Media Hits Military, But Not EPA, for Illegal Human Testing

The Charlotte Observer has no problem reporting on illegal human testing when the military is to blame — but it’s not so willing when the EPA is at fault.

Outside of NBC-17 (WNCN, Raleigh) and the Daily Tar Heel, no North Carolina media has covered our lawsuit over the EPA’s illegal human testing that was aided and abetted by the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

But change the culprit to the military and, all of a sudden, a lawsuit over illegal human testing is newsworthy:

“A North Carolina man’s quest to learn how the military experimented on him in the 1960s has turned into a class-action lawsuit for as many as 100,000 veterans the government used to test hundreds of drugs, chemicals and biological agents over more than 50 years.” [Charlotte News & Observer]

6 thoughts on “Media Hits Military, But Not EPA, for Illegal Human Testing”

  1. As a prior EPA employee, my late-husband as well as I witnessed the serious-criminal aspects between EPA employees and those they were suppose to write up for major offenses. Instead EPA employees accepted money to turn their heads. They don’t care about the chemical dumping from the skies — that is overwhelming, now. Just look-up.

  2. Atropine is the drug of choice to reverse the effects of exposure to nerve agents, should such exposure occur. The problem has always been that atropine is a theoretical antidote, no one knows for sure if it will work, and though they know that high doses of atropine can be fatal, no one knows much about its human toxicity.

    So, the Army has a problem assigning a dose level sufficient to help against nerve agents, yet not so high that the antidote becomes fatal. It sounds like the researchers at Edgewood were addressing that issue.

  3. Actually Jim…. at least one woman was taken to the hospital by EMTs as a result of EPAs’ testing.

    More importantly, this is a case where EPA is lying to someone.

    If EPA has lied to the study subjects about the dangers of PM2.5, then it has civil and criminal liability.

    If it hasn’t lied to the study subjects, then it has lied to the rest of us in claiming that PM2.5 is so dangerous and deadly.

    The answer must be one or the other; it can’t be neither.

  4. You comparison is bogus. Climate alarmists are not shouting about the dangers of C02 in one breath, and then advocating new coal power plants in the next.

    The EPA is exposing people to a substance that they claim is “deadly” in even small exposures. Either they are lying about the toxicity of PM2.5, or they are purposely poisoning people in their quest to prove how deadly it is. Either way this kind of conduct can’t be tolerated by a government agency. The stakes are just too high.

  5. Sounds like someone is making a mountain out of a mole hill.
    Nobody subjected to these allegedly harsh experiments has died and nobody has even become sick. There are many real issues to worry about without wasting time about what might happen when it isn’t going to happen. This whole thing sounds a lot like the climate alarmists who worry that CO2 is going to destroy humanity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.