Here's the GOP Senator Who Caused a Ruckus Regarding the Deal to Avert...
Of Course, the Liberal Media Had This Reaction to Don Lemon's Arrest
The Protesters Who Crashed a Minneapolis Church Service Are Finding Out Why It...
Seattle Just Lost a CHOP Wrongful Death Lawsuit. Here's How Much the City...
Border Czar Tom Homan Reveals That ICE, FBI Have Located More Than 145,000...
Democrats Don't Understand 'Basic Economics'
Has Nick Shirley Discovered Even More Fraud in Minnesota
Senate Approves Bill To Avoid Government Shutdown
Proposed Settlement Would Force Ice Giants to Divest Across 5 States in $126M...
This Senator Just Launched a New Bill to Shake Up Remittance Payments
Ex-Google Engineer Convicted of Stealing AI Secrets for China in Landmark Espionage Case
This Texas Republican Congressional Candidate Is Asking for Amnesty for Illegals
Sitting Detroit Judge, Lawyer Allegedly Looted Vulnerable Wards
The White House Has Some Patriotic Plans to Celebrate America's 250th Birthday
Hackers Just Took Down This Massive ICE Doxxing Website
Tipsheet

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