The coronavirus vaccines were being hailed as lifesaver and people had assumed that the inoculation drives will bring immediate relief in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus">pandemic</a> struggles.&nbsp;

However, as per a recent warning by the director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a "fourth surge" can occur before the whole population of the US is vaccinated.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/its-a-psychological-distress-japan-asks-china-to-stop-anal-swab-tests-for-coronavirus-on-citizens-367309" hreflang="en">'It's a psychological distress': Japan asks China to stop anal swab tests for coronavirus on citizens</a>

"At this level of cases, with variants spreading, we stand to completely lose the hard-earned ground we have gained," Rochelle Walensky said in a White House briefing.

Walensky urged people to not put down their guards. She asked people to not relax and keep following the coronavirus restrictions imposed by the medical experts.

"Now is not the time to relax the critical safeguards that we know can stop the spread of Covid-19 in our communities, not when we are so close. We have the ability to stop a potential fourth surge of cases in this country," she said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/astrazeneca-sells-stake-in-moderna-for-more-than-1-billion-report-367063" hreflang="en">AstraZeneca sells stake in Moderna for more than $1 billion: Report</a>

This can, however, be helped by the recently approved single-shot coronavirus vaccine of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-us-approves-johnson-johnson-coronavirus-vaccine-biden-warns-americans-366715">Johnson &amp; Johnson.</a>

Jeff Zients, the coordinator of the White House coronavirus response team, reported that the single-shot vaccine's delivery will start "as early as tomorrow".

The pharmaceutical company has a ready plan to distribute nearly 3.9 million doses of the vaccine in the upcoming days. This will add to the already-existing stockpile of Pfizer-BioNtech and Moderna vaccines in the US.&nbsp;

However, he also added that "J&amp;J has indicated that the supply will be limited for the next couple of weeks".

The approval of the Johnson &amp; Johnson vaccine, however,&nbsp;is being predicted to be a great help in ramping up the immunisation process in the country which has lost more than 500,000 people to this deadly virus, as this vaccine only requires a single dose, as compared to the other two which are two-dose vaccines.

The coronavirus vaccines were being hailed as lifesaver and people had assumed that the inoculation drives will bring immediate relief in the pandemic struggles.

The coronavirus vaccines were being hailed as lifesaver and people had assumed that the inoculation drives will bring immediate relief in the pandemic struggles. However, as per a recent warning by the director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a "fourth surge" can occur before the whole population of the US is vaccinated. Also read | 'It's a psychological distress': Japan asks China to stop anal swab tests for coronavirus on citizens "At this level of cases, with variants spreading, we stand to completely lose the hard-earned ground we have gained," Rochelle Walensky said in a White House briefing. Walensky urged people to not put down their guards. She asked people to not relax and keep following the coronavirus restrictions imposed by the medical experts. "Now is not the time to relax the critical safeguards that we know can stop the spread of Covid-19 in our communities, not when we are so close. We have the ability to stop a potential fourth surge of cases in this country," she said. Also read | AstraZeneca sells stake in Moderna for more than $1 billion: Report This can, however, be helped by the recently approved single-shot coronavirus vaccine of Johnson & Johnson. Jeff Zients, the coordinator of the White House coronavirus response team, reported that the single-shot vaccine's delivery will start "as early as tomorrow". The pharmaceutical company has a ready plan to distribute nearly 3.9 million doses of the vaccine in the upcoming days. This will add to the already-existing stockpile of Pfizer-BioNtech and Moderna vaccines in the US. However, he also added that "J&J has indicated that the supply will be limited for the next couple of weeks". The approval of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, however, is being predicted to be a great help in ramping up the immunisation process in the country which has lost more than 500,000 people to this deadly virus, as this vaccine only requires a single dose, as compared to the other two which are two-dose vaccines.

Potential 'fourth surge' of coronavirus possible soon, CDC chief warns

A day after the US authorised Johnson &amp; Johnson's <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">coronavirus vaccine</a> for emergency use, the authorities are now hoping that four million doses of the vaccine will be delivered across the country as early as Tuesday.

The single-shot vaccine is the third one to be authorised by the US' Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna's vaccine.

"Starting tonight, 3.9 million doses of J&amp;J will be distributed across all channels — states, tribes, territories, and pharmacies and community health centers. Those J&amp;J doses will be delivered as early as this Tuesday morning," a senior administration official said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-us-approves-johnson-johnson-coronavirus-vaccine-biden-warns-americans-366715" hreflang="en">As US approves Johnson &amp; Johnson coronavirus vaccine, Biden warns Americans</a>

The authorities are also hoping to receive at least 16 million doses of the J&amp;J vaccine by the end of this month. "That's the entirety of J&amp;J's current inventory," the official said. "J&amp;J expects to deliver approximately 16 million additional doses by the end of March. So that's a cumulative 20 million."

This vaccine has brought in hopes of ramping up the mass vaccination programme as over 65 million people have already been vaccinated by the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. The J&amp;J vaccine can make the process faster as unlike the other two, this vaccine only requires single-dose to fight against the deadly coronavirus, including the new variants.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eu-to-clear-johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-by-march-366917" hreflang="en">EU to clear Johnson and Johnson vaccine by March</a>

J&amp;J had earlier announced it aims to deliver 20 million doses by the end of March, with 100 million by June — though the US is pushing to expedite that timeline.

Meanwhile, the White House's top pandemic advisor Anthony Fauci, on Sunday, said he hopes that the US can start vaccinating the younger lot of the country by year end of early 2022.

"We now have three really efficacious vaccines," Fauci said in an interview on an American news channel.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-rolls-out-first-one-jab-covid-vaccine-366870" hreflang="en">China rolls out first one-jab Covid vaccine</a>

If the country is able to start vaccinating children by the end of the year or early 2022, it can help make school reopenings easier as majority of children will then be able to return to offline classrooms, instead of the ongoing virtual classes.

Fauci believes children around the age of 14 to 18 — high schoolers — should be able to get vaccinated by the fall season, while the children between the ages of five and 13 — elecmentary and middle chool children — will not be able to receive the vaccine by early 2022.

"I'm not sure it'll exactly be on the first day that school opens, but pretty close to that," Fauci said.

Meanwhile, former US PResident Donald Trump, in his speech at the CPAC 2021, urged the Biden administration to reopen schools. "On behalf of the moms, dads and children of America, I call on Joe Biden to get the schools open and get them open now," the former reality TV star yelled.

A day after the US authorised Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine for emergency use, the authorities are now hoping that four million doses of the vaccine will be delivered across the country as early as Tuesday.

A day after the US authorised Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine for emergency use, the authorities are now hoping that four million doses of the vaccine will be delivered across the country as early as Tuesday. The single-shot vaccine is the third one to be authorised by the US' Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna's vaccine. "Starting tonight, 3.9 million doses of J&J will be distributed across all channels — states, tribes, territories, and pharmacies and community health centers. Those J&J doses will be delivered as early as this Tuesday morning," a senior administration official said. Also read | As US approves Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine, Biden warns Americans The authorities are also hoping to receive at least 16 million doses of the J&J vaccine by the end of this month. "That's the entirety of J&J's current inventory," the official said. "J&J expects to deliver approximately 16 million additional doses by the end of March. So that's a cumulative 20 million." This vaccine has brought in hopes of ramping up the mass vaccination programme as over 65 million people have already been vaccinated by the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. The J&J vaccine can make the process faster as unlike the other two, this vaccine only requires single-dose to fight against the deadly coronavirus, including the new variants. Also read | EU to clear Johnson and Johnson vaccine by March J&J had earlier announced it aims to deliver 20 million doses by the end of March, with 100 million by June — though the US is pushing to expedite that timeline. Meanwhile, the White House's top pandemic advisor Anthony Fauci, on Sunday, said he hopes that the US can start vaccinating the younger lot of the country by year end of early 2022. "We now have three really efficacious vaccines," Fauci said in an interview on an American news channel. Also read | China rolls out first one-jab Covid vaccine If the country is able to start vaccinating children by the end of the year or early 2022, it can help make school reopenings easier as majority of children will then be able to return to offline classrooms, instead of the ongoing virtual classes. Fauci believes children around the age of 14 to 18 — high schoolers — should be able to get vaccinated by the fall season, while the children between the ages of five and 13 — elecmentary and middle chool children — will not be able to receive the vaccine by early 2022. "I'm not sure it'll exactly be on the first day that school opens, but pretty close to that," Fauci said. Meanwhile, former US PResident Donald Trump, in his speech at the CPAC 2021, urged the Biden administration to reopen schools. "On behalf of the moms, dads and children of America, I call on Joe Biden to get the schools open and get them open now," the former reality TV star yelled.

US to get 4 million J&J vaccine by Tuesday; Fauci hopes to vaccinate children by 2021 end

On Saturday, the US authorised Johnson &amp; Johnson's <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">coronavirus vaccine</a> for emergency use, making it the third approved vaccine of the county since the outbreak of COVID-19 a year ago.

The main attraction of Johnson &amp; Johnson's coronavirus vaccine is that it is a single-shot vaccine, unlike Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca which are administered in two parts.

ALso read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/south-africa-receives-second-batch-of-jj-vaccines-366627" hreflang="en">South Africa receives second batch of J&amp;J vaccines</a>

This single-shot vaccine is, reportedly, highly effective against the deadly coronavirus, and also works as a guard against the new variants of COVID-19.

President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a> took this opportunity to address the nation and share the happy news. "This is exciting news for all Americans, and an encouraging development in our efforts to bring an end to the crisis," he said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-approves-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-for-emergency-use-366776">WATCH|</a>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-approves-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-for-emergency-use-366776/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

However, he was also mindful to urge people to exercise caution and not assume that the pandemic is over, as the death toll due to the virus in the country has been on a constant rise.

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pfizer-vaccines-single-dose-provides-strong-immunity-to-those-who-have-had-covid-19-study-366628" hreflang="en">Pfizer vaccine's single dose provides strong immunity to those who have had Covid-19: Study</a>

"But we cannot let our guard down now or assume that victory is inevitable," he warned.

The emergency approval of the Johnson &amp; Johnson's vaccine has come as a piece of welcome news as it is being predicted to be a great help in ramping up the immunisation process in the country which has lost more than 500,000 people to this deadly virus.

In the clinical trials, the efficacy of this vaccine against the deadly virus was 85.9 per cent in the United States, 81.7 per cent in South Africa, and 87.6 per cent in Brazil.

Questions and concerns have been raised about the efficacy of this vaccine as the vaccine were, overall, 85.4 per cent effective in a study of 39,321 participants, with the efficacy decreasing to 66.1 per cent when the moderate forms of the disease were included. 
&nbsp;

On Saturday, the US authorised Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine for emergency use, making it the third approved vaccine of the county since the outbreak of COVID-19 a year ago.

On Saturday, the US authorised Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine for emergency use, making it the third approved vaccine of the county since the outbreak of COVID-19 a year ago. The main attraction of Johnson & Johnson's coronavirus vaccine is that it is a single-shot vaccine, unlike Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca which are administered in two parts. ALso read| South Africa receives second batch of J&J vaccines This single-shot vaccine is, reportedly, highly effective against the deadly coronavirus, and also works as a guard against the new variants of COVID-19. President Joe Biden took this opportunity to address the nation and share the happy news. "This is exciting news for all Americans, and an encouraging development in our efforts to bring an end to the crisis," he said. WATCH| However, he was also mindful to urge people to exercise caution and not assume that the pandemic is over, as the death toll due to the virus in the country has been on a constant rise. Also read| Pfizer vaccine's single dose provides strong immunity to those who have had Covid-19: Study "But we cannot let our guard down now or assume that victory is inevitable," he warned. The emergency approval of the Johnson & Johnson's vaccine has come as a piece of welcome news as it is being predicted to be a great help in ramping up the immunisation process in the country which has lost more than 500,000 people to this deadly virus. In the clinical trials, the efficacy of this vaccine against the deadly virus was 85.9 per cent in the United States, 81.7 per cent in South Africa, and 87.6 per cent in Brazil. Questions and concerns have been raised about the efficacy of this vaccine as the vaccine were, overall, 85.4 per cent effective in a study of 39,321 participants, with the efficacy decreasing to 66.1 per cent when the moderate forms of the disease were included.

As US approves Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine, Biden warns Americans

South Africa's second tranche of 80,000 Johnson &amp; Johnson <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">COVID-19 vaccine </a>from Brussels touched down at OR Tambo International airport on Saturday morning.&nbsp;

The second batch of vaccines is reserved for frontline healthcare workers. The single-shot Johnson and Johnson vaccine has been shown to be 82 per cent effective in preventing severe illness from the COVID variant first discovered in South Africa.&nbsp;

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/who-chief-ghebreyesus-praises-india-pm-modi-for-covid-vaccine-effort-366417" hreflang="en">WHO chief Ghebreyesus praises India, PM Modi for Covid vaccine effort</a>

The jabs have been taken to a secure facility in Gauteng from where it will be distributed to vaccine centres in provinces.&nbsp;

This second batch of vaccines is part of 500,000 jabs South Africa is getting for research purposes.

By the end of Friday, the country had used 63,648 vaccines out of the 80,000 that arrived in the country on February 01. The health department says about 12,000 health workers are getting vaccinated in a day now.

As of February 26, South Africa recorded 1.5 million positive cases and 49,784 deaths, government statistics showed.&nbsp;

South Africa's second tranche of 80,000 Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine from Brussels touched down at OR Tambo International airport on Saturday morning. The second batch of vaccines is reserved for frontline healthcare workers.

South Africa's second tranche of 80,000 Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine from Brussels touched down at OR Tambo International airport on Saturday morning. The second batch of vaccines is reserved for frontline healthcare workers. The single-shot Johnson and Johnson vaccine has been shown to be 82 per cent effective in preventing severe illness from the COVID variant first discovered in South Africa. Also read| WHO chief Ghebreyesus praises India, PM Modi for Covid vaccine effort The jabs have been taken to a secure facility in Gauteng from where it will be distributed to vaccine centres in provinces. This second batch of vaccines is part of 500,000 jabs South Africa is getting for research purposes. By the end of Friday, the country had used 63,648 vaccines out of the 80,000 that arrived in the country on February 01. The health department says about 12,000 health workers are getting vaccinated in a day now. As of February 26, South Africa recorded 1.5 million positive cases and 49,784 deaths, government statistics showed.

South Africa receives second batch of J&J vaccines

The food and drug administration of the US has now said that Johnson & Johnson's one shot Corona vaccine appears to be safe and effective in the trial.

FDA paves way for Johnson & Johnson's one-shot COVID-19 vaccine approval for emergency use

South Africa will continue with the planned phase 1 <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">vaccination </a>using the Johnson &amp; Johnson, Health Minister, Zweli Mkhize said today.&nbsp;

“Given the outcomes of the efficacy studies, the Department of Health will continue with the planned phase 1 vaccination using the Johnson &amp; Johnson vaccine instead of the AstraZeneca vaccine,” the Minister said in a virtual briefing on Wednesday morning.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/who-says-do-not-dismiss-astrazeneca-jab-after-south-africa-suspends-vaccine-campaign-362289">WHO says do not dismiss AstraZeneca jab after South Africa suspends vaccine campaign</a>

The government temporarily delayed the rollout of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in South Africa after initial trial data showed it was less effective against the dominant 501.Y.V2 Covid variant first seen in South Africa.&nbsp;

“The Johnson &amp; Johnson vaccine has been proven effective against the 501Y.V2 variant and the necessary approval processes for use in South Africa are underway,” he said.&nbsp;

“We will soon announce more details about the delivery of Johnson &amp; Johnson vaccines in our new rollout strategy. It's likely to be next week, but I can't yet confirm as yet,” Mkhize said.&nbsp;

The rollout of vaccination will proceed in the form of an implementation study with the partnership of the Medical Research Council and the National Department of Health vaccination sites across the country, Mkhize added.

The minister also gave clarity on what is going to happen to the 1 million doses of AstraZeneca Vaccine already bought from Serum Institute of India.

“We intend to use the AstraZeneca vaccine based in what experts will say...We are waiting for experts to give us advise,” he said.

“In the rest of the world, it (AstraZeneca) Vaccine is highly well used. There are already some countries who are asking us to sell it to them. All we can say to our public, we will not waste the money. We will either swap the vaccine and get different vaccine or get fresh batch,” the minister added.&nbsp;

As of Tuesday, South Africa reported 1.48 million positive cases and 46,869 deaths.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

South Africa will continue with the planned phase 1 vaccination using the Johnson & Johnson, Health Minister, Zweli Mkhize said today. “Given the outcomes of the efficacy studies, the Department of Health will continue with the planned phase 1 vaccination using the Johnson & Johnson vaccine instead of the AstraZeneca vaccine,” the Minister said in a virtual briefing on Wednesday morning.

South Africa will continue with the planned phase 1 vaccination using the Johnson & Johnson, Health Minister, Zweli Mkhize said today. “Given the outcomes of the efficacy studies, the Department of Health will continue with the planned phase 1 vaccination using the Johnson & Johnson vaccine instead of the AstraZeneca vaccine,” the Minister said in a virtual briefing on Wednesday morning. Also read | WHO says do not dismiss AstraZeneca jab after South Africa suspends vaccine campaign The government temporarily delayed the rollout of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine in South Africa after initial trial data showed it was less effective against the dominant 501.Y.V2 Covid variant first seen in South Africa. “The Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been proven effective against the 501Y.V2 variant and the necessary approval processes for use in South Africa are underway,” he said. “We will soon announce more details about the delivery of Johnson & Johnson vaccines in our new rollout strategy. It's likely to be next week, but I can't yet confirm as yet,” Mkhize said. The rollout of vaccination will proceed in the form of an implementation study with the partnership of the Medical Research Council and the National Department of Health vaccination sites across the country, Mkhize added. The minister also gave clarity on what is going to happen to the 1 million doses of AstraZeneca Vaccine already bought from Serum Institute of India. “We intend to use the AstraZeneca vaccine based in what experts will say...We are waiting for experts to give us advise,” he said. “In the rest of the world, it (AstraZeneca) Vaccine is highly well used. There are already some countries who are asking us to sell it to them. All we can say to our public, we will not waste the money. We will either swap the vaccine and get different vaccine or get fresh batch,” the minister added. As of Tuesday, South Africa reported 1.48 million positive cases and 46,869 deaths.

South Africa to proceed with planned phase 1 vaccination using J&J

South Africa faces a serious setback as scientists and experts announced that AstraZeneca vaccine is less effective against 501.Y.V2 covid variant first found in South Africa.&nbsp;

In a virtual briefing, health Minister Zweli Mkhize alongside South Africa’s top scientists and experts announced that the rollout of the 1 million AstraZeneca vaccine bought from India will be kept on hold until a committee of scientists decides on a way forward.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/oxfordastrazeneca-jab-fails-to-prevent-coronavirus-from-south-african-strain-study-361874" hreflang="en">Oxford/AstraZeneca jab fails to prevent coronavirus from South African strain: Study</a>

“AstraZeneca rollout on temporary hold. Awaiting clinical efficacy information,” the briefing presentation slide read.&nbsp;

Instead, Minister Mkhize said, there will be an expedited rollout of the Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;vaccine for health workers in the next four weeks.&nbsp;

Minister also clarified on why South Africa bought AstraZeneca vaccine. He said, they had some data that it could work well and the company could provide with jabs before it received its Covax jabs.&nbsp;

Prof Abdool Karim also added that the only Covid-19 vaccine they had clinically tested is for Johnson &amp; Johnson. He said they don’t yet have clinical data to show AstraZeneca vaccine can protect against severe disease caused by 501.Y.V2.&nbsp;

South Africa received its first batch of one million AstraZeneca vaccine from Serum Institute of India on February 1.&nbsp;

Mkhize said the AstraZeneca vaccine (bought from India) will not be sent back. Scientists will be concluding studies linked to the efficacy. They might be swapped out for newer stock as they expire in April, he added.&nbsp;

South Africa faces a serious setback as scientists and experts announced that AstraZeneca vaccine is less effective against 501.Y.V2 covid variant first found in South Africa.

South Africa faces a serious setback as scientists and experts announced that AstraZeneca vaccine is less effective against 501.Y.V2 covid variant first found in South Africa. In a virtual briefing, health Minister Zweli Mkhize alongside South Africa’s top scientists and experts announced that the rollout of the 1 million AstraZeneca vaccine bought from India will be kept on hold until a committee of scientists decides on a way forward. Also read: Oxford/AstraZeneca jab fails to prevent coronavirus from South African strain: Study “AstraZeneca rollout on temporary hold. Awaiting clinical efficacy information,” the briefing presentation slide read. Instead, Minister Mkhize said, there will be an expedited rollout of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine for health workers in the next four weeks. Minister also clarified on why South Africa bought AstraZeneca vaccine. He said, they had some data that it could work well and the company could provide with jabs before it received its Covax jabs. Prof Abdool Karim also added that the only Covid-19 vaccine they had clinically tested is for Johnson & Johnson. He said they don’t yet have clinical data to show AstraZeneca vaccine can protect against severe disease caused by 501.Y.V2. South Africa received its first batch of one million AstraZeneca vaccine from Serum Institute of India on February 1. Mkhize said the AstraZeneca vaccine (bought from India) will not be sent back. Scientists will be concluding studies linked to the efficacy. They might be swapped out for newer stock as they expire in April, he added.

South Africa halts AstraZeneca vaccinations over variant data

Johnson &amp; Johnson on Thursday applied for emergency use authorisation of its single-dose <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus-vaccine">coronavirus vaccine</a>&nbsp;to US health regulators.&nbsp;

If approved, the vaccine will be third for the worst-hit United States, the country which has seen over 450,000 deaths due to the deadly virus.

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/your-story-oxford-to-study-alternate-doses-of-covid-19-vaccine-by-different-manufacturers-361398/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

J&amp;J's Covid-19 vaccine has some logistical advantages over other rivals as the drug does not require deep-freeze storage and only a single-shot is required for inoculation.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/johnson-and-johnson-says-covid-vaccine-66-effective-overall-less-so-against-s-african-variant-360129">Johnson and Johnson says Covid vaccine 66% effective overall, less so against S African variant</a>

However, a January 29 report said that the vaccine has an efficacy rate of 66 per cent, which is significantly lower than Moderna and Pfizer's Covid-19 drug.&nbsp;

Various trials have also suggested that J&amp;J's vaccine does not protect against highly transmissible coronavirus variant found in South Africa.&nbsp;

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said on Thursday that its vaccines committee will meet on February 26 to discuss J&amp;J's vaccine.&nbsp;

J&amp;J is ready to begin shipping to roll out the drug in March once emergency approval is granted, Paul Stoffels, chief scientific officer of the pharma giant, said.&nbsp;

The US has agreed to pay J&amp;J $1 billion for 100 million doses and the company plans to deliver a billion doses in 2021.&nbsp;

In the trial of about 44,000 volunteers in eight nations, the efficacy of J&amp;J's vaccine was 72 per cent in the US, 66 per cent in Latin America and 57 per cent in South Africa.&nbsp;

Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines have an effectiveness of about 95 per cent, though the trial results of both the drugmakers were largely based in the US.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

Johnson & Johnson on Thursday applied for emergency use authorisation of its single-dose coronavirus vaccine to US health regulators. If approved, the vaccine will be third for the worst-hit United States, the country which has seen over 450,000 deaths due to the deadly virus.

Johnson & Johnson on Thursday applied for emergency use authorisation of its single-dose coronavirus vaccine to US health regulators. If approved, the vaccine will be third for the worst-hit United States, the country which has seen over 450,000 deaths due to the deadly virus. Watch | J&J's Covid-19 vaccine has some logistical advantages over other rivals as the drug does not require deep-freeze storage and only a single-shot is required for inoculation. Also read | Johnson and Johnson says Covid vaccine 66% effective overall, less so against S African variant However, a January 29 report said that the vaccine has an efficacy rate of 66 per cent, which is significantly lower than Moderna and Pfizer's Covid-19 drug. Various trials have also suggested that J&J's vaccine does not protect against highly transmissible coronavirus variant found in South Africa. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said on Thursday that its vaccines committee will meet on February 26 to discuss J&J's vaccine. J&J is ready to begin shipping to roll out the drug in March once emergency approval is granted, Paul Stoffels, chief scientific officer of the pharma giant, said. The US has agreed to pay J&J $1 billion for 100 million doses and the company plans to deliver a billion doses in 2021. In the trial of about 44,000 volunteers in eight nations, the efficacy of J&J's vaccine was 72 per cent in the US, 66 per cent in Latin America and 57 per cent in South Africa. Pfizer and Moderna's vaccines have an effectiveness of about 95 per cent, though the trial results of both the drugmakers were largely based in the US.

Johnson & Johnson seeks emergency use authorisation for its Covid-19 vaccine

Johnson & Johnson Coronavirus vaccine has shown an overall 66% efficacy in preventing moderate to severe COVID-19. Although the trial results indicate that it is less effective against the virus variant first discovered in South Africa.

Single-dose Johnson & Johnson Coronavirus vaccine shows 66% efficacy

Johnson &amp; Johnson expects to release critical results from its COVID-19 vaccine trial in as little as two weeks — a potential boon in the effort to protect Americans from the coronavirus — but most likely won’t be able to provide as many doses this spring as it promised the federal government because of unanticipated manufacturing delays.

If the vaccine can strongly protect people against COVID-19, as some outside scientists expect, it would offer big advantages over the two vaccines authorized in the United States. Unlike those products, which require two doses, Johnson &amp; Johnson’s could need just one, greatly simplifying logistics for local health departments and clinics struggling to get shots in arms. What’s more, its vaccine can stay stable in a refrigerator for months, whereas the others have to be frozen.

But the encouraging prospect of a third effective vaccine is tempered by apparent lags in the company’s production. In the company’s $1 billion contract signed with the federal government in August, Johnson &amp; Johnson pledged to have 12 million doses of its vaccine ready by the end of February, ramping up to a total of 100 million doses by the end of June.

Federal officials have been told that the company has fallen as much as two months behind the original production schedule and won’t catch up until the end of April, when it was supposed to have delivered more than 60 million doses, according to two people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Carlo de Notaristefani, lead manufacturing adviser for Operation Warp Speed, the federal vaccine development program, acknowledged a delay but said the company might be able to catch up with initial production goals by March.

“I agree there was a problem,” de Notaristefani said. But he added, “Manufacturing of pharmaceuticals is not a black box where you turn the key and start counting.”

Any delay could be critical because the federal government has secured only enough vaccine doses to inoculate 200 million of the roughly 260 million eligible adults in the first half of this year. With the nation in the grip of its largest surge of the coronavirus to date and the death toll escalating to as high as 4,000 a day, Americans desperate to be vaccinated are lining the sidewalks outside vaccination centers.

Fears about the virus have only escalated with the scientific discovery last month that the country has been seeded with a new, highly contagious variant. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced it would no longer hold back vaccine stocks for second doses in order to get more people at least partly vaccinated more quickly.

Dr. Paul Stoffels, Johnson &amp; Johnson’s chief scientific officer, said he expected to see clinical trial data showing whether his company’s vaccine is safe and effective in late January or early February. But he declined to provide details about the company’s production capacity.

“We are not ready to release the numbers month by month at the moment, as we are in the discussion with the FDA,” he said.

If the data is positive and the Food and Drug Administration authorizes the vaccine for emergency use, he added, “hopefully somewhere in March we’ll be able to contribute” to the nation’s vaccination drive.

That Johnson &amp; Johnson’s timetable has slipped is not unusual given the frantic pace of vaccine development amid the worst pandemic in a century. But the delay also highlights the unrealistic promises of Operation Warp Speed.

The premise of the program was that the federal government would front the costs of development and manufacturing so that vaccine makers could mass-produce doses even before the vaccines were proved to work. Moncef Slaoui, chief scientific adviser for Warp Speed, said in December that Johnson &amp; Johnson’s vaccine would be a “game changer” in the pandemic.

But at a Tuesday news conference, Slaoui said that instead of 12 million doses envisioned in the contract by the end of February, the company was likely to have in the “single-digit” millions. He also said the company was “trying to make that number get as close to a double-digit number as possible, and then a larger number in March and a much larger number in April.” Another person familiar with the company’s progress said it was poised to deliver only perhaps 3 million or 4 million doses of its vaccine by the end of next month.

In a statement, a Johnson &amp; Johnson spokesman said: “We are confident we can meet our contractual obligations to supply our vaccine candidate to the US&nbsp;government.”

De Notaristefani, Operation Warp Speed’s manufacturing chief, said the government’s contracts with vaccine makers were written at a time of great uncertainty, with the understanding that unforeseen obstacles could throw off the timetables. “Numbers are never cast in stone when you start a new process,” he said, adding that the company had to transfer its manufacturing from the Netherlands to a plant in Baltimore. “I really think that technically they couldn’t do it earlier.”

Dr. Marcus Plescia, chief medical officer for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, said that state health officials were clearly excited about Johnson &amp; Johnson’s one-dose vaccine.

“You can get it, and you’re done,” he said. “Everybody is eager to have it out there. It has a lot of potential.”

But even if Johnson &amp; Johnson’s vaccine pans out, Plescia said, it won’t be enough. He predicted that state health departments would need a total of four vaccines in the next six months if they hope to reach their goals of offering a vaccine to every American who wants one.

“Or else the public is going to get very frustrated, because they’re ready for it to be opened up, and there isn’t adequate supply to do that,” Plescia said.

Johnson &amp; Johnson is by no means alone in its manufacturing delays. Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s chief executive, told investors in the fall that his company had agreed to deliver 40 million doses of its vaccine to the federal government in 2020, assuming it proved successful in clinical trials. In the end, the company had only half that many ready to ship.

No one — including company executives — knows whether Johnson &amp; Johnson’s vaccine will work. But Lynda Coughlin, a virus expert at the University of Maryland School of Medicine who is not involved in the trial, said that the design of the vaccine and the results from early trials made her optimistic.

“Hopefully the results from Johnson &amp; Johnson are just really going to knock it out of the park,” she said.

Johnson &amp; Johnson’s COVID vaccine is fundamentally different from the authorized vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech. Those two consist of genetic molecules encased in oily bubbles. Johnson &amp; Johnson built its vaccine from a virus that causes common colds, known as an adenovirus.

Testing the vaccine on monkeys, the researchers found that a single shot was enough to protect the animals from infection. When they tried out different formulations of the vaccine in early clinical trials, they were pleased to see that the vaccine prompted a strong antibody response with a single dose.

On Wednesday, Johnson &amp; Johnson researchers and their colleagues published the full details of these early clinical trials in the New England Journal of Medicine. They reported that when they checked the blood of volunteers 71 days after receiving a single dose, their levels of coronavirus antibodies were still high. In some cases they were still increasing.

As results of the early clinical trials emerged over the summer, the company had to make a high-stakes decision: proceed with a clinical trial of two doses, which had the most likelihood of success, or try one with a single dose, which would be far more useful for getting shots to the masses — if it worked. The company decided to roll the dice with a single-shot trial.

“We know from vaccination campaigns that the simpler the logistics, the more successful the program,” said Dr. Dan Barouch, a virus expert at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center who pioneered adenovirus vaccines in the early 2000s and collaborated with Johnson &amp; Johnson researchers on the trial.

If many people began developing immunity from a single-shot dose, it might become harder for the virus to move from person to person, bringing down the high rates of new cases and easing the burden of the pandemic.

“A vaccine that is one dose would have a tremendous, tremendous public health impact, of course for low-income countries, but also in high-income countries,” said Ruth Faden, a professor of biomedical ethics at Johns Hopkins University.

While other vaccine developers moved quickly into late-stage trials, Johnson &amp; Johnson deliberately moved more slowly so it could focus on ramping up manufacturing of its vaccine. At a facility in the Netherlands, researchers grew cells in which their adenoviruses could multiply. Adjusting the chemistry in giant vats, the scientists found a recipe for producing the vaccine at a fast, reliable rate.

Johnson &amp; Johnson also began working early with other companies to prepare to manufacture the vaccine across the world. In April, it announced a partnership with Maryland-based Emergent BioSolutions to manufacture the vaccine for the United States. Researchers from Johnson &amp; Johnson began visiting Emergent BioSolutions starting that month to help it prepare for producing the adenoviruses.

“It was much more than a paper exercise: ‘Here’s the recipe, follow this,’” said Remo Colarusso, vice president at Janssen Supply Chain. “This is complex manufacturing.”

By the fall, Emergent BioSolutions was growing cells that were spewing out new adenoviruses. When Johnson &amp; Johnson announced the start of its final Phase 3 trial, executives began making aggressive projections. “We are now committed to make more than 1 billion doses during 2021 and more after that,” Stoffels said at a September news conference.

The company then secured more deals to provide the vaccine to countries around the world.

In 2021, Johnson &amp; Johnson has promised to supply 200 million doses to Covax, an international partnership seeking to distribute coronavirus vaccines to nations that would not otherwise be able to afford them. It will supply another 300 million to Covax in 2022.

Soon after Johnson &amp; Johnson started its trial, cases surged around the world. All the Phase 3 clinical trials of COVID vaccines accelerated because trials end only after a specified number of volunteers — from both the placebo and vaccinated groups — get sick. In November, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccine trials both delivered impressive results, with efficacy rates around 95%.

The FDA authorized both vaccines for the United States, and other countries soon followed suit. But these two vaccines had some major shortcomings that soon became impossible to ignore. Both vaccines have to be kept in a deep freeze to prevent them from degrading. Once they reach a hospital or clinic, they have to be used before they spoil. In New York City and elsewhere, unused vaccines have ended up in the trash.

Once data collection is complete at the end of January or early February, an advisory board will review the data and report its analysis on safety and efficacy to Johnson &amp; Johnson. FDA regulators are already evaluating manufacturing data weeks ahead of when Johnson &amp; Johnson is expected to apply for emergency authorization. Hiccups as small as mold in part of a facility could spur further delays. 
&nbsp;

Johnson & Johnson expects to release critical results from its COVID-19 vaccine trial in as little as two weeks — a potential boon in the effort to protect Americans from the coronavirus — but most likely won’t be able to provide as many doses this spring as it promised the federal government because of unanticipated manufacturing delays.

Johnson & Johnson expects to release critical results from its COVID-19 vaccine trial in as little as two weeks — a potential boon in the effort to protect Americans from the coronavirus — but most likely won’t be able to provide as many doses this spring as it promised the federal government because of unanticipated manufacturing delays. If the vaccine can strongly protect people against COVID-19, as some outside scientists expect, it would offer big advantages over the two vaccines authorized in the United States. Unlike those products, which require two doses, Johnson & Johnson’s could need just one, greatly simplifying logistics for local health departments and clinics struggling to get shots in arms. What’s more, its vaccine can stay stable in a refrigerator for months, whereas the others have to be frozen. But the encouraging prospect of a third effective vaccine is tempered by apparent lags in the company’s production. In the company’s $1 billion contract signed with the federal government in August, Johnson & Johnson pledged to have 12 million doses of its vaccine ready by the end of February, ramping up to a total of 100 million doses by the end of June. Federal officials have been told that the company has fallen as much as two months behind the original production schedule and won’t catch up until the end of April, when it was supposed to have delivered more than 60 million doses, according to two people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Carlo de Notaristefani, lead manufacturing adviser for Operation Warp Speed, the federal vaccine development program, acknowledged a delay but said the company might be able to catch up with initial production goals by March. “I agree there was a problem,” de Notaristefani said. But he added, “Manufacturing of pharmaceuticals is not a black box where you turn the key and start counting.” Any delay could be critical because the federal government has secured only enough vaccine doses to inoculate 200 million of the roughly 260 million eligible adults in the first half of this year. With the nation in the grip of its largest surge of the coronavirus to date and the death toll escalating to as high as 4,000 a day, Americans desperate to be vaccinated are lining the sidewalks outside vaccination centers. Fears about the virus have only escalated with the scientific discovery last month that the country has been seeded with a new, highly contagious variant. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced it would no longer hold back vaccine stocks for second doses in order to get more people at least partly vaccinated more quickly. Dr. Paul Stoffels, Johnson & Johnson’s chief scientific officer, said he expected to see clinical trial data showing whether his company’s vaccine is safe and effective in late January or early February. But he declined to provide details about the company’s production capacity. “We are not ready to release the numbers month by month at the moment, as we are in the discussion with the FDA,” he said. If the data is positive and the Food and Drug Administration authorizes the vaccine for emergency use, he added, “hopefully somewhere in March we’ll be able to contribute” to the nation’s vaccination drive. That Johnson & Johnson’s timetable has slipped is not unusual given the frantic pace of vaccine development amid the worst pandemic in a century. But the delay also highlights the unrealistic promises of Operation Warp Speed. The premise of the program was that the federal government would front the costs of development and manufacturing so that vaccine makers could mass-produce doses even before the vaccines were proved to work. Moncef Slaoui, chief scientific adviser for Warp Speed, said in December that Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine would be a “game changer” in the pandemic. But at a Tuesday news conference, Slaoui said that instead of 12 million doses envisioned in the contract by the end of February, the company was likely to have in the “single-digit” millions. He also said the company was “trying to make that number get as close to a double-digit number as possible, and then a larger number in March and a much larger number in April.” Another person familiar with the company’s progress said it was poised to deliver only perhaps 3 million or 4 million doses of its vaccine by the end of next month. In a statement, a Johnson & Johnson spokesman said: “We are confident we can meet our contractual obligations to supply our vaccine candidate to the US government.” De Notaristefani, Operation Warp Speed’s manufacturing chief, said the government’s contracts with vaccine makers were written at a time of great uncertainty, with the understanding that unforeseen obstacles could throw off the timetables. “Numbers are never cast in stone when you start a new process,” he said, adding that the company had to transfer its manufacturing from the Netherlands to a plant in Baltimore. “I really think that technically they couldn’t do it earlier.” Dr. Marcus Plescia, chief medical officer for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, said that state health officials were clearly excited about Johnson & Johnson’s one-dose vaccine. “You can get it, and you’re done,” he said. “Everybody is eager to have it out there. It has a lot of potential.” But even if Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine pans out, Plescia said, it won’t be enough. He predicted that state health departments would need a total of four vaccines in the next six months if they hope to reach their goals of offering a vaccine to every American who wants one. “Or else the public is going to get very frustrated, because they’re ready for it to be opened up, and there isn’t adequate supply to do that,” Plescia said. Johnson & Johnson is by no means alone in its manufacturing delays. Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s chief executive, told investors in the fall that his company had agreed to deliver 40 million doses of its vaccine to the federal government in 2020, assuming it proved successful in clinical trials. In the end, the company had only half that many ready to ship. No one — including company executives — knows whether Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine will work. But Lynda Coughlin, a virus expert at the University of Maryland School of Medicine who is not involved in the trial, said that the design of the vaccine and the results from early trials made her optimistic. “Hopefully the results from Johnson & Johnson are just really going to knock it out of the park,” she said. Johnson & Johnson’s COVID vaccine is fundamentally different from the authorized vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech. Those two consist of genetic molecules encased in oily bubbles. Johnson & Johnson built its vaccine from a virus that causes common colds, known as an adenovirus. Testing the vaccine on monkeys, the researchers found that a single shot was enough to protect the animals from infection. When they tried out different formulations of the vaccine in early clinical trials, they were pleased to see that the vaccine prompted a strong antibody response with a single dose. On Wednesday, Johnson & Johnson researchers and their colleagues published the full details of these early clinical trials in the New England Journal of Medicine. They reported that when they checked the blood of volunteers 71 days after receiving a single dose, their levels of coronavirus antibodies were still high. In some cases they were still increasing. As results of the early clinical trials emerged over the summer, the company had to make a high-stakes decision: proceed with a clinical trial of two doses, which had the most likelihood of success, or try one with a single dose, which would be far more useful for getting shots to the masses — if it worked. The company decided to roll the dice with a single-shot trial. “We know from vaccination campaigns that the simpler the logistics, the more successful the program,” said Dr. Dan Barouch, a virus expert at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center who pioneered adenovirus vaccines in the early 2000s and collaborated with Johnson & Johnson researchers on the trial. If many people began developing immunity from a single-shot dose, it might become harder for the virus to move from person to person, bringing down the high rates of new cases and easing the burden of the pandemic. “A vaccine that is one dose would have a tremendous, tremendous public health impact, of course for low-income countries, but also in high-income countries,” said Ruth Faden, a professor of biomedical ethics at Johns Hopkins University. While other vaccine developers moved quickly into late-stage trials, Johnson & Johnson deliberately moved more slowly so it could focus on ramping up manufacturing of its vaccine. At a facility in the Netherlands, researchers grew cells in which their adenoviruses could multiply. Adjusting the chemistry in giant vats, the scientists found a recipe for producing the vaccine at a fast, reliable rate. Johnson & Johnson also began working early with other companies to prepare to manufacture the vaccine across the world. In April, it announced a partnership with Maryland-based Emergent BioSolutions to manufacture the vaccine for the United States. Researchers from Johnson & Johnson began visiting Emergent BioSolutions starting that month to help it prepare for producing the adenoviruses. “It was much more than a paper exercise: ‘Here’s the recipe, follow this,’” said Remo Colarusso, vice president at Janssen Supply Chain. “This is complex manufacturing.” By the fall, Emergent BioSolutions was growing cells that were spewing out new adenoviruses. When Johnson & Johnson announced the start of its final Phase 3 trial, executives began making aggressive projections. “We are now committed to make more than 1 billion doses during 2021 and more after that,” Stoffels said at a September news conference. The company then secured more deals to provide the vaccine to countries around the world. In 2021, Johnson & Johnson has promised to supply 200 million doses to Covax, an international partnership seeking to distribute coronavirus vaccines to nations that would not otherwise be able to afford them. It will supply another 300 million to Covax in 2022. Soon after Johnson & Johnson started its trial, cases surged around the world. All the Phase 3 clinical trials of COVID vaccines accelerated because trials end only after a specified number of volunteers — from both the placebo and vaccinated groups — get sick. In November, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccine trials both delivered impressive results, with efficacy rates around 95%. The FDA authorized both vaccines for the United States, and other countries soon followed suit. But these two vaccines had some major shortcomings that soon became impossible to ignore. Both vaccines have to be kept in a deep freeze to prevent them from degrading. Once they reach a hospital or clinic, they have to be used before they spoil. In New York City and elsewhere, unused vaccines have ended up in the trash. Once data collection is complete at the end of January or early February, an advisory board will review the data and report its analysis on safety and efficacy to Johnson & Johnson. FDA regulators are already evaluating manufacturing data weeks ahead of when Johnson & Johnson is expected to apply for emergency authorization. Hiccups as small as mold in part of a facility could spur further delays.

Johnson & Johnson expects vaccine results soon but lags in production

Johnson &amp; Johnson launched a new large-scale late-stage trial on Monday to test a two-dose regimen of its experimental COVID-19 vaccine and evaluate potential incremental benefits for the duration of protection with a second dose.

The U.S. drugmaker plans to enrol up to 30,000 participants for the study and run it in parallel with a one-dose trial with as many as 60,000 volunteers that began in September.

The UK arm of the study is aiming to recruit 6,000 participants and the rest will join from other countries with a high incidence of COVID-19 cases such as the United States, Belgium, Colombia, France, Germany, the Philippines, South Africa and Spain, it said.

They will be given a first dose of either a placebo or the experimental shot, currently called Ad26COV2, followed by a second dose or placebo 57 days later, said Saul Faust, a professor of paediatric immunology and infectious diseases who is co-leading the trial at University Hospital Southampton.

The trial follows positive interim results from the company`s ongoing early to mid stage clinical study that showed a single dose of its vaccine candidate induced a robust immune response and was generally well-tolerated.

"The study will assess efficacy of the investigational vaccine after both the first and second dose to evaluate protection against the virus and potential incremental benefits for duration of protection with a second dose," J&amp;J said in a statement.

Rival drugmakers Pfizer and BioNtech said last week that their potential COVID-19 shot showed more than 90% efficacy in interim data from a late-stage trial, boosting hopes that vaccines against the pandemic disease may be ready for use soon.

While the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine uses a new technology known as messenger RNA, J&amp;J`s uses a cold virus to deliver genetic material from the coronavirus into the body to prompt an immune response.

The platform, called AdVac, is also used in an Ebola vaccine that was approved earlier this year.

"It`s really important that we pursue trials of many different vaccines from many different manufacturers and be able then to ensure the supply both to the UK and global population," Faust told reporters at a briefing.

Recruitment into the study will complete in March 2021 and the trial will last for 12 months.

Johnson & Johnson launched a new large-scale late-stage trial on Monday to test a two-dose regimen of its experimental COVID-19 vaccine and evaluate potential incremental benefits for the duration of protection with a second dose.

Johnson & Johnson launched a new large-scale late-stage trial on Monday to test a two-dose regimen of its experimental COVID-19 vaccine and evaluate potential incremental benefits for the duration of protection with a second dose. The U.S. drugmaker plans to enrol up to 30,000 participants for the study and run it in parallel with a one-dose trial with as many as 60,000 volunteers that began in September. The UK arm of the study is aiming to recruit 6,000 participants and the rest will join from other countries with a high incidence of COVID-19 cases such as the United States, Belgium, Colombia, France, Germany, the Philippines, South Africa and Spain, it said. They will be given a first dose of either a placebo or the experimental shot, currently called Ad26COV2, followed by a second dose or placebo 57 days later, said Saul Faust, a professor of paediatric immunology and infectious diseases who is co-leading the trial at University Hospital Southampton. The trial follows positive interim results from the company`s ongoing early to mid stage clinical study that showed a single dose of its vaccine candidate induced a robust immune response and was generally well-tolerated. "The study will assess efficacy of the investigational vaccine after both the first and second dose to evaluate protection against the virus and potential incremental benefits for duration of protection with a second dose," J&J said in a statement. Rival drugmakers Pfizer and BioNtech said last week that their potential COVID-19 shot showed more than 90% efficacy in interim data from a late-stage trial, boosting hopes that vaccines against the pandemic disease may be ready for use soon. While the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine uses a new technology known as messenger RNA, J&J`s uses a cold virus to deliver genetic material from the coronavirus into the body to prompt an immune response. The platform, called AdVac, is also used in an Ebola vaccine that was approved earlier this year. "It`s really important that we pursue trials of many different vaccines from many different manufacturers and be able then to ensure the supply both to the UK and global population," Faust told reporters at a briefing. Recruitment into the study will complete in March 2021 and the trial will last for 12 months.

Johnson & Johnson starts two-dose trial of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate

Two major clinical trials for experimental Covid-19 vaccines got back on track in the United States Friday -- providing a glimmer of hope as the number of cases skyrocket across the country.

COVID-19 has now killed more than 223,000 Americans, and the health crisis is a top issue in the presidential election pitting incumbent Donald Trump against Joe Biden.

AstraZeneca announced that the trial of its vaccine candidate, developed with the Britain's University of Oxford, has resumed in the US, the only country where it remained suspended following a participant's illness six weeks ago.

"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today authorized the restart in the US, following the resumption of trials in other countries in recent weeks," the drugmaker said.

The trial was suspended worldwide on September 6 but resumed shortly thereafter in Britain, and in the following weeks in South Africa, Brazil and Japan, with authorities determining the illness was not apparently linked to the vaccine.

"The FDA reviewed all safety data from trials globally and concluded it was safe to resume the trial," AstraZeneca said.

The company added it was hoping to have results later this year, "depending on the rate of infection within the communities where the clinical trials are being conducted."

The AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine project is one of the most promising and advanced in the world to combat the global pandemic, which has now claimed the lives of 1.1 million people.

It is one of 10 vaccine candidates being tested on tens of thousands of people in so-called phase 3 trials.

In the United States, the two top candidates vying to get a green light from the FDA are those made by Pfizer and Moderna. Both expect to request approval next month.

Many countries are counting on using the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine to inoculate their populations.

The drugmaker pre-sold hundreds of millions of doses on several continents and signed partnership deals with other producers to ensure the doses could be made locally.

"No evidence" vaccine to blame

Shortly after AstraZeneca's announcement, Johnson &amp; Johnson said it was preparing to resume recruitment for its parallel trial, which was suspended last week after a volunteer fell ill.

"After a thorough evaluation of a serious medical event experienced by one study participant, no clear cause has been identified," the group said in a statement.

"The company has found no evidence that the vaccine candidate caused the event."

Just before Friday's announcements, a top US official involved with Operation Warp Speed, the government's vaccine initiative, said he expected the J&amp;J trial to resume quickly.

Paul Mango, from the US Department of Health and Human Services, also said he expected the country to have enough doses on hand to vaccinate the "most vulnerable" Americans before year's end.

"By the end of January, we believe we'll be able to vaccinate all seniors," Mango said, adding that by March or April, "we believe we'll be able to vaccinate any American who desires a vaccination."

Two major clinical trials for experimental Covid-19 vaccines got back on track in the United States Friday -- providing a glimmer of hope as the number of cases skyrocket across the country.

Two major clinical trials for experimental Covid-19 vaccines got back on track in the United States Friday -- providing a glimmer of hope as the number of cases skyrocket across the country. COVID-19 has now killed more than 223,000 Americans, and the health crisis is a top issue in the presidential election pitting incumbent Donald Trump against Joe Biden. AstraZeneca announced that the trial of its vaccine candidate, developed with the Britain's University of Oxford, has resumed in the US, the only country where it remained suspended following a participant's illness six weeks ago. "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today authorized the restart in the US, following the resumption of trials in other countries in recent weeks," the drugmaker said. The trial was suspended worldwide on September 6 but resumed shortly thereafter in Britain, and in the following weeks in South Africa, Brazil and Japan, with authorities determining the illness was not apparently linked to the vaccine. "The FDA reviewed all safety data from trials globally and concluded it was safe to resume the trial," AstraZeneca said. The company added it was hoping to have results later this year, "depending on the rate of infection within the communities where the clinical trials are being conducted." The AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine project is one of the most promising and advanced in the world to combat the global pandemic, which has now claimed the lives of 1.1 million people. It is one of 10 vaccine candidates being tested on tens of thousands of people in so-called phase 3 trials. In the United States, the two top candidates vying to get a green light from the FDA are those made by Pfizer and Moderna. Both expect to request approval next month. Many countries are counting on using the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine to inoculate their populations. The drugmaker pre-sold hundreds of millions of doses on several continents and signed partnership deals with other producers to ensure the doses could be made locally. "No evidence" vaccine to blame Shortly after AstraZeneca's announcement, Johnson & Johnson said it was preparing to resume recruitment for its parallel trial, which was suspended last week after a volunteer fell ill. "After a thorough evaluation of a serious medical event experienced by one study participant, no clear cause has been identified," the group said in a statement. "The company has found no evidence that the vaccine candidate caused the event." Just before Friday's announcements, a top US official involved with Operation Warp Speed, the government's vaccine initiative, said he expected the J&J trial to resume quickly. Paul Mango, from the US Department of Health and Human Services, also said he expected the country to have enough doses on hand to vaccinate the "most vulnerable" Americans before year's end. "By the end of January, we believe we'll be able to vaccinate all seniors," Mango said, adding that by March or April, "we believe we'll be able to vaccinate any American who desires a vaccination."

AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson Covid vaccine trials back on track in US 

US businesses with COVID-19 outbreaks are facing an emerging legal threat from claims that workers brought coronavirus home and infected relatives, which one risk analysis firm said could cost employers billions of dollars.

The daughter of Esperanza Ugalde of Illinois filed in August what lawyers believe is the first wrongful death "take-home" lawsuit, alleging her mother died of COVID-19 that her father contracted at Aurora Packing Co's meat processing plant.

The cases borrow elements from "take-home" asbestos litigation and avoid caps on liability for workplace injuries, exposing the business to costly pain and suffering damages, even though the complainant never set foot on their premises.

"Businesses should be very concerned about these cases," said labour and employment attorney Tom Gies of Crowell &amp; Moring, which defends employers.

The lawsuit against Aurora alleges that Ricardo Ugalde worked "shoulder to shoulder" on the company's processing line in April when Aurora knew it had a coronavirus outbreak at its facility and failed to warn employees or adopt any infection prevention measures.

Aurora did not respond to a request for comment.

Between 7% and 9% of the roughly 200,000 US COVID-19 deaths so far are believed to stem from take-home infections and the lawsuits could cost businesses up to $21 billion if the number of Americans fatalities reaches 300,000, according to Praedicat, a firm that evaluates risks for insurers.

Rob Reville, Praedicat's chief executive, cautions that is a worst-case scenario and said the cases might cost far less, depending on how judges view the lawsuits.

The US workers compensation system generally makes it difficult for workers to sue for COVID-19. The system caps liability for businesses and bars costly lawsuits in return for quick payments to employees, who do not need to prove fault.

But Esperanza Ugalde was not an employee of Aurora, so her family can sue the company. Depending on the circumstances, a successful wrongful death case can top $1 million in damages.

Take-home cases have been around for decades in asbestos litigation and courts have split on whether a business has an obligation to members of the public who have never been on their premises.

In 2013, a California jury awarded Rose-Marie Griggs $27.3 million in compensatory and punitive damages after she contracted mesothelioma that her lawyers argued was caused by asbestos fibers carried home in the 1950s on the work clothes of her then-husband, who installed insulation for an affiliate of Owens-Illinios Inc.

The company appealed and two sides reached a private settlement before the appeal was heard.

Contesting The 'Causal Chain'

Attorneys for both complainants and companies said successful cases require a strong "causal chain" linking the sick family member to the worker and then to the business and the business's alleged failure to adopt safety measures.

Miriam Alvarez Reynoso sued Byrne &amp; Schaefer Inc, a manufacturer of electrical components in Lockport, Illinois, alleging negligence by the company led to her contracting COVID-19 and suffering "serious injuries to multiple organs."

Reynoso's lawsuit says she became infected while caring for her husband Servando Reynoso, a parts assembler at the company, who came home sick from work on April 8. It lists 18 categories of alleged shortcomings by Byrne &amp; Schaefer, including failing to clean work areas and ignoring employees who said they had COVID-19 symptoms.

Company owner Tim Byrne said his five employees wore masks routinely before the pandemic to protect against dust and regularly used gloves.

"He was sick before anyone else," said Byrne. "It's difficult to prove after the fact."

Lawyers said employers would likely be reluctant to settle the cases for significant sums until claims were vetted in the court system.

Peter Wozniak, an attorney with Barnes &amp; Thornburg who represents employers, said the cases will test juror attitudes toward the behaviour of complainants, who need to show they protected themselves from other sources of infection.

"Are you always wearing a mask? Are you staying six feet away? Are you washing your hands," he said. "It will be interesting and unpredictable with regards to people's attitudes for individual responsibility."

The best protection for business owners will be adopting and documenting measures to protect workers.

"If they had acted reasonably and if Aurora put these things in place before the death of Esperanza I don't know if I would have taken the case," said Bridget Duignan, who represents Ugalde's daughter. 
"But they did nothing."

US businesses with COVID-19 outbreaks are facing an emerging legal threat from claims that workers brought coronavirus home and infected relatives, which one risk analysis firm said could cost employers billions of dollars.

US businesses with COVID-19 outbreaks are facing an emerging legal threat from claims that workers brought coronavirus home and infected relatives, which one risk analysis firm said could cost employers billions of dollars. The daughter of Esperanza Ugalde of Illinois filed in August what lawyers believe is the first wrongful death "take-home" lawsuit, alleging her mother died of COVID-19 that her father contracted at Aurora Packing Co's meat processing plant. The cases borrow elements from "take-home" asbestos litigation and avoid caps on liability for workplace injuries, exposing the business to costly pain and suffering damages, even though the complainant never set foot on their premises. "Businesses should be very concerned about these cases," said labour and employment attorney Tom Gies of Crowell & Moring, which defends employers. The lawsuit against Aurora alleges that Ricardo Ugalde worked "shoulder to shoulder" on the company's processing line in April when Aurora knew it had a coronavirus outbreak at its facility and failed to warn employees or adopt any infection prevention measures. Aurora did not respond to a request for comment. Between 7% and 9% of the roughly 200,000 US COVID-19 deaths so far are believed to stem from take-home infections and the lawsuits could cost businesses up to $21 billion if the number of Americans fatalities reaches 300,000, according to Praedicat, a firm that evaluates risks for insurers. Rob Reville, Praedicat's chief executive, cautions that is a worst-case scenario and said the cases might cost far less, depending on how judges view the lawsuits. The US workers compensation system generally makes it difficult for workers to sue for COVID-19. The system caps liability for businesses and bars costly lawsuits in return for quick payments to employees, who do not need to prove fault. But Esperanza Ugalde was not an employee of Aurora, so her family can sue the company. Depending on the circumstances, a successful wrongful death case can top $1 million in damages. Take-home cases have been around for decades in asbestos litigation and courts have split on whether a business has an obligation to members of the public who have never been on their premises. In 2013, a California jury awarded Rose-Marie Griggs $27.3 million in compensatory and punitive damages after she contracted mesothelioma that her lawyers argued was caused by asbestos fibers carried home in the 1950s on the work clothes of her then-husband, who installed insulation for an affiliate of Owens-Illinios Inc. The company appealed and two sides reached a private settlement before the appeal was heard. Contesting The 'Causal Chain' Attorneys for both complainants and companies said successful cases require a strong "causal chain" linking the sick family member to the worker and then to the business and the business's alleged failure to adopt safety measures. Miriam Alvarez Reynoso sued Byrne & Schaefer Inc, a manufacturer of electrical components in Lockport, Illinois, alleging negligence by the company led to her contracting COVID-19 and suffering "serious injuries to multiple organs." Reynoso's lawsuit says she became infected while caring for her husband Servando Reynoso, a parts assembler at the company, who came home sick from work on April 8. It lists 18 categories of alleged shortcomings by Byrne & Schaefer, including failing to clean work areas and ignoring employees who said they had COVID-19 symptoms. Company owner Tim Byrne said his five employees wore masks routinely before the pandemic to protect against dust and regularly used gloves. "He was sick before anyone else," said Byrne. "It's difficult to prove after the fact." Lawyers said employers would likely be reluctant to settle the cases for significant sums until claims were vetted in the court system. Peter Wozniak, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg who represents employers, said the cases will test juror attitudes toward the behaviour of complainants, who need to show they protected themselves from other sources of infection. "Are you always wearing a mask? Are you staying six feet away? Are you washing your hands," he said. "It will be interesting and unpredictable with regards to people's attitudes for individual responsibility." The best protection for business owners will be adopting and documenting measures to protect workers. "If they had acted reasonably and if Aurora put these things in place before the death of Esperanza I don't know if I would have taken the case," said Bridget Duignan, who represents Ugalde's daughter. "But they did nothing."

‘Take home’ lawsuits over Covid infections could be costly for US employers

Interim results published on Friday said that a single dose of Johnson &amp; Johnson's experimental Covid-19 vaccine produced a strong immune response against novel coronavirus in early-to-mid stage clinical trial. The vaccine is called Ad26.COV2.S. It was well tolerated at two different doses, as per the results. A single shot of the vaccine could simplify the distribution of the vaccine.

It is still unclear whether elderly people will be protected to the same degree as younger people with Johnson and Johnson vaccine.

The results, released on the medical website medRxiv, have not been peer-reviewed.

In July, the vaccine was found to offer strong protection in a single dose to monkeys. The vaccine is backed by the US government. The trial in about 1000 healthy adults started after the vaccine elicited a strong immune response.

On Wednesday, Johnson &amp; Johnson kicked off a final 60,000 person trial. This may pave way for regulatory approval post an application.

Researchers, including those from J&amp;J's unit Janssen Pharmaceuticals, said 98% of participants with data available for the interim analysis had neutralizing antibodies, which defend cells from pathogens, 29 days after vaccination.

However, immune response results were available from only a small number of people - 15 participants - over 65 years old, limiting the interpretation.

In participants older than 65, the rate of adverse reactions such as fatigue and muscle aches was 36%, much lower than the 64% seen in younger participants, the results showed, suggesting the immune response in older people may not be as strong.

The researchers said more details on safety and effectiveness will follow when the study is completed.

For now, the results justify why more studies are needed in larger numbers to look for serious adverse effects, Dr. Barry Bloom, a professor at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who was not involved in the J&amp;J trial, told Reuters.

"Overall, the vaccine is doing what you would expect it to do if you were to move it to Phase 3 trials," Bloom said. 
&nbsp;

Interim results published on Friday said that a single dose of Johnson & Johnson's experimental Covid-19 vaccine produced a strong immune response against novel coronavirus in early-to-mid stage clinical trial.

Interim results published on Friday said that a single dose of Johnson & Johnson's experimental Covid-19 vaccine produced a strong immune response against novel coronavirus in early-to-mid stage clinical trial. The vaccine is called Ad26.COV2.S. It was well tolerated at two different doses, as per the results. A single shot of the vaccine could simplify the distribution of the vaccine. It is still unclear whether elderly people will be protected to the same degree as younger people with Johnson and Johnson vaccine. The results, released on the medical website medRxiv, have not been peer-reviewed. In July, the vaccine was found to offer strong protection in a single dose to monkeys. The vaccine is backed by the US government. The trial in about 1000 healthy adults started after the vaccine elicited a strong immune response. On Wednesday, Johnson & Johnson kicked off a final 60,000 person trial. This may pave way for regulatory approval post an application. Researchers, including those from J&J's unit Janssen Pharmaceuticals, said 98% of participants with data available for the interim analysis had neutralizing antibodies, which defend cells from pathogens, 29 days after vaccination. However, immune response results were available from only a small number of people - 15 participants - over 65 years old, limiting the interpretation. In participants older than 65, the rate of adverse reactions such as fatigue and muscle aches was 36%, much lower than the 64% seen in younger participants, the results showed, suggesting the immune response in older people may not be as strong. The researchers said more details on safety and effectiveness will follow when the study is completed. For now, the results justify why more studies are needed in larger numbers to look for serious adverse effects, Dr. Barry Bloom, a professor at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who was not involved in the J&J trial, told Reuters. "Overall, the vaccine is doing what you would expect it to do if you were to move it to Phase 3 trials," Bloom said.

Coronavirus vaccine being tested by Johnson & Johnson shows promise

A US court has upheld a verdict that talcum powder sold by Johnson & Johnson caused ovarian cancer and ordered the pharmaceutical giant to pay $2.1 billion in damages.

A US court has upheld a verdict that talcum powder sold by Johnson & Johnson caused ovarian cancer and ordered the pharmaceutical giant to pay $2.1 billion in damages. The decision by the Missouri Court of Appeals cut by more than half the $4.4 billion a jury had awarded 22 people in 2018. The court agreed that some of the plaintiffs should not have been included in the case as they were from outside the state. But the Tuesday decision upheld the awarding of damages for the company "knowingly selling products that contained asbestos to consumers." "Because defendants are large, multi-billion-dollar corporations, we believe a large amount of punitive damages is necessary to have an effect in this case," the judgement said. "It is impossible to place monetary value on the physical, mental and emotional anguish plaintiffs suffered because of their injury caused by defendants." A spokeswoman for Johnson & Johnson said the company would appeal the decision in the Supreme Court of Missouri, according to the Wall Street Journal. Johnson & Johnson has faced thousands of lawsuits across the United States alleging it failed to warn consumers of the risk of cancer from asbestos in its talc-based products. In 2019 a California jury became the latest to award millions in damages to a plaintiff who said the company's baby powder had given her terminal cancer. Last month the firm announced it was discontinuing production of its talc-based baby powder in the US and Canada, in part due to the "constant barrage of litigation advertising" over the product. It will continue to sell the product in the rest of the world, it added.

