---
title: "Three scientists beat J&J's defamation suit over talc research"
type: "News"
locale: "en"
url: "https://longbridge.com/en/news/296638678.md"
datetime: "2026-08-21T16:27:25.000Z"
locales:
  - [zh-CN](https://longbridge.com/zh-CN/news/296638678.md)
  - [en](https://longbridge.com/en/news/296638678.md)
  - [zh-HK](https://longbridge.com/zh-HK/news/296638678.md)
generator: "portal-rs"
---

# Three scientists beat J&J's defamation suit over talc research

By Dietrich Knauth

NEW YORK, Aug 21 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge in Virginia has ruled that three researchers did not defame Johnson & Johnson by publishing research linking cosmetic talcum powder products to mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer.

-   J&J sued Theresa Emory, John Maddox and Richard Kradin, alleging that they defamed the company in a 2020 scientific article.
-   The article said it reviewed 75 patients who had mesothelioma and had no link to asbestos other than exposure to cosmetic talc products like baby powder.
-   U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker on Wednesday ruled in favor of the scientists, finding no evidence of “malice” in their article.
-   The litigation revealed some “mistakes” in the data, but nothing that was obvious or ignored at the time of the study, according to the ruling.
-   J&J said it would appeal, seeking a trial on its claims that the scientists made false statements about cosmetic talc and asbestos exposure.
-   The three defendants are doctors who maintain pathology practices, and who have testified as plaintiffs’ experts in asbestos litigation.
-   The scientists’ attorney, Liz Lockwood, said that the ruling vindicates her clients and strongly affirms the importance of protecting scientific speech.
-   J&J has been facing a deluge of litigation over its talc products, and it sued the scientists before agreeing to settle those cases for at least $5.5 billion.
-   The company showed that eight of the 75 patients in the 2020 study had been included in a 2019 study by another researcher, even though the 2020 study claimed to have an entirely new set of patients. J&J has also sued the scientist who published the 2019 paper.
-   The researchers were comparing anonymized data sets and information provided by lawyers, making it sometimes difficult to detect duplicates, the ruling said.

### Related Stocks

- [JNJ.US](https://longbridge.com/en/quote/JNJ.US.md)

## Related News & Research

- [Johnson & Johnson names new vice president for litigation](https://longbridge.com/en/news/296647636.md)
- [Johnson & Johnson $JNJ Position Reduced by Oppenheimer Asset Management Inc.](https://longbridge.com/en/news/296697035.md)
- [EXPLAINER-Can J&J finally put the talc litigation behind it?](https://longbridge.com/en/news/294232224.md)
- [Analysts Favor Dividend Aristocrats JNJ and LIN Ahead of Q3 Earnings](https://longbridge.com/en/news/296406382.md)
- [BUZZ-Street View: J&J's strongest talc settlement push yet could clear legal cloud](https://longbridge.com/en/news/294044207.md)

---
> **Disclaimer: This article is for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice.**