So, Nancy Mace's Gubernatorial Hopes Might've Been Nuked From Orbit...
Chuck Schumer Really Doesn't Want to Compensate Victims of Government Abuse
To Democrats, Cosplaying the Oppression of Women Is 'Fun'
Doug Burgum Schools CNN on What the Real D.C. Clean Up Scandal Should...
Javier Milei's Experiment in Pure Free Markets Just Proved the 'Experts' Wrong Again
Nick Shirley Questions What CA Dems Have to Hide as 'The Stop Nick...
Talarico Campaign Refuses to Deny He Had Inappropriate Relationships With Other Staffers
Slain Student's Family Blasts Chicago's Sanctuary Policies After Killer Found With Weapon...
New York's Government Won't Hand Over Documents About the CDL Holder Who Killed...
Graham Platner Ducks Media Interviews After Explosive Sexting Scandal
Anti-Weaponization Fund Gets Scrapped, But That's Not Enough for Chuck Schumer
Federal Court Blocks Trump Administration Ban on Transgender Service Members
Goodbye Pride Month, Hello Nuclear Family Month
She's Back? Janet Mills Hints at Last-Ditch Shake Up in Maine Senate Race
This Wacky Congresswoman Just Demanded an 'Underground Railroad for Abortion'
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement