That is begging the question and a deflection.
@restorer-john wasn't commenting on these Hypex modules failing but these modules using components that have a known history of failing in other uses (in his experience). He does have a valid point as to why a SOTL/TOTL product must use such a component.
As far as I know there is no central repository of information for tracking failures of Hypex modules to know whether they have failed other than self-certification from vested manufacturers. So, absence of evidence in this case does not imply evidence of absence. It is irrelevant anyway for the above comment.
The analogy would be a disk drive that is known to have a higher than expected rate of failure. There are a few such known ones from third party tests. Doesn't mean all of them will fail or that your would see computer graveyards would be full of computers using them.
Say Apple were to use one of those drives in their top of the line Macs being sold at a premium. It is perfectly reasonable to criticize them for using such a component without having to prove how many Macs have failed because of that drive.
As a consumer, if I am paying a premium price it would very well be reasonably within my expectation to expect top quality components, not just take the manufacturers claims for it. Similar criticisms have been made for other units like NAD.
It might a reasonable argument if you can show that the capacitor failures that John might have seen is not from the type of use it sees in Hypex modules and therefore not likely to suffer from the same failure modes as he might have seen.
Every lemon of an automobile had exactly the above line of thinking from the manufacturer before it became known as a lemon. So I am not sure I would be saying that with a straight face if I were in your shoes.