A Complete Waste of Space

WASHINGTON (AP) — An internal investigation issued Wednesday found that the Environmental Protection Agency failed to disclose long-term cancer risks and a small chance of death to 81 human test subjects who consented to breathe in diesel exhaust and other pollutants during experiments.

The inspector general's report released said that at least some people participating in five studies conducted in 2010 and 2011 would like to have known whether a study involves a chance of death, no matter how small.

The Environmental Protection Agency has been conducting dangerous experiments on humans over the past few years in order to justify more onerous clean air regulations.

The agency conducted tests on people with health issues and the elderly, exposing them to high levels of potentially lethal pollutants, without disclosing the risks of cancer and death, according to a newly released government report.

These experiments exposed people, including those with asthma and heart problems, to dangerously high levels of toxic pollutants, including diesel fumes, reads a EPA inspector general report obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The EPA also exposed people with health issues to levels of pollutants up to 50 times greater than the agency says is safe for humans.

The EPA conducted five experiments in 2010 and 2011 to look at the health effects of particulate matter, or PM, and diesel exhaust on humans. The IG’s report found that the EPA did get consent forms from 81 people in five studies. But the IG also found that “exposure risks were not always consistently represented.”

“Further, the EPA did not include information on long-term cancer risks in its diesel exhaust studies’ consent forms,” the IG’s report noted. “An EPA manager considered these long-term risks minimal for short-term study exposures” but “human subjects were not informed of this risk in the consent form.”

callmeslick wrote:inexcusable study. The second piece is the usual, predictable jump-to-conclusions. So, Dawg, would you admit that every administration does things which are wrong, even inexcusable? If so, then, why focus on Obama for the matter of a rather smallish group of EPA studies. If not, how on earth can you make such a claim?

callmeslick wrote:admittedly, no comparison. The egregious, obscene violations of the prior administration in foreign policy, use of military, lying to the public to justify a war, and ignoring most environmental issues to the point of criminality make it hard to see much wrong at all from the current admin. Still, I admit that Obama's admin is not perfect. But, for instance, the example that Dawg cites here is bureaucratic in nature. Let's face it, at no time did discussion of this study cross Obama's desk. Being President doesn't work that way.

Pudfark wrote:with relevant facts, supporting evidence and a link...