Cosmetics giant Johnson & Johnson was last week ordered by a Missouri jury to pay $72 million in damages to the family of a woman whose death from ovarian cancer was linked to her decades-long use of the company’s talc-based Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products. Ovarian cancer survivor Deane Berg, 58, a physician’s assistant from Sioux Falls, SD, believes the judgment is a great victory. Here, Berg tells The Post’s Jane Ridley her story.

When I first noticed spotting between my periods in the fall of 2006 at the age of 49, I chalked it up to impending menopause. But my instinct as a physician’s assistant told me to get a second opinion from a gynecologist after my family practitioner told me I was fine.

So, that December, I went to Sanford Medical Center in Sioux Falls for an ultrasound. The technician was chatting away happily, but suddenly went quiet. “We’ll finish this up, and the nurse practitioner will come in to talk to you,” she said.

I got dressed, and the NP arrived. She put her hand on my knee. “Deane, I’m afraid something is wrong,” she said. “You’ve got a hemorrhagic ovary. We’re going to have one of the doctors review it.”

The next few days were a haze. I had both ovaries removed — the non-hemorrhagic one as a precaution. I was desperately upset but, after having two daughters, now ages 30 and 27, my child-bearing years were over.

But that was the least of my concerns. The results of the biopsy in January 2007 were devastating. As a health-care professional, I saw the words “bilateral carcinoma” on the pathology report, and my heart sank. I had stage 3 ovarian cancer, which had metastasized to some of my lymph nodes. The prognosis was not good, and I was facing a life expectancy of less than five years. I had a full hysterectomy within a week and prepared to undergo six months of painful chemotherapy.

Just a couple days after the surgery, I read some literature from my oncologist that included information from Gilda’s Club, the foundation created by friends of the late actress Gilda Radner. To my astonishment, it said that use of talcum powder has been implicated in the development of ovarian cancer.

There was no ovarian cancer in my family. I didn’t smoke. I wasn’t overweight. The one risk factor that stood out was my use of talcum powder. According to the leaflet, since the early 1980s, a slew of studies showed that women who regularly used talc for feminine hygiene had higher-than-average rates of ovarian cancer. [According to the American Cancer Society, the current body of research linking talc to ovarian cancer is mixed.]

Like many others, I had dusted my perineum area with baby powder as a daily routine, like brushing my teeth, ever since I was 18. I’d used both Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, which was specifically marketed as a feminine hygiene product. “A sprinkle a day helps keep odor away,” the ads said. “Your body perspires in more places than just under your arms.”

To my shock, there was very little on the Internet suggesting a link between talc and ovarian cancer. It was mostly confined to medical journals and had barely registered with the general public.

But that all changed last week, exactly 10 years since my surgery, with the news that the family of Alabama woman Jacqueline Fox has been awarded $72 million in damages from Johnson & Johnson after her death from ovarian cancer was linked to her prolonged use of Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, a brand that Johnson & Johnson sold in 2012 to Valeant Pharmaceuticals International.

Jurors found Johnson & Johnson liable for fraud, negligence and conspiracy after lawyers argued that the company knew about the dangers but did nothing to inform customers.

I’m so relieved that the issue is finally getting the attention it deserves. In 2013, I, too, sued Johnson & Johnson, and a federal jury found that its body powder products were a factor in my condition. Although I was surprised that the jury awarded me zero damages — South Dakota is a very conservative state, and there had to be a unanimous verdict on whether any compensation should be paid — it was never about the money. Earlier I had turned down a $1.3 million out-of-court settlement because I didn’t want to sign a confidentiality clause.

I believe that talc can cause ovarian cancer in women. Many apply it to their private parts, and talc particles travel to the ovaries through the cervix and line the uterus and fallopian tubes, resulting in toxic effects on the ovaries. In my opinion, talcum powder products should be withdrawn from the market and, until then, be clearly labeled indicating the risk.

No woman should have to go through what Mrs. Fox and I endured, along with thousands of other ovarian cancer sufferers. My life was consumed by chemotherapy and hospital visits. I had two ports put in my chest and abdomen for the IVs. Getting the chemo in my abdomen was the worst pain I’d ever experienced, even worse than childbirth. I suffered from hair loss, nausea, lack of appetite, and I would frequently throw up. I became anemic and could barely walk. Off work for sickness for six months, I couldn’t go out in public in case my immunity was compromised. Then my hearing started to go bad, a side effect of the chemotherapy. It was a living hell, but mercifully, about a year later, in 2008, I was told my cancer went into remission.

And my case paved the way for plaintiff lawyers to bring claims for hundreds of women who blame their ovarian cancer on exposure to talcum powder. As my lawyer said, I’m the equivalent of the first smokers who sued tobacco companies because of their lung cancer. The pioneers didn’t receive compensation, but the dangers and the conspiracy were finally exposed.

Now I hope the family of Mrs. Fox will be the first of many to be awarded damages. Some people think $72 million is excessive, but I don’t think so. How can you put a value on a life?

Johnson & Johnson responded in a statement: “We have no higher responsibility than the health and safety of consumers who use our products and we sympathize with Ms. Berg. At the same time, we are pleased that the jury unanimously rejected the claim that talc is defective as labeled and declined to award any damages. It is important for consumers to know that the safety of cosmetic talc is supported by decades of scientific evidence and independent peer-reviewed studies.”