This is INDEPENDENT, AD-FREE work that you are certainly NOT going to see in conventional media.
Please help keep JohnsonAndToxin ad-free, online and me working to expose Johnson & Johnson and their 275+ subsidiaries for the benefit of every man, woman and child on the planet - and that INCLUDES YOU and the ones YOU love.
NOTE: November 18,2017:
HAVE NOT HAD A GIFT OF SUPPORT SINCE SEPTEMBER 26, 2017.
I CANNOT AFFORD THIS ENTIRE PROJECT ALONE.
The site ended up going down for two days because I was late with last months' hosting fees. I can't come up with enough money again this month for the hosting fees due on November 26. Without financial support, the site and all content will likely go down again.
PLEASE, PLEASE HELP...
What are consumers to use until harmful chems are removed?
Keywords: jnj, johnson and johnson, johnson + johnson, J&J, shampoo, toxin, toxic, aveeno
Date Created/Edited: August 17, 2012
Less than a year after a Chinese commentary in a state-run new agency, Xinhua, published that Johnson & Johnson needs to "practice morality" with regard to toxins in the United States formulation of baby shampoo and other products, Johnson & Johnson is considering the acquisition of Shanghai-based Elsker, a baby product manufacturer.
In November of 2011, Johnson and Johnson stated that known and potentially harmful chemicals would be removed from baby care products within two years. A statement was recently released that the goal is still on schedule. My question is: If Johnson and Johnson knows these chemicals are harmful to human health, and Johnson and Johnson has safer formulations available in other countries that do not contain the carcinogens and chemicals that cause asthma, why do United States consumers have to wait two years for our products to be safe for our babies? Why doesn't Johnson and Johnson immediately pull the products that contain carcinogens from every store shelf in the United States and replace them immediately with the safer formulations already available in other countries?
On August 16, 2012, Reuters published a statement by Johnson and Johnson that known and suspected harmful chemicals will also be removed from adult products. As with baby care products, Johnson and Johnson already has safer formulations available for consumers in other countries, including: Britain, Japan, the Netherlands, South Africa, the U.K., Denmark.
Why doesn't Johnson and Johnson immediately remove the toxic version of their products from store shelves in the United States and replace them with the safer formulations available in other countries?
Why do United States consumers have to use products with known carcinogens on themselves and their children for another three years?
Will Johnson and Johnson offer medical assistance to those who were harmed by the increased incidence of asthma, allergies and cancer associated with the use of Johnson and Johnson personal care products?
1. BEIJING Correspondant (2011, November 7). China says Johnson & Johnson should 'practise morality' Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/07/china-johnson-johnson-idUSL4E7M71XW20111107
2. Emily Patterson (2012, March 23). Johnson & Johnson Baby Shampoo Poison Johnson and Toxin. Retrieved from http://www.johnsonandtoxin.com/jnj_baby_shampoo_poison.shtml
3. Jonathan Allen (2011, November 1). Health campaigners urge boycott of J&J baby shampoo Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/01/us-babyshampoo-idUSTRE7A06HN20111101
4. Shi Jing (2012, August 2). Johnson & Johnson said to buy local brand China Daily. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2012-08/02/content_15640049.htm
5. Ransdell Pierson (2011, November 17). J&J to nix baby-product contaminant within 2 years Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/17/johnsonandjohnson-idUSN1E7AF21020111117
6. Reuters (2012, August 16). J&J to remove harmful chemicals from adult products by 2015-NYT Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/16/johnsonjohnson-chemicals-idusl4e8jg0jj20120816?RPC=49