They knew since the 1950s of the risks.

This shows how far companies will go to hide the dangers of what we bring into our homes.

The connection between J&J talc and construction pollution lies in the failure to disclose health risks to consumers and residents. In the case of talc, it took lawsuits and investigative journalism to reveal the presence of asbestos in their powder. Whether true or not, and despite J&J winning most talc lawsuits by claiming no asbestos and no cancer (BBC), the company still paid billions in settlements. However, in the case of construction dust which spreads into people’s homes during major construction activities, the known hazards are not communicated to the public by experts and state/local regulatory agencies.

This is not a case of just traces of asbestos like in J&J talc, but a whole cloud of asbestos and also silica spreading in the air and into people’s homes, into their lungs, and on their skin and there is no doubt that the dust from the demolition of old buildings contains these toxic carcinogenic substances.

Shouldn’t the public be informed and protected from all health risks, whether they stem from consumer products or environmental exposure?

When manufacturing and distributing products to consumers, companies like J&J are required to disclose the risks of contaminants like asbestos to the FDA. However, there are no regulations to disclose that clouds of the same substances are in our air. This makes it even worse since this is known and a fact. Not only are the risks willingly hidden, but there are also no regulations in place to disclose it.

Let’s face it, if J&J is shady, our government is even worse. Construction dust is loaded with asbestos and silica, making it far more dangerous than talc powder.

So, what’s the going rate for not disclosing asbestos and silica floating in our air? Apparently, the bill’s still in the mail and marked ‘Return to Sender’ by agencies sworn to protect us.

In this case, the responsibility of asbestos and silica lies with our government, the EPA and not a private company like J&J. So who should we sue? The #EPA?

May 2024. The settlement builds upon J&J’s earlier agreements with about 95% of individuals who sued the company over mesothelioma, a rare cancer linked to asbestos exposure, as well as settlements with U.S. states accusing the company of failing to warn consumers about potential talc product hazards…

Shouldn’t the Clean Air Act actually keep our Air Clean?

Shouldn’t we demand more than feel-good legislation? And demand action that matches the urgency of our data.

Why worry about what’s on your skin when you can breathe the ‘essence’ of construction every day? Come to the DC metro area and experience the irony of avoiding talc while embracing construction dust with open lungs. It’s not just talc, it’s a lifestyle choice. Embrace the dust, inside and out!

With solid data and official communications in literally my ‘hand’, it’s clear, the law’s promise and its practice are worlds apart.

Because state agencies aren’t stepping up, and we’re stuck without the data we need for change, why aren’t we testing our own air? We evidence we can go right up to these agencies, and demand air quality monitors at demolition sites and real transparency in disclosures. If your company has the resources to help conduct environmental testing, or monitoring indoor and outdoor contact me.

Contact Me: Monica LaFonte