logo
Did Johnson & Johnson put profit over safety?

Did Johnson & Johnson put profit over safety?

USA Today22-05-2025
Did Johnson & Johnson put profit over safety? | The Excerpt
On a special episode (first released on May 21, 2025) of The Excerpt podcast: For generations of Americans, the Johnson & Johnson brand has been a beloved one, as quintessentially American as baseball and apple pie. Its baby shampoo 'no more tears' has been a fixture in bathrooms for decades, as has its iconic band aids and talcum power. But it's this last item, the talcum powder, that may prove to be a tipping point in destroying its hard-won 139-year-old reputation with consumers. Author and freelance investigative journalist Gardiner Harris joins us on The Excerpt to discuss his new book 'no more tears: The Dark Secrets of Johnson & Johnson,' which is on bookshelves now.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Dana Taylor:
Hello and welcome to The Excerpt. I'm Dana Taylor. Today is Wednesday, May 21st, 2025, and this is a special episode of The Excerpt. For generations of Americans the Johnson & Johnson brand has been a beloved one, as quintessentially American as baseball and apple pie. Its baby shampoo No More Tears has been a fixture in bathrooms, as has its iconic Band-Aids and talcum powder. But it's that last item, the talcum powder that may prove to be a tipping point in destroying its hard-won 139 year-old reputation with consumers. To find out why, we're now joined by author and freelance investigative journalist, Gardiner Harris, his new book, No More Tears: The Dark Secrets of Johnson & Johnson is on bookshelves now. Gardiner, thanks for joining me.
Gardiner Harris:
Thanks for having me, Dana.
Dana Taylor:
There are two products that immediately come to mind when I think of Johnson & Johnson. One inspired the title of your book, Johnson & Johnson's baby shampoo, No More Tears. The other, the topic of your investigation, is J&J's Baby Powder. What are the risks associated with talcum powder, and can you share some of the evidence you uncovered that the company knew about those risks?
Gardiner Harris:
About talcum powder, the risks are clearly about its chronic contamination with asbestos. But I also want to make clear, Dana, that my book is not just about baby powder. It is about nine separate products. The products that I go through include Tylenol, that is the most widely used drug on the planet, and is far more dangerous than most people know. I also talk about Epo or Procrit, that most people know because Lance Armstrong used it to win seven tours to France, but actually ended up killing more than 500,000 Americans in the worst cancer drug disaster in American history. Also, Risperdal, an antipsychotic that is part of a disaster that's killed more than a million Americans.
So through these various products, I point out that Johnson & Johnson has been responsible for contributing or causing more than 2 million American deaths over the last 50 odd years, and that's more deaths than have died in all of America's wars combined. It's an extraordinary toll from what has long been one of the most admired corporations in the world. And it is that contrast between what we think of Johnson & Johnson and how Johnson & Johnson has actually behaved. That is the focus of my book. And that I hope people can come away and find ways to protect themselves, not only against Johnson & Johnson, but against corruption writ large in American healthcare.
Dana Taylor:
So can you give us some of the evidence that you uncovered specifically as relates to baby powder?
Gardiner Harris:
Sure. So talc and asbestos are chemically identical. They have the same exact constituencies. And the only difference between the two, is a little bit of pressure and time as to whether those chemicals form into talc deposits or they form in asbestos deposits. And basically, what geologists will tell you is that you cannot have a talc deposit without a little bit of asbestos ribboned in the middle of it, and you can't have an asbestos deposit without some talc ribboned in there. And basically, Johnson & Johnson began to understand this problem in the 1950s and the 1960s. Now, in the fifties and sixties, these small contaminations, and these tests showed that up to three to 5% of baby powder was asbestos in the early years, but there was asbestos everywhere in American society during those years. There wasn't a boat, plane, house, car that didn't have asbestos in it and often pure asbestos. So it didn't seem like a big deal.
But science began to discover in the 1960s and the 1970s that even microscopic quantities of asbestos could cause cancer, particularly a cancer of the lining of the lung, which is known as mesothelioma. The industry then rallied, came up with an asbestos testing standard that it sold to the FDA as safe. In fact, this testing standard would bless talcum powders as being asbestos free, even when they had up to 3% asbestos. And then FDA basically washed its hands of the issue. It didn't have the money to police cosmetics at the time or even now, and it didn't. And so Johnson & Johnson then tested its own products for decades repeatedly finding asbestos in Johnson's Baby Powder, but not telling anyone. And this started to get very, very dark, Dana, beginning in the 1980s as researchers around the world, the first one at Harvard, began doing epidemiological studies comparing the cancer rates of women who used talcum-based powders like Johnson's Baby Powder with women who didn't.
And those studies began to show that women who used talcum-based baby powders suffered somewhere around 80% more cancers, usually ovarian cancer, than women who didn't. And Johnson & Johnson saw this research. Nearly all other companies that were using talcum powders got away from talcum powders and substituted in cornstarch. Johnson & Johnson stubbornly clung to this iconic product, and it is now paying the price. It has been sued over the last several years by 93,000 people, mostly women suffering ovarian cancer, who are blaming their illnesses, and in some cases the death of their loved ones, on their use of Johnson's Baby Powder.
Dana Taylor:
