asked what percentage of responsibility they assigned to J&J for Moore’s mesothelioma, the jury responded: 100%.
Breaking Down the Jury’s Awards for Pain, Suffering, Loss and Punitive Damages
The jury was asked to determine non-economic damages. These go beyond covering treatment expenses and other medical costs related to mesothelioma. They focus on what’s known as “pain and suffering.”
The jury was asked to consider what she experienced before her death. Specifically, “What were Mae Moore’s non-economic damages for her past physical pain, mental suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, physical impairment, inconvenience, grief, anxiety, humiliation and emotional distress?”
How the Jury Divided the Award
- $6 million: Mae Moore’s non-economic damages
- $4 million: Joy Moore, Mae Moore’s daughter, named successor in interest
- $3 million: Kathryn Pratt, Mae Moore’s daughter
- $3 million: Carol Farquharson, Mae Moore’s daughter
- $950 million: punitive damages
The jury was also asked to consider non-economic damages for Mae Moore’s three daughters. The question posed: “What are Plaintiffs’ non-economic damages for the loss of Mae Moore’s love, companionship, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support, training and advice?”
The most substantial part of the mesothelioma compensation awarded was the amount of punitive damages. This type of damages is designed to “punish” defendants for offenses like negligence, fraud and malice. When asked, “Do you find by clear and convincing evidence that Johnson & Johnson acted with malice, oppression or fraud in the conduct upon which you base your finding of liability?” the jury responded yes.
What the Wrongful Death Lawsuit Revealed: Decades of Internal Documents
We obtained a copy of the amended wrongful death lawsuit filed in February 2022, which laid out the plaintiff’s case through hundreds of exhibits spanning from the 1930s to recent years. The exhibits, including internal company documents, testing reports and correspondence, formed the body of evidence that ultimately persuaded the jury to award $950 million in punitive damages.
Moore’s Exposure and J&J’s Early Knowledge
According to the mesothelioma lawsuit, “Mae K. Moore was exposed to asbestos on a regular and frequent basis while she used asbestos-containing talcum powder products on herself and her children from approximately the 1930s to 2021.” The plaintiff’s attorneys argued J&J had known about asbestos contamination in talc for decades.
The lawsuit cited internal documents showing that “beginning in the 1930s, scientific literature emerged indicating talc often had impurities that were known or suspected of being carcinogenic, such as asbestos.” The company knew about these health concerns through its membership in the National Safety Council, according to exhibits from 1934, 1935 and 1936.
Failed Asbestos-Removal Attempts
The lawsuit detailed J&J’s unsuccessful efforts to remove asbestos from talc ore dating back to the 1960s. According to the complaint, “asbestos found in talc ore is impossible to remove from the ore.”
The company attempted multiple methods: floating the asbestos out, using citrus acids to burn it out and employing reagents, beneficiation and ultrasonic grinding. Evidence entered into the record included a dozen Battelle Reports and confidential internal documents from 1958 through 1974. “These methods do not work, which J&J understood for decades,” the lawsuit stated.
The plaintiff’s attorneys emphasized the scale of contamination: “Asbestos weighs very little so that small amounts represent millions to trillions of fibers of asbestos per gram of baby powder.” They cited trial testimony from a J&J witness in a previous suit acknowledging 1% asbestos would equal millions to trillions of fibers.
Internal Concerns About Litigation Risk
A 1969 internal company document was cited as Exhibit 40 in Moore’s lawsuit. It discussed that “J&J was concerned that the presence of tremolite in its talc products would cause pulmonary diseases and cancer and increase the risk that the company would be drawn into litigation.”
Moore’s lawsuit also quoted from internal memos showing the company’s own executives and lawyers acknowledged key facts while defending other talc cases. This included a 1997 memo stating: “There is no doubt that ‘mesothelioma can be caused by non-occupational exposure to mineral fibers.'” The same documents noted that “mesothelioma may occur after brief or indirect exposure to asbestos.”
One internal analysis was particularly damning. According to the complaint: “In several mesothelioma patients studied, both talc fibers and tremolite were detected. In fact, the majority of asbestos bodies isolated from the lungs of women in the general population have tremolite or anthophyllite and because they’re known contaminants of talc, this data suggests that rare cases of mesothelioma among women with no other identifiable exposure might be related to exposure to cosmetic talc.”
Testing Results J&J Reportedly Never Disclosed
Moore’s case alleged “J&J internally and through hired testing laboratories, such as Battelle Memorial Institute, McCrone Associates and the Colorado School of Mines Research Institute, tested for asbestos impurities in the source talc ore, processed ore and finished products used to manufacture J&J cosmetic talc products. All of these testing laboratories found asbestos minerals in J&J source talc ore or cosmetic talc products.”
Materials Analytical Services, another testing firm, “repeatedly found what was also found in J&J internal testing, the presence of tremolite and anthophyllite asbestos,” the lawsuit stated. According to the complaint, “J&J withheld most of these results from the public until recently.”
Public Assurances vs. Internal Documents
The lawsuit contrasted J&J’s internal test results with its public statements. The company “assured consumers that ‘asbestos has never been found in Johnson’s Baby Powder and it never will'” and “repeatedly told the public that ‘Baby Powder does not contain asbestos and never will,'” according to the complaint.
The intent, the lawsuit argued, quoting internal documents, was “to reassure” consumers there was a “zero chance” of exposing their families to asbestos. “These statements… were false when they were made and J&J knew they were false when they made those statements,” the lawsuit alleged.
Representations to the FDA
The plaintiff’s attorneys detailed what they characterized as a pattern of misleading federal regulators. According to the lawsuit, “J&J’s answer to the FDA’s inquiries was always the same: there is no evidence of any amount of asbestos in any J&J cosmetic talc product.”
The company “represented to the FDA ‘over and over again’ that there is not a single instance or report of asbestos… in its products,” the complaint stated. The lawsuit cited particularly troubling allegations about evidence suppression.
In 1978, “the Chairman of the CTFA Task Force on Round Robin Testing and then current employee of J&J instructed the CTFA to ‘destroy your copy of the table’ containing the results finding asbestos in cosmetic talcs,” according to correspondence entered as an exhibit. “The repeated findings of asbestos in talc were not provided to the FDA,” the lawsuit stated.
“As recently as 2016, J&J represented to the FDA that no asbestos structures have ever been found in its talc-based products in any testing anywhere in the world,” the lawsuit alleged. “This statement made to the FDA was false.”
Alleged Manipulation of Testing Results
The lawsuit alleged that “McCrone and J&J worked together to manipulate testing results of J&J products done by outside laboratories.” And further claims it “reported those manipulated findings to the FDA as negative results.”
In one instance, the complaint stated, Johnson & Johnson hired Professor Hutchinson from the Minnesota Space Center to “privately test the products with the intention of refuting the FDA consultant’s findings.” Instead, “Professor Hutchinson informed Ian Stewart that he found ‘incontrovertible asbestos’ in J&J’s talc-based products.”
According to the lawsuit, “J&J hired outside consultants to conduct tests of J&J Talc Products using test methods J&J knew would not detect asbestos at low levels.” The complaint stated the more sensitive TEM testing “found asbestos fibers in J&J’s talc; the less powerful/sensitive methods did not.”
