Talcum Powder Litigation

Talcum powder is made from talc, a naturally occurring mineral valued for its ability to absorb moisture and reduce friction. For much of the 20th century, talc-based powders were marketed as everyday hygiene products and were commonly used on infants, for feminine hygiene, and as a body powder.

Major manufacturers promoted talcum powder as gentle and safe for frequent use, encouraging daily application, including in the genital area. This marketing led to decades of widespread exposure among millions of women.

What many consumers were never told is that talc is often mined near asbestos deposits. Without rigorous testing and controls, talc products can become contaminated with asbestos fibers—microscopic particles that can lodge in the body and cause cancer years or even decades later.

Scientific research has shown that talc particles applied to the genital area can migrate through the reproductive system and reach the ovaries. Once there, these particles may cause chronic inflammation and cellular damage, increasing the risk of malignant changes over time.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified talc-based powders used in the genital area as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." This classification reflects evidence linking talc exposure to ovarian cancer, particularly with long-term, repeated use.

In cases involving asbestos-contaminated talc, the risks are even more severe. Asbestos fibers are a well-established cause of mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive cancer that affects the lining of the lungs or abdomen. Even minimal exposure can be dangerous, and symptoms often do not appear until decades after initial use.

Ovarian cancer linked to talc exposure is often difficult to detect early. Symptoms can be vague and easily overlooked, allowing the disease to progress before diagnosis.

Mesothelioma symptoms may include shortness of breath, chest or abdominal pain, fluid buildup, and severe fatigue. Both diseases frequently require aggressive treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy, and long-term medical care, with significant impacts on quality of life.

Over the past several decades, epidemiological studies have identified a statistically significant association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer. Researchers have observed higher rates of ovarian cancer among women who reported long-term talcum powder use compared to those who did not.

Internal corporate documents, later revealed through litigation, suggest that manufacturers were aware of asbestos contamination risks and emerging cancer concerns while continuing to market their products as safe.

These findings form the scientific foundation of the litigation and raise critical questions about whether companies acted responsibly in light of known or knowable risks.

The talcum powder lawsuits primarily assert product liability and failure-to-warn claims. Plaintiffs allege that manufacturers prioritized profits over consumer safety and concealed critical information about cancer risks.

Plaintiffs argue that clear warnings or safer alternatives would have changed consumer behavior and prevented countless injuries.

In many talcum powder cases, juries have awarded punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. Punitive damages are intended to punish defendants for especially reckless or deceptive conduct and to deter similar behavior in the future.

Evidence introduced at trial has included internal company memos showing awareness of asbestos risks and strategic decisions about how to manage public perception rather than eliminate the danger.

For example, a St. Louis jury awarded $4.62 billion to 22 women with ovarian cancer, including billions in punitive damages, after finding that executives knew about asbestos contamination but failed to warn consumers.

Each case is evaluated individually, with compensation reflecting the severity of illness, length of exposure, and overall impact on the plaintiff’s life.

Most federal talcum powder lawsuits are consolidated in a multidistrict litigation known as MDL 2738, pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.

As of January 2026, there are approximately 67,580 pending cases in the MDL. The litigation has progressed through extensive discovery, including the review of internal corporate documents and expert testimony.

While Johnson & Johnson previously attempted to resolve the litigation through a controversial bankruptcy strategy, courts rejected that effort. The MDL is now moving toward additional bellwether trials, which will help shape settlement discussions and future case outcomes.

You may be eligible to pursue a talc lawsuit if you were diagnosed with ovarian cancer or mesothelioma after regularly using talc-based products over an extended period.

Eligibility often depends on factors such as frequency and duration of use, type of product, and timing of diagnosis. Family members may also be able to bring wrongful death claims on behalf of loved ones who passed away from talc-related cancer.

An experienced attorney can review your medical history and exposure details to determine whether your claim is viable.

Attorneys often assist in gathering and organizing this evidence, particularly when exposure occurred many years in the past.

Statutes of limitations vary by state and can be complex in latent disease cases like ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. In many jurisdictions, the clock begins to run when a person is diagnosed and reasonably discovers a potential link to talc exposure.

Because these deadlines are strict, waiting too long to seek legal advice can permanently bar a claim. Speaking with an attorney as soon as possible helps ensure your rights are protected.