Johnson & Johnson told to pay $2.1 billion over cancer-causing talc powder

As 'Black lives matter' movement took over the world, a lot of companies had to rethink their campaigns and company policies, to be morally correct towards the Afican-American community.

Following the same process, Johnson &amp; Johnson, a medical consumer goods company, has decided to stop the production and sale of skim whitening creams.

These products, as reported by Johnson &amp; Johnson, are more popular in Asia and the Middle East.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/atlanta-police-shooting-donald-trump-defends-officer-who-shot-victim-307038">Also read|&nbsp;Atlanta police shooting: Donald Trump defends officer who shot victim</a>

In India, products from Johnson &amp; Johnson's range 'Clean &amp; Clear Fairness' are very popular.&nbsp;News that it would pull its Neutrogena Fine Fairness line, available in Asia and the Middle East, was reported earlier this month.

The company&nbsp;had been facing heat about their products and was being blamed for promoting racial inequality through their products. Clearing the air, a spokesperson said,&nbsp;"Conversations over the past few weeks highlighted that some product names or claims on our dark spot reducer products represent fairness or white as better than your own unique skin tone. This was never our intention – healthy skin is beautiful skin."

However, the products will be on shelves till stocks last, the company said.

As 'Black lives matter' movement took over the world, a lot of companies had to rethink their campaigns and company policies, to be morally correct towards the Afican-American community.

As 'Black lives matter' movement took over the world, a lot of companies had to rethink their campaigns and company policies, to be morally correct towards the Afican-American community. Following the same process, Johnson & Johnson, a medical consumer goods company, has decided to stop the production and sale of skim whitening creams. These products, as reported by Johnson & Johnson, are more popular in Asia and the Middle East. Also read| Atlanta police shooting: Donald Trump defends officer who shot victim In India, products from Johnson & Johnson's range 'Clean & Clear Fairness' are very popular. News that it would pull its Neutrogena Fine Fairness line, available in Asia and the Middle East, was reported earlier this month. The company had been facing heat about their products and was being blamed for promoting racial inequality through their products. Clearing the air, a spokesperson said, "Conversations over the past few weeks highlighted that some product names or claims on our dark spot reducer products represent fairness or white as better than your own unique skin tone. This was never our intention – healthy skin is beautiful skin." However, the products will be on shelves till stocks last, the company said.

Healthy skin is beautiful skin: Johnson & Johnson stops sale of skin whitening creams

&nbsp;Johnson &amp; Johnson moved up the start of human clinical trials for its experimental vaccine against the highly contagious coronavirus by two months to the second half of July, as the drugmaker rushes to develop a prevention for COVID-19, the company said on Wednesday.

The acceleration should allow J&amp;J to take part in the massive clinical trials program planned by the U.S. government, which aims to have an effective vaccine by year end.

J&amp;J shares rose nearly 2% to $148.69.

Last March, J&amp;J signed deals with the U.S. government to create enough manufacturing capacity to produce more than 1 billion doses of its vaccine through 2021, even before it has evidence that it works.

There are currently no U.S. approved treatments or vaccines for the virus. A vaccine is seen as essential to ending the pandemic that has infected more than 7.2 million people and killed over 412,000 globally, while battering economies worldwide.

J&amp;J initially expected safety trials to start in September. Chief Scientific Officer Paul Stoffels told Reuters the company has been working closely with its U.S. government partners to accelerate that timeline.

"Based on the strength of the preclinical data we have seen so far and interactions with the regulatory authorities, we have been able to further accelerate the clinical development," Stoffels said in a statement on Wednesday.

J&amp;J's study will test the vaccine for safety and early signs of efficacy in 1,045 healthy volunteers aged 18 to 55 years, and in those aged 65 and older. The trial will take place in the United States and Belgium.

The company is also in talks with the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases(NIAID) to start larger, late-stage trials ahead of schedule, depending on results of the early studies and regulatory approval.

The United States is planning to test a handful of coronavirus vaccine candidates in trials that will enroll up to 30,000 subjects with the aim of getting an answer on efficacy as quickly as possible. National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins told Reuters that companies will need to complete their safety trials by the end of summer to be included in those studies.

Stoffels said last week that J&amp;J hopes to have results of its vaccine efficacy trials in the first quarter of 2021. He added that the company is "working hard to bring it back to the end of the year."

A lot will depend on how much virus is circulating at that time, he said.

"If you have an incidence of 1% a year versus 4% a year, it's totally different. And that's where these trials are so unpredictable," he said referring to the percentage of new cases occurring in the population at the time.

The company plans to test the vaccine in high-transmission regions within the United States. If the incidence is low, "we will complement that with international sites to make sure that we reach enough endpoints quickly to prove the vaccine works," Stoffels said.

Moderna Inc, which is working in close partnership with NIAID, has started testing its vaccine candidate in a 600-subject mid-stage trial. The company expects to begin late-stage trials in July.

Moderna's vaccine uses messenger RNA technology, an approach that has yet to produce any approved vaccines. J&amp;J is utilizing the same technology used to make its Ebola vaccine, which won European regulatory approval late last month.

There are about 10 coronavirus vaccines in human testing. Experts have said a safe and effective vaccine could take at least 12 to 18 months from the start of development, which would shave several years off the typical vaccine development timeline.

Johnson & Johnson moved up the start of human clinical trials for its experimental vaccine against the highly contagious coronavirus by two months to the second half of July, as the drugmaker rushes to develop a prevention for COVID-19, the company said on Wednesday.

Johnson & Johnson moved up the start of human clinical trials for its experimental vaccine against the highly contagious coronavirus by two months to the second half of July, as the drugmaker rushes to develop a prevention for COVID-19, the company said on Wednesday. The acceleration should allow J&J to take part in the massive clinical trials program planned by the U.S. government, which aims to have an effective vaccine by year end. J&J shares rose nearly 2% to $148.69. Last March, J&J signed deals with the U.S. government to create enough manufacturing capacity to produce more than 1 billion doses of its vaccine through 2021, even before it has evidence that it works. There are currently no U.S. approved treatments or vaccines for the virus. A vaccine is seen as essential to ending the pandemic that has infected more than 7.2 million people and killed over 412,000 globally, while battering economies worldwide. J&J initially expected safety trials to start in September. Chief Scientific Officer Paul Stoffels told Reuters the company has been working closely with its U.S. government partners to accelerate that timeline. "Based on the strength of the preclinical data we have seen so far and interactions with the regulatory authorities, we have been able to further accelerate the clinical development," Stoffels said in a statement on Wednesday. J&J's study will test the vaccine for safety and early signs of efficacy in 1,045 healthy volunteers aged 18 to 55 years, and in those aged 65 and older. The trial will take place in the United States and Belgium. The company is also in talks with the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases(NIAID) to start larger, late-stage trials ahead of schedule, depending on results of the early studies and regulatory approval. The United States is planning to test a handful of coronavirus vaccine candidates in trials that will enroll up to 30,000 subjects with the aim of getting an answer on efficacy as quickly as possible. National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins told Reuters that companies will need to complete their safety trials by the end of summer to be included in those studies. Stoffels said last week that J&J hopes to have results of its vaccine efficacy trials in the first quarter of 2021. He added that the company is "working hard to bring it back to the end of the year." A lot will depend on how much virus is circulating at that time, he said. "If you have an incidence of 1% a year versus 4% a year, it's totally different. And that's where these trials are so unpredictable," he said referring to the percentage of new cases occurring in the population at the time. The company plans to test the vaccine in high-transmission regions within the United States. If the incidence is low, "we will complement that with international sites to make sure that we reach enough endpoints quickly to prove the vaccine works," Stoffels said. Moderna Inc, which is working in close partnership with NIAID, has started testing its vaccine candidate in a 600-subject mid-stage trial. The company expects to begin late-stage trials in July. Moderna's vaccine uses messenger RNA technology, an approach that has yet to produce any approved vaccines. J&J is utilizing the same technology used to make its Ebola vaccine, which won European regulatory approval late last month. There are about 10 coronavirus vaccines in human testing. Experts have said a safe and effective vaccine could take at least 12 to 18 months from the start of development, which would shave several years off the typical vaccine development timeline.

J&J moves up start of coronavirus vaccine human trials to July

Healthcare giant Johnson &amp; Johnson will&nbsp;stop selling its talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in the US and Canada.

The move comes after years of litigation where Johnson &amp; Johnson has been&nbsp;ordered to pay out billions of dollars in compensation.

The company faces more than 19,000 lawsuits from consumers and their survivors claiming its talc products caused cancer due to contamination with asbestos, a known carcinogen.&nbsp;

It has long denied claims that the talc powder it uses contains cancer-causing asbestos, but has nonetheless been taken to court several thousands of times over the allegations.

In a statement, Johnson &amp; Johnson said it remained "steadfastly confident" in the product's safety and would "vigorously" defend against the lawsuits, noting that all guilty verdicts passed against the company have been overturned.

"As part of a portfolio assessment related to COVID-19, in March, Johnson &amp; Johnson Consumer Health stopped shipping hundreds of items in the US and Canada to prioritize high-demand products and to allow for appropriate social distancing in manufacturing and distribution facilities," the statement said.

Johnson &amp; Johnson said it would wind down sales of the product, which makes up about 0.5 per cent&nbsp;of its US consumer health business, in the coming months, but that retailers would continue to sell existing inventory.

"Demand for talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in North America has been declining due in large part to changes in consumer habits and fueled by misinformation around the safety of the product and a constant barrage of litigation advertising," the company said.

Healthcare giant Johnson & Johnson will stop selling its talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in the US and Canada. The move comes after years of litigation where Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay out billions of dollars in compensation.

Healthcare giant Johnson & Johnson will stop selling its talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in the US and Canada. The move comes after years of litigation where Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay out billions of dollars in compensation. The company faces more than 19,000 lawsuits from consumers and their survivors claiming its talc products caused cancer due to contamination with asbestos, a known carcinogen. It has long denied claims that the talc powder it uses contains cancer-causing asbestos, but has nonetheless been taken to court several thousands of times over the allegations. In a statement, Johnson & Johnson said it remained "steadfastly confident" in the product's safety and would "vigorously" defend against the lawsuits, noting that all guilty verdicts passed against the company have been overturned. "As part of a portfolio assessment related to COVID-19, in March, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Health stopped shipping hundreds of items in the US and Canada to prioritize high-demand products and to allow for appropriate social distancing in manufacturing and distribution facilities," the statement said. Johnson & Johnson said it would wind down sales of the product, which makes up about 0.5 per cent of its US consumer health business, in the coming months, but that retailers would continue to sell existing inventory. "Demand for talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in North America has been declining due in large part to changes in consumer habits and fueled by misinformation around the safety of the product and a constant barrage of litigation advertising," the company said.

Johnson & Johnson to halt sales of baby powder in US, Canada

A major US government-led study published Tuesday found no link between ovarian cancer and the use of talcum powder in the genital area, citing data from more than 250,000 women.

The paper appeared in the influential Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), which also published an editorial praising the research methods and calling the findings "overall reassuring."

For decades, some women have used talcum powder for genital hygiene to absorb odor and moisture either through direct application or via underwear, sanitary pads, tampons or diaphragms. The practice is more common among older generations.

But its use has grown controversial because of reported cancer risks.

In 2018, US pharmaceutical giant <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/child-rights-body-asks-states-to-stop-sale-of-johnsons-baby-shampoo-214002">Johnson &amp; Johnson</a> was ordered to pay out $4.7 billion to 22 women who had claimed that asbestos in the company's talcum powder products caused them to develop ovarian cancer. An appeal is underway.

In the 1970s, concerns arose over possible contamination of the mineral talc with asbestos, which often forms alongside each other in nature.

Some studies showed a higher risk of ovarian <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/actress-nafisa-ali-diagnosed-with-stage-3-cancer-178256">cancer</a> among users of talcum powder, which was suspected of entering the ovaries via the vagina and uterus.

But the link remained contested because of the overall low number of studies conducted, with some of them criticized for a methodology that introduced recall bias among participants, while others were not statistically conclusive.

The effect is also difficult to isolate because ovarian cancers themselves are rare: only 1.3 percent of all women risk being affected in their lifetimes.

In the new JAMA paper, led by Katie O'Brien of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, researchers synthesized data from four large studies, which encompassed data from a quarter of a million women from 1982 to 2017.

The studies surveyed participants every year or two on a diverse set of questions related to health, including the use of talcum powder.

The hope was that by scaling up the number of participants, it would be possible to discern weak effects with statistical validity, which would have been undetectable on a smaller population.

Among the 252,745 women followed for a median period of 11.2 years, 2,168 developed ovarian cancer.

No statistically significant association was found when comparing women who had used powder and those who had never used it. Nor was any significant association found when comparing frequency or length of use.

But although the study is the largest of its kind with the longest follow-up time, the authors said there were several limitations.

These included that two of the four data sets missed information on frequency and duration of use.

There are also inherent limitations associated with so-called observational studies of the population at large as opposed to controlled clinical trials for drugs&nbsp;including failure to account for all possible external factors.

Kevin McConway, an emeritus professor of applied statistics at Britain's Open University called it a "good, competent, careful study," but added that it could not definitively rule out a link between talc and cancer entirely.

"Most of the risk differences that the researchers examined were not statistically significant," he said. "That doesn't mean that these differences were definitely zero, only that they were small enough so that they could plausibly be due only to random variation."

He concluded that what the research did establish was that if such a risk did exist, it was likely to be very small.

"I'm not a woman, so can't have concerns about my own health in these respects &nbsp;but if I were a woman, this wouldn't be high on my list of worries."

A major US government-led study published Tuesday found no link between ovarian cancer and the use of talcum powder in the genital area, citing data from more than 250,000 women.

A major US government-led study published Tuesday found no link between ovarian cancer and the use of talcum powder in the genital area, citing data from more than 250,000 women. The paper appeared in the influential Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), which also published an editorial praising the research methods and calling the findings "overall reassuring." For decades, some women have used talcum powder for genital hygiene to absorb odor and moisture either through direct application or via underwear, sanitary pads, tampons or diaphragms. The practice is more common among older generations. But its use has grown controversial because of reported cancer risks. In 2018, US pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson was ordered to pay out $4.7 billion to 22 women who had claimed that asbestos in the company's talcum powder products caused them to develop ovarian cancer. An appeal is underway. In the 1970s, concerns arose over possible contamination of the mineral talc with asbestos, which often forms alongside each other in nature. Some studies showed a higher risk of ovarian cancer among users of talcum powder, which was suspected of entering the ovaries via the vagina and uterus. But the link remained contested because of the overall low number of studies conducted, with some of them criticized for a methodology that introduced recall bias among participants, while others were not statistically conclusive. The effect is also difficult to isolate because ovarian cancers themselves are rare: only 1.3 percent of all women risk being affected in their lifetimes. In the new JAMA paper, led by Katie O'Brien of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, researchers synthesized data from four large studies, which encompassed data from a quarter of a million women from 1982 to 2017. The studies surveyed participants every year or two on a diverse set of questions related to health, including the use of talcum powder. The hope was that by scaling up the number of participants, it would be possible to discern weak effects with statistical validity, which would have been undetectable on a smaller population. Among the 252,745 women followed for a median period of 11.2 years, 2,168 developed ovarian cancer. No statistically significant association was found when comparing women who had used powder and those who had never used it. Nor was any significant association found when comparing frequency or length of use. But although the study is the largest of its kind with the longest follow-up time, the authors said there were several limitations. These included that two of the four data sets missed information on frequency and duration of use. There are also inherent limitations associated with so-called observational studies of the population at large as opposed to controlled clinical trials for drugs including failure to account for all possible external factors. Kevin McConway, an emeritus professor of applied statistics at Britain's Open University called it a "good, competent, careful study," but added that it could not definitively rule out a link between talc and cancer entirely. "Most of the risk differences that the researchers examined were not statistically significant," he said. "That doesn't mean that these differences were definitely zero, only that they were small enough so that they could plausibly be due only to random variation." He concluded that what the research did establish was that if such a risk did exist, it was likely to be very small. "I'm not a woman, so can't have concerns about my own health in these respects but if I were a woman, this wouldn't be high on my list of worries."

