Obama's EPA Conducts Dangerous Human Experiments
Posted 04/04/2014 06:53 PM ET
'Improvements to EPA Policies and Guidance Could Enhance Protection of Human Study Subjects," released by the EPA's Office of Inspector General on March 31, confirms that the agency "exposed 81 human study subjects to concentrated airborne particles or diesel exhaust emissions in five EPA studies conducted during 2010 and 2011."
According to the report, obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation, the human subjects, said to have given their "informed consent," were exposed to levels of pollutants up to 50 times greater than the EPA itself says is safe for humans. And there are questions as to how informed that consent was.
The Daily Caller said the inspector general's report revealed that "only one of five studies' consent forms provided the subject with information on the upper range of the pollutant" to which the people would be exposed.
Even more alarming, said the Daily Caller, a new and opinion website, "is the fact that only 'two of five alerted study subjects to the risk of death for older individuals with cardiovascular disease.' "
From the Daily Caller we also learn that "three of the studies exposed human subjects to high levels of particulate matter while two of the studies exposed people to high levels of diesel exhaust and ozone. Diesel exhaust contains 40 toxic air contaminants, including 19 that are known carcinogens and particulate matter."
There's also the issue of tests involving children and the EPA's efforts to cover this up. The agency also exposed children to pollution as part of an experiment at the University of Southern California. In February 2013, JunkScience.com, run by Steve Milloy, a Johns Hopkins-trained biostatistician, reported the EPA giving USC grant money to study how particulate matter affects "asthma in susceptible children."
A Dec. 4, 2012, document in the EPA extramural research grants database showed diesel exposure to children. The original document has since been replaced by a strongly edited version, and JunkScience.com, reports Breitbart.com, has "made a Freedom of Information Act request to the EPA to explain the deletion and alteration of its database of the documentation regarding diesel experiments on children."
In 2012, the American Tradition Institute's Environmental Law Center filed a lawsuit charging that the "EPA failed to adequately inform project participants that the pollution they will inhale imposes a risk to their health and there is no benefit whatever."
David Schnare, a former EPA scientist, policy analyst and enforcement attorney who now heads the ATI, said:
"EPA parked a truck's exhaust pipe directly beneath an intake pipe on the side of a building. The exhaust was sucked into the pipe, mixed with some additional air and then piped directly into the lungs of the human subjects. EPA actually has pictures of this gas chamber, a clear plastic pipe stuck into the mouth of a subject, his lips sealing it to his face, diesel fumes inhaled straight into his lungs."
The EPA human experiments were designed to provide support for new ambient air quality standards, something that has outraged Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter.
"Maybe the biggest reason to slow down the new rule is that the EPA is talking out of both sides of their mouth," Vitter said last year. "On one side exposure to it is deadly, and on the other they say human exposure studies are not harmful."
Human beings are not lab rats or misinformed pawns in the EPA's pursuit of its ideological agenda. There is no justification for exposing breathing-impaired human subjects, including children, to high levels of deadly and cancer-causing pollutants to justify its case for new job- and economy-killing regulations.
No comments:
Post a Comment