TUCSON, Ariz., Feb. 4, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- According to the homeopathic theory that is disdained by virtually the entire medical community, therapeutic effects can be obtained at infinitesimally low doses of medications. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), however, appears to subscribe to a comparable theory, only for harmful effects, according to the newsletter Civil Defense Perspectives.
In particular, the EPA plans to impose crippling rules on U.S. industry in an effort to reduce already tiny levels of supposedly lethal "PM2.5"—dust.
According to testimony to Congress by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, there is no safe level of dust particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are able to pass deep into the lungs. Such particles occur in diesel exhaust, industrial emissions as from coal-fired power plants—and dust storms.
Reducing dust could be as beneficial as curing cancer, the EPA claims. In fact, it estimates "saving" $2.2 trillion and 220,000 lives in 2020 with costly new regulations. Most of the purported benefits of new "train wreck" regulations, such as mercury rules for power plants, are based on coincidental reductions in dust.
The "evidence" for the harm is very weak correlations seen in epidemiologic studies done in 1993 and 1995. Findings are contradicted by other studies. The EPA is now apparently trying to prove harm by subjecting human subjects to diesel exhaust in an apparatus some say resembles a gas chamber.
"Either the EPA is lying to Congress about the lethality of PM2.5, or it is engaged in illegal and unethical human experiments, subjecting vulnerable patients to a substance it believes could kill them instantly," states Jane Orient, M.D., president of Physicians for Civil Defense.
The EPA has been anything but transparent about its methods. The U.S. Department of Justice has ordered the release of some 12,000 emails.
The American Tradition Institute filed a lawsuit challenging the experiments, and a complaint against the researchers was filed with their state medical licensure board. Both have been dismissed.
The method used to calculate harm from PM2.5 is widely used for radiation and chemicals. The linear no-threshold model assumes that if a big dose of something will kill you, then a tiny dose will kill someone too if enough people take it, explains Dr. Orient. For example, if one person dies from taking 1,000 aspirin tablets, then one person will also die out of 1,000 persons each taking just one tablet.
With this type of "homeopathic" logic, the EPA could destroy virtually any industry it chose, Dr. Orient warns. If we are really interested in protecting human health, we need to insist on sound science, not discredited models that squander resources.
www.physiciansforcivildefense.org
Contact: Jane M. Orient, M.D., (520) 323-3110, [email protected]
SOURCE Physicians for Civil Defense
Advertisement
In particular, the EPA plans to impose crippling rules on U.S. industry in an effort to reduce already tiny levels of supposedly lethal "PM2.5"—dust.
Advertisement
According to testimony to Congress by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, there is no safe level of dust particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are able to pass deep into the lungs. Such particles occur in diesel exhaust, industrial emissions as from coal-fired power plants—and dust storms.
Reducing dust could be as beneficial as curing cancer, the EPA claims. In fact, it estimates "saving" $2.2 trillion and 220,000 lives in 2020 with costly new regulations. Most of the purported benefits of new "train wreck" regulations, such as mercury rules for power plants, are based on coincidental reductions in dust.
The "evidence" for the harm is very weak correlations seen in epidemiologic studies done in 1993 and 1995. Findings are contradicted by other studies. The EPA is now apparently trying to prove harm by subjecting human subjects to diesel exhaust in an apparatus some say resembles a gas chamber.
"Either the EPA is lying to Congress about the lethality of PM2.5, or it is engaged in illegal and unethical human experiments, subjecting vulnerable patients to a substance it believes could kill them instantly," states Jane Orient, M.D., president of Physicians for Civil Defense.
The EPA has been anything but transparent about its methods. The U.S. Department of Justice has ordered the release of some 12,000 emails.
The American Tradition Institute filed a lawsuit challenging the experiments, and a complaint against the researchers was filed with their state medical licensure board. Both have been dismissed.
The method used to calculate harm from PM2.5 is widely used for radiation and chemicals. The linear no-threshold model assumes that if a big dose of something will kill you, then a tiny dose will kill someone too if enough people take it, explains Dr. Orient. For example, if one person dies from taking 1,000 aspirin tablets, then one person will also die out of 1,000 persons each taking just one tablet.
With this type of "homeopathic" logic, the EPA could destroy virtually any industry it chose, Dr. Orient warns. If we are really interested in protecting human health, we need to insist on sound science, not discredited models that squander resources.
www.physiciansforcivildefense.org
Contact: Jane M. Orient, M.D., (520) 323-3110, [email protected]
SOURCE Physicians for Civil Defense
