I'm Stunned USA Today Published This Op-Ed From a Dem About Trump's State...
This Always Happens With These Anti-ICE Stories in the Media
This State's Lawmakers Are Pushing a Bill That Would Ban Facial Recognition Technology
Top Baton Rouge Aide Indicted for Stealing Taxpayer Funds in 'Kickback' Scheme
This Is What Marco Rubio Said When Asked About North Korea
What Will Stop the Iranian Regime's Oppression and Murder of Its People?
The Media Once Scolded Us for Using a Certain Label They Now Love
Illegal Alien Hurt Three Kids While Evading Arrest. Guess Who the Mayor Blames.
California Dems Took Nearly $1B From a Solar Panel Project to Build a...
Vice President Vance Destroyed Tony Evers for Refusing to Help Clean Up Fraud...
JD Vance Says There Is ‘No Chance’ of Prolonged War as US Warships...
Here's How Mamdani's Snow Shoveling Program is Going
Steve Hilton's CalDOGE Says It Uncovered Over $900M in State Fraud in Second...
What the World Needs Now
Illinois Pair Convicted in $5 Million Multistate Pyramid Scheme Case
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