Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 94 posts

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#81

Post by NeedMoreTea »

malmsteen wrote: post #74
marcosdumay wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not saying I have an answer. Well, I do have a simple one. You take each person that you can show that knew about the problem, propose a punishment proportional to the power they had, and send them into a judicial system where they can defend themselves before facing the punishment. The fact that things do not seem to work this way is disconcerting.

Cause they will always say "i didn't know" and you can't prove anything

Ignorance of the law is not a defence.

Not knowing that an employee of a company broke the law and you're a director or more senior manager probably shoots down any chance of a due diligence defence.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#82

Post by mosj3 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #71
lordnacho wrote: post #14

We shouldn't be surprised that this sort of thing happens from time to time. What are the incentives? If you're an exec in charge of some product, you want to sell the product. You don't want to be pulling it, you'll never get promoted like that. And you know more about how to move product than about asbestos testing results, that's for sure. And chances are nothing will be discovered. And if it is discovered it will…

> Not saying I have an answer. Well, I do have a simple one. You take each person that you can show that knew about the problem, propose a punishment proportional to the power they had, and send them into a judicial system where they can defend themselves before facing the punishment. The fact that things do not seem to work this way is disconcerting.

I blame their mothers. Society should too. And things will change overnight.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#84

Post by polkapolka »

marcosdumay wrote: post #71
lordnacho wrote: post #14

We shouldn't be surprised that this sort of thing happens from time to time. What are the incentives? If you're an exec in charge of some product, you want to sell the product. You don't want to be pulling it, you'll never get promoted like that. And you know more about how to move product than about asbestos testing results, that's for sure. And chances are nothing will be discovered. And if it is discovered it will…

> Not saying I have an answer. Well, I do have a simple one. You take each person that you can show that knew about the problem, propose a punishment proportional to the power they had, and send them into a judicial system where they can defend themselves before facing the punishment. The fact that things do not seem to work this way is disconcerting.

Eat your own dogfood.

Let them douse their babies in asbestos, drink fracking water, or force them to watch Scientology advertisements.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#85

Post by nickbauman »

The whole purpose of making a corporation is to mitigate risk in the first place. That's literally why they came into being. Secondly, it is to concentrate financial power to pursue a joint mission, usually profit. So with these two design forces, there's a structural incentive in the short term for these things to happen. A decades-long awareness of unethical dealings is another side effect of this design: externalizing costs onto society at large.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#86

Post by objektif »

cm2187 wrote: post #66
rightbyte wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3% of other (minerals?) than talk. Not 3% asbestos to make that clear.

And even then, without a dangerous threshold level, the number is meaningless.

How about none? Is it advertised or listed as containing asbestos in the ingredient list? Do you want to use it on your baby?

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#87

Post by cm2187 »

objektif wrote: post #86
cm2187 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And even then, without a dangerous threshold level, the number is meaningless.

How about none? Is it advertised or listed as containing asbestos in the ingredient list? Do you want to use it on your baby?

"None" doesn't exist in nature. Every product is always contaminated by all sort of chemicals. It's always a matter of concentration. The water with which you prepare you baby milk likely contains cyanide, lead or arsenic. Just not in high enough dose to matter.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#88

Post by refurb »

andrepd wrote: post #24
refurb wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize that the FDA (regulator) was award of these results and still didn’t pull it off the market?

Yes, because the so-called "regulators" are in the hands of the companies which they are supposed to supervise . It's a complete perversion.

As someone who has worked with the FDA I find this laughable. The FDA has very few qualms about bringing the full force of the US govt down on a company.

Maybe, just maybe, the situation is a little more complex than you realize?

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#89

Post by msiyer »

lordnacho wrote: post #14

We shouldn't be surprised that this sort of thing happens from time to time. What are the incentives? If you're an exec in charge of some product, you want to sell the product. You don't want to be pulling it, you'll never get promoted like that. And you know more about how to move product than about asbestos testing results, that's for sure. And chances are nothing will be discovered. And if it is discovered it will…

Exactly. Nobody is surprised. I have asked my coworkers many times to stop using these poisons on their kids. They do not listen. They do not care. One reply that I often listen to is:

"Everything has pesticides in it. If we start caring about these things, we may as well stop living."

Well, I did what I could. The consequences are yours to bear.

Re: Johnson and Johnson knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder

#90

Post by ekianjo »

foolrush wrote: post #32
ekianjo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget to include the regulators in your argument, since they were also heavily involved. So much for "the free market".

That is somewhat of my point; the market actually dictates this abusive behaviour and endorses it. All that matters is profit at all costs. Even if hit with fines, the entity can likely carry on existing because profit permits survival. Regulation needs to require prison for the white collars involved. If we stop to think about what people are serving time in prison for at this moment, and comparative impact, it is s…

> Regulation needs to require prison for the white collars involved.

You are completely missing the point. Here regulators were aware and judged it was fine to continue selling the product.

Post reply on HN