The record
At a 1972 meeting attended by FDA representatives, the CTFA, J&J and others to discuss preliminary results of an analysis of over 100 talc-containing cosmetic products, a summarizing memorandum recorded no disagreement between FDA and industry scientists about the potential safety hazard.
Claim scope
TWO independent published appellate opinions, in different states, quote the same FDA memorandum language from the same August 1972 meeting. This is the single best-corroborated document in the whole timeline. Ingham notes the analysis covered 'over 100 talc-containing cosmetic products'; McNeal dates the meeting to August 1972 and identifies the FDA memorandum as its record.
What this source does not establish
It establishes shared recognition of a POTENTIAL hazard as of August 1972 — not agreement that any specific product was contaminated, and not a regulatory finding.
Limitations
Ingham frames it as plaintiffs' evidence; McNeal presents it within its own chronological description of the documentary record. In Ingham the opinion writes “Cosmetic Talc and Fragrance Association (‘CTFA’)” — the association's actual name is the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association, as correctly given in McNeal and in PMID 31095409. Quote Ingham's text exactly if quoting, but name the body correctly in your own prose.
Source
Case Citation — Ingham v. Johnson & Johnson, No. ED107476 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. June 23, 2020); independently recounted in McNeal v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, No. B313472 (Cal. Ct. App. July 5, 2022)