The regime, the regime media, and the useful idiots, that Vladimir Ulyanov talked about, always tell us to trust the experts, especially the scientists of course.
Well, as expected, they have not had much to say about the most recent Project Veritas video, this time exposing the company famous for asbestos filled baby powder.
One should never forget the companies that the Globalist American Empire (GAE) mobilized to make these vaccines.
Reuters, hardly an outlet friendly to dissidents like us did an investigation in 2018 into Johnson & Johnson having asbestos in its baby powder and knowing about it.
J&J didn’t tell the FDA that at least three tests by three different labs from 1972 to 1975 had found asbestos in its talc – in one case at levels reported as “rather high.”
Johnson & Johnson avoided scrutiny for it as long as it did because it didn’t hand over talc test results and other internal company records and documents.
A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.
The Reuters investigative article further went on to show the first indications of this happening went all the way back to 1957 and 1958.
The earliest mentions of tainted J&J talc that Reuters found come from 1957 and 1958 reports by a consulting lab. They describe contaminants in talc from J&J’s Italian supplier as fibrous and “acicular,” or needle-like, tremolite. That’s one of the six minerals that in their naturally occurring fibrous form are classified as asbestos.
At various times from then into the early 2000s, reports by scientists at J&J, outside labs and J&J’s supplier yielded similar findings. The reports identify contaminants in talc and finished powder products as asbestos or describe them in terms typically applied to asbestos, such as “fiberform” and “rods.”
In 1976, as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was weighing limits on asbestos in cosmetic talc products, J&J assured the regulator that no asbestos was “detected in any sample” of talc produced between December 1972 and October 1973. It didn’t tell the agency that at least three tests by three different labs from 1972 to 1975 had found asbestos in its talc – in one case at levels reported as “rather high.”
People who suffered cancer because of Johnson & Johnson had to fight the hardest they possibly could to get the truth out but even they eventually would end up getting caught.
The evidence of what J&J knew has surfaced after people who suspected that talc caused their cancers hired lawyers experienced in the decades-long deluge of litigation involving workers exposed to asbestos. Some of the lawyers knew from those earlier cases that talc producers tested for asbestos, and they began demanding J&J’s testing documentation.
What J&J produced in response to those demands has allowed plaintiffs’ lawyers to refine their argument: The culprit wasn’t necessarily talc itself, but also asbestos in the talc. That assertion, backed by decades of solid science showing that asbestos causes mesothelioma and is associated with ovarian and other cancers, has had mixed success in court.
In two cases earlier this year – in New Jersey and California – juries awarded big sums to plaintiffs who, like Coker, blamed asbestos-tainted J&J talc products for their mesothelioma.
A third verdict, in St. Louis, was a watershed, broadening J&J’s potential liability: The 22 plaintiffs were the first to succeed with a claim that asbestos-tainted Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talc, a longtime brand the company sold in 2012, caused ovarian cancer, which is much more common than mesothelioma. The jury awarded them $4.69 billion in damages. Most of the talc cases have been brought by women with ovarian cancer who say they regularly used J&J talc products as a perineal antiperspirant and deodorant.
People like Dr. Arthur Langer and Jerome Ketchmer were put on a Johnson & Johnson enemies list all the way back in 1972 because of their work trying to expose and prevent this.
Academics who looked into these tainted products that Johnson & Johnson recorded finding incontrovertible asbestos in their Shower to Shower talc.
In 1973 DeWitt Petterson, the company’s research director admitted they couldn’t even produce pure talc free of asbestos.
Their internal memos admitted how dangerous it was and they didn’t try to get rid of it, but instead they waged a campaign to play down these negative health effects.
The investigative article by Reuters ended by noting
J&J’s effort to protect its iconic Baby Powder franchise by shaping research was led by physician and scientist executives. An early 1970s study of 1,992 Italian talc miners shows how it worked: J&J commissioned and paid for the study, told the researchers the results it wanted, and hired a ghostwriter to redraft the article that presented the findings in a journal.
The effort entailed other attempts to influence research, including a U.S. government study of the health of talc workers in Vermont. J&J’s Windsor Minerals Inc subsidiary, one of several mine operators involved in the study, developed a relationship with the U.S. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health researchers to “even influence the conclusions” through suggestions of “subjective interpretations,” according to a 1973 Windsor Minerals memo.
Peter Bicks, outside counsel for J&J, told Reuters in an email that for the Vermont study, company “representatives acted in an ‘educational and advisory capacity’ to provide the researchers with a realistic study plan.”
A 1979 article in the Journal of Environmental Pathology and Toxicology detailing the findings of the study was not good news for talc. It reported a “significant increase” in “respiratory cancer mortality” among miners. A subsequent analysis of the underlying data published in 1988 determined that at least one of the workers died of mesothelioma, the cancer most closely associated with asbestos.
The proposal to study the health of miners of the Italian talc used in Baby Powder for decades came from William Ashton, J&J’s longtime talc supply chief. Ashton had obtained a summary of miners’ medical records compiled by an Italian physician, who also happened to control the country’s talc exports.
J&J should use those records “for maximum benefit,” Ashton said in a May 8, 1973, letter to Dr Gavin Hildick-Smith, J&J’s director of medical affairs. “It seems to me that the Italian records give us the opportunity to fortify a position on talc safety.”
At the time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was considering a limit on asbestos in talcs. In an Oct. 18, 1973, memo, Hildick-Smith advised J&J: “The risk/benefit ratio of conducting an epidemiological study in these mines must be considered.”
