Talk:Johnson & Johnson/Archives/2013

Litigation

I removed a paragraph from the litigation section because it was about something that was essentially a non-event. The threatened litigation was never carried out. Per Wikipedia's policy WP:UNDUE, I think this was not at all an important event in J&J history and should therefore not be included in an the article. In contrast, one of the most important litigation events in J&J history (the suit against Abbott) was not included in the article. So I added a paragraph about that. I think the net result is a more balanced article that better reflects the history of the company. CockpitJim (talk) 13:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

The above removed paragraph seems to have been about concern over Johnson baby shampoo containing small amounts of Formaldehyde in some markets (including US) and while it may have been an over-reaction it seems to have notable coverage so not sure why entirely removed.

On a separate issue, there is a paragraph still in the article ("U.S. Justice Department suit") which ends: "The judge sided with Johnson & Johnson and the lawsuit was dismissed in September 2011". The incomplete citation for this "10-cv-2033, D. NJ., Sept. 29, 2011" has no link but seems to be this technical point - HOWEVER the overall case seems to have continued and in fact Johnson had to pay 2.2 billion dollars in fines for misleading patients and doctors, not diclosing known side-effects, and bribing officials to prescribe more often, and there have been further large fines in particular states regarding the same drugs ('antipsychotics' used for all kinds of conditions), apparently including for illegally misleadingly promoting unapproved use in kids (which apparently caused boys to grow breasts??). No mention here or in sub-articles like Janssen Pharmaceuticals, anyone around can help clear this up? Also being investigated by the European Union for bribing other drug companies to delay releasing cheaper generics? Sighola (talk) 17:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

So no one, and in fact the intro has instead been changed to also say that the Justice Dept suit was unsuccessful, when according to reports from last year they agreed a settlement of 2.2 billion dollars, and was also a State fine of 1.1 billion against them also for illegal marketing of antipsychotics? (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-25/j-percent-j-pushed-risperdal-with-golf-popcorn-witness-says) Sighola (talk) 00:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Request For Comment on whether the existing legal source (see above) supports claim that the Dept of Justice case failed, or whether in fact there were billions in damages. Sighola (talk) 00:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh well in absence of any response for weeks found time to check and fix error myself despite not being american, funny how wikipedia so concerned about slight unreliability against individuals but massive errors in favour of companies can go unchecked and no help wiht it. Sighola (talk) 00:47, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Risperdal

can you please add Risperdal to the Product list Qwh (talk) 10:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)