What was their punishment? A self-policing report on what they could do better in the future. Seriously?!? Look at the title. ‘Enhance Protection of Human Study Subjects’ sounds like they thinks of human beings as no more than rats.
In the government report, Improvements to EPA Policies and Guidance Could Enhance Protection of Human Study Subjects, in the section ‘At a Glance’, it states:
“Why We Did This Review
“In response to a congressional request, we conducted this review to determine whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) followed applicable laws, regulations, policies, procedures and guidance when it exposed human subjects to diesel exhaust emissions or concentrated airborne particles. In particular, we reviewed five studies that the EPA conducted during 2010 to 2011 to determine whether the agency (1) obtained sufficient approval to conduct these studies; (2) obtained adequate informed consent from the human study subjects; and (3) adequately addressed adverse events that occurred during these studies.”
According to a repot by The Daily Caller, the five experiments conducted in 2010 and 2011 exposed a group of human beings, including those suffering with asthma and heart problems, to “dangerously high levels of toxic pollutants”, up to 50 times greater than the EPA claims is safe. I reviewed the report and found The Daily Caller article to be true - and the report to be even more alarming!
The EPA admits that “exposure risks were not always consistently represented” to its test subjects. There is also evidence that documents gaining approval and review for the studies were not performed as required (pages 12-14). And, Page 15 of the report notes that higher levels of contaminants were used without proper application and approval.
Tests were conducted at twice the level approved, although the application stated “the human subjects would be exposed to concentrated air particle levels between 50 and 300 µg/m3” ( micrograms per cubic meter of air) and that“an exposure session would be shut down if the exposure concentration exceeded 400 µg/m3”, the subjects were exposed to levels as high as 600 µg/m3 without approval from the Independent Review Board, and most likely from the subjects, as well, although the report is suspiciously missing this information.
It is noted: “This study modification, which some may consider significant, was not sent to the HSRRO [Human Subjects Research Review Official] for review.”
Common sense tells me that any governmental agency with as much power as the EPA (and the FDA for that matter) is not going to use that power wisely and for the ‘common good’ as the Progressives like to tout the American public should, but to further their own power.