A suit filed in federal court charges the Environmental Protection Agency with conducting illegal and potentially lethal experiments on hundreds of financially needy people who were paid $12/hour without even informing them of risks. Based upon thousands of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, procedures undertaken since 2004 and continuing through the Obama administration exposed subjects at the University of North Carolina’s School of Medicine to very high levels of toxic air pollutants. Many of these subjects were already health-impaired, suffering from asthma, metabolic syndrome, and aging (up to 75 years old).
One of the pollutants was a fine particulate substance known as PM2.5, a major component of diesel exhaust which EPA had determined to be unsafe for inhalation at any level, particularly for health-impaired and elderly populations. The administration’s own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Council chairman, Jon Samet, stated that in a 2011 commentary published in the New England Journal of Medicine. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) reiterated EPA’s position on this in a February 2012 letter to EPA air chief, Gina McCarthy.
It all sounds rather horrific on the face of it. Though we should perhaps be cautious of the reports given the source of the article is Larry Bell. Bell is a climate change denialist and author of “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax” and the suit has been brought by the American Tradition Institute.
According to Sourcewatch the American Tradition Institute is part of a broader network of groups with close ties to energy interests that have long fought greenhouse gas regulation. Our investigation also finds that ATI has indirect connections with the Koch brothers, Art Pope and other conservative donors seeking to expand their political influence. Specific claims aimed at the foundation include:
In 2011 In 2011, ATI sued the University of Virginia to get access to the emails of climatologist Michael Mann and in 2012, the Guardian posted a confidential memo prepared by a fellow of the American Tradition Institute (ATI) that advises how to build a national movement of wind farm protesters. Among its main recommendations, the proposal calls for a national PR campaign aimed at causing “subversion in message of [wind] industry so that it effectively becomes so bad that no one wants to admit in public they are for it.” It suggests setting up “dummy businesses” to buy anti-wind billboards, and creating a “counter-intelligence branch” to track the wind energy industry. It also calls for spending $750,000 to create an organisation with paid staff and tax-exempt status dedicated to building public opposition to state and federal government policies encouraging the wind energy industry.
In 2010 During the 2010 elections, the Montana Commission of Political Practices found that the organization broke state campaign laws by failing to register as a political committee or report its donors and spending. The state suggested WTP/ATP was involved in corruption and money laundering.
So there is the possibility that the science he expounds in the article is possibly flawed.
So Skeptics what’s the truth of the matter – have the EPA conducted another Tuskegee experiment or is this an opportunistic lawsuit?