Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, December 15, 2017

One of the new White House appointees to a critical environmental panel once said that the air these days is just too clean to promote good health. Robert Phalen, an air pollution researcher at the Irvine campus of the University of California, said in 2012 that children need to breathe irritants so that their bodies learn how to ward them off. "Modern air," he told the American Association for the Advancement of Science, "is a little too clean for optimum health."

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Phalen is one of 17 new appointees to the Environmental Protection Agency's Scientific Advisory Board, which helps develop environmental policy. Other nominees include scientists from the oil industry, a chemical industry trade association, and various universities and consulting groups.

Like Phalen, many are expected to argue for less regulation, an agenda that is backed by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.

But Phalen's earlier comments drew renewed interest in his career as a researcher and an opponent of air pollution-related regulations. Much like President Donald Trump, Phalen prides himself on holding unpopular opinions, like his 2004 study that air pollution is not such a big deal.

"The relative risks associated with modern [particulate matter] are very small and confounded by many factors," Phalen wrote. "Neither toxicology studies nor human clinical investigations have identified the components and/or characteristics of [particulate matter] that might be causing the health-effect associations."

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is still my favorite line:

"The relative risks associated with modern [particulate matter] are very small and confounded by many factors," Phalen wrote. "Neither toxicology studies nor human clinical investigations have identified the components and/or characteristics of [particulate matter] that might be causing the health-effect associations."

Since we can't tell exactly what and how much will kill you, we'll just expose you to lots of everything.

#1 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-14 02:02 PM | Reply

Republican lawmaker: Reducing carbon emissions will ‘kill all the trees and plants'

During during a talk radio appearance last week, state Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg explained why he opposed efforts to curb the emission of greenhouse gases by taxing them.

"So, you know, when we talk about carbon dioxide and those type of things, actually, those are important to agriculture and to the balance of nature," he explained. "Trees and plants use carbon dioxide to create oxygen. It's part of their process. And it's nature's way to make things work. So I guess my argument to those enviros that want less carbon is, ‘Here, you want to kill all the trees and plants.'"

RawStory

#2 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2017-12-15 06:16 PM | Reply

#2 There is a small pinch of reality to what he's saying, but just a pinch.

climate.nasa.gov

#3 | Posted by LEgregius at 2017-12-15 06:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You just can't make this stuff up... I am dumbfounded by the sheer stupidity - despite all the evidence - of this moron.

#4 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-12-15 06:50 PM | Reply

Phalen can go suck on a tailpipe

#5 | Posted by hamburglar at 2017-12-15 07:58 PM | Reply

we'll just expose you to lots of everything.

#1 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

We have to build up an immunity to the garbage in our environment.

That is why I eat Big Macs while watching Trump TV.

I might get a little nauseous but it makes me tough!

#6 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-12-15 09:32 PM | Reply

"#2 There is a small pinch of reality to what he's saying, but just a pinch."

In reality, no, there isn't.

#7 | Posted by Angrydad at 2017-12-16 11:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I am dumbfounded by the sheer stupidity - despite all the evidence - of this moron.
#4 | Posted by GalaxiePete

Surely you don't think he believes any of that crap.

#8 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2017-12-16 12:21 PM | Reply

#8 | Posted by SomebodyElse

You never know - he is a right wing nut job...

#9 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-12-16 04:47 PM | Reply

I couldn't find any reference in a quick search, but I remember seeing some industrialists in the 19th century arguing that smog was good for you - that the coughing it brought on was helping to clear your lungs. This sounds quite similar.

I'm sure the arguments are documented somewhere - probably around the time of the passage of the UK's Smoke Nuisance Abatement Act of 1821. If I find the time, I'll go back and look again, but I wasn't able to find anything freely available quickly.

#10 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2017-12-17 10:16 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort