Hundreds of women in the UK are planning to receive on one of the globe’s biggest pharmaceutical companies over alleged links between talc and cancer.

Diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2021, Cassandra Wardle is one of the women launching a throng action against the biggest seller of talcum powder, Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Cassandra, who stumbled on a Facebook piece linking cancer and talc following her diagnosis, said it was used on her as a baby and she continued to use it “for 20 years or more”.

“You mimic your mum who used it,” she said. “Baby powder was supposed to be something deemed ‘secure to use’, even on a baby’s bum.”

If it proceeds, the legal action would be the first of its benevolent brought against the pharmaceutical multinational in the UK.

With 1,900 potential claimants, including cancer patients, survivors and families, lawyers declare it is set to be the largest pharmaceutical product throng action in English and Welsh legal history.

The BBC has spoken to a number of women with gynaecological cancers – many are part of the throng action – who depend their repeated use of talcum powder played a part in their diagnosis.

Their lawyers allege that for decades, talcum powder was contaminated with cancer-causing asbestos – something they claim J&J was aware of but sought to suppress.

J&J denies suppressing any information and denies any links between its baby powder, asbestos and cancer.

“The doctors said the cancer was unusual for my age at 44,” says Cassandra, from Alfreton in Derbyshire.

She says she would regularly use talcum powder after a bath or as a deodoriser, including across her genitals.

“I was just starting my chemo trip when I read about the links, but I felt enraged that a corporate giant like J&J could seem to do this,” she says.

At first, doctors believed Cassandra’s cancer was terminal.

“I went to the consultation alone,” she says. “So I had to arrive home and inform my husband what they said, inform my parents they would be burying me.

“I closed down my business unit and laid off staff.

“I even created a not-so-creative acronym: ‘LAC – Life After Cass’.”

Then, she had an unexpected lifeline. Chemotherapy had in truth triggered an autoimmune state, giving the impression of late-stage cancer.

Cassandra survived. But the disease still had a devastating result on her life.

She was forced to provide up her business, and an infection during chemotherapy damaged her vocal cords, reducing her voice to a murmur. A hysterectomy to remove cancerous tissue had a huge impact on her body.

“I was plunged into surgical menopause,” she says.

“I would have liked children. I was never blessed that way, but my last ability to have children was taken away due to cancer.”

The claims of links between talcum powder and cancer revolve around asbestos – a known carcinogen.

Talc is a mineral that is sometimes used in talcum powders and other cosmetic products, according to Cancer Research UK.

Sophia Lowes, from the charity, said: “[Talc] can be mined in places where there is asbestos, which can factor the talc to become contaminated. Asbestos is known to factor mesothelioma and cancers of the lung, larynx and ovary.

“The sale of products containing asbestos is banned in the UK and cosmetic products require to be safety-tested before they can be sold.”

Many documents were hidden from community view until Americans with cancer began suing the firm.

J&J has been accused of knowing decades ago that its baby powder could contain contaminants of asbestos.

J&J has previously said that “any suggestion that Johnson & Johnson knew or hid information about the safety of talc is untrue”.

The corporation discontinued mineral-based talc in North America in 2020 – and followed suit in the UK last year – replacing it with cornstarch. J&J said this was due to monetary pressures and a “misinformation campaign” around the product.

While the focus of the throng action is on the contamination of talc with asbestos, in July this year the globe Health Organization (WHO) concluded that mineral talc itself was “probably carcinogenic for humans”.

Deborah, who did not desire to be identified by her real name, also lives in Derbyshire, and was diagnosed with ovarian cancer at 29, just two weeks after she and her husband had started trying for a baby.

“I used talcum powder for years as a teenager,” she says.

“Literally all I had was some stabbing pain on a Sunday night. I went to the doctor and was sent for an ultrasound on the Tuesday.”

During the scan, a tumour was found on Deborah’s ovary. A few days later she had an operation, at which point doctors told her there was a uncertainty the cancer had spread to her womb.

“Within two weeks of the first symptoms, I’d had a packed hysterectomy,” she says.

“I went from excitedly planning for a baby to having all of my parts removed.”

Deborah’s diagnosis was 30 years ago, and she and her husband ultimately went on to adopt.

But she still feels angry that she was robbed of the chance to conceive naturally.

“If [J&J] knew, they shouldn’t have been doing it,” she says.

KP Law, representing the claimants, has begun the procedure of litigation, which is expected to commence at the beginning of 2025.

In the US, the firm has been sued by more than 62,000 people and at least $13bn has been paid out or set aside in response to the action.

Cases there have seen the corporation found liable for mesothelioma – an asbestos-specific cancer – and gynaecological cancers women suffered after using talc, with billions of dollars awarded in damages.

Tom Longstaff, a associate at KP Law, says: “The case has been litigated repeatedly in the American judicial structure but women in the UK deserve an respond, and compensation, here.

“Asbestos cancers tend to have a latency of around 10 to 40 years. So we are walking into a wave of women reaching an age where asbestos cancers develop.”

Mr Longstaff’s firm sent a pre-action note to J&J in September, a essential step before starting proceedings. If the case goes ahead, it would likely complete up in court next year.

In response, Erik Haas – worldwide vice-president of litigation for Johnson & Johnson, said the allegations against the corporation “defy logic, rewrite history and ignore the facts”.

“J&J takes the issue of talc safety incredibly seriously and always has,” he says.

“As our documents display, we have relied upon the most state-of-the-art testing protocols for decades and have been entirely transparent with government institutions and academic researchers regarding our findings.”

Mr Haas also said the concept that J&J hid the contaminated contents of its products from the community, government and other groups was “inconceivable and untrue”.

Litigation like this can receive four or five years. Some of the women we spoke to terror they won’t view it concluded.

Linda Jones has stage four cancer, which has reached her bones and blood.

“I don’t have that long left. I might be dead by the period it’s sorted out,” the 66-year-ancient, from Devon, says.

“I loved [talcum powder]. After a bath at night, it was a great large warm hug putting on Johnson’s baby powder.

“As soon as my children were born, I used it on them.”

If she does get a settlement, she wants to assist other women going through similar situations. She hopes to set up a holiday retreat for women diagnosed with gynaecological cancers.

“I just desire to view them compensating everyone without a fight. We already had a fight in the States,” she says.

A J&J spokesperson said: “As the history of the US talc litigation shows, the majority of cases tried resulted in defence verdicts or were overturned in favour of the defence on appeal.

“The UK judicial structure is vastly different than in the US, and we depend that if a UK court has an chance to review the scientific literature and corporation documents in proper context, it too will conclude that Johnson’s baby powder is secure, does not contain asbestos, and does not factor cancer.”

pursue BBC Derby on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your narrative ideas to [email protected] or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.