Document Retention Issues
The lawsuit alleged serious problems with Johnson & Johnson’s preservation of evidence. “Since at least 1971 J&J has known that information in the company’s possession relevant to or produced in any particular talc-based lawsuit would be relevant to discovery in future talc-based cases,” the complaint stated.
Yet, according to the lawsuit: “although J&J was legally obligated to retain evidence, it does not know where the documents and evidence related to these cases are located or whether they even exist.” The complaint alleged that “in a recent trial, J&J was forced to admit under oath” that statements in an affidavit were “false and perjurious.”
The Jury’s Assessment
These allegations, and the hundreds of exhibits entered into evidence, formed the basis of the plaintiff’s case. The jury’s $950 million punitive damages award suggests they found the evidence of J&J’s conduct particularly compelling. Punitive damages are specifically designed to punish defendants for alleged wrongdoing.
J&J, however, has disputed the verdict and announced plans to appeal. The company’s worldwide Vice President of Litigation Erik Haas called the verdict “egregious and unconstitutional” in a statement. Haas argued the scientific evidence the plaintiffs’ experts presented in the case is “based on ‘junk science’” and said it “never should have been presented to a jury.”
J&J maintains that though it has ended sales of talc-based products globally, those products were safe and didn’t contain asbestos. J&J is still facing more than 67,000 lawsuits related to allegations of asbestos-contaminated talc.
The post What the Court Documents Show About J&J’s $966M Loss appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
A Connecticut judge has added more money to a jury’s verdict award for a plaintiff with mesothelioma who filed suit against Johnson & Johnson. A Bridgeport Superior Court jury initially awarded Evan Plotkin $15 million in October 2024. The judge has now added $10 million in punitive damages, bringing the total to $25 million.
Plotkin’s lawyers filed his mesothelioma lawsuit in 2021. His attorneys argued in the suit that Plotkin used J&S’s talc-based powder on himself and his children for decades. The lawsuit further argued repeated inhalation of J&J’s asbestos-contaminated talcum powder caused Plotkin’s cancer.
As Karen Selby, RN, a Patient Advocate at The Mesothelioma Center, tells us, “Talc is a very common product that’s used in a lot of cosmetics and powder.” But she notes the talc in these products, like J&J’s talc-based baby powder, was mined “from the same mines that asbestos came from.”
The amount of asbestos in a batch of talc used to make baby powder or other products “could be a very small percentage” Karen explains. However, she notes, “If you’re using powder every day, and you’re getting small doses of talc that may be contaminated with asbestos, over time, that can be a health hazard” that can eventually cause mesothelioma.
Johnson & Johnson Plans to Appeal
While Trey Branham, Potkin’s mesothelioma lawyer, said he and his client “are grateful the judge read the opinion and did what he thought was right,” the company says it will appeal the judge’s ruling. Branham said the verdict strengthens efforts to hold Johnson & Johnson accountable. But the company’s legal team pointed to a recent South Carolina case they argue was similar and the jury found in J&J’s favor.
Erik Haas, the head of J&J’s global litigation team, has repeatedly argued the company’s talcum products don’t cause mesothelioma, ovarian cancer or other asbestos-related cancers. However, Branham commented, ““It’s frustrating that a company known for caring for mothers and babies continues to deny this clear truth.”
Branham pointed to a growing number of verdicts nationwide against J&J. And more than 67,000 talc lawsuits remain pending against the company.
New FDA Dashboard Increases Transparency as Cosmetic Safety Concerns Rise
Growing coverage of talc lawsuits and research linking asbestos-contaminated talc to cancer has made consumers increasingly worried about whether their cosmetics are safe. People are demanding better oversight and in response, the FDA launched a new dashboard on September 12, 2025.
The FAERS Public Dashboard for Cosmetic Products is an interactive real-time tool providing public access to adverse event data related to cosmetics. The user-friendly platform allows anyone to search, query and download adverse event reports that are updated daily. The agency says this represents a major advancement in “radical transparency.”
The dashboard brings together adverse event reports from multiple sources. This includes mandatory reports that cosmetic companies must submit under the 2022 Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act, as well as voluntary reports from doctors, consumers and salon workers. Users can look up specific product names or types of reactions and sort the results based on severity, date and report type. The database covers a wide range of products including moisturizers, shampoos and hair dyes.
The FDA cautions that reports in the dashboard haven’t been verified and don’t prove that a product caused the reported reaction. The data should be viewed as a tool to spot potential safety issues that need further investigation, not as a final judgment on whether a product is safe or dangerous. More information about the dashboard and how to report adverse events is available through the FDA’s MedWatch program.
The post Judge Increases Mesothelioma Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and Representatives Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon and Don Bacon of Nebraska are leading a bipartisan effort to pass the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act of 2025. This updated version of a bill previously introduced in Congress would ban all types of asbestos in the United States. Health experts, labor groups and environmental organizations have voiced their support.
The bill’s supporters stress its importance for closing loopholes and creating lasting protections for every American. The World Health Organization reports more than 200,000 people die each year worldwide from diseases connected to asbestos exposure. Workers and disadvantaged communities face the highest risks.
Nearly 70 countries have already banned asbestos. Yet limited uses continue in the U.S., mainly sheet gaskets for nuclear material processing at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site (allowed through 2037) and in the chloralkali industry (allowed through 2029).
Evidence over many decades proves asbestos causes deadly diseases, including mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer. Advocates note previous steps from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency banned only some uses of chrysotile asbestos. Other fiber types and applications continue in industries such as chemical manufacturing and automotive parts.
Legislative Timeline of the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act
Efforts to pass a full asbestos ban in the United States have spanned several years. Lawmakers continue to reintroduce versions of the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act across multiple congressional sessions. Each version aims to close loopholes and strengthen protections against asbestos exposure.
The Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act has faced years of reintroduction and debate. With each attempt, support has grown among lawmakers, health groups and the public. Asbestos advocates say the bipartisan bill in 2025 represents the strongest chance yet to finally end asbestos use in the United States.
What ARBAN Would Ban
The Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act demands an immediate and permanent ban on the import, manufacture, processing and sale of asbestos. The law covers all 6 fiber types, as well as winchite and richterite, which are lesser-known fibrous minerals that remain unregulated.
Advocates say ARBAN would finally align the United States with global public health standards, closing loopholes earlier EPA rules and court rulings allowed, which let asbestos use continue for decades. The act also blocks future legal challenges that could weaken protections, delivering long-term safety for generations and making it the most sweeping asbestos legislation before Congress in more than 30 years.
Industries such as the chloralkali sector, which still uses asbestos to create chlorine and sodium hydroxide, would need to switch to safer options within a set compliance timeline. Advocates point out other countries have phased out asbestos and lowered future cases of preventable asbestos-related diseases.
The Biden administration issued a ban on chrysotile asbestos in 2024. That move marked the first asbestos ban since the 1989 EPA effort was overturned. The rule applies only to chrysotile asbestos and allows companies as long as 12 years to complete a gradual phaseout.
Alan Reinstein’s Legacy and the Fight Against Asbestos
Alan Reinstein, the bill’s namesake, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2003 and died in 2006. Before his diagnosis, neither he nor his wife Linda had ever heard of mesothelioma.
