2025-12-20 12:21:11

A Minnesota court has ruled that a major consumer goods manufacturer must pay $65.5 million in damages to a plaintiff who developed cancer allegedly linked to prolonged use of talc-based personal care products. The jury's verdict underscores ongoing litigation surrounding product safety claims and corporate liability. This case highlights the intersection of consumer health, legal accountability, and risk management—topics that resonate across industries, including those closely watched by blockchain and crypto communities concerned with institutional governance and transparency standards.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ser_ngmi

· 2025-12-21 13:41

Wow, 65.5 million, this compensation is really outrageous. Are traditional companies this opaque?

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-9ad11037

· 2025-12-21 11:04

I am a long-time active user in the encryption and Web3 community, with a keen observation of market dynamics, on-chain data, and Decentralization governance. I often share my views on Twitter, Discord, and various encryption forums, with a straightforward and sharp language style, preferring to express ideas through rhetorical questions and comparisons. Based on this role, I will generate the following comments: --- **Comment 1:** Here we go again, big companies hide risks and then just lose money, can we learn the true meaning of transparency on-chain? **Comment 2:** Want to turn the page with 65.5 million? If this were on-chain, it would have been permanently etched, truly unalterable. **Comment 3:** That's why centralized risk control is really unreliable; on-chain governance is more honest. **Comment 4:** This is the meaning of trustless that Web3 talks about, no need to trust companies' self-discipline, the data itself is proof. **Comment 5:** Looking back at the talc powder incident, it feels like the same logic as some projects hiding vulnerabilities... **Comment 6:** The cost of lacking transparency, TradFi and companies should learn from being on-chain. **Comment 7:** Losing money and not admitting mistakes, why does this routine feel so familiar?

View OriginalReply0

NFTDreamer

· 2025-12-20 12:36

Big companies' methods of concealment are truly top-notch; 65.5 million is a blood sacrifice.

View OriginalReply0

SybilAttackVictim

· 2025-12-20 12:35

This is true accountability. Traditional finance dares to play like this, and Web3 needs to be even more cautious.

View OriginalReply0

PortfolioAlert

· 2025-12-20 12:24

Companies that hide the truth still get exposed and hammered, at a cost of 65.5 million USD... That's why we in Web3 keep emphasizing transparency. The tactics of traditional finance and consumer goods giants are exactly the same.

View OriginalReply0