EPAfinalSolutionIn 2010 and 2011 the EPA conducted studies that exposed 81 “human study subjects” (what you and I know as “people”) to concentrated airborne particles or diesel exhaust emissions, ostensibly to learn more about the effects of short-term exposure. The experiments, which required test subjects to sit in a small chamber and breathe in hazardous levels of pollution for two hours, led to migraines, cardiac arrhythmia, decreased lung function, tachycardia and atrial fibrillation in the subjects.

Yup. The EPA is in the gas chamber business.

I’m not being dramatic here. It’s a real gas chamber. The EPA says that their test facility “has the capability to deliver gaseous pollutants at precise concentrations across a broad range of atmospheric conditions.” When you brag about your secret program that involves putting citizens into a confined space and gassing them, you really want to make sure you work the word “concentration” in there. No other word will do.

The only reason you, me, or anyone else even knows about these experiments is a recent report by the EPA’s Inspector General. The watchdog group has no problem with the nature or means of the experiment, but it does ever-so-lightly slap the EPA on the wrist because “exposure risks were not always consistently represented” to test subjects. You see, some of the scientists who ran the tests felt that these risks, which also include cancer and death, were not big enough to require warning the guinea pigs … I mean “human subjects.” Turns out that was a mistake. As the Inspector General’s report helpfully states: “Evidence suggests that at least some human study subjects would like to know if the study involves risk of death, even if the death risk is small.”

A couple of things to discuss here… continue

By Ryan Callahan

Ryan Callahan is a writer, director, and sandwich enthusiast. Ryan believes that taking care of the environment is important because that’s where the animals live. Animals make the best parts of the sandwich.