Defective Products

March 29, 2022

What is the Boppy Pillow Lounger Recall

Around 3,500 babies die in the U.S. each year in sleep-related incidents. An overwhelming 72% of these sudden infant deaths have been linked to soft bedding. Safe sleeping guidelines are clear: babies should sleep on a flat surface such as a crib without pillows, blankets, or other soft bedding. However, an entire class of commercial infant products known as inclined sleepers violates these rules.

Inclined sleepers–including Boppy pillow loungers–are not flat, have soft padding, and come with a very real risk of suffocation. In fact, they are so dangerous that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) passed a new regulation effectively banning these products in 2022. But the decision comes too late for the families of the over 100 babies who died while using inclined loungers.

What is the Boppy Pillow Lounger Recall?

March 29, 2022

Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Talc is a soft mineral that absorbs moisture, soothes skin, reduces smells, and prevents caking. As a result, its use in commercial products ranges from baby powder and deodorant to makeup and moisturizing lotion. Unfortunately, critics say, it may also cause cancer.

Concerns about talcum powder’s safety have existed since at least the 1970s. But in recent decades, the scrutiny has become an avalanche. In the past 15 years, nearly 40,000 talcum powder lawsuits were filed against the product’s largest manufacturer: Johnson & Johnson.

The Link Between Talcum Powder and Cancer

May 10, 2021

Peloton Treadmill Recall

by Altman & Altman

In response to mandatory state and local lockdowns during the COVID pandemic, countless people have invested in expanding their own home gyms to continue to maintain or improve their fitness. While home gyms provide convenience to owners who want to avoid gym fees and crowds, they may also introduce unexpected dangers. Peloton, the wildly popular company that sells stationary bikes and other gym equipment recently recalled roughly 125,000 of its Tread and Tread+ treadmills per recommendation from the Consumer Product Safety Commision (CPSC) due to reported injuries from the machine and even a death. If you or a loved one have been injured as a result of a malfunction with the treadmill, you may be entitled to damages for your injuries in addition to a refund for the machine.

Why Are The Tread and Tread+ Treadmills Being Recalled?

On April 17, 2021, the CPSC issued an urgent warning to consumers who used the treadmill machines, warning that there were at least 39 reported incidents of injuries involving the treadmill. The injuries that they described included children, pets, and objects being unexpectedly pinned under a treadmill. At the time, Peloton believed the warning to be “inaccurate and misleading” and did not take any immediate action. Less than 2 weeks and many additional reported injuries later, the CPSC amended their original statement with a stronger finding.

October 21, 2020

The FDA requested that Allergan recall all BIOCELL textured breast implants

by Altman & Altman

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigated the potential link between certain defective breast implants and higher instances of cancer. In July 2019, the FDA issued a statement requesting that Allergan, the manufacturer of BIOCELL textured breast implants and tissue expanders, recall all of their BIOCELL line of products. The FDA found that people with BIOCELL implants and/or tissue expanders were six times more likely to develop breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).

If you or a loved one was diagnosed with BIA-ALCL and after having BIOCELL implants and/or tissue expanders, you may be entitled to compensation for the damages that you’ve experienced. The attorneys at Altman & Altman have the experience and resources to support you. Contact us today by phone at 617.492.3000 or toll free at 800.481.6199 for a free consultation to discuss the details of your case.

Which Allergan products were recalled?

The list of Allergan products that were recalled because of an increased risk of BIA-ALCL includes:

Natrelle saline breast implant styles 168, 363, 468
Natrelle and McGhan 410 breast implant styles LL, LM, LF, LX, ML, MM, MF, MX, FL, FM, FF, FX
Natrelle and McGhan 410 Soft Touch breast implant styles LL, LM, LF, LX, ML, MM, MF, MX, FL, FM, FF, FX
Natrelle 510 Dual-Gel styles LX, MX, FX
Natrelle Inspira breast implants, styles TRL, TRLP, TRM, TRF, TRX, TSL, TSLP, TSM, TSF, TSX, TCL, TCLP, TCM, TCF, TCX
Natrelle and McGhan Round Gel Implants, styles 110, 110 Soft Touch, 120, 120 Soft Touch
Natrelle Komuro breast implants styles KML, KMM, KLL, and KLM
Natrelle Ritz Princess breast implant styles RML, RMM, RFL, RFM
Natrelle 150 Full Height and Short Height double lumen implants
Natrelle 133 tissue expanders with and without suture tabs: styles 133FV, 133MV, 133LV, 133MX, 133SX, 133SV, T-133FV, T-133MV, T-133LV, T-133MX, T-133SX, T-133SV, 133FV-T, 133MV-T, 133LV-T, 133MX-T, 133SX-T, 133SV-T
Natrelle 133 Plus tissue expander styles 133P-FV, 133P-MV, 133P-LV, 133P-MX, 133P-SX, 133P-SV, T-133P-FV, T-133P-MV, T-133P-LV, T-133P-MX, T-133P-SX, T-133P-SV, 133P-FV-T, 133P-MV-T, 133P-LV-T, 133P-MX-T, 133P-SX-T, 133P-SV-T

What is BIA-ALCL?