No link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer, finds major study

Johnson & Johnson, the producer of a new vaccine aimed at protecting people against the Ebola virus, announced on Sunday it would be providing 200,000 Ebola vaccines to Rwanda to stop the virus spreading from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Vaccination programme begins to stop Ebola spread

Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;said on Friday it is recalling around 33,000 bottles of baby powder in the United States after US health regulators found trace amounts of asbestos in samples taken from a bottle purchased online.

J&amp;J shares fell more than 6% to close at $127.70 (98.7 pounds).

The move marks the first time the company has recalled its iconic baby powder for possible asbestos contamination, and the first time US regulators have announced a finding of asbestos in the product. Asbestos is a known carcinogen that has been linked to deadly mesothelioma.

The recall is the latest blow to the more than 130-year-old US healthcare conglomerate that is facing thousands of lawsuits over a variety of products, including baby powder, opioids, medical devices and the antipsychotic Risperdal.

A jury last week ordered the company to pay $8 billion to a plaintiff in a case claiming J&amp;J downplayed the risks of Risperdal. That award is not expected to stand, the company and legal experts have said.

J&amp;J faces more than 15,000 lawsuits from consumers claiming its talc products, including Johnson's Baby Powder, caused their cancer.

On a conference call with reporters on Friday, Dr. Susan Nicholson, head of Women’s Health in the company's medical safety organization, called the asbestos finding "extremely unusual," adding that it was "inconsistent with our testing to date."

The voluntary recall announced on Friday is limited to one lot of Johnson's Baby Powder produced and shipped in the United States in 2018, the company said. J&amp;J in a news release said that testing by the US Food and Drug Administration as recently as a month ago found no asbestos in their talc.

The FDA said in a statement that the latest sampling took place during its testing for asbestos in talc-containing cosmetics that it began reporting this year. A second Johnson’s Baby Powder sample from a different lot tested negative for asbestos, the agency said.

The FDA said it stands by the quality of its testing and results and recommended consumers stop using the product if it comes from the affected lot.

J&amp;J said on the conference call that it received a report from the FDA on October 17 alerting the company about the asbestos finding. It said it has started an investigation and is reviewing manufacturing records and collecting data on the distribution of the lot to determine where the product was shipped.

J&amp;J added that it is working with the FDA to determine the integrity of the tested sample as well as the validity of test results.

Thorough investigation needed

The type of asbestos discovered by FDA testing has not been found in the mine where the company sources its talc, J&amp;J's Nicholson said. She described it as an environmental contaminant most commonly found in building materials and industrial applications.

J&amp;J said it was too early to confirm whether cross-contamination of the sample had caused a false positive, whether the sample was taken from a bottle with an intact seal or whether the it was prepared in a controlled environment. It added that it could not confirm whether the tested product was authentic or counterfeit.

"It is so critical that we perform a thorough investigation of the sample to determine the source of contamination," Nicholson said.

Since 2003, talc in Johnson's Baby Powder sold in the United States has come from China through supplier Imerys Talc America, a unit of Paris-based Imerys SA&nbsp;and a co-defendant in much of the talc litigation. Imerys and J&amp;J said the Chinese talc is safe.

J&amp;J has known for decades that asbestos lurked in its talc, Reuters reported last year. Internal company records, trial testimony and other evidence show that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos. Company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it, while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public, Reuters found.

J&amp;J has repeatedly said that its talc products are safe, and that decades of studies have shown them to be asbestos-free and that they do not cause cancer.

The FDA test indicated the presence of no greater than 0.00002% of chrysotile asbestos in the tested sample, J&amp;J said.

The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later.

Thousands of the lawsuits against J&amp;J have been consolidated before a New Jersey federal judge, who is currently weighing company motions to disqualify plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, including the head of an asbestos testing lab who has testified in earlier trials that he found the contaminant in J&amp;J powders.

Leigh O’Dell, one of the lead plaintiff attorneys, on Friday said the recall "vindicates the position we’ve been taking for months.”

Wells Fargo analyst Larry Biegelsen said in a research note that the recall could encourage additional lawsuits and prompt the company to pursue a broader settlement.

Jefferies healthcare strategist Jared Holz said J&amp;J has already lost close to $10 billion in market value due to the talc issue over the past year.

He said further downside to J&amp;J stock is likely to be limited because legal concerns over talc are well known and have already taken a toll on the share price. "This is one single bottle within one lot with barely a trace here," he said.

J&amp;J said in February that it had received subpoenas from the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission for documents related to the asbestos contamination allegations. A Bloomberg report, which Reuters has confirmed, said those inquiries include a criminal grand jury investigation into how forthright J&amp;J has been in its statements about the safety of its powders.

While talc products make up less than 1% of J&amp;J sales expected by analysts to reach $82 billion in 2019, the New Jersey-based healthcare-products maker considers its Baby Powder to be an essential facet of a carefully tended image as a caring company.

Johnson & Johnson said on Friday it is recalling around 33,000 bottles of baby powder in the United States after US health regulators found trace amounts of asbestos in samples taken from a bottle purchased online.

Johnson & Johnson said on Friday it is recalling around 33,000 bottles of baby powder in the United States after US health regulators found trace amounts of asbestos in samples taken from a bottle purchased online. J&J shares fell more than 6% to close at $127.70 (98.7 pounds). The move marks the first time the company has recalled its iconic baby powder for possible asbestos contamination, and the first time US regulators have announced a finding of asbestos in the product. Asbestos is a known carcinogen that has been linked to deadly mesothelioma. The recall is the latest blow to the more than 130-year-old US healthcare conglomerate that is facing thousands of lawsuits over a variety of products, including baby powder, opioids, medical devices and the antipsychotic Risperdal. A jury last week ordered the company to pay $8 billion to a plaintiff in a case claiming J&J downplayed the risks of Risperdal. That award is not expected to stand, the company and legal experts have said. J&J faces more than 15,000 lawsuits from consumers claiming its talc products, including Johnson's Baby Powder, caused their cancer. On a conference call with reporters on Friday, Dr. Susan Nicholson, head of Women’s Health in the company's medical safety organization, called the asbestos finding "extremely unusual," adding that it was "inconsistent with our testing to date." The voluntary recall announced on Friday is limited to one lot of Johnson's Baby Powder produced and shipped in the United States in 2018, the company said. J&J in a news release said that testing by the US Food and Drug Administration as recently as a month ago found no asbestos in their talc. The FDA said in a statement that the latest sampling took place during its testing for asbestos in talc-containing cosmetics that it began reporting this year. A second Johnson’s Baby Powder sample from a different lot tested negative for asbestos, the agency said. The FDA said it stands by the quality of its testing and results and recommended consumers stop using the product if it comes from the affected lot. J&J said on the conference call that it received a report from the FDA on October 17 alerting the company about the asbestos finding. It said it has started an investigation and is reviewing manufacturing records and collecting data on the distribution of the lot to determine where the product was shipped. J&J added that it is working with the FDA to determine the integrity of the tested sample as well as the validity of test results. Thorough investigation needed The type of asbestos discovered by FDA testing has not been found in the mine where the company sources its talc, J&J's Nicholson said. She described it as an environmental contaminant most commonly found in building materials and industrial applications. J&J said it was too early to confirm whether cross-contamination of the sample had caused a false positive, whether the sample was taken from a bottle with an intact seal or whether the it was prepared in a controlled environment. It added that it could not confirm whether the tested product was authentic or counterfeit. "It is so critical that we perform a thorough investigation of the sample to determine the source of contamination," Nicholson said. Since 2003, talc in Johnson's Baby Powder sold in the United States has come from China through supplier Imerys Talc America, a unit of Paris-based Imerys SA and a co-defendant in much of the talc litigation. Imerys and J&J said the Chinese talc is safe. J&J has known for decades that asbestos lurked in its talc, Reuters reported last year. Internal company records, trial testimony and other evidence show that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos. Company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it, while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public, Reuters found. J&J has repeatedly said that its talc products are safe, and that decades of studies have shown them to be asbestos-free and that they do not cause cancer. The FDA test indicated the presence of no greater than 0.00002% of chrysotile asbestos in the tested sample, J&J said. The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later. Thousands of the lawsuits against J&J have been consolidated before a New Jersey federal judge, who is currently weighing company motions to disqualify plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, including the head of an asbestos testing lab who has testified in earlier trials that he found the contaminant in J&J powders. Leigh O’Dell, one of the lead plaintiff attorneys, on Friday said the recall "vindicates the position we’ve been taking for months.” Wells Fargo analyst Larry Biegelsen said in a research note that the recall could encourage additional lawsuits and prompt the company to pursue a broader settlement. Jefferies healthcare strategist Jared Holz said J&J has already lost close to $10 billion in market value due to the talc issue over the past year. He said further downside to J&J stock is likely to be limited because legal concerns over talc are well known and have already taken a toll on the share price. "This is one single bottle within one lot with barely a trace here," he said. J&J said in February that it had received subpoenas from the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission for documents related to the asbestos contamination allegations. A Bloomberg report, which Reuters has confirmed, said those inquiries include a criminal grand jury investigation into how forthright J&J has been in its statements about the safety of its powders. While talc products make up less than 1% of J&J sales expected by analysts to reach $82 billion in 2019, the New Jersey-based healthcare-products maker considers its Baby Powder to be an essential facet of a carefully tended image as a caring company.

J&J recalls 33,000 bottles of baby powder as FDA finds asbestos in sample

An Oklahoma judge on Monday ordered US health care giant Johnson &amp; Johnson to pay $572 million in damages for its role in fostering the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/johnson-johnsons-greed-helped-fuel-us-opioid-crisis-oklahoma-claims-at-trial-222378">state's opioid addiction crisis</a>.

In the first civil trial of a drugmaker over an epidemic that has caused hundreds of thousands of overdose deaths, Judge Thad Balkman said prosecutors had demonstrated that J&amp;J contributed to a "public nuisance" in its deceptive promotion of highly addictive prescription painkillers.

"Those actions compromised the health and safety of thousands of Oklahomans," he said.

According to the ruling, the company and its Janssen pharmaceuticals division will fund an "abatement plan" for care for addicts, families and communities ravaged by the crisis.

"The defendants Janssen and Johnson &amp; Johnson's misleading marketing and promotion of opioids created a nuisance," Balkman said.

Landmark case

J&amp;J was the first pharmaceutical company tried over the US opioid crisis, which fueled over 70,000 overdose deaths in 2017 alone.

But there are some 2,000 outstanding lawsuits against many drugmakers and distributors filed by state and local governments, many overwhelmed by the costs of an epidemic that has only slightly abated.

Most of those are being rolled into a case to go to trial in October in Ohio that will likely set the basis for potentially many billions of dollars in settlements across the country.

Prosecutors had sought $17 billion in damages against J&amp;J for an abatement program to be spread over 30 years.&nbsp;

But Balkman said the state had not made a strong case for the future costs of the crisis to it and the community beyond one year, and so limited his ruling to that.

J&amp;J's shares rose about two percent to $130 in after-market trade following the decision.

The company immediately said it would appeal the decision.

"Janssen did not cause the opioid crisis in Oklahoma, and neither the facts nor the law support this outcome," said J&amp;J executive vice president Michael Ullmann.

"The unprecedented award for the state's 'abatement plan' has sweeping ramifications for many industries and bears no relation to the company's medicines or conduct."

Company downplayed addiction claims

J&amp;J argued that the law was being inappropriately applied and that its products had a very small role in the addiction epidemic in Oklahoma and nationally.

Balkman said J&amp;J had promoted its drugs by telling doctors and patients that pain was not being treated enough and that "there was a low risk of abuse and a low danger" in the drugs themselves.

"The defendants used the phrase 'pseudoaddiction' to convince doctors that patients who exhibited signs of addiction... were not actually suffering from addiction, but from the undertreatment of pain," he said in his decision.

He also said the company consciously downplayed risks it knew were present, pointing to the 2007 $600 million fine in a Virginia trial of Purdue Pharma, one of the leading prescription opioid makers, for misleading the health industry and the public about the highly addictive properties of its Oxycontin painkiller.

J&amp;J is the first drugmaker to go to trial and the case is seen as a bellwether for thousands of possible criminal and civil suits over the seeming uncontrolled distribution of highly addictive painkillers like oxycodone and hydrocodone, and J&amp;J's Nucynta and Duragesic, between 2000 and 2015.

Two other major drugmakers accused in the same suit, Purdue Pharma of the United States and Israel's Teva, settled with Oklahoma before the case went to trial.&nbsp;

Purdue, which produced the widely abused opioid Oxycontin, agreed to pay the state $270 million in March and Teva negotiated an $85 million settlement.

Dozens of local and state governments across the country have also already exacted settlements with opioid manufacturers and distributors to address their problems.

An Oklahoma judge on Monday ordered US health care giant Johnson & Johnson to pay $572 million in damages for its role in fostering the state's opioid addiction crisis.

An Oklahoma judge on Monday ordered US health care giant Johnson & Johnson to pay $572 million in damages for its role in fostering the state's opioid addiction crisis. In the first civil trial of a drugmaker over an epidemic that has caused hundreds of thousands of overdose deaths, Judge Thad Balkman said prosecutors had demonstrated that J&J contributed to a "public nuisance" in its deceptive promotion of highly addictive prescription painkillers. "Those actions compromised the health and safety of thousands of Oklahomans," he said. According to the ruling, the company and its Janssen pharmaceuticals division will fund an "abatement plan" for care for addicts, families and communities ravaged by the crisis. "The defendants Janssen and Johnson & Johnson's misleading marketing and promotion of opioids created a nuisance," Balkman said. Landmark case J&J was the first pharmaceutical company tried over the US opioid crisis, which fueled over 70,000 overdose deaths in 2017 alone. But there are some 2,000 outstanding lawsuits against many drugmakers and distributors filed by state and local governments, many overwhelmed by the costs of an epidemic that has only slightly abated. Most of those are being rolled into a case to go to trial in October in Ohio that will likely set the basis for potentially many billions of dollars in settlements across the country. Prosecutors had sought $17 billion in damages against J&J for an abatement program to be spread over 30 years. But Balkman said the state had not made a strong case for the future costs of the crisis to it and the community beyond one year, and so limited his ruling to that. J&J's shares rose about two percent to $130 in after-market trade following the decision. The company immediately said it would appeal the decision. "Janssen did not cause the opioid crisis in Oklahoma, and neither the facts nor the law support this outcome," said J&J executive vice president Michael Ullmann. "The unprecedented award for the state's 'abatement plan' has sweeping ramifications for many industries and bears no relation to the company's medicines or conduct." Company downplayed addiction claims J&J argued that the law was being inappropriately applied and that its products had a very small role in the addiction epidemic in Oklahoma and nationally. Balkman said J&J had promoted its drugs by telling doctors and patients that pain was not being treated enough and that "there was a low risk of abuse and a low danger" in the drugs themselves. "The defendants used the phrase 'pseudoaddiction' to convince doctors that patients who exhibited signs of addiction... were not actually suffering from addiction, but from the undertreatment of pain," he said in his decision. He also said the company consciously downplayed risks it knew were present, pointing to the 2007 $600 million fine in a Virginia trial of Purdue Pharma, one of the leading prescription opioid makers, for misleading the health industry and the public about the highly addictive properties of its Oxycontin painkiller. J&J is the first drugmaker to go to trial and the case is seen as a bellwether for thousands of possible criminal and civil suits over the seeming uncontrolled distribution of highly addictive painkillers like oxycodone and hydrocodone, and J&J's Nucynta and Duragesic, between 2000 and 2015. Two other major drugmakers accused in the same suit, Purdue Pharma of the United States and Israel's Teva, settled with Oklahoma before the case went to trial. Purdue, which produced the widely abused opioid Oxycontin, agreed to pay the state $270 million in March and Teva negotiated an $85 million settlement. Dozens of local and state governments across the country have also already exacted settlements with opioid manufacturers and distributors to address their problems.

Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $572 million for opioid addiction crisis

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/johnson-johnson-rejects-report-by-rajasthan-government-on-presence-of-formaldehyde-in-baby-shampoo-214079">Johnson &amp; Johnson's</a> greed led the drugmaker to use deceptive marketing to create an oversupply of painkillers that fuelled the US&nbsp;opioid epidemic, the state of Oklahoma alleged at the start of the first trial to result from lawsuits over the drug crisis.

Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter, who filed the multibillion-dollar case, argued in a state court in the city of Norman that J&amp;J should be forced to pay for helping cause the "worst manmade public health crisis in our state's history."

His case is the first to reach trial from around 2,000 lawsuits filed by state and local governments seeking to hold pharmaceutical companies responsible for a drug epidemic the US&nbsp;Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says led to a record 47,600 opioid-related overdose deaths in 2017.

The non-jury trial came after Oklahoma resolved claims against OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP in March for $270 million and against Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd on Sunday for $85 million, leaving only J&amp;J as a defendant.

Brad Beckworth, a lawyer for the state, told Cleveland County District Judge Thad Balkman that New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&amp;J, along with Purdue and Teva, used misleading marketing beginning in the 1990s to push doctors to prescribe more opioids.

Watch: After Teva Pharm to pay Oklahoma $85 mn to settle opioid claims; Johnson &amp; Johnson still set for trial

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/after-teva-pharm-to-pay-oklahoma-85-mln-to-settle-opioid-claims-johnson-johnson-still-set-for-trial-222190/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Beckworth said J&amp;J, which sold the painkillers Duragesic and Nucynta, marketed the opioids as "safe and effective for everyday pain" while downplaying their addictive qualities, helping create a drug oversupply.

He said J&amp;J was motivated to boost prescriptions not only because it sold opioid painkillers, but because it also grew and imported raw materials opioid manufacturers like Purdue used.

"If you have an oversupply, people will die," Beckworth said.

J&amp;J lawyer Larry Ottway countered that its products made up a small share of opioids prescribed in Oklahoma and carried US&nbsp;Food and Drug Administration-approved labels that warned of the addictive risks.

"You have to examine the details because facts are stubborn things," he said.

He also argued Oklahoma was seeking to "stretch" the bounds of a public nuisance statute in order to force it to pay up to $17.5 billion to help the state address the epidemic for the next 30 years.

The case is being closely watched by plaintiffs in other opioid lawsuits, particularly the 1,850 cases consolidated before a federal judge in Ohio, who has been pushing for a settlement ahead of an October trial.

Some plaintiffs' lawyers have compared the cases to litigation by states against the tobacco industry that led to a $246 billion settlement in 1998.

Johnson & Johnson's greed led the drugmaker to use deceptive marketing to create an oversupply of painkillers that fuelled the US opioid epidemic, the state of Oklahoma alleged at the start of the first trial to result from lawsuits over the drug crisis.

Johnson & Johnson's greed led the drugmaker to use deceptive marketing to create an oversupply of painkillers that fuelled the US opioid epidemic, the state of Oklahoma alleged at the start of the first trial to result from lawsuits over the drug crisis. Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter, who filed the multibillion-dollar case, argued in a state court in the city of Norman that J&J should be forced to pay for helping cause the "worst manmade public health crisis in our state's history." His case is the first to reach trial from around 2,000 lawsuits filed by state and local governments seeking to hold pharmaceutical companies responsible for a drug epidemic the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says led to a record 47,600 opioid-related overdose deaths in 2017. The non-jury trial came after Oklahoma resolved claims against OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP in March for $270 million and against Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd on Sunday for $85 million, leaving only J&J as a defendant. Brad Beckworth, a lawyer for the state, told Cleveland County District Judge Thad Balkman that New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&J, along with Purdue and Teva, used misleading marketing beginning in the 1990s to push doctors to prescribe more opioids. Watch: After Teva Pharm to pay Oklahoma $85 mn to settle opioid claims; Johnson & Johnson still set for trial Beckworth said J&J, which sold the painkillers Duragesic and Nucynta, marketed the opioids as "safe and effective for everyday pain" while downplaying their addictive qualities, helping create a drug oversupply. He said J&J was motivated to boost prescriptions not only because it sold opioid painkillers, but because it also grew and imported raw materials opioid manufacturers like Purdue used. "If you have an oversupply, people will die," Beckworth said. J&J lawyer Larry Ottway countered that its products made up a small share of opioids prescribed in Oklahoma and carried US Food and Drug Administration-approved labels that warned of the addictive risks. "You have to examine the details because facts are stubborn things," he said. He also argued Oklahoma was seeking to "stretch" the bounds of a public nuisance statute in order to force it to pay up to $17.5 billion to help the state address the epidemic for the next 30 years. The case is being closely watched by plaintiffs in other opioid lawsuits, particularly the 1,850 cases consolidated before a federal judge in Ohio, who has been pushing for a settlement ahead of an October trial. Some plaintiffs' lawyers have compared the cases to litigation by states against the tobacco industry that led to a $246 billion settlement in 1998.

Johnson & Johnson's greed helped fuel US opioid crisis, Oklahoma claims at trial

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/how-can-someone-kill-in-the-name-of-god-wonders-sri-lankan-cardinal-214113">How can someone kill in the name of God, wonders Sri Lankan Cardinal</a>

Sri Lanka's Roman Catholic leader Sunday said God is the reflection of love and kindness and wondered how someone can kill in the name of God as he referred to the Islamist militants who claimed the massive Easter Sunday bombings were on behalf of the Almighty.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/manual-counting-of-votes-kills-270-in-indonesia-after-general-polls-214135">Manual counting of votes kills 270 in Indonesia after general polls</a>

Ten days after Indonesia held the world's biggest single-day elections, more than 270 election staff have died, mostly of fatigue-related illnesses caused by long hours of work counting millions of ballot papers by hand, an official said on Sunday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/johnson-johnson-rejects-report-by-rajasthan-government-on-presence-of-formaldehyde-in-baby-shampoo-214079">Johnson &amp; Johnson rejects report by Rajasthan government on presence of formaldehyde in baby shampoo</a>

Johnson &amp; Johnson has strongly rejected findings of a Rajasthan government laboratory showing the presence of "harmful" chemicals in the US-based company's baby shampoo, a popular product in India.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/father-two-brothers-of-sri-lanka-suicide-bombings-mastermind-killed-in-gun-battle-214078">Father, two brothers of Sri Lanka suicide bombings mastermind killed in gun battle</a>

The father and two brothers of the suspected mastermind of Sri Lanka's Easter Sunday bombings were killed when security forces stormed their safe house two days ago, police sources and a relative of the suicide bombers told Reuters on Sunday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/thousands-take-to-hong-kong-streets-to-protest-new-extradition-laws-214082">Thousands take to Hong Kong streets to protest new extradition laws</a>

Thousands of people marched on Hong Kong's parliament on Sunday to demand the scrapping of proposed extradition rules that would allow people to be sent to mainland China for trial - a move which some fear puts the city's core freedoms at risk.

How can someone kill in the name of God, wonders Sri Lankan Cardinal Sri Lanka's Roman Catholic leader Sunday said God is the reflection of love and kindness and wondered how someone can kill in the name of God as he referred to the Islamist militants who claimed the massive Easter Sunday bombings were on behalf of the Almighty.

How can someone kill in the name of God, wonders Sri Lankan Cardinal Sri Lanka's Roman Catholic leader Sunday said God is the reflection of love and kindness and wondered how someone can kill in the name of God as he referred to the Islamist militants who claimed the massive Easter Sunday bombings were on behalf of the Almighty. Manual counting of votes kills 270 in Indonesia after general polls Ten days after Indonesia held the world's biggest single-day elections, more than 270 election staff have died, mostly of fatigue-related illnesses caused by long hours of work counting millions of ballot papers by hand, an official said on Sunday. Johnson & Johnson rejects report by Rajasthan government on presence of formaldehyde in baby shampoo Johnson & Johnson has strongly rejected findings of a Rajasthan government laboratory showing the presence of "harmful" chemicals in the US-based company's baby shampoo, a popular product in India. Father, two brothers of Sri Lanka suicide bombings mastermind killed in gun battle The father and two brothers of the suspected mastermind of Sri Lanka's Easter Sunday bombings were killed when security forces stormed their safe house two days ago, police sources and a relative of the suicide bombers told Reuters on Sunday. Thousands take to Hong Kong streets to protest new extradition laws Thousands of people marched on Hong Kong's parliament on Sunday to demand the scrapping of proposed extradition rules that would allow people to be sent to mainland China for trial - a move which some fear puts the city's core freedoms at risk.

News brief: Big stories of the day

Johnson &amp; Johnson has strongly rejected findings of a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/child-rights-body-asks-states-to-stop-sale-of-johnsons-baby-shampoo-214002">Rajasthan government laboratory showing the presence of "harmful" chemicals</a> in the US-based company's baby shampoo, a popular product in India.

Based on the report of the Drug Testing Laboratory in Jaipur, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has written to the chief secretaries of all states and Union Territories asking them to stop the sale of Johnson &amp; Johnson's (J&amp;J) baby shampoo and remove it from the stocks.

The NCPCR said the test report found the presence of formaldehyde in J&amp;J's baby shampoo.

The company, in a statement, said it has not received any direction to stop the sale of its shampoo and that it was not accepting the interim results of the laboratory tests which were based on "unknown and unspecified" methods.

India is a major market for J&amp;J globally, and its share in the country's Rs 4,000-crore baby care market is nearly three-fourths.

"We will await the results and conclusions of the re-testing process at the Central Drugs Laboratory. We are not aware of any directions from NCPCR. It must be noted that any such directions, under the law, can only be issued under certain prescribed conditions," the company said.

J&amp;J said it is in full compliance with current Indian regulatory requirements and standards for manufacturing and testing of all its products.&nbsp;

"We have confirmed to the Indian authorities that we do not add Formaldehyde as an ingredient in our shampoo nor does Johnson's baby shampoo contain any ingredient that can release formaldehyde over time. Our products are safe to use and conform to all applicable standard under the D&amp;C (Drugs and Cosmetics) Act and D&amp;C rules," it said.

"We unequivocally maintain that our products are safe, and our assurance process is amongst the most rigorous in the world, meeting or exceeding the safety standards in every country where our products are sold," the company added.

Officials said NCPCR has powers to recommend action, but it was for the state governments and union territories to take a call on the implementation of the recommendation by the apex child rights body.

The NCPCR had sought sample test reports of J&amp;J's baby shampoo and talcum powder from authorities of five states -- Andhra Pradesh (south), Jharkhand (east), Rajasthan (west), Madhya Pradesh (central) and Assam (North East) -- after reports of presence of asbestos and carcinogenic substance in them emerged.

The order by the NCPCR around a week back was issued after test reports of the baby shampoo came from Rajasthan. However, it is yet to receive test reports from the other four states.

The NCPCR has asked the Drug Control Officer of Rajasthan to send the test report of the talcum powder at the earliest, officials at the child rights body said.

In December last year, India's drug regulator ordered laboratory testing of J&amp;J's baby powder following international media reports it may contain cancer-causing asbestos. Months later, test reports showed that the talcum powder did not contain asbestos.&nbsp;

Johnson & Johnson has strongly rejected findings of a Rajasthan government laboratory showing the presence of "harmful" chemicals in the US-based company's baby shampoo, a popular product in India.

Johnson & Johnson has strongly rejected findings of a Rajasthan government laboratory showing the presence of "harmful" chemicals in the US-based company's baby shampoo, a popular product in India. Based on the report of the Drug Testing Laboratory in Jaipur, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has written to the chief secretaries of all states and Union Territories asking them to stop the sale of Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) baby shampoo and remove it from the stocks. The NCPCR said the test report found the presence of formaldehyde in J&J's baby shampoo. The company, in a statement, said it has not received any direction to stop the sale of its shampoo and that it was not accepting the interim results of the laboratory tests which were based on "unknown and unspecified" methods. India is a major market for J&J globally, and its share in the country's Rs 4,000-crore baby care market is nearly three-fourths. "We will await the results and conclusions of the re-testing process at the Central Drugs Laboratory. We are not aware of any directions from NCPCR. It must be noted that any such directions, under the law, can only be issued under certain prescribed conditions," the company said. J&J said it is in full compliance with current Indian regulatory requirements and standards for manufacturing and testing of all its products. "We have confirmed to the Indian authorities that we do not add Formaldehyde as an ingredient in our shampoo nor does Johnson's baby shampoo contain any ingredient that can release formaldehyde over time. Our products are safe to use and conform to all applicable standard under the D&C (Drugs and Cosmetics) Act and D&C rules," it said. "We unequivocally maintain that our products are safe, and our assurance process is amongst the most rigorous in the world, meeting or exceeding the safety standards in every country where our products are sold," the company added. Officials said NCPCR has powers to recommend action, but it was for the state governments and union territories to take a call on the implementation of the recommendation by the apex child rights body. The NCPCR had sought sample test reports of J&J's baby shampoo and talcum powder from authorities of five states -- Andhra Pradesh (south), Jharkhand (east), Rajasthan (west), Madhya Pradesh (central) and Assam (North East) -- after reports of presence of asbestos and carcinogenic substance in them emerged. The order by the NCPCR around a week back was issued after test reports of the baby shampoo came from Rajasthan. However, it is yet to receive test reports from the other four states. The NCPCR has asked the Drug Control Officer of Rajasthan to send the test report of the talcum powder at the earliest, officials at the child rights body said. In December last year, India's drug regulator ordered laboratory testing of J&J's baby powder following international media reports it may contain cancer-causing asbestos. Months later, test reports showed that the talcum powder did not contain asbestos.

Johnson & Johnson rejects report by Rajasthan government on presence of formaldehyde in baby shampoo

The apex child rights body has asked all states to stop the sale of Johnson's baby shampoo after its sample was found to be of substandard quality in a lab test.

In a letter to chief secretaries of all states, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights or NCPCR ordered stoppage of sale of Johnson's baby shampoo and also removing the product from the stock of shops after Drug Testing Laboratory, Jaipur declared it of substandard quality as the presence of formaldehyde was confirmed in it.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights in a letter to Chief Secretaries of all states and UTs directs to stop sale of Johnson&amp;Johnson baby shampoo in their respective states and also removing product stocked at shops, on basis of sample testing report from Rajasthan. <a href="https://t.co/Dn5iQ6Vhwi">https://t.co/Dn5iQ6Vhwi</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1122111172667478016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 27, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The apex child rights body had sought sample test reports of Johnson's baby shampoo and talcum powder from authorities of five states -- Andhra Pradesh (south), Jharkhand (east), Rajasthan (west), Madhya Pradesh (central) and Assam (northeast) -- after reports of presence of asbestos and carcinogenic substance in them emerged.

The order to stop sale was issued after test reports of the baby shampoo sample from Rajasthan came in. It is yet to receive the test reports from the other four states.

It has asked the Drug Control Officer of Rajasthan to send the test report of the talcum powder at the earliest.

The apex child rights body has asked all states to stop the sale of Johnson's baby shampoo after its sample was found to be of substandard quality in a lab test.

The apex child rights body has asked all states to stop the sale of Johnson's baby shampoo after its sample was found to be of substandard quality in a lab test. In a letter to chief secretaries of all states, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights or NCPCR ordered stoppage of sale of Johnson's baby shampoo and also removing the product from the stock of shops after Drug Testing Laboratory, Jaipur declared it of substandard quality as the presence of formaldehyde was confirmed in it. National Commission for Protection of Child Rights in a letter to Chief Secretaries of all states and UTs directs to stop sale of Johnson&Johnson baby shampoo in their respective states and also removing product stocked at shops, on basis of sample testing report from Rajasthan. https://t.co/Dn5iQ6Vhwi — ANI (@ANI) April 27, 2019 × The apex child rights body had sought sample test reports of Johnson's baby shampoo and talcum powder from authorities of five states -- Andhra Pradesh (south), Jharkhand (east), Rajasthan (west), Madhya Pradesh (central) and Assam (northeast) -- after reports of presence of asbestos and carcinogenic substance in them emerged. The order to stop sale was issued after test reports of the baby shampoo sample from Rajasthan came in. It is yet to receive the test reports from the other four states. It has asked the Drug Control Officer of Rajasthan to send the test report of the talcum powder at the earliest.

