3 ms·

40,000 people got cancer from talc? Please link the research paper that shows that. Everybody thinks personal injury lawyers are slimy but then quotes their “

by refurb 4y ago

40,000 people got cancer from talc? Please link the research paper that shows that. Everybody thinks personal injury lawyers are slimy but then quotes their “data” like it was proven fact.

westpfelia 4y ago
What do you think the lawsuit was about? You think J&J is being forced to pay the measly 8.9 billion just because they want this to go away? 40,000 people got cancer that we know of. People should be in jail.
- _a_a_a_ 4y ago
  Where is this figure given? I can't see it (may have skipped over it accidentally)
  - freeone3000 4y ago
    It is the number of members in the class.
    - Auracle 4y ago
      Which would just be people that got a relevant cancer that also used the product - that signed up to be part of the class. People get cancer all the time. It’s very, very hard to prove a causal relationship.
      - freeone3000 4y ago
        Assumably this is why there’s a trial. J&J is willing to pay $9B to avoid one; this leads me to believe that they think they have a significant risk of having cancer be linked to their product.
- smabie 4y ago
  Which people?
bastawhiz 4y ago
Let's consider, for a moment, that they paid nine billion (with a B) as a settlement because they thought that it would be cheaper than the outcome of fully litigating it. Which is to say, $9B was the cheaper option. Regardless of the numbers, for that to be true, you've got to be pretty convinced you've fucked up really hard.
- thfuran 4y ago
  No, you just have to be convinced that there's a pretty good chance that a jury can be convinced that you need to pay for what you did.
  - bastawhiz 4y ago
    Clearly J&J was convinced
93po 4y ago
40,000 people claimed it did and followed through with legal action. Sure, maybe only a percentage of them actually got it from talc. But globally, what percent of people who did get cancer from talc actually sue? Also likely a low percentage.
- refurb 4y ago
  Maybe none?
themitigating 4y ago
Lawyers don't create the data.
- refurb 4y ago
  No, but they certainly take weak data and argue why it's strong. And they make a ton of money doing it.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    And? That has nothing to do with what I'm replying to. Your just making another complaint.

by refurb 4y ago

40,000 people got cancer from talc? Please link the research paper that shows that. Everybody thinks personal injury lawyers are slimy but then quotes their “data” like it was proven fact.

westpfelia 4y ago

What do you think the lawsuit was about? You think J&J is being forced to pay the measly 8.9 billion just because they want this to go away? 40,000 people got cancer that we know of. People should be in jail.

_a_a_a_ 4y ago
Where is this figure given? I can't see it (may have skipped over it accidentally)
- freeone3000 4y ago
  It is the number of members in the class.
  - Auracle 4y ago
    Which would just be people that got a relevant cancer that also used the product - that signed up to be part of the class. People get cancer all the time. It’s very, very hard to prove a causal relationship.
    - freeone3000 4y ago
      Assumably this is why there’s a trial. J&J is willing to pay $9B to avoid one; this leads me to believe that they think they have a significant risk of having cancer be linked to their product.
smabie 4y ago
Which people?

bastawhiz 4y ago

Let's consider, for a moment, that they paid nine billion (with a B) as a settlement because they thought that it would be cheaper than the outcome of fully litigating it. Which is to say, $9B was the cheaper option. Regardless of the numbers, for that to be true, you've got to be pretty convinced you've fucked up really hard.

thfuran 4y ago
No, you just have to be convinced that there's a pretty good chance that a jury can be convinced that you need to pay for what you did.
- bastawhiz 4y ago
  Clearly J&J was convinced

93po 4y ago

40,000 people claimed it did and followed through with legal action. Sure, maybe only a percentage of them actually got it from talc. But globally, what percent of people who did get cancer from talc actually sue? Also likely a low percentage.

refurb 4y ago
Maybe none?

themitigating 4y ago

Lawyers don't create the data.

refurb 4y ago
No, but they certainly take weak data and argue why it's strong. And they make a ton of money doing it.
- themitigating 4y ago
  And? That has nothing to do with what I'm replying to. Your just making another complaint.