As you say, there are literally tens of thousands OF pending lawsuits against J&J. and while this J&J subsidiary is still in bankruptcy because of all the lawsuits, the company's been unable to reach a settlement that's acceptable to the courts. What's the big sticking point here?
Gardiner Harris:
So Johnson & Johnson wants to use the bankruptcy system to solve all of its baby powder liability, not only now, but ever in the future. The problem with ovarian cancer and asbestos is that it can take 30 years for asbestos to cause the changes that lead to cancer. So it's possible that Johnson & Johnson will be sued by tens of thousands of women annually every year for 30 years. And it's that that Johnson & Johnson wants to get out from under, and so try to use the bankruptcy system to do that. Three judges have now thrown out all three of Johnson & Johnson's bankruptcy claims. And so Johnson & Johnson is now being forced to fight each one of these claims individually in the usual court system.
Dana Taylor:
Gardiner, did you find that the people you approached for your book, doctors, former employees, were willing to speak to you on the record? What kind of risks did they face in coming forward?
Gardiner Harris:
Johnson & Johnson is the most litigious company arguably in American history. It has spent more than $35 billion on lawyers and litigation since 2011. It sues anyone at the drop of a hat. And so it also has this huge cavalcade of consultants in just about every major American medical center in the country. So it first tries to sweet talk you, and then if you are not amenable, it often sues. So the people I talked to universally were really afraid. I ended up getting grand jury records, which as you may know, Dana, are the last truly secret institutions in American society. So in those documents, I got access to hundreds and hundreds of Johnson & Johnson employees cell numbers. I called hundreds of them. I got many of them to talk to me, but only because I promised them again and again that I would keep their name secret.
Dana Taylor:
Tylenol, another Johnson & Johnson product became a target of product tampering in the 1980s. People died when someone successfully slipped cyanide into Tylenol bottles. The tampering crisis led to their creation of tamper-proof bottles still in use today. They're an important part of the Johnson & Johnson legacy. But your book takes aim at their response. Why?
Gardiner Harris:
There is a lot of evidence that Johnson & Johnson knew that the poisoning probably happened somewhere in their own distribution system, and that they kept that knowledge from not only the public, but investigators themselves. To this day, Dana, the Johnson & Johnson response in 1982 is considered the gold standard of corporate response to crises. And it's taught as among the first things that students at the Harvard Business School, Wharton School, all of them, learn. And the lessons that are taught to these students is if you're open, if you're honest, if you do the right thing, the public will reward you and you will be profitable. Those lessons are all wrong. It's fairly clear that Johnson & Johnson kept a lot of what it knew from the public and from investigators. So the real lessons that students at HBS, at Harvard and Wharton should be taught, is if you lie to the public, you might really get away with this, which is what Johnson & Johnson did, and what it has been doing for decades.
Dana Taylor:
Yours is a story about a beloved American brand. At its core, it's a story about the people behind the brand and the people affected by the brand. What compelled you to tell this story?
Gardiner Harris:
Dana, you and I are both reporters. I was a reporter at the highest levels of media, becoming a White House correspondent for the New York Times, but we fail the American public all too often. And I think the story of Johnson & Johnson is one of our greatest failures. It is essentially, a killer in our midst that we fail to warn the public about. Now, I tried a couple of times, but this is a very difficult story to tell. It's a complicated story. It needed a book to show its sweep. And I felt like it was partly my responsibility that this company had been allowed to behave so badly for so long without anyone knowing about it. Because I was one of the top drug reporters in the country, and so I left daily journalism to write this book, and it took me basically six years to get it done.
Dana Taylor:
And finally, your book was released last month. How has J&J responded?
Gardiner Harris:
So far, crickets. Haven't heard from them, which is not at all unusual. I covered the company at the Wall Street Journal, at the New York Times. For tough stories, Johnson & Johnson has historically refused to participate in any of these stories. And I actually tell story after story in the book about Johnson & Johnson managing to kill some very critical stories over the course of its history, by calling up headquarters of these big media conglomerates. And because Johnson & Johnson was one of the largest advertisers in the world, was able to threaten these organizations, "If you run this piece, we will pull all of our ads." And again and again, that succeeded in having critical stories about the company killed. So the company has been very successful by these backdoor mechanisms of keeping its brand pristine. That has not happened in this case. They have not responded, and I don't really expect them ever to.
Dana Taylor:
We reached out to Johnson & Johnson for comment on Harris's investigation, and they issued a statement saying, "We stand by the safety of our products and are focused on what we do best, delivering medical innovation for patients around the world." Investigative journalist, Gardiner Harris's new book is called No More Tears: The Dark Secrets of Johnson & Johnson, and it's on bookshelves now. Gardiner, thanks for being on The Excerpt.
Gardiner Harris:
I'm thrilled to be here, and thanks for inviting me.
Dana Taylor:
Thanks to our Senior Producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan for their production assistance. Our Executive Producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcast@usatoday.com. Thanks for listening. I'm Dana Taylor. Taylor Wilson will be back tomorrow morning with another episode of The Excerpt.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

