I have also heard that the risk of asbestos either exclusively or overwhelmingly presented to smokers. The article fails to mention whether she smoked or not. (At any time she was exposed to the tainted talc.)
Hypothetically, if out of the tens of thousands of cancer cases, 99.9% of them smoked, then there would really be only tens, instead of tens of thousands, of purely JNJ-caused cases, which would have a different liability profile.
Although knowingly concealing the contamination from the general public should be prosecutable as intentional misrepresentation.
The dangers of asbestos became apparent after many employees who built Liberty Ships for WWII developed lung cancer and Mesothelioma. Asbestos was used for insulation in the ships, and many workers were exposed clouds of asbestos particles daily. Smoking could increase their chance of these diseases by a factor of 10.
Asbestos comes in several different varieties, and only the small particles with a sharp needle like structure were linked to the diseases. In the lungs, they could directly cause cancer. They could also migrate through the lungs to the outer lung lining, causing Mesothelioma. Larger particles could be stopped from even getting to the lung, and smaller, rounded particles could be intercepted by normal body defenses. Much of this information is ignored by the press and the plaintiff attorneys.