After two separate aviation accidents involving Boeing 737 MAX 8 planes within the past six months, the plane’s manufacturer is under a great deal of scrutiny. A Lion Air plane crashed in Indonesia on October 29, 2018, and an Ethiopian Airlines plane crashed outside of Addis Ababa on March 10, 2019, with the two crashes resulting in the deaths of 346 people. Investigations have found that faulty sensors and software may be to blame for these disasters, which opens up the possibility that the families of these plane crash victims may be able to pursue product liability lawsuits against Chicago-based Boeing.

Faulty Flight Control Systems

Investigators into both crashes have noted that there are “striking similarities” between the two incidents. In both cases, it appears that a flight control system called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which was meant to prevent mid-air stalls, caused the pilots to lose control of the planes. The MCAS had automatically acted to force the planes’ noses down in response to incorrect readings from the planes’ angle-of-attack (AOA) sensors, and pilots had not been properly trained in how to disengage this system. Experts believe that the combination of faulty data, automated systems, and lack of pilot training proved to be deadly in these cases, and in order to avoid similar crashes, countries around the world have grounded all 737 MAX planes.

Many people are questioning how such a system could have been put in place and how it could have passed the certification process by the FAA. Typically, planes have redundant systems in place to ensure that if one component fails, others will be able to ensure that the aircraft can be operated safely. However, the Boeing 737 MAX appears to have been designed with a single point of failure, and the reliance on sensors that were providing faulty readings likely was a major factor in these disasters.

Recently, reports that Johnson & Johnson baby powder may contain asbestos have alarmed people throughout the United States. This product has been a staple of many families for decades, and the potential dangers that it may pose has led many to worry about their safety. In March of 2019, a woman in California won a major victory against the company when a jury awarded her $29 million because she contracted mesothelioma that she claimed was caused by her use of J&J’s products.

Johnson & Johnson is currently facing around 13,000 lawsuits involving injuries allegedly caused by their baby powder. In another recent case, 22 women in Missouri were awarded $4.69 billion from J&J because they contracted ovarian cancer. Those who have experienced injuries or illnesses that may have been caused by asbestos in baby powder should be sure to understand their options for pursuing compensation through a product liability lawsuit.

Asbestos and Mesothelioma

Baby powder is composed of talc, and depending on where this talc is mined, it may potentially contain asbestos fibers. When baby powder is applied, any asbestos in the product is likely to become airborne, and it may be inhaled. The inhalation of asbestos can lead to mesothelioma, a form of cancer that attacks the chest cavity.

On March 10, 2019, an Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed, leading to the deaths of 157 people. This was the second major airline disaster in recent months involving a Boeing 737 MAX plane, and in response, countries around the world have ordered these planes to be grounded. Those who have been affected by these incidents or who have been injured while traveling on a plane should understand their options for pursuing compensation through a product liability lawsuit.

Legal Issues Involved in Aviation Accidents

The cause of the Ethiopian Airlines plane crash has not yet been determined. However, the fact that it occurred so soon after another Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft operated by Lion Air crashed in Indonesia in October 2018 indicates that these planes may have dangerous defects that threaten the safety of passengers. That crash is also still being investigated, but it may have been caused by a faulty sensor that affected pilots’ ability to control the plane.

In response to this potential danger, multiple countries, including China, Britain, Germany, France, and Australia have chosen to temporarily ground all Boeing 737 Max 8 planes. This is not the first time in recent history that Boeing planes have faced safety issues; in 2013, airlines grounded Boeing 787 Dreamliners because of an issue with lithium batteries.

In the United States, we expect the products we use to be safe, but unfortunately, large corporations often put profits ahead of public safety, and unsafe or dangerous products are put on the market as a result. When people are injured by the negligence of product manufacturers, they deserve to be compensated for their damages. In some cases, injuries may even be caused by trusted brands that many people have relied on for decades. This was illustrated recently by reports that Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder has been found to contain asbestos.

J&J Knew That Baby Powder Danger Existed for Decades

Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder has been a popular product for over 100 years. However, when the talc used in this product is mined from various sources around the world, it can become contaminated by tremolite, a naturally-occurring form of asbestos. While J&J has claimed that its Baby Powder is safe to use and does not contain dangerous amounts of asbestos, recently-uncovered reports have shown that the company was aware that their products were contaminated and took steps to conceal this information from the public.

A Reuters investigation has found that as early as the late 1960s, Johnson & Johnson was aware that the talc used in its products contained asbestos. As the dangers of this substance became known, J&J claimed that it had addressed this issue and taken steps to remove asbestos from its Baby Powder. However, internal company documents have revealed that over the subsequent decades, the company was aware that the product continued to contain unsafe levels of the substance, and it took steps to misrepresent data when reporting results of product testing to the FDA.