> They didn't mention deliberately shipping products with asbestos, but rather than even with their testing, they could not find/remove the trace amounts. Sure

> They didn't mention deliberately shipping products with asbestos, but rather than even with their testing, they could not find/remove the trace amounts. Sure, But TFA did go into their efforts to downplay third-party evidence, and slander critics. And it mentioned questions about the sensitivity of J&J's asbestos testing. And about removing it, TFA argues that they currently use Chinese talc, which contains much less asbestos. So they could have sought other sources decades ago, instead of stonewalling. Or maybe better yet, they could have stopped using talc.