By early 1974, the study was a go. Hildick-Smith sent money to the Italian talc exporter-physician to hire a team of researchers. Hildick-Smith told the lead researcher in a June 26, 1974, letter exactly what J&J wanted: data that “would show that the incidence of cancer in these subjects is no different from that of the Italian population or the rural control group.”
That is exactly what J&J got, Hildick-Smith told colleagues a few months later. At a meeting on Sept. 27, 1974, for a “Talc/powder Safety Studies Review,” he reported the Italian study would dispel the “cancer concern associated with exposure to talc.”
The following spring, Hildick-Smith got a draft of the Italian study from the lead researcher. It needed work to meet the “form and style” requirements of the target journal, he told colleagues in a March 31, 1975, memo. He added that he would send it to a scientific ghostwriter “who will hold it in confidence and rewrite it.”
The article that appeared in 1976 in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine reported results even better than J&J had bargained for. The study found fewer lung cancer deaths than expected, a result that the authors said supported “the thesis of no cancerogenic effect attributable to pure talc.”
It also found no mesothelioma, the signature cancer of asbestos exposure. There is no evidence J&J manipulated or misused the data. Experts for plaintiffs have testified that the Italian study was too small to draw any conclusions about the incidence of such a rare cancer. J&J’s expert witnesses have concluded the opposite.
Bicks noted that the Italian study has been updated three times – in 1979, 2003 and 2017 – “confirming the lack of association between exposure to asbestos-free talc, lung cancer and mesothelioma.”
J&J got a lot of mileage out of the study. It was cited in a review article titled “The Biology of Talc,” published Nov. 1, 1976, in the British Journal of Industrial Medicine. In addition to dozens of published studies, the review cited unpublished research, including one experiment that used a doll as a proxy for infants and that supported the company’s position on the safety of talc. It didn’t disclose that J&J had commissioned the unpublished research.
The author of the review article concluded that the “concern that has been expressed about the possible health hazard from consumer exposure to cosmetic talc is unwarranted … There is no evidence that its normal use poses a hazard to health.”
The author was Hildick-Smith, the J&J physician executive who had overseen the Italian study and played a key role in the company’s talc safety research. The article did not disclose his J&J connection, identifying him only as a Rutgers University clinical assistant professor. Hildick-Smith died in 2006.
The reason I went through this exposee by Reuters on Johnson & Johnson, is to drive home the point about just who the GAE is using to make these vaccines, which are being put in the arms of tens of millions of Americans.
Johnson & Johnson scientist Justin Durrant in the discussion with the undercover Project Veritas journalist expressed his desire to inconvenience the pure bloods (unvaccinated) and to turn them into second class citizens.
Justin Durrant, Johnson & Johnson Scientist: “Inconvenience [the unvaccinated] to the point where it’s like, ‘I might as well just f*cking do it [and take the COVID vaccine],’ you know what I’m saying? Like ‘I can’t go out of state,’ I can’t – ‘my grandma’s in Canada and I can’t visit her,’ you know what I’m saying? You can’t go to France unless you’re vaccinated — you know you’ve just got to keep doing things like that where you’re almost like a second-grade citizen if you’re not vaccinated, but I know that’s awful.”
Veritas Journalist: “You’re almost what?”
Durrant: “Like a second-grade citizen, like you can’t do anything that a normal citizen can do.”
Veritas Journalist: “A second graded citizen?”
Durrant: “Yeah like top grade, like the ones that get it, and the ones that just like — then you can’t do sh*t.”
Veritas Journalist: “So then how do we punish [the unvaccinated]?”
Durrant: “I mean if you can’t work, I feel like that’s punishment enough.”
Veritas Journalist: “People what?”
Durrant: “Only way people really act and comply is if it affects their pockets, like if you’re working for a big company and you’re going to lose your job, best believe you’ll be the first one in line [to take the COVID vaccine].”
Veritas Journalist: “Right, so if you’re working for a big company and you’re about to lose your job, you’ll be the first one in line?”
Veritas Journalist: “That’s so true. That’s smart, that’s what we need to do.”
Durrant: “That’s what we’re doing.”
In private however, Durrant discourages taking the vaccine saying “Don’t get the Johnson & Johnson [COVID vaccine], I didn’t tell you though.” It is always one rule for the regime, their media, and their companies, and another rule for those of us they see as peasants.
Project Veritas exposed further that the regional Johnson & Johnson business lead Brandon Schadt strongly opposed giving kids the vaccine.
- Brandon Schadt, Johnson & Johnson Regional Business Lead: “It’s a kid, you just don’t do that, you know? Not something that’s so unknown in terms of repercussions down the road, you know?”
- Schadt: “Kids shouldn’t get a f*cking [COVID] vaccine.”
- Schadt: “It’s a kid, it’s a f*cking kid, you know? They shouldn’t have to get a f*cking [COVID] vaccine, you know?”
- Schadt: “J&J is like stepping in the best smelling pile of sh*t you could step in.”
Of course this further exposes an already horrible company with a record as bad as it gets but the regime will never hold these pigs accountable.
- The Biden Regime Admits To Holding Supplies Hostage In Desperate Attempt To Blackmail Americans Into Taking The Vaccine - October 18, 2021
- Tunisian President Kais Saied Is Being Targeted Globalist American Empire (GAE) - October 18, 2021
- First Domino To Fall? Delta Air Lines CEO Ditches “Divisive” Vaccine Mandate - October 16, 2021