Linda Reinstein co-founded the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization with Doug Larkin, whose loved one also developed mesothelioma. Together, they launched a mission to end asbestos exposure and protect public health.
Asbestos was once widely used in materials such as flooring, insulation and building products. Hundreds of thousands of people have filed asbestos lawsuits to help pay medical bills and replace lost income from asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma.
Families experiencing secondary asbestos exposure may also file a legal claim. No safe level of asbestos exposure exists.
The post Lawmakers Renew Asbestos Ban Effort to Prevent Mesothelioma appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
Researchers are reporting promising advances for people with pleural mesothelioma who can have surgery. One tested immunotherapy given before and after surgery. The other studied a blood test that helps doctors detect mesothelioma earlier than scans.
Doctors at several cancer centers, including Johns Hopkins, ran an early clinical trial testing immunotherapy for mesothelioma. They gave patients Opdivo (nivolumab) alone or with Yervoy (ipilimumab) before surgery. After surgery, doctors gave Opdivo again. The trial confirmed this approach is safe. Early results suggest giving immunotherapy before mesothelioma surgery may help some patients live longer.
The blood test study at Georgetown University looks for mesothelioma tumor DNA in the bloodstream. It lets doctors track how mesothelioma responds to treatment and identify patients at higher risk of the disease returning. Patients whose DNA levels dropped after therapy lived longer.
Together, these studies give doctors new ways to plan mesothelioma treatment and monitor the disease. They may help doctors personalize care and give patients more time with their loved ones.
Pre-Surgical Immunotherapy May Extend Life for Mesothelioma Patients
The phase II clinical trial tested pre-surgical (perioperative) immunotherapy for people with mesothelioma whose tumors could be removed surgically. More than 80% of patients were able to have surgery on schedule after receiving pre-surgical immunotherapy. Doctors monitored each patient closely to track treatment response and adjust follow-up care.
The study explored whether giving immunotherapy before surgery could help the immune system fight mesothelioma more effectively. Early results showed some patients lived longer than expected compared with historical outcomes, and doctors reported the treatment was generally well tolerated.
While the results remain preliminary, they suggest pre-surgical immunotherapy could provide meaningful benefits for some people with mesothelioma. The findings offer a foundation for larger studies that may help doctors tailor treatment to individual patients and improve both survival and quality of life. The study was published in Nature Medicine on September 8, 2025, marking an important step in mesothelioma research.
Researchers ran the clinical trial at multiple cancer centers, including Johns Hopkins and Georgetown University. They enrolled people with operable diffuse pleural mesothelioma, meaning it spreads widely across the lung lining.
They measured survival, treatment tolerance and if surgery can be done safely. Doctors used this information to understand who might benefit most from combining surgery with immune-based therapy.
Breakthrough Blood Test Detects Hidden Mesothelioma
Researchers tested a highly sensitive blood test that looks for circulating mesothelioma tumor DNA (ctDNA), which are tiny fragments tumors shed into the bloodstream. This test reads the genetic material of these fragments to find mesothelioma cells too small to see on scans.
The low mutation rate of mesothelioma tumors makes standard ctDNA detection difficult. Tracking ctDNA in the blood allowed doctors to monitor how the cancer changed over time and see whether treatments were working. Patients whose ctDNA levels dropped significantly or became undetectable after therapy tended to have better outcomes.
The test also helped identify patients likely to experience mesothelioma recurrence, even when scans appeared normal. This early detection could let doctors adjust treatment sooner, potentially improving survival and quality of life.
Georgetown University Medical Center researchers published the study on September 11, 2025. Dr. Joshua Reuss, Dr. Valsamo Anagnostou and their team tracked ctDNA changes in patients with mesothelioma.
They detected tiny traces of cancer that imaging scans missed and used the results to monitor treatment response. These findings give doctors new tools to act sooner and offer patients more personalized care, bringing hope for better outcomes in the future.
The post Mesothelioma Blood Test, Pre-Surgery Immunotherapy Offer Hope appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization will host its 20th annual Asbestos Awareness and Prevention Conference on September 12 and 13 in New York City at the Westin Grand Central hotel. Global experts will discuss diagnosing, treating and preventing asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma, as well as policy, advocacy and asbestos law.
Linda Reinstein, ADAO co-founder and president, tells us this conference is unique. Reinstein shares, “This conference is about using what we know, advancing what we should know and getting to a learned place so we can prevent asbestos exposure.”
The event will start at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, September 12 with a candlelight vigil at the World Trade Center Memorial. Participants will honor those who have died of 9/11-connected asbestos exposure.
Following the vigil, an awards and recognition ceremony will take place. Public health leaders and dedicated asbestos advocates will receive awards. The evening will also feature a special music performance from Jordan Zevon, a singer and songwriter who advocates for awareness about the dangers of asbestos.
9/11 Ongoing Health Crisis and Dr. Selikoff’s Enduring Legacy
This year’s event begins the day following the 24th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. The conference will focus on the ongoing public health crisis affecting first responders and recovery workers exposed to asbestos at Ground Zero. First responders like firefighters have developed serious illnesses linked to asbestos, including mesothelioma, which can take decades to appear.
ADAO continues to honor them and push for safer conditions for first responders and the public. Reinstein says, “Our annual conference is a place to exchange life-saving knowledge, honor those we’ve lost, and galvanize our efforts to ban asbestos and prevent exposure.”
The theme of the 2025 conference is “Building on Dr. Selikoff’s Legacy in Asbestos Science, Prevention and Justice.” During the 1950s, New York physician Dr. Irving Selikoff discovered a pattern of serious illnesses among asbestos workers. By 1964 his work proved the toxic mineral increased the risk of several deadly diseases.
Dr. Selikoff pioneered and transformed our understanding of asbestos exposure and asbestos-related diseases. Reinstein notes, “Gathering together in New York City is especially meaningful as we reflect on the legacy of Dr. Selikoff and the sacrifices of 9/11 responders.”
Academic Session at Mount Sinai Hospital
The academic session on September 13 will run from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Mount Sinai Hospital. Leading medical professionals, scientists, legal experts and advocates will present information across multiple topics.
Medical experts will cover new breakthroughs in diagnosis, treatment and prevention strategies. Legal experts and advocates will discuss efforts to hold companies accountable and the push for a global asbestos ban.
2025 ADAO Conference Agenda
- Session 1: From Then to Now, Selikoff’s Vision and Our Journey Forward
- Session 2: Diagnosing and Treating Asbestos-Related Diseases
- Session 3: Prevention Is the Cure, Strategies for Exposure Reduction
- Session 4: Dr. Irving Selikoff, Paul Brodeur and Beyond
- Session 5: Asbestos and the Law
Tickets are still available for people who want to join. Visit ADAO’s official conference site to register and learn more.
The post Join ADAO’s 20th Annual Asbestos Awareness & Prevention Event appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
Hundreds of asbestos exposure injury claims are set to be resolved after a federal judge approved a bankruptcy plan for cosmetics supplier Presperse and its parent company Sumitomo Corporation.
The company, which has battled asbestos-related lawsuits since 2015, faced a recent wave of litigation from people who claimed they were exposed to asbestos through its talc-based products and later developed asbestos-related illnesses, including mesothelioma. Presperse supplies raw materials to the cosmetics and personal-care industry.
The plan includes a $50 million trust to settle current lawsuits and future claims and was approved by U.S. District Judge Robert Kirsch and Judge Michael B. Kaplan of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. Presperse filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2024 after litigation costs threatened the company’s ability to continue operating.
Presperse is owned by Tokyo-based Sumitomo Corporation, which also owns U.S.-based Sumitomo Corporation of Americas.
$50 Million Trust Targets Mounting Talc-Asbestos Claims
According to court documents, Presperse sells more than 400 products to over 300 corporate customers. These ingredients are used in formulations for color cosmetics, extended product applications, delivery of active ingredients, novel texturizing agents, anti-aging actives, skin cleansing systems and organic-certified extracts.
Presperse was first named a defendant in a talc personal injury lawsuit in 2015. From 2015 to 2021, it was named in several additional lawsuits. However, in late 2021 and 2022, the number of lawsuits increased to more than 275 cases, according to court filings.
The company stopped selling talc products in the summer of 2023, citing “an abundance of caution” and “the overwhelming cost of defense.” Talc products accounted for only 4% of its annual revenue, according to court filings.
Presperse called the lawsuits “entirely without merit” and maintains all talc sold by the company was safe.
Financial Strain Led to Bankruptcy
Presperse’s financial position collapsed in the year before its bankruptcy filing, records show. For the fiscal year ending in March 2024, the company posted a net loss of $40.6 million, driven largely by asbestos-related litigation. Pre-tax losses reached $53.3 million, while operating losses totaled $6.3 million, according to court documents.
By the end of that fiscal year, Presperse’s net assets had fallen to negative $14 million, and total liabilities stood at $59.2 million. The parent company absorbed much of the impact, booking litigation costs around $35 million in its fourth quarter results and the value of Presperse shares fell to zero.
Executives warned in court filings that ongoing litigation expenses made the company unlikely to keep operating without a court-supervised restructuring. Sumitomo contributed $49 million to the trust and a $2 million loan to help with bankruptcy financing.
Asbestos-Related Illnesses Linked to Talc
Talc is widely used in cosmetic and personal care products and can sometimes be contaminated with asbestos. Both minerals occur naturally in close proximity in the earth. Asbestos is a known carcinogen, and inhaling or ingesting the fibers can cause serious and often fatal diseases.
The most common illness linked to asbestos exposure is mesothelioma, a rare cancer that develops in the lining of the lungs, abdomen or heart; lung cancer, and asbestosis, a chronic lung disease that causes scarring of lung tissue. Symptoms of these illnesses include shortness of breath, persistent cough and chest pain. It can take decades for these illnesses to develop after exposure.
In mesothelioma cases, brief or low-level asbestos exposure can be enough to trigger disease years later. Any amount of asbestos exposure is dangerous. In recent years, asbestos lawyers have reported an increase in asbestos-related talc lawsuits.
According to the latest KCIC report, “In 2024, 751 of the 3,931 lawsuits filed alleged exposure to asbestos through talc. This represents 19% of total 2024 filings and an increase of 18% compared to 2023. The majority of these (90%) were mesothelioma cases.”
The trust’s approval marks a step toward resolving years of litigation and offers a path to compensation for claimants.
The post Judge Approves Presperse $50M Talc-Asbestos Bankruptcy Deal appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
People diagnosed with mesothelioma have another reason to trust major hospitals this year. U.S. News & World Report released its 2025-2026 Best Hospitals for Cancer list, ranking the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston as the top hospital for cancer care in America for the 11th year.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City is once again the runner-up, praised for its research advances and patient outcomes. Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center in Boston, Mayo Clinic in Rochester and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston round out the top 5 for cancer care.
U.S. News & World Report evaluated nearly 5,000 hospitals and surveyed 30,000 physicians to determine the top facilities for cancer treatment. The rankings measure patient outcomes, safety, nurse staffing, physician reputation and key programs, such as hospice and palliative care.
“We are honored to again be ranked as the nation’s top hospital for cancer care-a recognition that reaffirms our commitment to our shared mission to end cancer,” said Peter WT Pisters, M.D., president of MD Anderson Cancer Center. “We are grateful to every one of our teammates, trainees, students, donors, volunteers, advocates and patients, whose unwavering dedication make it possible for MD Anderson to deliver outstanding patient care,” Dr. Pisters added.
2025 Top 10 Best Hospitals for Cancer
The top 2 hospitals remain the same from last year. Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center and Mayo Clinic ranked No. 3 and No. 4, respectively. UCSF Health-UCSF Medical Center remains in the No. 7 spot from last year.
Massachusetts General Hospital broke into the top 5. In last year’s rankings, it came in at No. 11. Meanwhile, Mount Sinai moved up from No. 8 to No. 6, and Stanford Health Care also rose from No. 13 to No. 9. This year, the No. 10 spot is a tie between City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center and Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania-Penn Presbyterian.
Top 10 Best Hospitals for Cancer
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City
- Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Boston
- Mayo Clinic-Rochester
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
- Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City
- UCSF Health-UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco
- Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore
- Stanford Health Care-Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto, CA
- (Tie) City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA & Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania-Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia
Each of these top facilities offers cutting-edge treatments, access to clinical trials and teams led by expert oncologists, nurses and researchers. Many hold National Cancer Institute designation for excellence in cancer research and care. These centers continue to drive advances in mesothelioma treatment, giving patients and families hope for better outcomes.
2025 Top 11-20 Best Hospitals for Cancer
Choosing a top-ranked cancer hospital gives each mesothelioma patient access to leading specialists, the newest treatments and supportive services during every stage of care. A person diagnosed with mesothelioma or another rare cancer often benefits from treatment at specialized centers named in the rankings. Many of these hospitals have dedicated teams and advanced therapies tailored to each person’s needs.
Rounding Out the Top 20 List
The University of Chicago Medical Center holds the top position in Illinois for cancer treatment for the third year. The center offers cutting-edge therapies and has a dedicated cancer pavilion under development. It’s slated to open in 2027.
2025 Best Hospitals Honor Roll
U.S. News & World Report also released a yearly Best Hospitals Honor Roll list. This list spotlights health care leaders who deliver excellent treatment for a range of conditions, not just one specialty. This approach helps people find hospitals that meet their complex needs, especially when facing serious illnesses.
The 2025-2026 Best Hospitals Honor Roll includes 20 hospitals from across the country. Facilities from states such as Arizona, California, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas all earned this distinction. These hospitals stand out because they excel in many areas of health care, showing their commitment to superior patient outcomes and innovative care.
Mayo Clinic continues to lead the Honor Roll, with both its Rochester and Phoenix locations featured. Other top hospitals include Cleveland Clinic, Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles and making its debut on the list is AdventHealth Orlando.
The post 2025’s Top Cancer Hospitals: Best Places for Mesothelioma Care appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
A Boston jury has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay more than $42 million to a Massachusetts family, finding its baby powder caused Paul Lovell’s mesothelioma. He testified that he used J&J’s baby powder for 40 years, applying it to himself and his children, and that he was diagnosed in 2021.