PublicSquare Grateful for Closure of Politically Motivated CFPB Investigation into Credova
PublicSquare Grateful for Closure of Politically Motivated CFPB Investigation into Credova

Business Wire

time7 minutes ago

  • Business Wire

PublicSquare Grateful for Closure of Politically Motivated CFPB Investigation into Credova

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--PSQ Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: PSQH) ('PublicSquare' or the 'Company') was pleased to receive notification from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ('CFPB') that it had formally closed the investigation into Credova Financial, LLC ('Credova'), a wholly owned subsidiary of PublicSquare. As the Bureau confirmed to Credova, it was closing the investigation because it 'has determined that this investigation exemplifies the type of weaponization against disfavored industries and individuals that President Trump and Acting Director Vought are committed to ending,' and that 'the record of this investigation clearly demonstrates that it was conducted in a biased manner that targeted Credova's exercise of its constitutional rights and facilitation of others' exercise of their constitutional rights.' The Bureau determined that its investigation of Credova 'was not aimed at protecting consumers, but at suppressing activities protected by the First and Second Amendment.' 'The conclusion of the CFPB's investigation confirms the strength and integrity of our company and validates the trust our merchants and consumers place in us,' commented Michael Seifert, Chairman and CEO of PublicSquare. 'This outcome is a win for our entire company, our board, our customers, and a 2nd Amendment community that has seen years of government attempts to regulate businesses like ours out of existence. We would like to thank President Trump, Acting Director Vought, CFPB Chief Legal Officer Mark Paoletta, CFPB Senior Adviser Jeff Clark, and the CFPB staff for their internal review of this investigation and commitment to ensuring the Bureau operates free from political bias and suppression of constitutional rights. PublicSquare remains committed to scaling responsibly, delivering long-term value to our shareholders, and advancing our mission to build an economy rooted in liberty.' 'For more than four years, Credova was forced to defend itself from what we always believed was a politically motivated investigation that was less about consumer protection and more about targeting lawful commerce tied to the Second Amendment,' stated Dusty Wunderlich, Chief Strategy Officer & Board Member of PublicSquare and former President of Credova. 'From our view, this was the most recent in a line of attempts to weaponize government against businesses that refuse to conform to a specific political agenda. We did not yield. We stood firm in defense of our mission, our merchants, and the constitutional rights of the Americans we serve. The conclusion of this investigation is a victory not just for our company, but for every business and citizen who believes that freedom must never be compromised.' Blake Masters, PublicSquare Board Member and leader in the 2nd Amendment Community, commented, 'The closure of this investigation is a strong reminder that when businesses stand firm against government intimidation, freedom wins. This victory affirms that the right to commerce, like the right to self-defense, is fundamental to our liberty.' About Credova Credova (a subsidiary of PublicSquare) was founded to fill a critical gap in the marketplace, providing modern, point-of-sale financing solutions to merchants and consumers in underserved sectors such as outdoor recreation and the firearms industry. For many merchants, Credova and PublicSquare are their only access to the kinds of financial tools that other industries take for granted. About PublicSquare PublicSquare is a Financial Technology Company that protects life, family, and liberty. PublicSquare operates under three segments: Financial Technology, Marketplace, and Brands. PublicSquare's Financial Technology segment includes Credova, a consumer financing service, and PSQ Payments, a 'cancel-proof' payments company. The primary mission of the Marketplace segment is to help consumers 'shop their values' and put purpose behind their purchases. PublicSquare leverages data and insights from the Marketplace to assess its customers' needs and provide high-quality, wholly owned financial products and brands. PublicSquare's Brands segment comprises EveryLife, a premium D2C life-affirming baby products company. The PublicSquare Marketplace is free to join for both consumers and business owners. Download the app on the App Store or Google Play, or visit to learn more.

California regulators back moves to boost zero-emissions vehicles as feds take on state's standards
California regulators back moves to boost zero-emissions vehicles as feds take on state's standards

The Hill

time7 minutes ago

  • The Hill

California regulators back moves to boost zero-emissions vehicles as feds take on state's standards

California regulators on Tuesday vowed to strengthen their commitment to slashing harmful vehicular emissions as the Trump administration ramps up efforts to overturn the state's pollution policies. 'Clean air efforts are under siege, putting the health of every American at risk,' Liane Randolph, chair of the California Air Resources Board (CARB), said on a Tuesday press call. 'California is continuing to fight back and will not give up on cleaner air and better public health — we have a legal and moral obligation,' she added. Randolph spoke alongside the publication of a new CARB report that outlined ways the state could fight back: by accelerating zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption via increased private investment, government incentives and changes in ZEV fuel pricing. The report, submitted to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), identified these specific priority action areas and others relating to state regulations and ZEV procurement, as requested by the governor in a June executive order. Chief among the CARB report's priorities was ensuring that private investment continues to support the ZEV market. To do so, the agency recommended sustaining California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard, a program designed to reduce the carbon intensity of fuels, decrease petroleum dependency and achieve air quality gains. As far as government incentives are concerned, CARB suggested that the governor and the legislature consider backfilling federal clean vehicle tax credits, which are set to expire at the end of September. Those credits could take the form of point-of-sale rebates or vouchers and could be scaled to match state policy goals, per the report. The agency also proposed creating an education pipeline for high-paying jobs in the clean transportation industry, as well as investigating opportunities to reinstate high-occupancy vehicle lane access for ZEVs. Regarding infrastructure, CARB identified a need for collaborative buildouts of charging and refueling infrastructure. As for the price of fuels, the agency suggested implementing an electric bill crediting system for EV charging, while support Western grid regionalization and leveraging private investments to bring down the cost of hydrogen. In the regulations area, the agency recommended advancing ZEV consumer assurance measures and working with local air districts on reducing 'indirect sources' of pollution, such as warehouses or railyards. The final priority, procurement, would benefit from the purchase of ZEVs for state fleets and support for doing so in local governments, according to the report. The recommendations, Randolph said, serve to steer near-term actions and 'ensure the state stays on track to meet its air quality and climate goals.' Newsom's June executive order — which mandated the CARB report — occurred after President Trump signed three congressional resolutions revoking California's previously approved emissions rules. That approval had come from the Biden administration, which granted California a waiver to set stricter-than-federal rules via the 1970 Clean Air Act. One such rule was the Advanced Clean Cars II standard, which sought to require that all cars sold in California would be zero-emissions by 2035. A second was the Advanced Clean Trucks rule, requiring 7.5 percent of heavy-duty vehicles to be emissions-free by 2035. A third, the Omnibus Regulation, focused on slashing nitrogen oxide releases. Just last week — in an about-face on compliance with the Golden State's standards — four major truck manufacturers sued California regulators over the latter two rules. Soon after, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that a voluntary ' Clean Truck Partnership ' between the companies and the state was 'unenforceable.' Then, Friday, the Department of Justice declared its intent to sue California about the same partnership, in a bid to 'advance President Donald J. Trump's commitment to end the electric vehicle (EV) mandate.' Later that day, CARB only said that it would not comment on pending litigation. On Tuesday, however, Randolph said that regardless of federal government's waiver revocation, California is continuing 'to fight hard for the emissions reductions that can easily be achieved in the heavy-duty sector and are already being achieved.' Referring specifically to the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, she noted that 'the actual adoption is way ahead of the compliance obligation in that regulation.' 'The market is there, and the market is moving,' she said. Randolph also told reporters that CARB is already working on updating Advanced Clean Cars, with the idea that rulemaking processes can take two to four years. By starting now, she explained, the rule might 'be ready, ideally, for a more receptive U.S. EPA.' Slamming the current federal administration for 'choosing to quit the race,' she stressed that 'California is still in.' 'The world is accelerating forward toward cleaner vehicle technologies and is going to watch the U.S. fade into the rearview mirror,' Randolph added.

IRS broke rules in firing probationary employees, Treasury Department watchdog finds
IRS broke rules in firing probationary employees, Treasury Department watchdog finds

The Hill

time7 minutes ago

  • The Hill

IRS broke rules in firing probationary employees, Treasury Department watchdog finds

The IRS broke its own rules when it fired thousands of employees earlier this year on the orders of the Trump administration, the Treasury Department's internal watchdog agency found last week. The terminated employees were not given proper notice, nor was their performance taken into account when getting rid of them, the office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) concluded in a report released on Thursday. 'Internal procedures were not followed when sending the termination notices. Policies and procedures require the IRS to give probationary employees a 30-day notice and consider their performance prior to terminating them,' TIGTA found. In February, the IRS fired 6,700 employees designated as probationary, meaning they were working for the agency on a trial basis prior to becoming full staff members. The hires were part of a large-scale overhaul of the agency initiated by Democrats in 2022 as part of their Inflation Reduction Act. That legislation awarded the agency an initial $80 billion funding boost to be spent over the subsequent decade. More than half of the initial money — $45 billion — was earmarked for extra tax enforcement, specifically increased audits for wealthy Americans. The IRS even set up a new division to go after complex partnerships, or nested legal entities that can shelter funds that are owed to the government. Auditing sophisticated companies requires skilled staff, and the IRS had just started hiring a first tranche of personnel to make that happen, many of whom were in their trial period at the agency when they got canned by the Trump administration. When they got fired, they were told it was for performance reasons, but TIGTA found on Thursday that the agency didn't take performance into account when issuing pink slips. 'Termination letters cited performance as a reason for termination; however, the IRS did not consider individual performance when deciding which employees to terminate,' TIGTA concluded. The Trump administration has declared an all-out bureaucratic war on public sector unions, firing employees at many different government agencies through a special cost-cutting panel. Last week, courts gave the go-ahead to the administration's plan to do away with collective bargaining rights at a number of agencies. It's not clear whether TIGTA's report presents a legal vulnerability for the Trump administration, but public sector unions are showing the resolve to fight for their jobs. 'Our friends with the VA have had their union contract terminated. They've had their rights to collective bargaining stripped. This is, we think, an illegal action,' Daniel Scharpenburg, vice president of the National Treasury Employee Union Chapter 66, said in a social media video posted last week, encouraging fellow union members to rally. Republicans worked throughout the back half of the Biden administration to kill the IRS funding boost, clawing back an initial $20 billion before eventually freezing the rest of the audit funding through what was likely a stealth negotiating maneuver. Biden administration officials told The Hill last year they had known about that loophole in the appropriations process and worked to prevent rescissions with requests to Congress. House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Richard Neal (D-Mass.) told The Hill last year that the freeze was likely due to a mistake.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store