> The only case that seemed significant was that J&J was found to have covered up contamination, but they seem to continue to contest this and I can't find any

> The only case that seemed significant was that J&J was found to have covered up contamination, but they seem to continue to contest this and I can't find any details on what the evidence was. E.g. is J&J claiming it wasn't contaminated, or are they claiming it was, but not to dangerous levels even over decades of use? This article doesn't go into the details too deeply but however bad it was, sounds like it went on for a while... https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/johnson-johnson-knew-decades-asbestos-lurked-its-baby-powder-n948016 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/johnson-johnson-k...