Johnson & Johnson may be forced to stop selling its baby powder talc in the UK and around the world amid concerns over alleged links to cancer, reports The Guardian.
The company is facing an attempt to force a shareholder vote to stop global sales of the products.
US regulators detected chrysotile fibres, a type of asbestos, in a sample several years ago and the company is facing more than 34,000 lawsuits.
Johnson & Johnson, which is based in New Brunswick, New Jersey, has stopped selling its iconic talc-based Johnson’s Baby Powder in the US and Canada, although it remains on the market elsewhere.
But the company faces thousands of lawsuits from women who claim asbestos in the powder caused their cancer.
Talc is a mineral similar in structure to asbestos, which is known to cause cancer, and they are sometimes obtained from the same mines.
The cosmetics industry in 1976 agreed to make sure its talc products do not contain detectable amounts of asbestos.
The Guardian says a shareholder vote has been proposed by Tulipshare, a London-based investment platform.
Talc is used for babies, to treat nappy rash and for personal hygiene.
Johnson & Johnson strongly denies its baby powder is dangerous and said it removed the product in North America after a slump in sales “fuelled by misinformation around the safety of the product”.
A spokesperson said: “We stand behind the ingredients we use in our products, and Johnson & Johnson has a rigorous testing standard in place to ensure our cosmetic talc is safe. Not only is our talc routinely tested to ensure it does not contain asbestos, but our talc has also been tested and confirmed to be asbestos-free by a range of independent laboratories, universities, and global health authorities.”
Johnson & Johnson's lawyers are trying to block the vote.
In June last year, the US Supreme Court left in place a two-billion-US-dollar (£1.4 billion) verdict in favour of women who claim they developed ovarian cancer from using Johnson & Johnson talc products.
The justices did not comment in rejecting Johnson & Johnson’s appeal. The company argued that it was not treated fairly in facing one trial involving 22 people with cancer who came from 12 states and different backgrounds.
A Missouri jury initially awarded the women 4.7 billion dollars (£3.3 billion), but a state appeals court dropped two women from the suit and reduced the award to two billion dollars (£1.4 billion).
The jury found that the company’s talc products contain asbestos and asbestos-laced talc can cause ovarian cancer. The company disputes both points.
Mark Lanier, the lead lawyer for the women during the trial, praised the court’s refusal to hear Johnson & Johnson’s appeal.
“This decision sends a clear message to the rich and powerful: you will be held to account when you cause grievous harm under our system of equal justice under law,” Mr Lanier said.
Target Ovarian Cancer said it was important to note that the increased risk was “very small”.
Rebecca Rennison, director of public affairs and services, said: “Various studies have shown a link between using talcum powder between the legs and ovarian cancer.
“We would therefore generally advise against using talcum powder on this area of the body.
“However it is important to note that the increased risk is very small.
“For someone without a family history of ovarian cancer the lifetime risk of developing the disease is 2%.
“Or, put another way, four women out of 200. For those that used talcum powder it could be five in 200.”
Ovacome, which provides advice and support to women with ovarian cancer, said the link remained unproven as there were “uncertainties” around the results of studies.
The charity said further research was needed.
Around 7,300 women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the UK each year, with half (53%) of cases diagnosed in women aged 65 and over.
