Consider this comparison: if you ran a giant food company which produced a particular product for
over a hundred years with no basic complaint against it beyond it not being a staple of a standard daily meal diet, and you found yourself accused in just the last 20 years of both knowing it was
cancer - causing and paying dietitian experts to tell the public otherwise — despite the lack of irrefutable evidence of its harm and the total lack of credible evidence that you paid «shill experts» to lie on your behalf — why would you suddenly capitulate to arguments against your product while not raising any concern about the corruption
accusation hurled at you?