The verdict is among the largest ever awarded in Massachusetts talc litigation. It underscores the mounting legal pressure facing J&J nationwide over claims of asbestos-contaminated talcum powder.
During the 2-week trial, Lovell’s attorneys noted he’d never worked in factories or other sites at higher risk for asbestos exposure. The jury agreed the company’s talc-based baby powder was contaminated with asbestos, directly causing Lovell’s mesothelioma. Jurors also concluded the company was J&J negligent, hid evidence of contamination and failed to warn consumers for decades.
“Paul never worked in a factory, never used joint compound, and never had any occupational exposure to asbestos,” said attorney Danny Kraft in a statement. “Instead, like untold millions of Americans, he was a lifelong user of J&J’s Baby Powder. He trusted the product on himself and on his children.”
Attorney Aaron Chapman added, “This verdict is not just about Paul Lovell. It’s about every consumer who was told these products were safe. For years, Johnson & Johnson ignored its own internal warnings and scientific evidence about the presence of asbestos in its talc. The jury has sent a strong message: Corporate misconduct will not be tolerated.”
J&J’s Response to the Verdict
Johnson & Johnson continues to deny its talc products contain asbestos or cause cancer. In a statement following the landmark $42 million verdict, global litigation Vice President Erik Haas, not only claimed the verdict was the result of “junk science,” he also said J&J plans to sue the expert cited in the case.
Haas promised an immediate appeal and disparaged Lovell’s attorneys. He argued, “The plaintiff’s lawyers’ business model is to roll the dice in search of jackpot verdicts, fueled by litigation-funded junk science, without regard to the fact that most claimants recover nothing in the tort system.”
This verdict follows a string of recent large jury awards against J&J, as courts around the country weigh evidence that the company’s talcum powder products may have exposed millions to toxic asbestos. Currently, J&J faces more than 63,000 lawsuits from people alleging harm from its talc products.
$8M Awarded in Another Massachusetts Talc Case
Another high-profile talc lawsuit in Massachusetts recently ended with an $8 million jury award for Janice Paluzzi. She used J&J’s talcum powder products for decades, believing them to be safe for daily use.
Attorneys presented evidence she had no other known contact with asbestos, mirroring other lawsuit claims nationwide. The jury in this case also found J&J negligent, determining that its talc products were asbestos-contaminated and directly caused Paluzzi’s mesothelioma diagnosis.
Jurors also ruled that the company breached the warranty that its products were safe for consumers. This case further demonstrates the mounting asbestos litigation J&J continues to face, even after removing talc from its baby powder and repeatedly denying the presence of asbestos in its products.
“Johnson & Johnson knew its talc Baby Powder could kill, and they chose to keep selling it anyway, despite the availability of safer cornstarch-based powders,” said Ben Braly, one of Paluzzi’s attorneys. “We are grateful to the jury for holding them to account.”
J&J’s Ongoing Talc Legal Battles
J&J’s efforts to resolve the majority of talc claims via bankruptcy court have failed. This has left the company to defend individual lawsuits in state and federal courts across the country. Settlements and jury awards are expected to climb as more cases go to trial in the coming months.
Despite J&J’s persistent denials, the company’s third attempt to resolve talc-related claims in bankruptcy court was dismissed in March 2025. J&J’s subsidiary, Red River Talc LLC, employed a controversial “Texas Two-Step” strategy in its filing, which was rejected as bad faith, including flaws in the voting process among claimants.
Following this dismissal, J&J officially abandoned its bankruptcy approach and announced it would return to defending the numerous pending lawsuits in the tort system. The company also reversed approximately $7 billion it had reserved for bankruptcy settlements, signaling a renewed focus on litigation rather than a global resolution through bankruptcy courts.
The post MA Jury Awards Landmark $42M Verdict in J&J Talc Lawsuit appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
A Delaware jury awarded $9 million to the family of Eugene Schoepke, an Illinois hunter who died from mesothelioma in 2022. The lawsuit argued companies added asbestos to Remington and DuPont shotgun shells in the 1960s and failed to warn consumers, putting the public at risk.
Schoepke hunted for many years and repeatedly used these asbestos-containing shotgun shells for decades. Asbestos exposure is the primary cause of mesothelioma. Medical experts testified that every time he fired the shells, asbestos fibers entered the air.
As Patient Advocate Snehal Smart, M.D. tells us, “The potential dangers of asbestos in these shotgun shells are that with every shot, these microscopic fibers become airborne and settle onto hunting equipment. The shooter and others in the immediate area can all be exposed to this asbestos.”
She explains the risk wasn’t only to the hunter firing the shells and those present at that specific location at the time. She says the fibers on hunting gear and even the hunter’s skin or hair can mean they’re carried into their car or home, potentially exposing others as well.
Snehal explains, “These airborne fibers could then be brought back home to families where the fibers dislodge. Asbestos brought into the home can lead to secondary exposure and eventually mesothelioma, a rare and terminal cancer.”
Anyone who still uses these vintage shotgun shells could be putting themselves at risk of developing mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. We’ve looked and found 1960s vintage Remington and DuPont shotgun shells for sale in various online auctions. None of these auctions note the shells potentially contain asbestos and pose a health risk.
Legal experts see this verdict as a call for greater transparency in sporting goods manufacturing and ammunition safety. Advocates believe more families may come forward now if they discover similar past asbestos exposure. The case highlights the ongoing need to hold companies accountable for the long-term health risks their products cause.
Thomas C. Crumplar, one of the attorneys representing Schoepke’s family said, “The family is very pleased that the word has gotten out about the asbestos shotgun shells, which is something that had never been disclosed. They were the only manufacturer that put [asbestos] in there. The family wanted some accountability and we’re pleased that a Delaware jury has given some.”
Shotgun Shell Manufacturers Named as Defendants
The lawsuit identified several companies responsible for the shotgun shells. Defendants include a former DuPont subsidiary and Remington, now Sporting Goods Properties Inc.
DuPont Co. oversaw production when the shells were made in the 1960s. Specifically, the defendant in the asbestos-containing shotgun shells lawsuit is E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, now operating as EIDP, Inc., a subsidiary of Corteva, Inc.
Founded in 1802 in Delaware as a gunpowder manufacturer and a major military supplier, E.I. du Pont de Nemours evolved over more than 200 years into a diversified chemical and materials business. The entity named in the lawsuit separated from the merged DowDuPont and changed its name to EIDP, Inc. on January 1, 2023, and is legally distinct from the modern DuPont company.
Remington, now Sporting Goods Properties Inc., operated under DuPont’s control from 1933 and became a fully owned subsidiary by 1980. After 1960, despite known dangers, DuPont and Remington added asbestos to Remington and Peters shells. DuPont controlled manufacturing, safety and branding. The company concealed asbestos risks and failed to warn consumers, making the shells a joint product under DuPont’s oversight.
So far, neither DuPont nor Sporting Goods Properties have released any public statement about the verdict. With this outcome, both companies now face increased scrutiny about past product decisions and product labeling.
Hidden Asbestos in Hunting Gear
During the trial, evidence showed that asbestos was added to shotgun shell wadding after 1960. At this time, scientific experts had not only widely understood the cancer risks associated with asbestos but also actively communicated these dangers to manufacturers, urging them to limit exposure and implement safety measures. No other large ammunition producers chose this ingredient, making these shells uniquely dangerous.
