Originally Published at Nutritional Anarchy
Our friends and protectors at the Environmental Deception Protection Agency are so adamant about protecting us from air pollution that they are conducting dangerous experiments on human beings, some of them children.
Just to emphasize the importance of your soon-to-be-due carbon taxes, the EPA exposed vulnerable members of our population to deadly pollutants: the elderly, people with chronic health problems, and children. What’s more – they never warned those participating in the study that the toxins they would be exposed to carried with them the risk of cancer and death.
Victims Participants were exposed to diesel exhaust particulates. One study was called “Asthma in Susceptible Children”. Here are some pictures that show the process of the experiment.
The website JunkScience.com first called out the EPA for their unethical experiments back in February of last year, when the EPA scrubbed their site of information regarding the unethical particulate experiment on children. (You can read their report HERE.) This week, JunkScience went even further with their exposure of the twisted experiments:
Let’s see if we can summarize the human experiments scandal.
I have an ongoing effort, along with many others to do battle with the EPA on air pollution research that violates scientific rules on how to prove causation.
Milloy and I found out the EPA was doing human experiments under the radar exposing subjects to what EPA said was lethal and toxic, even carcinogenic air pollution.
Here’s where we are in 2014:
Either the EPA is sponsoring horrific human experiments, or they are lying to the Congress about the toxicity of air pollution. (source)
Their article on this topic is absolutely a must-read – find it HERE.
Let’s revisit the last line of that excerpt:
Either the EPA is sponsoring horrific human experiments, or they are lying to the Congress about the toxicity of air pollution.
According to a report by the agency’s Inspector General, the EPA got consent forms from 81 people for 5 experiments over the course of 2010-2011.
The participants had an assortment of conditions, from asthma to heart problems. Some were children, and some were elderly. These people were exposed to particulate toxins that were up to 50 times greater than the agency had previously established was a danger to human health.
It may be no surprise that the volunteers were not informed of the extent of the extreme levels of toxicity that they were being exposed to. The EPA did not provide them with the extent of the long-term risks involved with inhaling the diesel particulates.
The Daily Caller reported on the IG’s findings about the shady human experiments:
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.”
According to the IG’s report, “only one of five studies’ consent forms provided the subject with information on the upper range of the pollutant” they would be exposed to, but even more alarming is that only “two of five alerted study subjects to the risk of death for older individuals with cardiovascular disease.”
Three of the studies exposed people to high levels of PM and two of the studies exposed people to high levels of diesel exhaust and ozone. Diesel exhaust contains 40 toxic air contaminants, including 19 that are known carcinogens and PM. The EPA has publicly warned of the dangers of PM, but seemed to downplay them in their scientific studies on humans.
“This lack of warning about PM,” the IG’s report notes, “is also different from the EPA’s public image about PM.” (source)
Now, if you’re wondering if they really knew how dangerous this substance is, you can take it right from former EPA head kahuna Lisa Jackson’s testimony to Congress back in 2011. Her exact words were:
“Particulate matter causes premature death. It doesn’t make you sick. It’s directly causal to dying sooner than you should.”
Could it be any more clear than that? Did these scientists attend the Josef Mengele School of Scientific Ethics? If these participants were cats or bunnies, there would be protests, marches, and sit-ins. It would be front page news and disturbing photos would be posted all over Facebook. But…it was human beings and they were deceived, and it seems that nobody really cares.
It’s probably no surprise that several of the participants became seriously ill during the studies.
No one was killed during the test, but a source close to the issue says that one test subject — a 58-year-old obese woman with medical problems and a family history of heart disease — was ordered to go to the hospital by the EPA after being exposed to “ambient air pollution particles” in October 2010.
Other test subjects also experienced health problems during their testing. One subject developed a persistent cough after being exposed to ozone for 15 minutes in April 2011 and two other subjects suffered from “cardiac arrhythmias” during testing in 2010 after being exposed to “clean air.” (source)
You may be asking why. Why would an agency charged with the responsibility of keeping people safe and healthy go full-out mad scientist with human experiments?
Because carbon taxes, that’s why.
The purpose of this study is to demonize the trucking industry and day to day drivers. It does nothing to establish a link between lung disease and the enormous factories that bellow out toxic fumes into the air.
The purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency is not to protect us, the citizens. It is to promote the agenda of the financial elite. And that agenda is pure Agenda 21 – ownership of all of the resources through climate change scare tactics, regulations, fees, and fines that make it impossible for everyday people to live and prosper independently.
One controversy after another can be attributed to the EPA, an agency charged with protecting the air we breathe, the soil in which we grow our food and the water that we drink. At the bottom of each of those controversies can be found ties to the conspiracies of the big businesses that really run the country. Decisions are being auctioned off to industry lobbyists with the most money and influence.
Environmental protection is only the rule of thumb if it goes along with Agenda 21 – the EPA is all over the green agenda in cases that benefit the redistribution of wealth, but the agency completely ignores blatant crimes against the earth if it involves fracking for the benefit of a natural gas company. (source)
Most recently, the vigilant advocates at the EPA approved even higher levels of deadly glyphosate to be allowed. This is great news for their friends in Big Biotech like Dow and Monsanto, but for the rest of us, a potential death sentence. Despite irrefutable evidence of toxicity and death with the previous allowable levels, the corrupt agency came to the conclusion that the allowable levels should actually be raised instead of lowered. We need only to look at the devastating health problems on the Hawaiin island of Molokai to realize that this is a terrible idea. With the full approval of the EPA, the island was turned into an experimental petri dish by Monsanto, and people died and suffered long-term health indications, not from consuming food tainted by glyphosate, but from the chemical drift from the sprayed fields.
When you look at incidents like this, the pattern of corruption becomes so clear that even the most die-hard government supporter has to see that the only interests that the EPA looks after are the interests of the highest bidder.
The EPA is willing to do whatever they must in order to forward their agendas, up to and including human sacrifice experiments. It is now a matter of record that they tested on children, the elderly, and the ill in order to “prove” something they had already allegedly proven. They twist science to make it say what they want it to say, whether that is that…
- Radiation is actually good for you in small doses.
- We were wrong, the previous levels of allowable radiation weren’t far too conservative, you can be radiated until you glow and it won’t hurt you as long as we can still allow seafood from Japan to be sold here.
- We were wrong – even though that poison they spray on your food causes breast cancer and gut disease, additional poison is perfectly fine.
- They covered up the crime of Monsanto deliberately tainting Lysol with deadly dioxin.
- They’ve flat out refused to ban a pesticide by Dow that contains a chemical component of deadly Agent Orange.
- (source)
Instead of being an unbiased agency looking out for public interest, the EPA is merely a puppet for industry. They spread disinformation from beneath a cloak of benevolence and authority. They use the trust that people have put in them to deceive and manipulate the public in favor of big business and the United Nations.
I’ll leave you with this condescendingly warm-and-fuzzy propaganda from the EPA’s website. This is how they explain everything that they do. Risk Assessment.
Human health risk assessment…[is]… a process of characterizing the nature of an environmental risk (in many cases, a chemical exposure) and determining how large that risk is to humans. It consists of four steps: (1) hazard identification, (2) dose-response assessment, (3) exposure assessment, and (4) risk characterization. I will discuss each in future posts.
So why is human health risk assessment important? Well, chemicals are a part of life. Some exist naturally; some are made by humans and can be released to the environment. They bring benefits to our lives, but like most things, they also come with risks.
Let’s consider a hypothetical example. Suppose a factory produces something you use every day. To make this product, the company uses several different chemicals, and some chemicals are produced during the manufacturing process as byproducts. Some are released to the air and water and may get into the soil. Let’s say this industrial site is located next to a river that leads to your local drinking water plant. Are any of the chemicals in that water? Are the levels safe for you to drink? What about your child? What levels of the chemicals are safe for you to breathe?
Human health risk assessment helps answer questions like these. It is a tool that helps local, state and federal governments make decisions about what levels of chemicals can be in drinking water; what additional controls are needed to keep levels emitted to the air at a safe level; and what levels need to be achieved to clean up a contaminated site. From a public health perspective, this is pretty important stuff. (source)
The risk (to us) is nearly always outweighed by the benefit (to corporations).
Hi Daisy- You are a really good writer. Thank you for what you do. My comment here is a bit on and off topic.
I was wondering if you could do an article on the concrete climate laws that we are already subject to. AB32 in CA is already in effect. Also the Waxman Markey bill applies to all states. Thanks Henry.
What I’m trying to say is everybody talks about the crazy warmers and their latest antics, like cow farts creating climate change. Meanwhile EVERY county, city and town has been wined and dined for the last 10+ yrs. by facilitators of ICLEI. All they have to do is wave GRANT money and your local commissioners and planning dept. and they will include these laws in the General Plan.
In my case, our county revised its GP with 500 pages of ICLEI hoodoo. Needless to say, this incorporates AB32 into LOCAL ENFORCEABLE law.
The GHG reduction game has begun and nobody even knows.
We will be FORCED to reduce GHG by 60% in 20 yrs. (2035) and 83% by 2050. Bill Gates wants us “Carbon Neutral” by 2050.
If and when your county, city or town revises its GP or Master Plan, you will be under the same weight.
Watching the county BOS meeting last week, they are a hair away from BANNING ALL BURNING in this rural county. Wood stoves, fireplaces, yard debris. After reading your recent article on EPA and wood stoves I read another that claims EPA is trying to set a 15 PPM cap on WS emissions. This is IMPOSSIBLE.
Then the GP goes on and on about “reducing travel” and “mitigating travel damage”. This is serious stuff.
I recently viewed Deborah Tavares’ you tube on the CAP (Climate Action Plan). This is the “goods”. If your locality has adopted a CAP, you’re hosed. And we all will be.
Why are they creating a police state and wanting the guns? We won’t just be starving- we’ll be dying from heat stroke and hypothermia because the poor, who cannot afford the inevitable thousand pound carbon fee on their car, and increased energy prices, like in England will be out of luck.
To conclude, I wish that the .alt community would stop highlighting warmist psychopathy and their interest in a carbon tax and get down to facts. They don’t WANT a tax, they’ve GOT it already. CA has already implemented Cap In Trade and is #2 behind the EU.