Skip to comments.Lawsuit: EPA Conducted Gas Chamber-like Experiments on Elderly, Infirm...(flashback)
Posted on 05/18/2013 7:12:11 PM PDT by blueyon
Lawsuit: EPA Conducted Gas Chamber-like Experiments on Elderly, Infirm at University of North Carolina
[T]he EPA has been conducting human experiments on people by piping diesel fumes from a running truck mixed with air into their lungs at a North Carolina university. The agency has ginned up yet another green crusade the lethal dangers of diesel fumes. They even had a gas chamber set up to accommodate the environmental research project that shockingly recalls the death camps in Poland.
Read more: http://joemiller.us/2012/10/lawsuit-epa-conducted-gas-chamber-like-experiments-on-elderly-infirm-at-university-of-north-carolina/#ixzz2ThSWxmIY
(Excerpt) Read more at joemiller.us ...
couldn’t they have just pitched tents by the LA Port and fed ‘em free food and meds.. might have been cheaper and more reliable a test, if we are going to be doing tests, that is, that reach so far into that delicate balance between science and boorsihness.
Heck, they could’ve put particulate sensors in the Lincoln or Holland Tunnels, while monitoring the PA cops and maintenance crews who work down there.
Selection criteria ..... Tea Party, Patriot, Conservative, Constitution, .....
The article does not say when these “tests” occurred, but still, the government needs to be brought to account. This is despicable. It doesn’t matter if it was done during the Bush years (I doubt that), but with all the other scandals Zero is having to endure, one more can’t help him. Anything to make him look like the evil incarnate that he his.
This is what the Nazis originally tried using vans. The people called them soul destroyers.
The Nazis complained that it didn’t kill fast enough. If you’ve seen the movie, “Conspiracy” when they talk about the bodies coming out pink, this is what they were talking about.
I am sure they could have just looked up this info from the Nazi records.
Click on the two links in the main article and get this....
those two stories are from OCTOBER last year and we are just now hearing about it??!!??
Somebody in the 0 administration has been covering stuff up again....
Here’s one of them:
It’s real. Local media covered it up quick. They always do for UNC...
This article is really misrepresenting the research done, and the reason the lawsuit was filed. It makes it sound like people were being thrown into gas chambers with highly lethal gases, and that is NOT what happened.
Like all research, this study was being conducted with IRB approval, and the study participants had the risks explained to them beforehand and signed statements that they understood the risks. Because a medical problem arose with one participant, she was taken to the hospital for testing and observation. The problem resolved itself within a couple of hours. The physicians conducting the study published a paper on the incident to warn other physicians who might conduct similar studies that this problem is a risk of this kind of study. The patient’s life was never endangered.
Lisa Jackson’s testimony (quoted in the linked article), “In testimony delivered to Congress in September of 2011, EPA chief Lisa Jackson claimed that exposure to fine particulate matter of 2.5 micronsor lesswas lethal” is also really misleading. She was saying the EPA’s rationale for trying to push such strict air pollution standards that we could shut down all industry and still not be able to meet the standards. The “lethality” of these particulates is based on studies showing that on days of high particulate matter density, more people die from asthma and other respiratory problems than on days of low particulate matter density. And the increase in numbers of deaths is so small as to be nearly hidden in the “noise” of the normal death rate. For instance, if on “normal” days, 1 out of 50,000 asthmatics die, on high particulate matter days, the rate might increase to 1.2 out of 50,000 asthmatics. That’s hardly “highly lethal.”
The entire lawsuit seems to have been filed for the purpose of making a political statement. While I normally like Steven Milloy, I do not like the fact that he stooped to engaging in political circus. That’s normally a tactic of the left. Yes, there are problems with the EPA overstepping its regulatory authority. But that’s not an excuse for circuses.
I am trying to find more out about this...I think the case was filed in 2006 or 7.......heads need to roll on this
While the air being tested probably was less bad than in heavy freeway traffic or next to a bus terminal or airport (ever smelled what it’s like next to Chicago O’Hare?) it still has a ghoulish sound.
Here is the original case report, as published in Environmental Health Perspectives: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279446/pdf/ehp.1103877.pdf
In case you are not familiar with how medical literature is written, the pertinent facts are these:
1) The proposed study and consent forms were reviewed and okayed by an ethics committee before any patients were tested. The study was explained to the patient and she had an opportunity to read the consent form before signing it.
2) The patient had a number of pre-existing conditions, including high blood pressure. Her father died at 57 from heart disease.
3) The patient herself was unaware of the medical problem when it occurred. It was detected because she was attached to a number of monitors. It fully resolved within two hours.
4) It is not clear that the incident occurred because of the study. The timing of the incident suggests a causal relationship, but is not definitive proof.
5) There is clearly no attempt to cover up anything. Obviously, had the study leads wanted to hide anything, they wouldn’t have published a case study on the incident.
There is nothing unusual about adverse events occurring during human medical studies, and, as adverse events go, this one was pretty mild.
Milloy did the right thing. Its against the law for EPA to do this. Someone should go to jail.
So now they are going Guatemala on Americans??
heard abt this at least a year ago or so
There is nothing illegal about doing research on human subjects. All of the proper procedures were followed. No human subject was harmed.
Steven Milloy’s lawsuit is for pure political circus. He seems to be making a statement about the discrepancy between the EPA’s declaration that exposure to particulates is “lethal” (it is not; it *may* marginally increase the likelihood of death of a person with respiratory illness) and that they consider such exposure so benign that they fund human studies on it.
Many people would say that the EPA is going too far with air pollution standards, and the particulate standards is one area. Do you really want the EPA to ban fireplaces and barbecues, which are a couple of sources of particulates? Because that’s what people like Lisa Jackson want when they testify how “lethal” these particles are.
While I agree with the statement Milloy seems to make here, I do not agree with his methods. He’s a good blog writer. He should have stuck with writing a blog highlighting how the EPA grossly exaggerates dangers to increase their regulatory power, while their own policies show they don’t consider these risks significant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.