Report: EPA tested deadly pollutants on humans to push Obama admin’s agenda

The Daily Caller
April 2, 2014

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.”

Read the entire article

Planned Parenthood's Lies! and the EPA's Regulatory Tyranny! WE'RE HIT!!! TELEVISION

WE'RE HIT!!! TELEVISION
http://werehit.blogspot.com
http://werhit-mathenyahu.blogspot.com
April 5, 2011
Mark Matheny

Go to grassrootsaction.com and demand that CNN news tell the truth about PlanParenthood's Lies:
http://www.grassrootsaction.com/471/email_form.asp?PID=30456300&NID=1


Go to JBS.org and Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny:

Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny

Please act on this email alert immediately. Debate on H.R. 910 begins in the House at noon on April 5.

The EPA conveniently claims that the 1970 Clean Air Act has given the agency carte blanche in regulatory powers over all manufacturing companies and heavy industry, energy producers and commuters concerning greenhouse gases. However, The Clean Air Conference rejected adding greenhouse gases to the Clean Air Act twenty years ago. But, that seemingly strong rejection was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 2007 decision which allowed the EPA to list carbon as a pollutant.

The self-anointed and unelected regulators of the EPA would implement global warming policies that severely impact business growth and jobs especially in the areas of energy production, in turn affecting energy costs and the entire economy, by regulating carbon emissions. Every hospital, manufacturing facility, power plant, agricultural establishment, refinery, you name it, would be subjected to an endless stream of costly regulations dreamed up by EPA regulators.

The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, H.R. 910, was introduced by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and has 95 cosponsors. H.R. 910 would counter the EPA's unconstitutional power trip. The measure would prohibit the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, plain and simple. It is quite elementary that excessive regulation always increases prices; H.R. 910 is an attempt to protect consumers and industry from high energy prices, and also returns regulation of fuel economy to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Global warmists and rabid environmentalists are labeling H.R. 910 a "rebuke" to all the scientists at the EPA and around the world who believe anthropogenic global warming to be an unequivocal truth based on consensus. Of course, other scientists in the tens of thousands disagree. The "national security" mantra has already been trotted out by environmentalists as they also claim the EPA has only the nation's health, welfare and reducing dependence on foreign oil at heart. Climate changers are trying to further discredit the bill by asserting Republicans are just carrying out the agenda of fossil fuel interests; they believe Congress has no business micro-managing regulatory issues "best left to scientific experts." Such an attitude disregards the proper role of Congress in our Constitutional system.

The bill was marked up on March 15, and approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee to be voted on before Easter. Debate in the House begins at noon tomorrow, April 5.

Manufacturing associations and organizations, and energy producers -- oil and gas to nuclear and coal -- all oppose any EPA regulation of greenhouse gases because they know and understand the impact on their products and services, and employees. The surprise has come with labor unions now entering the debate, normally huge supporters of all Democrat policies. Unions composed of utility workers, boilermakers, and mine workers are adamantly opposed to the EPA's regulatory expansion because they contend hundreds of thousands of workers' jobs may be on the line due to just a few of the new rules set forth. Even the steelworkers union is treading with caution and says the EPA needs to be "more mindful of the costs" of such regulations.

If you are in favor of reining in the unconstitutional overreach of the EPA concerning carbon emissions, contact your senators and representatives and have them support H.R. 910 and S. 482, the companion bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. James Inofe (R-Okla.). As of April 4, H.R. 910 has 95 cosponsors and S. 482 has 43 cosponsors.

Thanks,
Your friends at The John Birch Society

EPA Whistleblower Criticizes Global Warming Science and Policy in New Peer-Reviewed Study

Study Shows Claims of Catastrophic Warming Are Overwhelmingly Contradicted By Real-Word Data
Competitive Enterprise Institute

By Christine Hall

April 01, 2011

Washington, D.C., April 1, 2011 – The scientific hypotheses underlying global warming alarmism are overwhelmingly contradicted by real-world data, and for that reason economic studies on the alleged benefits of controlling greenhouse gas emissions are baseless.  That’s the finding of a new peer-reviewed report by a former EPA whistleblower.

Dr. Alan Carlin, now retired, was a career environmental economist at EPA when CEI broke the story of his negative report on the agency’s proposal to regulate greenhouse gases in June, 2009.  Dr. Carlin’s supervisor had ordered him to keep quiet about the report and to stop working on global warming issues.  EPA’s attempt to silence Dr. Carlin became a highly-publicized embarrassment to the agency, given Administrator Lisa Jackson’s supposed commitment to transparency.

Dr. Carlin’s new study, A Multidisciplinary, Science-Based Approach to the Economics of Climate Change, is published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.  It finds that fossil fuel use has little impact on atmospheric CO2 levels.  Moreover, the claim that atmospheric CO2 has a strong positive feedback effect on temperature is contradicted on several grounds, ranging from low atmospheric sensitivity to volcanic eruptions, to the lack of ocean heating and the absence of a predicted tropical “hot spot.”

However, most economic analyses of greenhouse gas emission controls, such as those being imposed by EPA, have been conducted with no consideration of the questionable nature of the underlying science.  For that reason, according to Dr. Carlin, the actual “economic benefits of reducing CO2 emissions may be about two orders of magnitude less” than what is claimed in those reports.

Sam Kazman, CEI General Counsel, stated, “One of the major criticisms of Dr. Carlin’s EPA report was that it was not peer-reviewed, even though peer-review was neither customary for internal agency assessments, nor was it possible due to the time constraints imposed on Dr. Carlin by the agency.  For that reason, we are glad to see this expanded version of Dr. Carlin’s report now appear as a peer-reviewed study.”

Read the full report: A Multidisciplinary, Science-Based Approach to the Economics of Climate Change

See also the CEI OnPoint, “Clearing the Air on the EPA's False Regulatory Benefit-Cost Estimates and Its Anti-Carbon Agenda” by Garrett A. Vaughn

Enterprise Institute's Fred Smith: Strip EPA Before It Kills Economy

Newsmax.com

Friday, 01 Apr 2011

By Henry J. Reske and Matthew Belvedere

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is an out-of-control operation that imperils America’s future as it crusades to regulate every aspect of life, from light bulbs to washing machines, Competitive Enterprise Institute President Fred Smith tells Newsmax.TV.

“The first thing that needs to be done is to strip the EPA of its ability to destroy America’s energy future and therefore America’s economic future,” said Smith, who founded the nonprofit public policy group in 1984.

The EPA is “hell-bent” on regulating CO2, Smith said during a Newsmax interview at a recent dinner in Washington, D.C., adding that allowing the EPA to regulate every use of energy in the country is a massive expansion of government authority “much bigger than Obamacare, which in its own way is every bit as destructive.”

Story continues below video.



“The EPA is a rogue organization,” he said. “It is totally out of control. It’s trying to basically micromanage everything from light bulbs, to the air conditioners we sell, to the washing machines, to our lives. I mean probably our very lives because there are too many of us; they want less of us on our planet.”

Smith’s Competitive Enterprise Institute promotes free enterprise and limited government and deals in a wide range of policy issues including energy, environment, and business and finance. The group also focuses on regulatory agencies, Smith said.

“Regulation is the tool of death to any smaller firm and entrepreneurial firms are always small,” he said. “You stomp out the seeds of tomorrow and you have no plants for tomorrow.”

As to efforts to reduce government spending, Smith said, “Republicans and Democrats and America has to recognize that when you have got a $1.5 trillion deficit and you’re worried about cutting the budget by $60 or $70 billion, you’re a way from being serious about the issue.”

“There is sort of a mock show going on. We haven’t even talked about entitlements, we haven’t talked about the military budget, how many wars can American fight without declarations of war and so on . . . All of that together means America is nonsustainable. It must stop; it will stop. What Congress had to realize is if it doesn’t move quickly, and the administration doesn’t move quickly that crash could be disastrous to the stability of our economy.”

Obama Energy Secretary Promises “Massive” Coal Plant Closures

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 10, 2011

Image: Department of Energy
Obama Energy Secretary Steven Chu has launched the next phase of the White House’s publicly stated agenda to bankrupt the coal industry via EPA regulations after announcing the prospect of “massive” coal plant closures even as Texas and other states suffer rolling blackouts as a result of maxed-out power plants that cannot cope with demand.
The Obama administration’s strict enforcement of draconian EPA regulations has led to new clean-burning coal-fired plants being mothballed and other existing ones being shut down, which has in turn led to Texas and other states becoming energy-dependent, leading to shortages and blackouts exacerbated by freezing temperatures.
Despite White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer’s brazen lie in claiming that the blackouts are solely a result of “mechanical failures,” the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the agency that oversees the state’s power, confirmed this morning that the threat of blackouts was ongoing as a result of a “maxed out grid”.
This “maxed out grid” is a consequence of federally enforced EPA restrictions that have led to the delay, mothballing and closing down of coal-fired plants. In Texas, approval for the much-needed Las Brisas Energy Center has been delayed for 3 years as a result of EPA meddling in Texas’ energy policy.

Read the entire article

EPA May Give 1st Approval of Nanosilver for Fabrics

AOL.com
Andrew Schneider

Nanotech socks like these could soon receive tentative EPA approval.

Senior Public Health Correspondent

(Aug. 18) -- A Swiss chemical producer may soon be the first company to receive approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to use nanosilver to make clothing smell better, stay cleaner and destroy germs.


However, health scientists say the nanoparticles will wash out with the rinse water and could cause unknown environmental and health problems downstream.

The EPA said that it may issue "conditional approval" to HeiQ Materials AG, a producer of nanosized additives, for the use of a nanosilver pesticide as a new active ingredient in fabrics.

Read the entire article