I have read that the Twin Towers World Trade Center was originally insulated with Asbestos. It was removed, (because of the asbestos scare) and this inferior product was sprayed on the infrastructure.
The Engineers who designed it expected Asbestos to protect the structural members in the event of a fire. The Structure was not designed with an inferior insulation product in mind.
When the planes ignited a fire, the new stuff just fell away and the intense heat weakened the steel, causing it to fail and both buildings collapsed.
Nearly 3,000 people were killed because someone had stripped out the asbestos and replaced it with an inferior insulation.
They should have left it alone.
I’d be extremely interested in reading that analysis, and would appreciate any clues you can provide on where you saw it, author or organizations, etc. With particular scientific analysis and experiments, it might be possible to make the judgement that proper fire-proofing would have protected the steel in both the frame and the floor slabs from the heat of mass quantities of burning aviation fuel. My understanding was that the building was designed to resist impact from a 707, and burning fuel was not specifically considered. If asbestos structural fire proofing was indeed abated, that was a very foolish move almost surely driven by artificial legal, not actual concerns. Even if asbestos f.p. would not have averted collapse altogether, it might have slowed the process down and better protected the stairwells, allowing more to evacuate in time.