Child rights body asks states to stop sale of Johnson's baby shampoo

Johnson &amp; Johnson's baby shampoo samples failed quality tests conducted by the northwestern Indian state of Rajasthan, according to a public notice from the state`s drugs watchdog, findings that were rejected by the US drugmaker.

This comes just a few months after Indian authorities launched an investigation into J&amp;J's Baby Powder to see if it contains cancer-causing asbestos. J&amp;J said in late February it had resumed production of baby talc after government tests found no asbestos in the product.

The Rajasthan Drugs Control Organisation's notice dated March 5 said that the samples of J&amp;J's baby shampoo taken from two batches had failed the quality test as they contained "harmful ingredients". It did not elaborate.

A J&amp;J spokeswoman said that the results it received from the watchdog indicated that formaldehyde had been discovered in the samples.&nbsp;

Formaldehyde, used in making building materials, is a known carcinogen.

"We do not accept the interim results given to us, which mentioned samples to 'contain harmful ingredients- identification positive for formaldehyde'," she told Reuters.&nbsp;

"We unequivocally maintain that our products are safe and our assurance process is amongst the most rigorous in the world," the J&amp;J spokeswoman said, adding that the company has contested the interim test results of the government analysis that were based on "unknown and unspecified methods".

The two batches of the baby shampoo tested are due to expire in September 2021 and were manufactured at the company`s plant in the northern state of Himachal Pradesh, according to the watchdog`s notice.

"We have confirmed to the Indian authorities that we do not add formaldehyde as an ingredient in our shampoo nor does Johnson`s baby shampoo contain any ingredient that can release formaldehyde over time," the company spokeswoman said.&nbsp;

The Rajasthan Drugs Control Organisation and India's Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) were not immediately available to comment.

The federal regulator and its counterparts in Indian states launched an investigation into J&amp;J`s Baby Powder following a Reuters report in December that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product.

J&amp;J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory".

J&amp;J's Baby Powder is one of the most recognised foreign brands in the country. The company leads sales in the Indian baby and child toiletries market, according to market research provider Euromonitor. 
 
&nbsp;

Johnson & Johnson's baby shampoo samples failed quality tests conducted by the northwestern Indian state of Rajasthan, according to a public notice from the state`s drugs watchdog, findings that were rejected by the US drugmaker.

Johnson & Johnson's baby shampoo samples failed quality tests conducted by the northwestern Indian state of Rajasthan, according to a public notice from the state`s drugs watchdog, findings that were rejected by the US drugmaker. This comes just a few months after Indian authorities launched an investigation into J&J's Baby Powder to see if it contains cancer-causing asbestos. J&J said in late February it had resumed production of baby talc after government tests found no asbestos in the product. The Rajasthan Drugs Control Organisation's notice dated March 5 said that the samples of J&J's baby shampoo taken from two batches had failed the quality test as they contained "harmful ingredients". It did not elaborate. A J&J spokeswoman said that the results it received from the watchdog indicated that formaldehyde had been discovered in the samples. Formaldehyde, used in making building materials, is a known carcinogen. "We do not accept the interim results given to us, which mentioned samples to 'contain harmful ingredients- identification positive for formaldehyde'," she told Reuters. "We unequivocally maintain that our products are safe and our assurance process is amongst the most rigorous in the world," the J&J spokeswoman said, adding that the company has contested the interim test results of the government analysis that were based on "unknown and unspecified methods". The two batches of the baby shampoo tested are due to expire in September 2021 and were manufactured at the company`s plant in the northern state of Himachal Pradesh, according to the watchdog`s notice. "We have confirmed to the Indian authorities that we do not add formaldehyde as an ingredient in our shampoo nor does Johnson`s baby shampoo contain any ingredient that can release formaldehyde over time," the company spokeswoman said. The Rajasthan Drugs Control Organisation and India's Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) were not immediately available to comment. The federal regulator and its counterparts in Indian states launched an investigation into J&J`s Baby Powder following a Reuters report in December that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product. J&J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory". J&J's Baby Powder is one of the most recognised foreign brands in the country. The company leads sales in the Indian baby and child toiletries market, according to market research provider Euromonitor.

Johnson & Johnson baby shampoo samples fail quality test; company rejects findings

Johnson &amp; Johnson has resumed production of its baby powder at plants in India after government tests found no asbestos in the product, the company said on Thursday.

"Johnson &amp; Johnson has resumed production of its Johnson`s Baby Powder at plants in Baddi and Mulund, after government sanctioned testing reaffirmed that the product does not contain asbestos," J&amp;J said in a statement to Reuters.

Reuters reported earlier on Thursday that the regulator had not found any asbestos in the company`s talc, citing sources familiar with the matter.

The regulator and its counterparts in Indian states launched an investigation into J&amp;J`s Baby Powder following a Reuters report in December that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product.&nbsp;

J&amp;J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory".

The Indian regulator wrote to the US company in December asking it to stop using the "huge quantities" of raw materials stocked in its plants in northern and western India until test results proved they were free of asbestos.

"In recent months, regulatory authorities from Singapore, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, and Egypt have also reaffirmed the purity of Johnson &amp; Johnson`s talc," J&amp;J said.

Johnson & Johnson has resumed production of its baby powder at plants in India after government tests found no asbestos in the product, the company said on Thursday.

Johnson & Johnson has resumed production of its baby powder at plants in India after government tests found no asbestos in the product, the company said on Thursday. "Johnson & Johnson has resumed production of its Johnson`s Baby Powder at plants in Baddi and Mulund, after government sanctioned testing reaffirmed that the product does not contain asbestos," J&J said in a statement to Reuters. Reuters reported earlier on Thursday that the regulator had not found any asbestos in the company`s talc, citing sources familiar with the matter. The regulator and its counterparts in Indian states launched an investigation into J&J`s Baby Powder following a Reuters report in December that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product. J&J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory". The Indian regulator wrote to the US company in December asking it to stop using the "huge quantities" of raw materials stocked in its plants in northern and western India until test results proved they were free of asbestos. "In recent months, regulatory authorities from Singapore, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, and Egypt have also reaffirmed the purity of Johnson & Johnson`s talc," J&J said.

Johnson & Johnson resumes production of baby talc in India after tests find no asbestos

Bangladesh&nbsp;will collect and test samples of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/indian-regulator-orders-jj-to-stop-using-raw-material-to-make-baby-powder-in-india-185628">Johnson &amp; Johnson's Baby Powder</a> for asbestos in a couple of days, its main testing authority said on Friday, after a Reuters report last Friday that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product.

The&nbsp;Bangladesh&nbsp;Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI), under the Industries Ministry, said it will either do the tests inside or outside the country.

"We take this issue seriously and within a couple of days we will collect samples from the market ...," S.M. Isahaque Ali, a director at the BSTI, told Reuters.

He said&nbsp;Bangladesh&nbsp;wouldn't stop the Baby Powder from being marketed unless it discovers asbestos is present.

J&amp;J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory".

J&amp;J spokespersons in India and&nbsp;Bangladesh&nbsp;could not be immediately reached for comment on the&nbsp;Bangladesh&nbsp;government move.

J&amp;J said on Thursday that its talc is routinely tested by both suppliers and independent labs to ensure that it is free of asbestos. It told Reuters in a statement: "All talc in India is sourced and exclusively sold in India and surrounding markets including Sri Lanka,&nbsp;Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and fully meets the regulatory standards of the Government of India".

Bangladesh will collect and test samples of Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder for asbestos in a couple of days, its main testing authority said on Friday, after a Reuters report last Friday that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product.

Bangladesh will collect and test samples of Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder for asbestos in a couple of days, its main testing authority said on Friday, after a Reuters report last Friday that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product. The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI), under the Industries Ministry, said it will either do the tests inside or outside the country. "We take this issue seriously and within a couple of days we will collect samples from the market ...," S.M. Isahaque Ali, a director at the BSTI, told Reuters. He said Bangladesh wouldn't stop the Baby Powder from being marketed unless it discovers asbestos is present. J&J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory". J&J spokespersons in India and Bangladesh could not be immediately reached for comment on the Bangladesh government move. J&J said on Thursday that its talc is routinely tested by both suppliers and independent labs to ensure that it is free of asbestos. It told Reuters in a statement: "All talc in India is sourced and exclusively sold in India and surrounding markets including Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and fully meets the regulatory standards of the Government of India".

Bangladesh to collect, test samples of Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder

India's drugs regulator has ordered <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/johnson-johnson-shares-plunge-after-report-on-asbestos-in-baby-powder-184131">Johnson &amp; Johnson</a>&nbsp;(J&amp;J) to stop manufacturing its Baby Powder using raw materials in two of its Indian factories until test results prove they are free of asbestos, a senior official said on Thursday.

The official at the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO), who declined to be named citing the sensitivity of the matter, said a written order had been sent to the US company telling it to stop using the "huge quantities" of raw materials stocked in its plants in northern and western India.

The company said on Wednesday that Indian drug authorities visited some of its facilities and took "tests and samples" of its talcum powder. It also said that the safety of its cosmetic talc was based on a long history of safe use and decades of research and clinical evidence by independent researchers and scientific review boards across the world.

The visits came as the CDSCO and state-based food and drug administrations launched an investigation into J&amp;J's Baby Powder following a Reuters report last Friday that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product. J&amp;J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory".

The company told Reuters that it is in full compliance with the current Indian regulatory requirements for the manufacturing and testing of its talc.

"All talc in India is sourced and exclusively sold in India and surrounding markets including Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and fully meets the regulatory standards of the Government of India," the company said in an emailed statement.&nbsp;

J&amp;J also said its talc is routinely tested by both suppliers and independent labs to ensure that it is free of asbestos.

Asked if the order meant the company would have to stop producing its ubiquitous baby powder in India for now, the official at the drugs regulator said that was "the inference you have to take" at least as far as the stores of raw materials were concerned.

"We have told them until this investigation concludes, you should not use the raw material. Test results will take time," the official said. "Testing for asbestos is not a routine procedure. It might be in traces. It will require us to develop a method and all those things."

Familiar Band&nbsp;

J&amp;J's Baby Powder is one of the most recognised foreign brands in India along with Colgate toothpaste and Surf detergent.&nbsp;

The company started selling its Baby Powder in India in 1948, just a year after the country won independence from the British. Presenting gift boxes containing the product and others aimed at newborns is almost a family ritual in this country of 1.3 billion people, 28 per cent of whom are aged between 0-14.

The company also commands a strong retail distribution network through small pharmacies, larger stores and the internet.

There is yet to be any significant signs of a backlash against J&amp;J products in India because of the scare. At eight pharmacies across India visited by Reuters reporters on Thursday, seven said J&amp;J remained the No. 1 seller of powder for babies.

That doesn`t mean it isn't under pressure from local and international competitors who sell talc-type powders, such as Bengaluru-based Himalaya Herbals, and Italy`s Artsana, which produces Chicco baby brands.&nbsp;

And some individual consumers say they are now very wary of J&amp;J`s Baby Powder.

"It is really very, very shocking," said Sitaram Beria, a chartered accountant in the eastern city of Bhubaneswar. He said he stopped applying J&amp;J powder on his six-month-old baby after hearing about the Reuters report over the weekend.

J&amp;J leads sales in the Indian baby and child toiletries market, which market research provider Euromonitor estimates would be worth 12.5 billion rupees ($178 million) this year, and forecasts will grow 84 per cent to 23 billion rupees in 2022.

Euromonitor did not give a breakdown for baby powder alone but said J&amp;J was the biggest player in the overall segment, followed by Mumbai-based VVF Ltd, Artsana, Wipro of Bengaluru and Himalaya.

Himalaya said in a statement that its herbs-based baby care products "are exclusively promoted and recommended by over 40,000 doctors in the country, which is the greatest endorsement for us," while declining to provide any financial figures.

The other companies could not be reached for comment.

India's drugs regulator has ordered Johnson & Johnson (J&J) to stop manufacturing its Baby Powder using raw materials in two of its Indian factories until test results prove they are free of asbestos, a senior official said on Thursday.

India's drugs regulator has ordered Johnson & Johnson (J&J) to stop manufacturing its Baby Powder using raw materials in two of its Indian factories until test results prove they are free of asbestos, a senior official said on Thursday. The official at the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO), who declined to be named citing the sensitivity of the matter, said a written order had been sent to the US company telling it to stop using the "huge quantities" of raw materials stocked in its plants in northern and western India. The company said on Wednesday that Indian drug authorities visited some of its facilities and took "tests and samples" of its talcum powder. It also said that the safety of its cosmetic talc was based on a long history of safe use and decades of research and clinical evidence by independent researchers and scientific review boards across the world. The visits came as the CDSCO and state-based food and drug administrations launched an investigation into J&J's Baby Powder following a Reuters report last Friday that the firm knew for decades that cancer-causing asbestos could be found in the product. J&J has described the Reuters article as "one-sided, false and inflammatory". The company told Reuters that it is in full compliance with the current Indian regulatory requirements for the manufacturing and testing of its talc. "All talc in India is sourced and exclusively sold in India and surrounding markets including Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and fully meets the regulatory standards of the Government of India," the company said in an emailed statement. J&J also said its talc is routinely tested by both suppliers and independent labs to ensure that it is free of asbestos. Asked if the order meant the company would have to stop producing its ubiquitous baby powder in India for now, the official at the drugs regulator said that was "the inference you have to take" at least as far as the stores of raw materials were concerned. "We have told them until this investigation concludes, you should not use the raw material. Test results will take time," the official said. "Testing for asbestos is not a routine procedure. It might be in traces. It will require us to develop a method and all those things." Familiar Band J&J's Baby Powder is one of the most recognised foreign brands in India along with Colgate toothpaste and Surf detergent. The company started selling its Baby Powder in India in 1948, just a year after the country won independence from the British. Presenting gift boxes containing the product and others aimed at newborns is almost a family ritual in this country of 1.3 billion people, 28 per cent of whom are aged between 0-14. The company also commands a strong retail distribution network through small pharmacies, larger stores and the internet. There is yet to be any significant signs of a backlash against J&J products in India because of the scare. At eight pharmacies across India visited by Reuters reporters on Thursday, seven said J&J remained the No. 1 seller of powder for babies. That doesn`t mean it isn't under pressure from local and international competitors who sell talc-type powders, such as Bengaluru-based Himalaya Herbals, and Italy`s Artsana, which produces Chicco baby brands. And some individual consumers say they are now very wary of J&J`s Baby Powder. "It is really very, very shocking," said Sitaram Beria, a chartered accountant in the eastern city of Bhubaneswar. He said he stopped applying J&J powder on his six-month-old baby after hearing about the Reuters report over the weekend. J&J leads sales in the Indian baby and child toiletries market, which market research provider Euromonitor estimates would be worth 12.5 billion rupees ($178 million) this year, and forecasts will grow 84 per cent to 23 billion rupees in 2022. Euromonitor did not give a breakdown for baby powder alone but said J&J was the biggest player in the overall segment, followed by Mumbai-based VVF Ltd, Artsana, Wipro of Bengaluru and Himalaya. Himalaya said in a statement that its herbs-based baby care products "are exclusively promoted and recommended by over 40,000 doctors in the country, which is the greatest endorsement for us," while declining to provide any financial figures. The other companies could not be reached for comment.

Amid cancer scare, drug regulator body asks Johnson & Johnson not to use baby powder raw material

Indian regulators took J&J talc samples from company's plant in Himachal Pradesh

johnson-johnson

Johnson & Johnson, News on Johnson & Johnson, stories on Johnson & Johnson, articles on Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson stories at Wion, Johnson & Johnson news, Johnson & Johnson latest news

johnson johnson