And to think liberals crave more of this...

[P@triot]

This is the government that liberals worship, praise, defend, and crave more of. Besides being unconstitutional/ilegal, inept and incompetent, oppressive, and $17 trillion in debt, it is also immoral...

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency failed to disclose cancer risks to volunteers used in research studies on harmful pollutants, a government watchdog says.

The EPA, which warns of dangers from diesel exhaust and tiny particles in its rules to cut pollution, recruited people for tests on those pollutants in 2010 and 2011. Consent forms they got didn’t mention cancer because the agency considered the risks minimal from short-term exposure, the agency’s Office of Inspector General said in a report yesterday.

“When justifying a job-killing regulation, EPA argues exposure to particulate matter is deadly, but when they are conducting experiments, they say human exposure studies are not harmful,” Louisiana Republican Senator David Vitter said in a statement, reacting to the report.

EPA Failed to Disclose Cancer Risk to People in Studies - Bloomberg

 

[P@triot]

EPA Forced Children To Inhale Cancer-Causing Diesel Pollutants As Part Of Heinous Government Experiments

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government intentionally subjected children and adults to bizarre medical experiments that required them to inhale diesel pollutants known to contain cancer-causing chemicals. The experiments involved collecting diesel fumes from idling diesel trucks, then piping those fumes into enclosed chambers where U.S. test subjects were required to breathe them for hours at a time.

The EPA conducted these experiments on children and sick people(1), specifically choosing test subjects with metabolic syndrome and asthma, then securing them in bizarre "pollution containment rooms" to make sure they inhaled the cancer-causing particles. (See photo below.)

EPA forced children to inhale cancer-causing diesel pollutants as part of heinous government experiments

 

[P@triot]

Another heinous, unethical, and illegal experiment on unaware people under Dumbocrat leadership...

Tuskegee syphilis experiment

CDC - NCHHSTP - Tuskegee Study - Timeline

 

[P@triot]

EPA Forced Children To Inhale Cancer-Causing Diesel Pollutants As Part Of Heinous Government Experiments

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government intentionally subjected children and adults to bizarre medical experiments that required them to inhale diesel pollutants known to contain cancer-causing chemicals. The experiments involved collecting diesel fumes from idling diesel trucks, then piping those fumes into enclosed chambers where U.S. test subjects were required to breathe them for hours at a time.

The EPA conducted these experiments on children and sick people(1), specifically choosing test subjects with metabolic syndrome and asthma, then securing them in bizarre "pollution containment rooms" to make sure they inhaled the cancer-causing particles. (See photo below.)

EPA forced children to inhale cancer-causing diesel pollutants as part of heinous government experiments

Isn't it funny how Dumbocrats cry about "the children" every time there is a threat to their government handouts, yet they murder over 1 million babies per year and the one's that survive the Dumbocrat genocide they subject to heinous cancer-causing chemical experiments?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

EPA Forced Children To Inhale Cancer-Causing Diesel Pollutants As Part Of Heinous Government Experiments

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government intentionally subjected children and adults to bizarre medical experiments that required them to inhale diesel pollutants known to contain cancer-causing chemicals. The experiments involved collecting diesel fumes from idling diesel trucks, then piping those fumes into enclosed chambers where U.S. test subjects were required to breathe them for hours at a time.

The EPA conducted these experiments on children and sick people(1), specifically choosing test subjects with metabolic syndrome and asthma, then securing them in bizarre "pollution containment rooms" to make sure they inhaled the cancer-causing particles. (See photo below.)

EPA forced children to inhale cancer-causing diesel pollutants as part of heinous government experiments

Isn't it funny how Dumbocrats cry about "the children" every time there is a threat to their government handouts, yet they murder over 1 million babies per year and the one's that survive the Dumbocrat genocide they subject to heinous cancer-causing chemical experiments?

We wanted to murder three million but we're understaffed.

 

[P@triot]

EPA Forced Children To Inhale Cancer-Causing Diesel Pollutants As Part Of Heinous Government Experiments

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government intentionally subjected children and adults to bizarre medical experiments that required them to inhale diesel pollutants known to contain cancer-causing chemicals. The experiments involved collecting diesel fumes from idling diesel trucks, then piping those fumes into enclosed chambers where U.S. test subjects were required to breathe them for hours at a time.

The EPA conducted these experiments on children and sick people(1), specifically choosing test subjects with metabolic syndrome and asthma, then securing them in bizarre "pollution containment rooms" to make sure they inhaled the cancer-causing particles. (See photo below.)

EPA forced children to inhale cancer-causing diesel pollutants as part of heinous government experiments

Isn't it funny how Dumbocrats cry about "the children" every time there is a threat to their government handouts, yet they murder over 1 million babies per year and the one's that survive the Dumbocrat genocide they subject to heinous cancer-causing chemical experiments?

We wanted to murder three million but we're understaffed.

The first honest thing PMH has ever stated on USMB!

 

[P@triot]

Vitter the Shitter, the guy who likes to gets his diapers changed by prostitutes? Great start.

And I prefer Full Disclosure but you don't, not if it would keep you from making a buck.

WARNING! Adult Material: Vitter The Shitter

How many people did Vitter poison?......

I didn't understand dumb-asses post at all (and I sure as hell wasn't going to click on such a repulsive sounding link). I didn't realize Vitter was the name of someone until I saw your post here and did a search.

What's hilarious is that dumb-ass there just further proved how dumb liberals are. I mean, I wouldn't want this guy in control of my life. Yet because it means free government handouts, PMH is willing to surrender control of his life to this buffoon.

So on top of what I have outlined, PMH just made an additional case for limited-government conservatism. Only a Dumbocrat could be that dumb...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Isn't it funny how Dumbocrats cry about "the children" every time there is a threat to their government handouts, yet they murder over 1 million babies per year and the one's that survive the Dumbocrat genocide they subject to heinous cancer-causing chemical experiments?

We wanted to murder three million but we're understaffed.

The first honest thing PMH has ever stated on USMB!

Sure thing little puppy, sure thing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Once again the difference between Rottweiler and the truth is a chasm of Grand Canyon proportions.

This is the relevant statement from the actual Inspector General's report:

The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 human study subjects before exposing them to pollutants.

If Rottweiler were capable of shame and embarassment he would drown in it.

 

[P@triot]

Once again the difference between Rottweiler and the truth is a chasm of Grand Canyon proportions.

This is the relevant statement from the actual Inspector General's report:

The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 human study subjects before exposing them to pollutants.

If Rottweiler were capable of shame and embarassment he would drown in it.

Wow - that is one of the most egregious lies ever posted on USMB (and illustrates my point about Dumbocrats defending illegal and immoral government).

Direct from the article linked in the OP:

Consent forms they got didn’t mention cancer because the agency considered the risks minimal from short-term exposure, the agency’s Office of Inspector General said in a report yesterday.

If [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION] were capable of shame and embarrassment he would drown in it. We certainly know he's capable of ignorance considering his failure to read an article before commenting on it and his spelling of "embarassment"

 

[NYcarbineer]

Once again the difference between Rottweiler and the truth is a chasm of Grand Canyon proportions.

This is the relevant statement from the actual Inspector General's report:

The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 human study subjects before exposing them to pollutants.

If Rottweiler were capable of shame and embarassment he would drown in it.

Wow - that is one of the most egregious lies ever posted on USMB (and illustrates my point about Dumbocrats defending illegal and immoral government).

Direct from the article linked in the OP:

Consent forms they got didn’t mention cancer because the agency considered the risks minimal from short-term exposure, the agency’s Office of Inspector General said in a report yesterday.

If [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION] were capable of shame and embarrassment he would drown in it. We certainly know he's capable of ignorance considering his failure to read an article before commenting on it and his spelling of "embarassment"

1. Did the Inspector General say the EPA was compliant or not?

2. Where was anyone forced to participate in the study? That was YOUR claim.

 

[P@triot]

Once again the difference between Rottweiler and the truth is a chasm of Grand Canyon proportions.

