Thousands of people across the United Kingdom have banded together in a landmark lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, one of the world’s most recognized baby-product manufacturers, alleging that the company knowingly sold talcum powder contaminated with asbestos—a deadly mineral linked to cancer. The legal action, filed on October 16, 2025, at the High Court in London by KP Law, represents more than 3,000 individuals who claim their lives, or the lives of loved ones, were upended by ovarian cancer, mesothelioma, or other cancers after years of using Johnson’s baby powder between 1965 and 2023.
The lawsuit is not only massive in scale but could also become the largest product liability case in British legal history, with damages potentially reaching hundreds of millions of pounds, according to lawyers for the claimants. The case hinges on internal company memos, scientific reports, and court documents that, as reported by BBC and Sky News, allege Johnson & Johnson was aware as early as the 1960s that its talc-based powder contained fibrous minerals—tremolite and actinolite—classified as asbestos in their needle-like forms.
“There exist very few, if any, commercially exploited talc deposits in the world which do not contain asbestos,” said Michael Rawlinson KC, the lead barrister for the claimants, in court filings. He alleges that reports from talc mines, Johnson & Johnson’s own research, and existing scientific literature would have made the company aware of the contamination risk. Despite this, Rawlinson claims, the firm “suppressed information that might indicate that baby powder was contaminated with asbestos,” “lobbied regulators” to keep its product on the shelves, and “sponsored studies to downplay the dangers” to human health.
The UK lawsuit mirrors a wave of litigation in the United States, where Johnson & Johnson has faced tens of thousands of lawsuits and has already paid out billions in damages. Just last week, a Los Angeles jury ordered the company to pay $966 million (£720 million) to the family of Mae Moore, a California woman who died in 2021 from mesothelioma—a rare cancer almost always caused by asbestos exposure, according to the NHS. Although the company is expected to appeal, the verdict stands as one of the largest awards against the firm to date. Earlier this month, a Connecticut court also ordered Johnson & Johnson and its successor entities to pay $25 million to a man diagnosed with terminal peritoneal mesothelioma after lifelong use of the baby powder.
At the heart of the UK case are internal documents and communications that, according to the BBC, reveal how Johnson & Johnson executives discussed the presence of asbestos in their talc as far back as 1973. One memo allegedly stated, “Our baby powder contains talc fragments classifiable as fiber. Occasionally sub-trace quantities of tremolite or actinolite are identifiable…” The same year, company leaders debated the value of patenting a method to remove asbestos fibers from talc, with one executive writing, “We may wish to keep the whole thing confidential rather than allow it to be published in patent form and thus let the whole world know.” Johnson & Johnson has maintained that these discussions were about securing valuable patents, not about concealing health risks.
Rather than issuing warnings on product packaging, the lawsuit claims the company doubled down on aggressive marketing, portraying its powder as a symbol of purity and safety. In the 1970s and 1980s, advertising focused on newborn babies, while in the 1990s and 2000s, the marketing shifted to target African American women. A 2008 internal email, cited by the BBC, noted, “The reality that talc is unsafe for use on/around babies is disturbing… I just don’t think we can continue to call it baby powder and keep it in the baby aisle.” Johnson & Johnson responded that this discussion concerned asphyxiation risks—a rare but acknowledged hazard of body powders—not cancer or asbestos, and that warnings regarding asphyxiation were included on the product label.
The claimants’ stories are often harrowing. Siobhan Ryan, a 63-year-old mother from Somerset, told the BBC, “My mother used it and I used it. It smelt nice and was soft and lovely. When my babies were born I used it on them. I thought I was doing my best for them.” Diagnosed with stage 4 ovarian cancer, Ryan has endured three rounds of chemotherapy, sepsis, and major abdominal surgery. She believes her cancer was caused by years of using the powder. “They knew it was contaminated and still they sold it to new mums and their babies,” she said.
Patricia Angell’s husband, Edward, died in 2006, just weeks after being diagnosed with mesothelioma. She recalled, “He would come home from work and shower every day and use J&J’s talc. Talc was mentioned on Edward’s autopsy report, along with asbestos strains found in contaminated talc.”
Medical experts emphasize the complexity of cancer causation. Professor Christina Fotopoulou, a gynecological oncology surgeon at Imperial College London, explained, “Cancer is usually an accumulation of mistakes in the reproduction cycle of the cells and so any harmful factors—internal or external—that disrupt the balance of the cells may contribute to these mistakes that eventually may lead to cancer.” Ovarian cancer, for instance, is caused by a mix of genetic, internal, and environmental factors. Symptoms can include persistent bloating, pelvic pain, feeling full quickly, and changes in bowel habits.
The legal claim also alleges that Johnson & Johnson lobbied US regulators, specifically the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to accept less sensitive testing standards for asbestos detection in talc, which would have allowed trace amounts of asbestos to go undetected. Internal documents cited by the lawsuit reportedly show the company argued for testing standards that tolerated up to 1% asbestos contamination, asserting that more sensitive detection methods were unnecessary. Johnson & Johnson disputes this, stating the documents were hypothetical calculations requested by the FDA and misrepresent the context.
In response to the mounting lawsuits and public scrutiny, Johnson & Johnson stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the US in 2020, switching to a cornstarch alternative. The company ceased global sales of its talc powder in 2023. Its consumer health arm has since been moved to a new company, Kenvue, which also faces legal action in the UK.
Both Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue have consistently denied all allegations. In a statement, Kenvue said, “We sympathise deeply with people living with cancer. We understand that they and their families want answers—that’s why the facts are so important. The safety of Johnson’s baby powder is backed by years of testing by independent and leading laboratories, universities, and health authorities in the UK and around the world. The high-quality cosmetic grade talc that was used in Johnson’s baby powder was compliant with any required regulatory standards, did not contain asbestos, and does not cause cancer.”
As the case proceeds, the outcome could set a major precedent for product safety and corporate responsibility in the UK and beyond. For now, thousands await answers—and perhaps, justice—for what they allege was a betrayal of trust spanning generations.
