Stop Being a Bum and Support Your Own Family
File This Under 'Didn't Happen:' Ex-CIA Spook Alleges Trump Tried to Use the...
The SPLC Was Paying People to Be Racist...So They Could Fight Racism
Why It's Not Shocking That Chris Murphy Was Cheering for the Iranians Yesterday
Maury Povich Couldn't Contain Himself When Joy Reid Said This About Democrats
Hell Freezes Over As This Prominent Attorney Announces He's Becoming a Republican
Check Out Denver Police's Latest Attempt to Stop Crime in the City
Canada's Two-Tier Justice System Is Letting a Convicted Terrorist Do What?
Rep. Jayapal Thinks Cuba's Healthcare System Is 'Remarkable'
Clarence Thomas' Great Speech on the Declaration
Biden’s Migrant Legacy: Video Shows Agency Workers Detailing Parents 'Selling' Children an...
I Wish You Knew What Memorial Day Really Was, I Wish We Didn’t...
Trump's Masterstroke in China's Backyard: The Philippines AI Trade Zone
They Got the Strong Leader They Wanted. Why Are Christian Conservatives Upset?
Why the Middle Class Doesn't Feel Like It Used To
Tipsheet

EPA's "Killer" Ideology

EPA's "Killer" Ideology

A new inspector general's report covering the EPA is profoundly dismaying.

It states that the EPA has conducted tests on humans -- in many cases without fully disclosing all risks, even deathly ones -- in order to justify more onerous air regulations.

Advertisement

In some cases, consent forms for tests of pollutants (1) did not contain the information about the upper range of the pollutant exposure to which humans would be subjected; (2) nor did it offer information about the known increased of death even from short-term exposure for those already suffering from cardiovascular disease (p.21). Another group of studies failed to include language about the long-term cancer risk resulting from exposure to diesel exhaust, the substance being examined.

Perhaps this was simple negligence. But it raises an ugly specter: That someone at the EPA was so eager to get results that would justify more stringent air regulations that officials simply failed to warn subjects adequately -- including those most prone to the dramatic, adverse health consequences that could be used to advance the administration's agenda. After all, to make an environmentally-friendly omelet, perhaps you just have to break a few human eggs, right?

(HT: Daily Caller)

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos