Part of the issue is that several of the mines that J&J sourced its talc from were known to have asbestos, which some of their tests discovered — and then we le

Part of the issue is that several of the mines that J&J sourced its talc from were known to have asbestos, which some of their tests discovered — and then we left it up to the company for the next 50 years to continue their own testing and disclosure… it strains credulity that some tests at eg Windsor Mines showed “rather high” levels of asbestos fibers and then they completely stopped finding fibers from the same mine later on. A responsible company would have stopped sourcing talc from asbestos-containing mines in favor of many other slightly more expensive sources that never showed any asbestos. J&J didn’t. That's not to say there aren't a bunch of shady lawyers filing suits on behalf of people who didn't actually have provable damages from the products - but I think it's okay to hold companies to very high standards in cases like this.