Saying "jbig2 in lossless mode won't do this" is as relevant as saying "png won't do this" The problem is the existence and use of a codec for a purpose, that

Saying "jbig2 in lossless mode won't do this" is as relevant as saying "png won't do this" The problem is the existence and use of a codec for a purpose, that harms that purpose. It doesn't matter what it's name is. Are scans being produced with this codec? And is it not true that not only is there data loss or corruption like with jpg, but that unlike jpg artifacts you can sometimes not know that the data loss or corruption occurred? That does make it not merely a problem of "I wish they scanned this in higher quality" but a far worse problem of "this document looks good so I trust it" when in fact it was corrupt.