BIA-ALCL is a form of cancer that affects the lymphatic system and develops in the scar tissue that surrounds a textured breast implant. In most cases when the cancer is caught early, BIA-ALCL can be successfully treated. If left untreated, BIA-ALCL can spread to other areas of the body and in the worst cases, can cause death.

What are symptoms of BIA-ALCL?

Some of the common symptoms of people who have BIA-ALCL include:

Breast asymmetry
Changes in breast appearance
Hardening of the breast
Lumps in the breast or armpit area
Swelling around the implant
Pain around the implant
Fatigue
Weight Loss
Rash or unusual itching
Swollen lymph nodes

These symptoms typically develop between 7 – 10 years after the product is implanted; however, some patients have reported that they developed BIA-ALCL symptoms earlier. Continue reading

July 27, 2020

3M Combat Arms Earplug Lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Military personnel deal with countless risks in their everyday lives, including exposure to incredibly loud noises. U.S. military veterans are 30% more likely to suffer hearing loss than the average citizen. During their service they may be exposed to noises from gunfire, explosions, heavy machinery, plane and jet engines, and much more. Military personnel have enough to worry about, and hearing loss is a preventable injury that ought to be taken seriously.

Defective dual-ended military earplugs have come under fire recently, likely enlarging the risk factor of hearing problems to four times as likely as the average citizen. The earplugs were manufactured by 3M Corporation as part of a deal with the U.S. military and were issued to service members deployed between 2002 and 2015. They were issued to protect service members from loud noises associated with their service, while still allowing them to hear low volume noises such as peers trying to communicate with them. 3M was the exclusive supplier of earplugs to the military at this time. After it was discovered that over 2 million service members have deafness and ringing in their ears, authorities found that the earplugs did not protect against what they claimed to. The result: thousands suffering from hearing loss and tinnitus who are now bringing suit against 3M.

This litigation was originally brought by Moldex-Metric, Inc., 3M’s rival company. The U.S. Department of Justice joined the case soon after. The earplugs at issue, The Combat Arms Earplugs Version 2, was designed by Aero Technologies with a defective seal that allowed dangerously loud noise to penetrate the ears. Evidence surfaced that the company knew of these defects dating back to testing done in 2000 and failed to inform the military. When 3M acquired Aero several years later, they continued these deceptive practices. The poor design allows the earplugs to become dislodged and allows high levels of noise to enter the ears and cause damage. The packaging also had improper instructions, increasing the chances of hearing damage.

In 2018, The U.S. Department of Justice reached an agreement with 3M, in which they would pay a $9.1 million settlement to the government. The company has yet to remedy the toll on former military personnel and has not yet admitted liability. Continue reading

April 2, 2020

FDA issues full recall of Zantac heartburn medication

by Altman & Altman

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on Wednesday that it would implement a full, nationwide recall of the popular over-the-counter heartburn medication, Zantac, over concerns that it could potentially introduce a cancer-causing compound into those who take it. If you or a loved one has used Zantac in the past and subsequently developed cancer, contact a personal injury attorney from the Cambridge firm of Altman & Altman LLP right away to get started on a claim.

You may be eligible to receive financial compensation through a class action lawsuit or other legal action against drug manufacturers, or other negligent third parties who allowed the production or sale of Zantac to continue despite independent lab tests showing the possible dangerousness of using Zantac.

What made the FDA recall Zantac?

Up until this week when the news broke, the FDA had been hesitant to respond to claims from independent laboratories that Zantac was potentially dangerous. Independent tests had demonstrated that there was a possibility that Zantac broke down into a compound known as NDMA (N-nitrosodimethylamine), which is a likely carcinogenic (meaning cancer causing) contaminant.

The tests revealed the creation of NDMA could occur inside of the patient’s digestive system once the medicine was ingested. One alarming study showed that just one Zantac tablet could potentially create 3 million nanograms of NDMA – when the recommended maximum amount of NDMA that a human should absorb in a day, according to the FDA, is just 96 nanograms.

Despite these alarming tests, the FDA only decided to issue a nationwide recall of all Zantac products once their independent investigation into the popular drug showed that NDMA production could occur if the medicine was stored at a higher-than-normal temperature. In their statements to press, they make the claim that they only pulled the medicine out of an abundance of caution.

How dangerous is NDMA?

