LOS ANGELES – An expert witness for plaintiff Amy Fong said on Wednesday in a trial to decide if the talc caused Fong to develop mesothelioma that a majority of bottles of Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder tested positive for asbestos.
“With a bundle (asbestos) you have multiple fibers,” William Longo explained, describing for a jury an exhibited photo taken by microscope. “You have multiple fibers at the back-end. The fibers are (bunched) together. It has to have the right chemistry and aspect ratio. This is tremolite asbestos.”
Asbestos fibers under magnification appear long and thin.
The trial in the Los Angeles Superior Court is being streamed live courtesy of Courtroom View Network.
Fong, 48, a resident of Pasadena, sued Johnson & Johnson and talc powder supplier Imerys Talc America claiming she developed mesothelioma, a deadly cancer of the lungs, as a result of breathing in asbestos-contaminated baby powder over a long period of time.
Johnson & Johnson attorneys are attempting to demonstrate the woman's mesothelioma could have been contracted from asbestos in fumes inhaled from an incinerator at a landfill in Hong Kong near where Fong lived during the 1970s.
A materials scientist and microscope researcher with the MAS lab in Georgia, Longo appeared for a second day of testimony. He is considered a major plaintiff witness in past talc powder trials and appears frequently to give testimony.
Longo said testing of the Johnson & Johnson powder from one sampling found that six out of seven bottles tested positive for asbestos, or 86 percent. Of Vermont talc, out of 36 bottles, 29 tested positive.
Talc, a mined mineral, has been taken from mines in Italy, Vermont, Korea and China.
“Did you share with Johnson & Johnson the (asbestos) photos and lab analysis?” asked Joseph Satterely, Fong’s attorney.
“Yes,” Longo said.
Longo said the fibers discovered had the appropriate “aspect ratio” for asbestos, long and thin, in one case 14-to-1 (length to width). Protocols for determining asbestos among health agencies figure that a fiber should have at least a 5-to-1 ratio size.
Slides projected for the courtroom showed a black smudge with frayed ends, denoting individual fibers bunched together, called an asbestos “bundle.”
A central part of past trials has been the issue of cleavage fragments, crushed talc rocks to be turned into powder and whether they are toxic or not. A cleavage fragment can look like an asbestos fiber.
“If someone said this is a cleavage fragment, would you agree?” Satterley asked, pointing to the bundle on the slide.
“No,” Longo said. “This meets all the standard counting rules (for asbestos). This is fibrous, this is abestiform. A cleavage fragment is like breaking a rock, or smashing a bottle into all sorts of pieces. To expect them to line up parallel (as in a bundle) is nonsensical.”
Longo said another type of asbestos had been identified called anthophyllite. He explained that high powered microscope technology uses color in an image of a mineral under magnification to determine how fast light goes through it to decide its contents.
Satterley asked if there was any doubt asbestos had been found in the powder samples.
“No,” Longo said.
Longo said he billed $550 per hour for his testimony and that his company, MAS, had billed an average $1 million per year over 30 years to clients and plaintiff attorneys.
On cross-examination, Kimberly Branscome, the attorney for Johnson & Johnson, attempted to use Longo’s past deposition testimony to portray him flip-flopping on opinions and of finding no asbestos in the powder.
“August of 2017 was the first time you looked to determine if there was amphibole (asbestos) in cosmetic talc,” she said.
“Yes,” Longo said.
Branscome added that on nine occasions, Longo earlier testified that it wasn’t until 2017 he looked for asbestos in cosmetic talc.
“We know that’s not true,” she said.
“It was incorrect (2017),” Longo agreed.
“It was as early as 2001,” Branscome said.
“I think that is correct,” Longo said.
“You didn’t find any asbestos.”
“Correct,” Longo said.
“In May of 2002 you said, ‘We have not found it (asbestos).’”
“That’s what the transcript says,” Longo responded. “I don’t remember saying it.”
Branscome asked Longo about his statement years ago that asbestos in baby powder was an “urban legend.”
Longo explained he meant at the time that it was something that could not be proven to be true (asbestos in baby powder). Or, it could be someone famous who lives in an urban area, he added.
“Is this funny to you?” Branscome asked.
“Object, argumentative,” Satterley called.
“Sustained,” Superior Court Judge David Cunningham ruled.
Longo agreed that in 2010 he had stated that other than samples in New York, no asbestos had been found in samples elsewhere.
“That’s what it (transcript) said,” he said.