Norwegian Olympian: I Won the Bronze. Also, I Cheated on My Girlfriend
Justice Department Wanted Michigan’s Voters’ Data — a Judge Had Other Ideas
Senate Democrats Are Gearing Up for a Fight to Protect Sanctuary Cities
Iran Is Preparing for a US Airstrike – Here's What Trump Is Saying
Antifa Is Now Targeting Moderate Congressional Democrats in Washington State
Man's Best Friend: Mystery Dog Helps Louisville Police Find Missing Toddler
Sen. Alex Padilla Gets Dragged for Sharing a Letter From Detained Migrant Child
The January Jobs Report Is Here
TX State Rep. Harrison Calls for Gene Wu to Be Stripped of Committee...
Check Out This Ridiculous Axios Headline About Plummeting Crime Rates
Police Released Person of Interest Detained in Guthrie Disappearance. Here's What We Know.
West Virginia Senate Has Good News on Gun Rights for Legal Adults Under...
Pam Bondi Goes Toe-to-Toe With Democrats in Explosive House Judiciary Hearing
Justice Jackson Defends Her Grammys Appearance
Steve Hilton Promises a ‘Political Revolution’ in California, and He’s Leading in the...
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