NDMA is presumed carcinogenic due to its cancer-causing qualities in laboratory experiments on mice. It has been observed to be linked to various cancers, including liver, intestinal, esophageal, stomach, colorectal and, in more limited capacities, it has been linked to prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, multiple myeloma and leukemia.

Claims and lawsuits against Zantac for its presumed role in the causation of cancer are already in motion, but none have come to a settlement or award yet. With the announcement of the full, nationwide recall, it is likely much more attention will be paid to this issue and more claims will likely begin to pile up. Continue reading

March 24, 2020

Claims of addiction due to Juul products

by Altman & Altman

Altman & Altman LLP is actively reviewing claims regarding cases of nicotine addiction that have occurred due to the widespread use of Juul brand vaporizers. Specifically, we are pursuing claims from individuals who used a Juul vaporizer before they were 18 years of age, and used it prior to November 2018.

Juul vaporizers (also known as vapes and e-cigarettes) have long been marketed as a “safer” alternative to traditional cigarettes. They have utilized the advertising slogan “Make the Switch,” meaning they intend to be a replacement for nicotine-addicted individuals who are either trying to quit nicotine entirely or are looking for a supposedly less harmful way to consume nicotine. With a streamlined, sleek appearance about the size of a standard USB flash drive, and a simple two-piece design with replaceable nicotine-laden oil cartridges, Juuls have become incredibly popular.

Juul may be specifically targeted for children to use

Studies have revealed that Juuls are not only popular with adults. Children under the age of 18 regularly use Juuls in alarming numbers – as data shows that about 3.6 million kids under the age of 18 tried an e-cigarette device at least once in 2018, a 78 percent increase over the prior year.

Combine this knowledge with the fact that Juul pods contain a higher concentration of nicotine than other e-cigarettes, and that children are more susceptible to developing addictions, and what you’re left with is a ripe recipe for children to become nicotine dependent very quickly.

Not only has Juul been criticized for potentially exposing children to a harmful product without doing much to prevent them from accessing it – the company has also come under scrutiny for their development of flavored pods that would also appeal to children; such as mint and berry flavors.

Juul and “popcorn lung”

Juul vaporizers and other electronic cigarette products like them contain a chemical called diacetyl, an additive that supposedly makes the heated vapor less harsh and smoother when inhaled. Diacetyl is also a component added to movie theater popcorn butter to give it that well-known buttery flavor. The chemical is approved by the FDA for consumption as a food product.

However, overexposure to vaporized diacetyl may cause “popcorn lung,” which causes a constriction of the airways within the lungs to the point of total closure – which may lead to further respiratory complications including total lung collapse, a potentially fatal health complication. Continue reading

January 14, 2020

How Ikea’s Dangerous Furniture Design Can Cause Fatal Accidents For Children

by Altman & Altman

Often we assume that dangers outside the home are the most likely to cause us harm. However, sometimes it’s the items found within our own homes can cause debilitating injuries or even wrongful deaths. Items like heavy furniture can be especially dangerous to children, and if you or a loved one or a child was injured or wrongfully killed in an accident involving furniture or other household items, contact a wrongful death attorney at the Cambridge law offices of Altman & Altman LLP today.

These tragedies can occur at any time

It may seem unlikely, but a furniture-related accident can happen at any time. Consider how easily a young child can wander away from your watchful eye. It can only take a matter of seconds before a child pulls out a drawer of a dresser and stands in it, simply wanting to play, only for the whole dresser to become off balance and fall onto the child.

These types of accidents have taken the lives of children in places across the world. Most recently, a California family was awarded $46 million in a settlement with Swedish furniture giant Ikea after a similar accident involving a dresser claimed the life of their two-year-old child. It is reportedly the largest settlement paid to a family for the wrongful death of a single child in United States history. In 2016, Ikea paid $50 million to the families of three other children who had been killed by the same type of dresser.

Families of the child victims say that Ikea was aware of the potential dangers involving that specific dresser, especially after the settlement in 2016. Despite this knowledge, they alleged the company did not do enough to get dangerous dressers recalled or do enough to promote better safety in newer models they produced since the wrongful deaths occurred. Ikea, through a spokesperson, took responsibility for the action and offered their condolences to the California family.

Children aren’t the only ones at risk

While children are vulnerable to furniture-related accidents more than an able-bodied adult would be, children are not the only one who can be injured in such an incident. The elderly – especially those who are living alone or with minimal supervision – can easily become injured if a heavy piece of furniture were to topple over.

Perhaps they lose their balance and grab for the nearest thing to catch them, and the furniture is on wheels without any braking mechanism or is too top heavy by design. The furniture could easily then topple over and land on the senior citizen, which would likely cause severe injuries such as lacerations, broken bones, concussions or other major trauma. This could result in extensive hospital stays with necessary and risky surgery, permanent mobility problems and, in the worst cases, death. Continue reading

November 18, 2019

Have you suffered hearing loss from 3M earplugs while serving in the military?

by Altman & Altman

Our nation’s veterans and active military members deserve our respect and appreciation for the tough job they do in protecting our country and our way of life. Unfortunately, veterans and active duty service members have not been treated with the type of respect we would hope when it comes to a brand of earplugs manufactured under the 3M umbrella, which has led to hearing loss and permanent hearing damage due to serious design flaws. If you or a loved one has suffered hearing loss as a result of the use of these earplugs, contact a personal injury attorney from Altman & Altman LLP today.

3M subject to many lawsuits over these common military earplugs

3M is a multinational conglomerate corporation which owns many subsidiary companies that manufacture any different type of medical and pharmaceutical products imaginable. One of these companies, Aearo Technologies, manufactured a type of protective earplug in 2000 that was intended to be useful when worn two different ways – one way would supposedly block out all loud sounds, while the other way would block out most loud sounds but still allow the wearer to hear soft sounds, like the instructions of a fellow soldier or commanding officer.

Aearo Technologies was bought by 3M in 2008, and since 3M won a bid to become the exclusive supplier of protective earplugs to the military between 2003 and 2012, they sought to continue selling these earplugs, which are called “Combat Arms.”

What is now the subject of many lawsuits is the fact that 3M allegedly knew from the moment they purchased the company that the Combat Arms earplugs had a crucial design flaw which essentially rendered them completely useless in a loud combat situation.

3M allegedly knew about this complaint because Aearo Technologies noted the presence design flaw during the earplug’s production in 2000 – when the technician testing the plugs took an extra step when inserting them to prevent the design flaw from affecting their sound blocking capabilities – a step that would not be immediately apparent to anybody unless they were made aware of it beforehand. There is good reason to suspect 3M would know about this flaw, because the technician that worked for Aearo Technologies was brought on board to work for 3M after they were acquired.

Lawsuits allege that both Aearo, and 3M after they acquired Aearo, knowingly misled the U.S. government and the thousands of U.S. military service members who relied on the faulty earplugs, which resulted in many cases of temporary and even permanent hearing damage.

These earplugs caused real damage, and Altman & Altman LLP can help

Research from complainants show that during the time interval in which 3M and Aearo was supplying Combat Arms earplugs to the military, cases of hearing loss and tinnitus in combat veterans spiked to a significant degree. This is simply unconscionable that a company trusted with the care of military service members could fail to protect one of their most crucial senses, despite having good reason to suspect there was a flaw in the design of one of their most highly sold products.

Selling defective products which are known to have a design flaw that renders them ineffective in their original purpose is unethical and it is also against the law. There is good evidence to suggest that 3M should have recognized the design flaw in these earplugs and accounted for that, but instead they chose to continue selling the earplugs to continue making a profit, allegedly at the expense of our brave men and women in uniform. Continue reading

November 6, 2019

Johnson & Johnson baby powder lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Johnson & Johnson has recently had to pull over 33,000 bottles of baby powder off the shelves after the Food and Drug Administration discovered evidence of asbestos – which is known to cause cancer – in one of the bottles. It is not the first time Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder has been feared to introduce people to the risk of contracting cancer. If you have reason to believe you or a loved one has been exposed to cancer-causing elements via their baby powder, contact Altman & Altman LLP today.

More lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson contributes to long list

Pharmaceutical titan Johnson & Johnson is known throughout the world for being the corporate owner of widely-used products such as Tylenol and Motrin – in addition to hundreds of other products that span a wide range of industries. However, they may very well be more notorious for their long list of lawsuits that continues to grow with each passing year.

The company – which made nearly $82 billion in profit in 2018 – is embattled with over 100,000 lawsuits against it due to people claiming they have come into harm due to the use of their products. Over 15 percent of those are directly related to lawsuits coming from those who have used their talc-based baby powder products.

Users of their baby powder who have brought suit in the past have made claims that the baby powder contributed to their contracting of various cancers – from talcum powder contributing to ovarian cancer to the same powder causing mesothelioma, a form of respiratory cancer that is traditionally caused by asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral that is confirmed to be an aggressive carcinogen.

As a result of the positive test for asbestos within the baby powder – which is manufactured in China – the FDA recommended that all users of Johnson & Johnson talc-based powders should cease using them immediately and indefinitely. Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, has denied any wrongdoing and liability for the test, instead shifting an accusatory tone of defensiveness towards the FDA testing process.

This is not uncommon for large companies to do. Even in cases where Johnson & Johnson has been found to be negligent in their contributions to a victim’s pain and suffering, they have been unwilling to accept the verdicts set against them and take responsibility – like what occurred when they were hit with a monumental $8 billion jury verdict against them following a claim that their anti-psychotic drug Risperdal had caused the man taking it to develop female-like breasts. Continue reading