Expert testimony explained how every shot would send microscopic asbestos fibers into the air where people nearby could breathe them in. Inhaled asbestos becomes trapped in tissue within the body, which can eventually cause inflammation and scarring. Over time, this inflammation can change the DNA of cells, becoming cancerous.
The case revealed gaps in product warnings and labeling, potentially leaving consumers unprotected. Most people wouldn’t know asbestos could be present in something like hunting gear. Advocacy groups hope the verdict will help update safety standards and product warnings across the ammunition industry.
The post $9M Mesothelioma Verdict Over Asbestos Shotgun Shells appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
People who developed mesothelioma, ovarian cancer and other diseases as a result of asbestos-contaminated talc continue to seek justice. But companies like Avon and Johnson & Johnson are fighting claims in court with mixed results.
In recent weeks, Avon’s own insurers have moved to block talc lawsuits in bankruptcy court. Meanwhile J&J faces its second trial in Boston this year, and a federal judge is pressing for accountability in the collapse of J&J’s third failed bankruptcy.
Boston Gears Up for Second Talc Trial Involving Johnson & Johnson
J&J is back in a Boston courtroom, this time facing a lawsuit from Paul Lovell. The Massachusetts resident was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2021 after using the company’s iconic baby powder for 40 years.
Lovell’s legal team alleges J&J knowingly sold talc contaminated with asbestos and hid the risk from consumers and regulators for decades. Attorney Danny Kraft told jurors in his opening statements that J&J’s talcum powder had “a dirty little secret.”
Kraft argued it was a secret J&J “hid from us all for decades.” He added J&J concealed the truth from “Mr. Lovell and his family, from the three decades that he used it.”
He said it was: “A secret that J&J hid from the FDA, regulators, scientists, nurses and doctors. But most importantly the people like Paul Lovell who used the product every single day, year after year, decade after decade.”
Attorneys for Johnson & Johnson deny the claims. They argue Lovell’s illness stems from a “very rare gene fusion,” and not exposure to asbestos.
The trial follows a recent Boston verdict in which a jury awarded $8 million to Janice Paluzzi. She was also diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2021.
The jury concluded J&J’s talc products, baby powder and Shower-to-Shower contained asbestos, which contributed to her illness. Paluzzi was awarded $5 million for past pain and suffering, and $3 million for future suffering.
The company is facing more than 63,000 similar mesothelioma lawsuits. J&J continues to deny its products are responsible.
J&J Bankruptcy Strategy Draws Scrutiny
J& J’s third bankruptcy attempt, filed through its subsidiary Red River Talc LLC, was dismissed. This left creditors and fee applicants in limbo, without any decision on how their compensation would be handled.
In April, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez tossed the case without addressing the pending professional fees. Now, U.S. District Court Judge Keith P. Ellison has ordered Lopez to clarify the legal basis for declining to rule on the outstanding matters.
The pharma giant had tried three times to perform a strategy known as a “Texas Two-Step.” This involves creating subsidiary companies, most recently Red River, to absorb the company’s talc related liabilities, then filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Courts have repeatedly rejected the filings, citing bad faith and that the parent company, J&J, remains financially solvent and capable of defending lawsuits against it.
In March, J&J officially abandoned the bankruptcy strategy and announced it would be returning to fighting the remaining lawsuits. The company also reversed approximately $7 billion it had held in reserve for the bankruptcy proceedings.
Avon Insurers Urge Court To Dismiss Bankruptcy
Avon, the global cosmetics and personal care brand, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August 2024, partly in response to a growing number of lawsuits alleging that its talc-based products caused cancer. At the time, Avon said the move was intended to “address its debt and legacy talc liabilities.”
But now, Avon’s own insurers have challenged the talc claims. In a recent Delaware bankruptcy court filing, they urged the judge to either dismiss the bankruptcy case entirely or convert it to a Chapter 7 liquidation.
Chapter 11 allows the company to continue operating while restructuring its debts. But Chapter 7 would require Avon to shut down and sell its assets to pay the claims.
The insurers argue that under Avon’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan, the plaintiffs in the talc lawsuits would be limited to seek compensation from a $30 million insurance fund. This could be much less after administrative costs are paid. The judge will decide if the bankruptcy is dismissed, which could allow the talc litigation against Avon to continue in civil court.
Avon is the defendant in hundreds of talc lawsuits. But the company denies its talc products are responsible for the plaintiffs’ injuries.
Plaintiff Rita-Ann Chapman, an Arizona woman, received a $52.1 million trial award in 2022, after winning her lawsuit against Avon. The family of an Illinois mesothelioma survivor received a $24.4 million trial award from another jury.
The post Courts Question Legal Tactics as J&J and Avon Confront Growing Talc Liability appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
A new clinical trial launched this month is testing a novel immunotherapy that could offer hope to people with mesothelioma or other hard-to-treat cancers. It will explore an experimental treatment using CAR T-cells, a type of immune cell engineered to find and attack cancer cells. The 100-person National Cancer Institute study is now recruiting participants.
This trial is open to adults who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma or other solid tumors that have returned or spread after standard treatment. To qualify, more than 50% of tumor cells must test positive for a specific protein called mesothelin.
This protein is often found in high levels in people with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma. It’s also found in high levels in people with ovarian cancer, pancreatic cancer, thymic cancer, bile duct cancers and non-small cell lung cancer.
Additional Key Eligibility Requirements
- No history of lung fibrosis, inflammatory lung disease or signs of pneumonitis at the start of enrollment
- No history of serious autoimmune or immune system diseases that aren’t controlled
- No other active cancers or uncontrolled illnesses
- Properly functioning organs
Dr. Raffit Hassan, an oncologist and senior investigator at the NCI, will lead the study. The trial for this treatment will take place at the NIH Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. There is no cost to participate in the trial, and some costs may be covered.
What Kind of New Immunotherapy Is This Trial Testing?
This clinical trial will study the effects of a therapy called TNhYP218 CAR T-cells, which target the protein mesothelin. CAR T-cell therapy takes T cells, a type of white blood cell, and changes them in a lab so they make chimeric antigen receptors. This special receptor, or CAR, helps T cells recognize mesothelioma cells and kill them.
While CAR T-cell therapies have shown success in treating blood cancers, they have struggled to work against solid tumors like mesothelioma. This type of immunotherapy isn’t Food and Drug Administration- approved for mesothelioma yet and is only available in clinical trials.CAR T-cell therapy is approved for some blood cancers like leukemia and lymphoma.
Currently, there is no known cure for this aggressive cancer. But emerging new mesothelioma treatments are offering hope for longer survival and better quality of life. Advances to standard treatments are also improving how doctors are able to manage the disease.
The most common type of mesothelioma affects the lining of the lungs, known as pleural mesothelioma. It can also affect the lining of the abdomen in peritoneal mesothelioma, the lining around the heart in pericardial mesothelioma and the tunica vagalis in testicular mesothelioma. Workplace exposure to asbestos is the most common cause of mesothelioma.
What Can I Expect if I Participate in This Trial?
In this early-phase clinical trial, first you’ll have a biopsy to measure your mesothelin levels. If your levels align with the study requirements, you’ll then begin the trial.
During treatment you’ll be hospitalized for at least 14 days. In the first 7 days, you’ll be given drugs in order to prepare for the study treatment. The modified T-cells will be reintroduced to you via IV. You’ll then spend an additional 7 days in the hospital, according to the study details.
Steps in the New TNhYP218 CAR T-Cell Trial
- You’ll have blood drawn through a vein.
- Your blood will then pass through a machine to separate the T-cells in a process called leukapheresis.
- Then your remaining blood will be reinfused back into your body through another vein.
- Your T-cells will be taken to a lab to be genetically modified, creating CARs known as TNhYP218 CAR T-cells, specifically designed to target mesothelin.
- Follow-up visits will be scheduled to monitor the results of the therapy and your overall health.
Follow-up visits will be conducted for 5 years and could include imaging, blood and heart tests and a new biopsy, according to the trial description. Participants will be followed for safety for up to 15 years, per the FDA requirement.
The trial will begin with a phase I dose-escalation clinical trial. If successful, the trial will move to phase II, to a dose-expansion to determine the efficacy of the treatment, according to the study overview.
The post Clinical Trial to Test New Mesothelioma CAR T-Cell Immunotherapy appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
The Environmental Protection Agency, now under the Trump administration, is reconsidering the former administration’s decision to ban the ongoing use of chrysotile asbestos. EPA officials asked an appeals court for a 30-month pause to evaluate whether it reverses the asbestos ban completely, parts of it or none of it.
Asbestos ban advocates, cancer survivors and the medical community say a potential reversal of the Biden administration’s 2024 ban of chrysotile asbestos is an outrageous decision that will put thousands of lives at risk to asbestos-related diseases such as mesothelioma and lung cancer.
“The EPA’s motion to delay and potentially reverse the 2024 Part 1 Chrysotile Asbestos Rule is deeply alarming. Every 13 minutes, someone in the U.S. dies from an asbestos-caused disease,” Linda Reinstein, president and co-founder of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, an advocacy nonprofit, told The Mesothelioma Center. “If this ban is reversed, more Americans will be exposed, more families will suffer, and more lives will be lost — all because of the ongoing legal challenge to the rule.”
EPA Faces Legal Challenges From Industries
In October 2024, Olin Corporation, Ohio Chemistry Technology Council, American Chemistry Council, Texas Chemistry Council and Georgia Chemistry Council among others filed a court case challenging the EPA’s asbestos ban enacted in 2024.
Court documents show they called the EPA’s 2024 decision an “overbroad approach” to the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. That rule permits the EPA to restrict certain chemical and toxic minerals, including asbestos, with exceptions.
“EPA’s risk assessment failed to account for reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, and its choice of an outright ban on chrysotile asbestos followed an inadequate discussion of alternatives and was not necessary to mitigate unreasonable risk,” according to court case documents. “Under these interpretative principles, EPA exceeded its authority under TSCA and otherwise acted in an arbitrary fashion, and its Final Rule should be vacated.”
EPA officials in March 2024 announced “a ban of ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos to protect people from lung cancer, mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, laryngeal cancer and other health problems caused by asbestos exposure.”
Mesothelioma is an asbestos-related cancer that primarily affects men who worked in blue-collar occupations and were regularly exposed to asbestos, such as construction workers, shipyard workers, and military personnel, particularly Navy veterans.
Chrysotile asbestos, also known as white asbestos, continues to be imported into the U.S., particularly for use in the chlor-alkali industry. According to ABC News, eight facilities in the U.S. used asbestos diaphragms in the chlor-alkali sector to produce chlorine and sodium hydroxide as water disinfectants.
Under the asbestos ban now on hold, companies would be given a phase-out period of up to 12 years, allowing them to continue using asbestos in manufacturing during that time.
Asbestos Ban Failed in 1989
In 1989, the EPA’s Asbestos Ban and Phase-Out Rule would have banned the production, importation and sale of asbestos products. However, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the ban in October 1991 following an industry-backed lawsuit. At that time, the court said the EPA failed to show the ban was the “least burdensome alternative” to regulating asbestos.
Other acts have attempted to ban asbestos, including the Asbestos Ban and Phase-Out Rule, the Ban Asbestos in America Act, the Bruce Vento Ban Asbestos and Prevent Mesothelioma Act and the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act, which is named after Linda Reinstein’s husband who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2003 and died of the disease in 2006.
In an ADAO press release, Reinstein said the EPA’s decision to reconsider the ban, “is a serious setback for public health that creates more unnecessary chaos and confusion.”
“EPA’s request for more time signals that the Part 1 Chrysotile Rule may face the same fate as the 1989 ban — another example of failed public health policy,” Reinstein said. “We urgently need Congress to pass the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now (ARBAN) Act to ban all asbestos fibers in all uses. Reversing course isn’t just irresponsible — it’s deadly.”
The post Asbestos Ban Future Is Uncertain appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
Leading scientists and doctors recently met with officials from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, participating in the FDA Expert Panel on Talc to talk about the potential danger of this mineral. They discussed talc’s continued use in many foods, medicines and cosmetics and the public health risks this could pose.
The panel noted the known danger from the possibility talc can become contaminated with asbestos when mined. Asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma cancer. It’s also strongly associated with ovarian cancer.
But Dr. Joellen Schildkraut from Emory University said even without the presence of asbestos, talc itself could still raise the risk of developing cancer. The experts agreed talc may cause long-term inflammation and cancer. Dr. Schildkraut asked, “If you don’t need to use it, why take a chance?”
Talc Still Found in Many Common Products
Prized for its ability to help make products smooth and prevent others from clumping or sticking together, the soft mineral has been heavily used in consumer products. It’s long been used in makeup and baby powder. And it’s even in the medicine we take and the foods we eat.
Talc is in some of the most-used medicines in the U.S. like Lipitor, Synthroid, Prilosec and Neurontin. Talc is used to keep tablets from sticking together. This helps companies manufacture them more easily.
Talc is also in products like gum, candy, cheese, flour and rice. But food labels aren’t required to list talc as an ingredient or note its presence.
Dr. George Tidmarsh from Stanford University said, “If you’ve ever unwrapped a piece of gum, that white powder – that’s talc.” He said people are often surprised to learn they’re eating food with a substance scientists now say may cause cancer.
Will Experts and Lawsuits Push FDA Decisions About Talc Rules?
Thousands of people have sued companies like Johnson & Johnson because of health problems linked to talc. Many talc lawsuits involve mesothelioma or ovarian cancer. The suits have presented that companies like J&J knew of the risks of asbestos-contaminated talc, but failed to warn the public.
Advice from the FDA Expert Panel on Talc could lead to new rules. Most panel participants agreed companies should stop using talc when safer options are available. FDA officials among the panelists said the agency will keep studying the issue.
FDA Commissioner Martin Makary didn’t outline what steps the federal agency will take next. But he stressed how serious the issue is, especially for children.
Makary said, “I am amazed that for 40 years [talc] has been recognized to be a carcinogen and yet we’re feeding it to our nation’s children. I’m amazed that we scratch our heads asking why we are seeing gastrointestinal cancers go up in young people. And we never stop to think about the existing body of scientific evidence that has been there.”
The post Experts Warn: Talc Could Pose a Serious Health Risk appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
The South Carolina Supreme Court has taken a major step in protecting the rights of people with mesothelioma as a result of legacy asbestos. On May 21, 2025, the court ruled against Atlas Turner, which has a long history of producing asbestos-containing products.
Donna Welch filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Atlas Turner that alleged the company’s products caused her husband’s mesothelioma and death in 2023. Welch’s husband, Melvin, worked at a Greenwood, South Carolina plant in the 1960s and 1970s. Atlas Turner’s asbestos insulation was used at the plant where Welch worked.
Atlas Turner, a Quebec-based Canadian company dating back to 1907, initially moved to have Welch’s mesothelioma lawsuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Then it argued laws in Canada prevented it from sending a company witness or sharing important documents. The court rejected the company’s argument and called Atlas Turner’s actions “willful and intentional.”
The justices ruled the laws in other nations don’t allow companies to ignore U.S. courts. As a result, the court placed Atlas Turner in default, meaning the company lost the case automatically.
Trey Branham, an attorney for Melvin Welch’s family, said in an official statement the firm released: “The ruling sends a clear message: companies cannot profit from doing business in the U.S. and then evade responsibility when they hurt Americans by refusing to obey court orders.”
“Companies like Atlas and its sister company, Asbestos Corporation Limited, have, for decades, thumbed their noses at U.S. court orders, after profiting from selling poisons in South Carolina and nearly every other state,” Branham added. “We are grateful that the South Carolina Supreme Court understood this and is holding them to the rule of law.”
Potential Turning Point for Mesothelioma Lawsuits
This case demonstrates a court can step in and force a company to pay insurance funds to people with mesothelioma and their loved ones after refusing to do so. Experts say this case shows courts won’t let companies hide money meant to help families coping with a mesothelioma diagnosis.
In its ruling, the court approved the appointment of a special receiver to find and take control of Atlas Turner’s insurance assets. These assets include insurance policies that could help people exposed to asbestos and their families get compensation.
Although the court set limits on what other company assets the receiver could access, it made it clear that insurance connected to mesothelioma claims is still allowed. That means other families may benefit from this ruling in future lawsuits.Because many companies that used asbestos in the past no longer operate, people often rely on insurance money as a key way to get compensated.
Theile McVey, an attorney who also represented the family of Melvin Welch, said in a statement: “This case is about protecting the rights of Americans and making sure companies and insurers are held responsible for injuries they’ve caused, no matter where they are located.”
Risk of Developing Mesothelioma After Asbestos Exposure
Many people who were exposed to asbestos years ago are at risk of developing mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. Asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma. Most people were exposed on the job, particularly in industries that heavily used asbestos products.
When asbestos materials break or are damaged, they release tiny fibers into the air that can be inhaled. These fibers can get stuck in tissues in the body, causing swelling and scarring over time. Decades later this irritation can cause the DNA in cells to change leading to mesothelioma and lung cancer.
Mesothelioma’s long latency period means it takes between 20 and 60 years after exposure for symptoms to appear. No amount of asbestos exposure is safe.
The high cost of cancer care can put a significant strain on families. Welch’s mesothelioma lawsuit illustrates why insurance money matters so much in mesothelioma cases.
The post Court Ruling Marks Major Shift in Mesothelioma Lawsuits appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
For 25 years, Libby, Montana’s Center for Asbestos Related Disease clinic, also known as CARD, has helped thousands of people with mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. But the clinic has now closed its doors after the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office delivered a writ of execution, ordering the clinic to pay $3.1 million to settle a judgment.
A writ of execution is a court order directing law enforcement to take someone’s property and sell it to pay off a legal debt. The judgment stemmed from BNSF Railway’s 2023 lawsuit against CARD. The Warren Buffet-owned railway claimed the clinic falsely diagnosed people to help them receive benefits and a jury agreed.
Many local leaders and residents say the clinic keeps the community healthy and they’re working to reopen it. The clinic’s executive director, Tracy McNew, said in a statement, “CARD remains committed to its patients and the Libby community and will fight to reopen as soon as possible.”
McNew and others working to reopen it say they fear closing the clinic will lead to fewer mesothelioma screenings and checks for other asbestos-related diseases. Early detection of diseases like mesothelioma helps people receive treatment sooner, gives them more options and can improve their outcomes.
Montana U.S. Attorneys Joins Fight to Reopen CARD
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mark Smith and Lynsey Ross asked the Lincoln County District Court to cancel its order against the CARD Clinic. In their request, they said they had asked BNSF lawyer Cole Anderson to drop the case, but BNSF refused. Montana U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme’s office is helping defend the clinic, saying BNSF was wrong to try to collect money for the federal government.
Alme’s office also said that since CARD gets money from the federal government, the local court and BNSF can’t legally take its property. Alme is asking the court to give the property back to CARD.
Federal lawyers also say the company never got permission to act for the government when collecting the money. BNSF Railway sued using a law that let it file the case for the federal government, but only because federal officials chose not to take the case themselves. BNSF won and now can get part of the $6 million that was awarded to the federal government.
Local leaders are also speaking up. Montana State Senator Mike Cuffe publicly stated the closure left him feeling “stunned and very disappointed.” Health officials have said CARD is the only place in the region providing screenings for and information about asbestos-related diseases.
BNSF and CARD’s Legal Fights
BNSF Railway has also faced lawsuits. In 2024 a federal jury’s verdict for the plaintiff said BNSF contributed to the deaths of two people who had lived near its railyard. The estates of Thomas Wells and Joyce Walder filed a wrongful death lawsuit that aimed to hold BNSF accountable for spreading asbestos across Libby.
Originally known as Burlington Northern, the company actively transported asbestos-contaminated vermiculite from the mine in Libby for decades. Libby vermiculite was shipped across the country to be used as insulation in homes and businesses across the country.
BNSF filed its lawsuit against CARD in 2023 and a jury fined the clinic nearly $6 million in fines and penalties. Soon after the jury’s ruling, the clinic filed for bankruptcy in an attempt to remain open. CARD said it had a deal with the government that should have protected it from closure.
Leaders at CARD strongly deny any wrongdoing and that the clinic followed all proper medical rules. They say a misunderstanding led to the outcome of the lawsuit and that the shutdown is unfair.
CARD’s Role in Helping Mesothelioma Survivors
CARD was created after a long history of mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis and other asbestos-related illnesses in Libby. Vermiculite mined in the town was contaminated with asbestos posing serious health risks to the public.
More than 3,000 people in Libby died as a result of asbestos exposure and many are currently coping with illness. CARD was created to help the community. It provided health screenings, checkups and treatment for those affected.
In 2024, the clinic received a $3 million federal grant to continue its work until at least 2029. Without the clinic and its screenings, many people might not get the help they need. Court documents show CARD has certified more than 3,400 people with asbestos-related diseases and has received a total of more than $20 million in federal funding.
The post Clinic That Helped Libby Mesothelioma Survivors Shuttered appeared first on Mesothelioma Center - Vital Services for Cancer Patients & Families.
|
|
