EPA Human Testing

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,897
6,003
Downrange
MILLOY: EPA’s illegal human experiments could break Nuremberg Code

The Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says no law empowers any judge to stop it from conducting illegal scientific experiments on seniors, children and the sick.
That astounding assertion will be tested Friday, when a federal district court in Alexandria decides whether it has jurisdiction to hear claims made by the American Tradition Institute that EPA researchers are exposing unwary and genetically susceptible senior citizens to air pollutants the agency says can cause a variety of serious cardiac and respiratory problems, including sudden death.

The American Tradition Institute contends in its lawsuit that the EPA has broken virtually every rule established to protect human subjects used in scientific experiments, including the Nuremberg Code, ethics principles for human experimentation adopted following the Nuremberg Trials at the end of World War II, and similar U.S. regulations known as “The Common Rule.”

Rather than defending itself against the serious allegations made by the institute, the EPA instead has said it is essentially above the law and the federal court has no business hearing those serious charges.

The EPA claims the court has no jurisdiction to hear the case under the Clean Air Act (CAA): “Nothing in the CAA provides a meaningful standard to evaluate what air pollution EPA chooses to study or how. To the contrary, the CAA gives EPA broad discretion in the subject matter of its research program. Congress broadly mandated that EPA study the health effects of air pollution.”

Of course, Congress most likely thought the EPA would conduct such research in a lawful manner.
 
"?..First of all, the experiments have been ongoing for 10 years according to this article. Obama has been President for 4. I know math is hard for conservatives, but that means 6 years of these experiments happened under Bush. Secondly, as a researcher I can tell you that there is strict protocol on doing dangerous experiments on humans. But they happen all the time, and the point is to learn about the danger in the safe conditions of the lab so we can save millions of people who don't have a doctor nearby and are exposed to the same stuff.
And its not the EPA doing this. Multiple highly respected universities are also implicated. Do you seriously think they would stoop to that level? I know you guys hate Obama and the EPA, but you are also saying that a bunch of great universities are also filled with Nazis....."

Another person's on the commentary posted by you above.

I will not even give merit to if this is yellow journalism or not as I don't have the time to research it now.

However, as for the EPA's defending the law suit; they do this all the time. There are law firms that exist only to challenge federal agencies, as there are those live solely to bring suit against companies. A status challenge is the first defense in any of these cases and is normal.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
So it matters more to you that this was done under Bush rather than on unsuspecting persons?

Believe it or not, its now called Obama Administration EPA.

Strict protocols on unsuspecting participants?

Rather than defending itself against the serious allegations made by the institute, the EPA instead has said it is essentially above the law and the federal court has no business hearing those serious charges.

This has a lot to say...EPA already has had their asses kicked in courts with this attitude in other areas. And with EPA making these kind of remarks about their responsibility says loads too. Implied guilt.

Your highly respected universities are doing this in conjunction with EPA...or don't you know how gov't research goes?

Gov't funded research and continued monetary support works just like your research on congressional lobbyist endorsements.

Why didn't you in fairness list the couple of hundred comments against EPA, I could only find maybe two against it. LOL


Chillelegans Soulphoenix • 3 hours ago


6 years of those experiments happened under Bush you moron. Read the article. Corsair Chillelegans • 17 minutes ago


Yes 6 yrs under Bush, but would they have taken the stance that they are above the law under Bush? Maybe, maybe not. It is disturbing either way.

Sic Semper Tyrannis • 5 hours ago


The real issue here is not the research, bad as that is. It is the EPA's argument that they are beyond any sort of judicial review. The Founding Fathers warned us about having more government than we absolutely need. This is the logical result of unfettered gov't. As they say, power corrupts... The EPA now sees themselves as the ultimate authority and power.
 
Do a search on experimental research in the US and you will find numerous examples of experiments done on people by government agencies and private firms.


If researchers knowingly and willfully exposed people to danger they should be prosecuted.
 
So it matters more to you that this was done under Bush rather than on unsuspecting persons?

Believe it or not, its now called Obama Administration EPA.

Strict protocols on unsuspecting participants?



This has a lot to say...EPA already has had their asses kicked in courts with this attitude in other areas. And with EPA making these kind of remarks about their responsibility says loads too. Implied guilt.

Your highly respected universities are doing this in conjunction with EPA...or don't you know how gov't research goes?

Gov't funded research and continued monetary support works just like your research on congressional lobbyist endorsements.

Why didn't you in fairness list the couple of hundred comments against EPA, I could only find maybe two against it. LOL
You posted that it was Obama's EPA. Yet the "article" you posted points out a single program that was started 10 years ago.

I posted someone else's comments on the blog. Finding a reasonable moderate comment on that site is like you trying to find a conservative comment on Rachel Maddow's blog.

I do know how research at universities is done, and how they are funded. I also know how many good things come for research at these universities.

You choose to damn the EPA. I will not even rehash all the good that has come as a result of the EPA.

You will never be convicted that anything good will ever come from anything inherently governmental. Enjoy your clean water and clean air, then throw darts where you can.

All you need to do is look up the list of sites covered under the RCRA (Superfund) and you will see how well corporate America does in policing itself when it comes to the environment.
 
Somehow this doesn't surprise me. The EPA is what is keeping the US from drilling it's oil reserves that would possibly bring gas prices down to a dollar.
 
Somehow this doesn't surprise me. The EPA is what is keeping the US from drilling it's oil reserves that would possibly bring gas prices down to a dollar.
There is so much bs in that statement I wouldn't know where to begin.

Is that you Michelle Bachmann?
 
There is so much bs in that statement I wouldn't know where to begin.

Is that you Michelle Bachmann?

No, it's your mom.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

Ever notice that when there is talk of drilling for oil, the protestors come out to try to stop it? We always hear about the dangers to the environment and our health and stop it any way we can. Currently we are to stop hydrofracking, yet most don't even know what it is.

http://www.dangersoffracking.com/

I know, I must be confusing environmentalists with the EPA. Piece of advice, when it comes to government, things don't/won't happen without its blessing. You were right to say this discussion started with Bush. It hasn't been stopped meaning it serves the government's purpose...whatever that is.
 
I'm actually not too fond of drilling in waters. Why? Because I believe that oil, or any pollutant, travels farther in water and is harder to contain. I'm all for land drilling, but like anything there are risks. There are risks with desk jobs, too.

Whether it's the Fed or Big Oil, if it cuts our gas prices it would be worth it. We can even sell it and become part of OPEC :lol: :lol: :lol:
Wow I almost said the OPEC part with a straight face.

But make no mistake, that if the Fed needs the oil, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. If war broke out and we needed oil to fuel our attack arsenal, the government will take it.
 
I am still a bit confused. Are you advocating that the Fed take over US oil reserves or not? If you are not then I am confused because I do not understand how gas prices could come down to $1 a gallon.
 
I am not 'advocating' either or. In a perfect world, the US would be selling oil and passing the savings along with the savings from importing foreign oil, to its citizens. How this happens? Well I couldn't care less if its the gov or big oil. But since government is government they'll get theirs.
 
In a perfect world I would have cured cancer and been a world famous F1 driver in my off time.

Since we live in reality how about you explain how US drilling oil will give us $1 gas. If we are selling oil at the same time we are importing oil that seems to defeat the purpose. We consume over 18 million barrels of oil per day. We are only producing 8 million a day. The two largest producers are Russia and SA at 9 million a day. In order for us to meet our daily needs we would need to either double our production (more than the top two producers in the world) or completely take over the production of one of the top two producers.

So please explain how this:


Somehow this doesn't surprise me. The EPA is what is keeping the US from drilling it's oil reserves that would possibly bring gas prices down to a dollar.

I'm specifically interested in the part about gas selling at $1. I really want to know how that works on a free oil market with other nations buying oil.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #14
You posted that it was Obama's EPA. Yet the "article" you posted points out a single program that was started 10 years ago.

I posted someone else's comments on the blog. Finding a reasonable moderate comment on that site is like you trying to find a conservative comment on Rachel Maddow's blog.

I do know how research at universities is done, and how they are funded. I also know how many good things come for research at these universities.

You choose to damn the EPA. I will not even rehash all the good that has come as a result of the EPA.

You will never be convicted that anything good will ever come from anything inherently governmental. Enjoy your clean water and clean air, then throw darts where you can.

All you need to do is look up the list of sites covered under the RCRA (Superfund) and you will see how well corporate America does in policing itself when it comes to the environment.

A single program purportedly testing on unknown elderly.....?

Here is the first sentence from the posted article:

The Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says no law empowers any judge to stop it from conducting illegal scientific experiments on seniors, children and the sick.

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]So EPA is already admitting it has done these dastardly deeds?[/background]​
So EPA is above the law?

I am aware good comes from gov't funded research....Climate change is a good example of well founded gov't research.

All the good in the world done by EPA goes out the window with this kind of reports.

I don't know if you've noticed EPA has a very bad habit of ignoring due process and a little thing called the Constitution. It has been coming out in courts recently going back at least ten or more years. Fining people, confiscating property without due process and muscling citizens around. EPA thinks it is God and the US Courts are saying no they are not.

During the Bush years, did you quit or take an eight year leave of absence?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #15
The EPA has a dirty secret — pollution in this country has already been significantly reduced, and now we have a lot of bureaucrats looking for ways to justify their employment.
 
Back
Top