This is the relevant statement from the actual Inspector General's report:

The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 human study subjects before exposing them to pollutants.

If Rottweiler were capable of shame and embarassment he would drown in it.

Wow - that is one of the most egregious lies ever posted on USMB (and illustrates my point about Dumbocrats defending illegal and immoral government).

Direct from the article linked in the OP:

Consent forms they got didn’t mention cancer because the agency considered the risks minimal from short-term exposure, the agency’s Office of Inspector General said in a report yesterday.

If [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION] were capable of shame and embarrassment he would drown in it. We certainly know he's capable of ignorance considering his failure to read an article before commenting on it and his spelling of "embarassment"

1. Did the Inspector General say the EPA was compliant or not?

2. Where was anyone forced to participate in the study? That was YOUR claim.

Bwahahahah! Where did I say participants were "forced"? Please cite the post number and quote it. I'll wait....

(this is twice in the last two posts that I have proven you were egregiously lying)

As far at the IG - considering he reports to the same Dumbocrat as the EPA does, what do you expect him to say? He sure as hell not going to tell the truth - people in the Obama Administration get fired (or worse) for doing that.

 

[westwall]

Once again the difference between Rottweiler and the truth is a chasm of Grand Canyon proportions.

This is the relevant statement from the actual Inspector General's report:

The EPA obtained informed consent from the 81 human study subjects before exposing them to pollutants.

If Rottweiler were capable of shame and embarassment he would drown in it.

And the Mengele apologist ignores the fact that a CHILD CAN'T GIVE INFORMED CONSENT. Dude, you really are a scumbag.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

Testing using humans is done all the time. Rarely does anyone know the full risks, which is why we are, ------------ wait for it -------------------, "testing".

 

[westwall]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

Testing using humans is done all the time. Rarely does anyone know the full risks, which is why we are, ------------ wait for it -------------------, "testing".

The problem with your statement is we know the risks with the compounds they were using. Once again you progressives lie to cover your masters ass.

Pathetic.

 

[P@triot]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

Testing using humans is done all the time. Rarely does anyone know the full risks, which is why we are, ------------ wait for it -------------------, "testing".

Except that they lied to the people about what they were testing. They never said they were testing CANCER and yet they pumped these people full of carcinogens.

Keep defending it stupid. You're showing everyone on USMB what a scumbag you are who defends his government masters at all costs (in exchange for handouts). Partisan hack much???

You're also proving what a selfish dirtbag you are - you'd rather sell out children to heinous experiments than risk losing your government table scraps.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

Testing using humans is done all the time. Rarely does anyone know the full risks, which is why we are, ------------ wait for it -------------------, "testing".

Except that they lied to the people about what they were testing. They never said they were testing CANCER and yet they pumped these people full of carcinogens.

Keep defending it stupid. You're showing everyone on USMB what a scumbag you are who defends his government masters at all costs (in exchange for handouts). Partisan hack much???

You're also proving what a selfish dirtbag you are - you'd rather sell out children to heinous experiments than risk losing your government table scraps.

They weren't testing cancer, that was one of the risks that they thought was too small to disclose. I would have disclosed everything. It's better that way.

And try not to be such a drama queen next time.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

Testing using humans is done all the time. Rarely does anyone know the full risks, which is why we are, ------------ wait for it -------------------, "testing".

The problem with your statement is we know the risks with the compounds they were using. Once again you progressives lie to cover your masters ass.

I doubt the EPA would see my statements as covering? You're a drama queen as well.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why would the EPA put people in a situation that could possibly harm them in the first place? Doesn't matter if it was voluntary. I'm sure they could get consent for human trials on non lead bullets too but that wouldn't make the test any less repugnant. Why doesn't the EPA test their own employees? Sounds like a good plan.

The drug companies run tests on humans all the time. Should that be outlawed?