Trump's Drug Price Announcement Had Some Drama Today
Does the Democrats' Chaos Strategy Work?
He Threw a Sandwich at a Federal Agent – Now a Jury Has...
The Left Wants AT&T to Unplug ICE (and They'll Unplug You, Too)
The Daily Beast Feels Picked on by the White House; Mary Bruce...
The UK's Backdoor Plan to Ban Car Ownership
Delaware's Permit-to-Purchase Law Not Going Into Effect Without a Fight
MI Poll: Mike Rogers Trounces Dems; Dixon Jumps to Lead Over James if...
Mamdani Allies Threaten Primary Challenges to Push His Agenda Through City Hall
Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser Under Investigation for Qatar Trip, Report Says
SCOTUS Revives Trump's Transgender Passport Rule
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Targets Roblox for Hosting ‘Digital Playground of Predat...
Fiber Laser Expert Convicted by Federal Jury of Espionage and Theft of Trade...
Sen. Kennedy Plans to Introduce Bills to Withhold Congressional Pay During Shutdown
19 Alleged Fraudsters Arrested for Scamming Over 500 US Seniors Out of $40M
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement