Asbestos in Johnson Johnsons talcbased baby powder. In response to the announcement, j j issued a limited recall of one lot of its talcum powder. On november 15, 2019, i sent an invitation to the ceo of Johnson Johnson, requesting that he appear before our subcommittee to discuss the Public Health concerns regarding j js baby powder. Hasdisappointed that j j refused to comply with our request. The ceo has not refrained from making multiple public statements on the topic, including authoring written statements and speaking with media outlets. He has now avoided voluntarily testified under oath before congress. In fact, this subcommittees first hearing earlier this year examined possible carcinogens in talcbased products. Johnson johnson objected to the hearing, complaining that it had not been invited to participate. An immediate in a media release, Johnson Johnson stated, the subcommittee did not hear the preponderance of evidence that supports the safety of our products. We gave the ceo almost a full months notice of our interest in his testimony. We wanted mr. Gorsky to come forward with their side of the story, but he declined. I can only guess why im speaking to an empty chair, but here are the facts. Evidence shows tests have found that Johnson Johnsons tal cbased baby powder contained asbestos. More sensitive testing methods have detected asbestos in talc. An internal Johnson Johnson memo from 1975, employees discussed suppressing the use of sensitive asbestos detection methods, stating, and i quote, we want to avoid promotion of this approach. Mr. Gorsky is not here to speak to that. There is evidence to suggest in the late 1980s and early 1990s the company pushed forward with an aggressive marketing plan for communities of color as its sales to caucasians declined. Unfortunately, is not here to speak to that either. In 2008, Johnson Johnson commissioned research international, a Market Survey consultant, to conduct a Consumer Survey to determine Public Perception of its powde s name. The Company Learned then that women preferred the cornstarchbased powder over the talcbased powder and that women had a particular aversion to the words talc and talcum, with one respondent stating, quote, i dont like that word brings to mind. Yet, as you can see behind me, the company made intentional decision to prominently feature cornstarch on the front of its cornstarchbased bottle, while failing to do the same by labeling the word talc on the front of its talcbased baby powder. Is notnately, mr. Gorsky here to speak to that, yet mr. Gorskys company has chosen to speak out and push back against every instance over the last two months in which asbestos has been detected in samples of Johnson Johnsons toughbased baby powder, including talcbased baby powder, including the fdas own analysis. Im sending a document request to Johnson Johnson seeking answers. We are asking the company to the to explain his decisions explain its decisions. Why it continues to keep the top powder on the market talc powder on the market, why the company refuses to attach an adequate carcinogen warning to the label of its talcbased baby powder, even as generic alternatives do so. This subcommittee will not rest until it has answers to these questions. Its with the American People and Public Health deserve its what the American People and Public Health deserve. I now recognize our colleagues, mr. Comer, of kentucky, for his Opening Statement. Thank the i want to witnesses who are here to testify. The issue is extremely important. Any possible risk from widely used Consumer Products should be a concern for everyone. Im confident that everyone in this room used some type of Consumer Product this morning, the safety of which we all take for granted. I believe its important that the committee hear from experts about possible talc contamination, the state of Scientific Understanding about the issue, and whether there are regulatory changes that should be considered with regard to the fda and other agencies. However, there are several things regarding this hearing today that im uncomfortable with. First id like to address the witness listed by the majority for todays hearing. Es. Witness since the majority was well aware in advance of todays hearing that Johnson Johnson did not believe the ceo was the appropriate witness for the subject matter specified by the majority and that therefore he would not be appearing today. Todays proceedings as they relate to his testimony appeared to be for the benefit of the media and the audience. Upon receipt of the invitation to this hearing on november 18 for the explicit purpose of examining, and i quote, me thods used to detect asbestos in talc. The company has operated in good faith to provide an appropriate witness. Mr. Gorsky does not have firsthand knowledge of such methods. Given the hearing topic identified by the committee majority, Johnson Johnson offered a recognized expert on talc geology testing methods. When that witness was rejected, the Company Proposed that the chair of Johnson Johnsons north america consumer division, which oversees johnsons baby powder, be allowed to appear. She is the highest level executive who is directly knowledgeable about the proposed topic of todays hearing. Committee democrats again rejected the proposal. In a supposed change of heart, the majority asked the witness to testify after all. Johnson johnson refused to rearrange her schedule did not rush to rearrange her schedule so that she could appear as they had originally proposed. However, later that same day, Committee Democrats again changed course and said she was not acceptable after all. They insisted on mr. Gorsky who the company has repeatedly and convincingly stated is not an appropriate witness for the of the Committee Democrats choosin today choosing today. As if they needed more theater on the day they announced their partisan impeachment. Johnson johnson has for the past year showing a willingness to cooperate shown a willingness to cooperate, providing briefings and producing documents, nearly 10,000 pages of requested information. Its offered to provide an additional 300 pages. This offer of Additional Information was declined by the majority for unspecified reasons. I worry, mr. Chairman, that the activities related to witness invitations and document production leading up to todays hearing may result in the perception that the committees investigation is not about learning new facts about the potential harm of Consumer Products, but rather is about trying to publicly shame or embarrass a company and seek out gotcha moments to aid in ongoing litigation, something this committee has been regularly doing over the past year. I worry that the committees actions raise questions about whether it is using its investigative tools to interfere with or give the appearance of interfering with ongoing litigation. More than 15,000 liability [audio loss] lawsuits have been filed against Johnson Johnson over its we ever be seen evidence of this happening. One of the majority witnesses is now citing her testimony before congress as part of her credentials during one of the ongoing lawsuits. I hope the subcommittee will commit to doing its best to refrain from interfering or appearing to interfere in ongoing litigation as we move forward. The issue we are discussing her today is of the utmost importance. I hope we can pursue this with a spirit of fairness. And an eye for witnesses able to provide the best available science. Our that said, i thank witnesses. Chrmn krishnamoorthi thank you, very much mr. Comer. Congresswoman maloney is with us, the new chairwoman of our committee and i now recognize her to say a few words and give her Opening Statement as well. Thank you, mr. Chairman for holding todays critical hearing and thank you for your subcommittees dedication for protecting Public Health. Fdactober 2019 the announced it had detected asbestos in Johnson Johnsons baby powder leaving the company to recall more than 30,000 bottles. Since then, Johnson Johnson has publicly questioned the integrity of fdas findings. Testing doubt on the accuracy of the testing that was conducted. The American People need to have faith that the products they are safe and it is part of fdas critical role. If Johnson Johnson claims there is some problem with fdas methods or procedures, they need to explain those allegations in detail and provide the basis for the allegations. Unfortunately, as the chairman explained, the ceo of Johnson Johnson, alex gorsky has declined the subcommittees invitation to testify here today. He has spoken to the press come issued a public statements and testified in litigation but he apparently does not want to defend his companys actions here today. Hat is unfortunate and frankly, unhelpful. I hope and encourage the subcommittee to continue its important work on behalf of the American People and i pledge my support as they do so, thank you of again, mr. Chairman for the support and hearing. And i yield back. Chrmn krishnamoorthi thank you, very much chairwoman maloney. I would like to recognize Ranking Member jordan for an Opening Statement if you wish. Our linking member, mr. Comer, has said what would need to be said. Chrmn krishnamoorthi really . That is the first time i have heard you say that. Thank you, mr. Jordan. Our first panel today shouldve should opportunity that have been our opportunity to hear from the ceo of Johnson Johnson. He was aware of our interested in march and said that our committee needed to hear their side of the story. We invited mr. Gorsky to come before us one month ago. And yet, mr. Gorsky is not here. Mr. Gorsky can still make this right. He can respond quickly and thoroughly to our document requests and he can come and testify before us at a future hearing because we will continue to examine this issue because it is not going away. Too many people are demanding too many answers to important questions and the safety of Johnson Johnsons talcum based has medic products is now in serious doubt. Too many people have come forward with evidence of being harmed by these products. Consequently, this issue is not going away and this committee will press forward with its inquiry. We will adjourn this panel and ask that the expert witnesses come forward to commence the next panel. Thank you. [gavel] [gavel] chrmn krishnamoorthi thank you, we will now resume our proceedings. Today, we are joined by a panel of witnesses that will help us examine the best way to discuss welcome. Mr. Etheridge will speak about his personal struggles to. Vercome mesothelioma which he believes could have been prevented if more sensitive test methods were standardized to test for asbestos and how come powder. A lablliam longo is scientist at material Analytical Services llc which has tested decades of samples of Johnson Johnson tell based baby powder talc based baby powder and he will share his findings with us. Is thequeline moline chairperson of the department of occupational medicine epidemiology and prevention at the donald and Barbara Zucker school of medicine at hofstra university. She is also the director of the north well held queens world trade and the director of the new york state funded center of long island. She will share her insights from a published case study with 33 patients with mesothelioma, male and female. And will share the broader lessons we need to understand for Public Health. Astly, dr. Ron metcalf is geologist from las vegas, nevada. He will help us understand the genesis of naturally occurring minerals often found in nature together, talc, asbestos, and the dangers both pose. If you would all please rise in raise your right hand, i will begin by swearing you win. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Let the record show that the witness is answered in the affirmative. Thank you and please be seated. Are sensitive so please speak directly into them. Without objection from your written statements will be a part of the record. And with that, dr. Longo you are now recognized for five minutes. You have to press the button. Sorry. Let me just explain the lighting system here. Press the button to speak. Green means go. To stop, itnot mean means to speed up and read, obviously means please conclude. You have five minutes to speak. Dr. Longo thank you, chairman esteemedng members and members of the subcommittee for giving me the opportunity to discuss the best methods for determining as best as in cousin medic talc. I am themetic talc president of materials Analytical Services. I have been involved in as best as analysis and research for over 30 years. I have testified on behalf of of both plaintiffs and defendants in as best as cases. And dependent labs throughout the country and over the course of several decades have documented the presence of asbestos in consumer talc products including johnsons talc products. Our own lab and Johnson Johnsons own consultants, Colorado School of mines, Dartmouth University, the crohns associates, Rutgers University and others have all documented as best as in johns inns and other manufacturers talc products for decades. The talc industry has accumulated hundreds if not thousands of results that report no quantifiable asbestos. These reports regarded by many factors as negative are misleading as a result from analytical methodological techniques. I would like to address the question in my testimony which is why are these testing methods been adopted and continue to fail these products. And what new methods can help ensure we are doing our best to find asbestos in talc. The answer in short is straightforward and should not be controversial to anyone. The methods used in the past by the industry are not sensitive enough to does to detect trace levels of assesses. We should have analytical methods that achieve the highest degree of sensitivity. Let me explain. The first thing to understand is that asbestos fibers are very small and virtually weightless. They are measured in pico grams or trillions of a gram. Millions and millions of asbestos fibers can be present in a single gram of talc. ,ven if the total good analytical sensitivity is extremely important when looking at very small samples at very low weight percentages. Analytical sensitivity is simply how many asbestos fibers must be present in the sample for the analyst to see a single fiber. The laboratories used by the poorindustry have very analytical sensitivity with detection limits of approximately 10 million per gram. To detect a single fiber in the sample, it needs to be between 10,000 excuse me, 10 million of to 14 million fibers per gram. Any method for the detection of asbestos must have good sensitivity but it does note good but it does you no good nothe preparation does allow you to see the s estes. It is been estimated that for ,very fiber in cosmetic talc there are 600,000 talc particles. Which prevent the analyst from being able to see the asbestos. This problem can be solved with sample preparation methods called heavy liquid separation. This did this technique can leave behind any asbestos that might be present making it easier to analyze. As stated, the industry analytical sensitivity is of 214 10 million million asbestos fibers per gram. Our laboratory using the hls sample preparation method we have been able to increase the analytical sensitivity to a approximately 4500 assesses fibers per gram. We have detected ample asbestos in approximately 65 of all of the cosmetic samples we have analyzed in the last three years. The hls method is not new to Johnson Johnson or to the talc industry. In the early 1970s, Dartmouth University successfully developed the method and presented it to j j. The Company Never adopted the itlim desk the method saying may be too sensitive and not in their best worldwide interest to employ. Lastly, if the manufacturers insist on continuing to use cousin medic their products, it is vital to the products it is vital to the Public Safety at this point, there is no dispute that the hls preparation method. An important caveat. Even using the best method, only truethe result the only solution to this problem is to ban the use of talc and has medic products. Thank you. Chrmn krishnamoorthi thank you, dr. Longo. Next, dr. Moline . Afternoon. Good i am honored to be here today. Dr. Jaclyn mullein. I am a Board Certified physician specializing in occupational medicine which deals with the impact of exposures on the health of individuals including asbestos. Asbestos has caused thousands of deaths and the united states. Ofislation pending, the band 2019 is currently under consideration by congress. It is time for us to ban this deadly substance. Asbestos fibers are microscopic. About 200,000 fibers could fit on abraham lincolns nose on the penny. Once these fibers are breathed in, they can penetrate deeply into the lungs and move throughout the body. The most devastating disease is mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lungs or the abdomen. It is considered a signature disease. The diagnosis almost always means asbestos. For men, the evidence is often easy to identify. Careof my patients sought because they knew they had worked with asbestos. And some men, they had no traditional source of us just as exposure and as a result, their cancers were considered idiopathic or having no cause. There is no sound scientific reason for a gender discrepancy a side from workplace exposure and could not be explained merely by chance. In my opinion come the conundrum has been solved. The presence of us best is in cosmetic talc is likely the cause of womens mesothelioma. The exposure was not their only exposure to asbestos. If doctors are not aware that as best as contaminated telcom powder, they do not ask about its use or consider it as a source. There have been no studies that look at endusers of cosmetic talcum powder. I recently published an article in the journal of environmental medicine. I colleagues and i reported on 33 individuals whose only source of asbestos exposure was cosmetic talc. Years before, other scientists also had looked at long burdens of women with mesothelioma and found the type of us best is commonly found in taupo stated that the asbestos might be related commonly found in talcum powder. A woman. Chest xray showed fluid surrounding her lungs and she had 1600 milliliters of fluid. More than seven of these water removedin front of me from her lungs. She had surgery to take tissue samples for diagnosis and had mesothelioma. Finding had a hallmark of prior asbestos exposure. Unfortunately, despite aggressive treatment, she passed away two years after her diagnosis. She had worked in various industries. She did have exposure to two settings. M in she worked as a hairdresser and she applied talcum powder to the next of her customers after she had cut their hair. She used it on her body. She stated that there would be a puff of smoke and it went everywhere. As best as can linger after that initial application and affects the health of the user and family members. The age of diagnosis in our study was 27 up to 88. Medic talc use was not cosmetic talc use was not limited to one brand. These of ely oma is a rare tumor. 3000 new cases are diagnosed in the u. S. Euro late but unfortunately it is not curable. Survival is less than 5 . 2019, asbestos fibers of a thickness of three micrometers or less caused a risk of cancer and pulmonary diseases when inhaled. What matters to me as a doctor is not the nomenclature. Any particle of us best this small enough to be inhaled is three times longer than it is wide. A cam cause disease including it can cause disease including mesothelioma. If it can be breathed into the lungs, the body does not care how the fiber group. From a clinical perspective it is simple. Millions of individuals have been exposed to as best as from contaminated talcum powder. The safer alternatives on the market do not contain talcum partner powder or asbestos. If there is any possibility of this, nce of us best asbestos, why should we take a chance . Chrmn krishnamoorthi thank you, dr. Moline. Votes were called so we will finish up the Opening Statements and then recess briefly. Mr. Average come you have five minutes. , you have fivee minutes. Mr. Etheridge good afternoon. Quiet news days are hard to find around here lately so i especially appreciate your presence here today and your interest in this important topic. I am david average. I am a virginian and for most of presbyterian minister. At the age of 56, i was diagnosed with a rare and deadly type of cancer called peritoneal mesothelioma. He cut the only known cause of mesothelioma is exposure to asbestos, my doctors and others quizzed me about my potential exposure. They asked me about where i had lived and worked. Where my family members had worked. To i livedwent in at william and mary. Trying to find some point of exposure to asbestos. They asked hundreds of questions but found no explanation. As it turns out, my mother was a liberal user of powder and throughout her life, she used it on herself and when i was an ant, talc she used based she used talcbased Johnson Johnson powder on me. From the day she brought me home from the hospital until the age i was three, i was covered in it. As an adult, trusting the product that had been used only johnson g, i used johnson baby powder on myself for a time. My sister also used the powder on herself and now she has over very and cancer which makes you wonder, doesnt it . Since then, i have learned that whenever talc is mined from the ground it has him. Hes mined along with it including asbestos fibers. It was these fibers that got into my system and migrated to my peritoneal cavity which caused a slowgrowing tumor that did to that debilitated me at the height of my career. Was powder containing talc the source of my asbestos exposure and the cause of the cancer that will kill me. Awaiting treatment, doctors withdrew six liters of fluid from my peritoneal cavity. They did this twice so i could breathe until the surgery. And then i came here to the medstar Washington Hospital sugarbakere dr. Paul performed an 11 hour surgery on me removing mice lean, my , the tale of my pancreas and 6. 5 pounds of cancer. He washed my insides with a strong solution of chemotherapy and sewed me back together for a 20 day stay in the hospital. On my 57th birthday he sent me for with a tube in my arm the antibiotics. After which, i endured 15 weeks of chemotherapy and rehabilitation and total exhaustion. I lost 50 pounds. After six months away from the church that i served, i returned to work but nine months later, more cancer was found. Cancer that cannot be remedied or radiated or cured so i resigned my position. I ended the service i felt called to from the age of 15 and i made my preparations to die. I understand that you all have friends that have cancer. Diealized that 1600 people every single day from cancer and i am thankful that needs of the leona has not yet taken my life. Has not yethelioma taken my life. But cancer has been caused on the most vulnerable members of our society, infants. This is the cancer that will kill me. The people that apply these products like my mother and sister are completely unaware of the suffering that it will cause or the death that will occur by simply driving a babys bottom. We cannot trust the talc industry to regulate itself in this matter. Since 1906 we have known that asbestos is deadly and yet somehow it has shown up in baby powder yet again. Nations to our children, parents, and every other consumer to ensure that our baby powder is truly safe and asbestos free. Despite decades of promises to do so, the industry has not regulated itself. Therefore, you must. May god bless you in your work. Thank you,namoorthi mr. Etheridge. Dr. Metcalf, you have five minutes. , rankinglf chairman member jordan and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here today. Bachelors, masters, and phd degrees in geology. I have served on the faculty of the department of geosciences at the university of nevada las vegas for 30 years. My Current Research is focused on understanding the geologic processes responsible for forming asbestos. Im here today to discuss the geological control the processes and form talc and asbestos its potential for it to coexist and whether or not it is toable to expect talc be free of asbestos minerals. The probability that talc and asbestos coexist in talc rich rocks is very high. They do coexist at scale and cannot be separated during the mining of talc. Though not impossible it is improbable for processes to produce 100 pure talc in my ble processes. Fibrous, thatways leads to this issue of cleavage fragments which im happy to discuss. And asbestos are formed by water rock interaction during rism. Ype of metapho subjectedting rock is and the penetration of hot waters. The changes drive reactions where new and stable minerals are formed. Ability toas the the materials. Significant shifts in composition, the process is thought to be responsible for the production of talc rich ore s. Asbestos is performed by the same waterrock interactions. The questions of particular interest here today are one, are talc producing reactions linked to the creation of asbestos . The answer to this is yes. Forming reactions involve the breakdown of asbestos in geologic conditions. Reactions, incomplete reaction product. Transition particles are interpreted as relics of these incomplete reactions. The second question are there processes capable of producing a rock of 100 pure talc free of asbestos . The answer to this question is the erratically yes but only under very specific conditions. Talc can be produced during the reactions of a breakdown of minerals. As long as the process operates in a specific range of temperature. However, if the process is started at slightly higher temperatures, asbestos can be formed. With asbestos is formed. At talc d has met and cosmetic talc is considered dangerous. We should not be surprised when more sensitive testing methods productsstos in talc given the formation are linked by common geologic processes. Although we often referred to asbestos as a contaminant in talc, asbestos can occur as a relic component of the natural geologic processes and is presence should be anticipated. Thank you for your time today. Then krishnamoorthi committee will now stand in recess subject to the call. I asked members to please return promptly after the vote series and we will be back shortly. Thank you. Cspans Live Campaign 2020 coverage continues tuesday at 11 i talked. Senator Elizabeth Warren in boston. Watch the president ial candidates live on cspan, online at cspan. Org, or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Cspans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up tuesday morning, eleanor clift, columnist for the daily beast discusses impeachment and campaign 2020. And then, one america news talks aboutwheeler the news of the day and her book. How to topple the house of cards. Watch cspans washington journal live at 7 00 eastern tuesday morning. Join the discussion. , coming up tonight on cspan andrew yang speaks to voters in nashua, new hampshire. Then, the president s daughter in law and Campaign Adviser joins a panel on women in the workforce. Later, democratic consultant doug varnell and republican consultant philip sets on the Political Landscape leading into 2020. [indiscernible conversations]
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.