The study linked in the article itself, indicates that the current state of scientific understanding is that water born and skin contact are not significant iss

The study linked in the article itself, indicates that the current state of scientific understanding is that water born and skin contact are not significant issues for asbestos, and the primary concern is inhalation. Took me only 5 minutes to find it looking through the docs. I am not agreeing with the GP on their theory of "overblown". Asbestos initiated cancers seem to be some of those with no known threshold. That is, there is no safe amount of asbestos dust inhalation above which you get cancer. I am disagreeing with your statement on the scientific literature and consensus. As far as I know (not my field, so I am an outsider looking at literature), there is no strong consensus either way. There are hypotheses that need deeper looks [1][2][3][4][5]. That is, it looks like there may be something there, but the investigators can't as of yet, distinguish between this as causal versus other factors. This does not mean I think it is safe to ingest a bowl of asbestos followed by an asbestos flavored adult drink. What it does mean is that evidence is inconclusive, though there are a few pathways researchers could imagine would make sense as a causative. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28276807 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28276807 [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27919155 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27919155 [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15820729 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15820729 [4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3304998 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3304998 [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21534087 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21534087 [minor update to add a missing "be" ]