BEIR, Calabrese, cancer, Chemicals, Chernobyl, cigarettes, clean water, corruption, dangers of nuclear, democracy, dose response, environment, EPA, epidemiology, Linear No Threshold Model, LNT, no safe dose, nuclear accident, nuclear disaster, nuclear energy, nuclear waste, pruitt, public health, Toxicology, Transparency in Science, Trump, uranium mining, USA
Comment here by August 16th: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0259 Comment is easy and can be short and can be anonymous, so there’s no excuse not to comment. The deadline was extended from May to August.
This isn’t just about chemicals and non-radioactive heavy metals, but also about increasing exposure to radioactive heavy metals and other radioactive materials by 400 times or more: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2018/05/09/trump-pruitt-nuclear-hit-job-on-the-epa-american-people-may-increase-radiation-exposure-by-400x-how-quickly-will-everyone-die
This appears the brain-child of Ed Calabrese of U Mass Amherst, who worked for big tobacco with the goal of proving that both the chemicals and radioactive material (polonium) in cigarettes is safe. For more about Calabrese type his name in the search window of this blog.
One of the over 41,000 comments submitted, thus far:
“From: Laura Danette
Date: 5/14/2018 9:02:05 PM Subject: Re: Docket No. EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0259 ————————————————————————————–
Scott Pruitt is hell-bent on gutting the EPA and lining the pockets of big oil companies and the like, with money gained from rolling back important regulations meant to protect Americans. He is not serving the people as he was supposedly hired to do. The fact that he is ignoring and in fact, banning scientific facts is the height of betrayal to the mandate he was given to protect America, Americans and the planet. Not only should his proposed rule be banned, he should be banned from the office he is holding.
I strongly oppose this proposed rule that has long been on polluting industries’ wishlists. The EPA’s job is to protect the environment and public health, not polluters’ profits, but that’s exactly what this rule would do.
Medical science has repeatedly proven that smog, particulate matter, and heavy metals — all hallmarks of the fossil fuel and chemical industries — can cause death and severe complications. But with this proposed rule, many of these studies linking pollution and toxics harming our health will be disregarded, and thousands of people will unnecessarily suffer.
Medical records and health data are largely kept confidential to protect patients’ privacy. But that does not mean that studies that rely on such data, when published in peer-reviewed journals, are not rigorous enough to be relied upon for regulations by the government. Quite the opposite is true. We must take these studies into account when creating our policies in order to protect the public’s health. I urge you to reconsider the premise behind this proposed rule and abandon it all together.”
https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0259-0307&attachmentNumber=1&contentType=pdf (Emphasis our own.)