UPDATE: A new website chronicles the issue here http://epahumantesting.com/
Exclusive to WUWT by David W. Schnare
Statement of ATI’s Lead Counsel
on
American Tradition Institute v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(US District Court, Easter District of Virginia No. 1:12-cv-1066)
There are few occasions in life that emerge directly from the core of an individual and almost never are those memorialized in a law suit. On Friday, September 21, 2012, I took five copies of a complaint to the Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, filing one of them with the court and having each of the rest stamped and then sent to four senior government officials, Attorney General Eric Holder, U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson and EPA General Counsel Scott Fulton. I sent them summons to appear and defend themselves in part because of my first name.
I was named after David Steiner, a man who died of starvation in Buchenwald concentration camp on May 3, 1945. Tattooed on his body was the number 59059. He was witness to horrors that, today, we have a hard time even contemplating, something that I thought would never exist on this planet again – the abhorrent practice of giving human subjects poisons in order to determine what subsequently happens to them.
I have always been deeply affected by the circumstances of my great-uncle’s death. It is a heavy burden to carry the name of such a victim. As I matured, I committed my life to giving to our civilization that which David Steiner was never able to give himself. I have given 37 years of service to the United States, most of that in an effort to protect human health and the environment as a professional at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
I was able to secure a position of responsibility and trust at EPA in large part because the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill offered me the opportunity to obtain graduate degrees and prepare myself for a career in public service. Until a few weeks ago, I had been a strong supporter of each. Then Steven Milloy asked me to represent him and other members of the American Tradition Institute who have stories much like mine, or otherwise cannot countenance such human experimentation.
Steve’s story is worse than death. His uncle, Zoran Galkanovic, was incarcerated at the Mauthausen concentration camp. Upon threat of death, Mr. Galkanovic was forced to rise each morning and identify those individuals at the concentration camp too ill to work, knowing they would subsequently be executed that very day. Because of the inhumanity forced on Mr. Galkanovic, Mr. Milloy has accepted as a family responsibility the fight against any government who subjects its citizens to inhumane treatment. Who knew it would be our government? Who knew it would be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency? Who knew that human experimentation would be done on the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill? Who knew it would be an official body of that University that approved this research?
On first blush, I simply could not believe Mr. Milloy. Then I looked carefully at the facts and at the law. This case involves the intentional exposure of human subjects to “fine particulate” matter, also known as PM2.5. EPA obtained their PM2.5 from a diesel truck. It is difficult to overstate the atrocity of this research. EPA parked a truck’s exhaust pipe directly beneath an intake pipe on the side of a building. The exhaust was sucked into the pipe, mixed with some additional air and then piped directly into the lungs of the human subjects. EPA actually has pictures of this gas chamber, a clear plastic pipe stuck into the mouth of a subject, his lips sealing it to his face, diesel fumes inhaled straight into his lungs.
Unbelievable as that may seem, consider the additional fact that EPA has officially concluded that this gas is a genotoxic carcinogen and that there is no exposure level below which it can be considered safe. In fact, EPA Administrator Jackson testified to Congress that of all deaths occurring in the United States, 1 in 4 “is attributable to PM2.5.” She told them “Particulate matter causes premature death. It doesn’t make you sick. It’s directly causal to dying sooner than you should.”
Under the law, under EPA regulations and under EPA policy, this human experimentation is strictly prohibited. To conduct human experimentation, the human subjects must be properly informed of the risks they face and these risks must be less than the potential benefit of the experiment. My family knows how that works too.
Few today know the ravages of Polio, but some of us are old enough to remember it too well. Susan Paidar was a childhood neighbor, the same age as one of my brothers. She died in an iron lung. And, she was one of the last victims of this terrible disease, in small part because of the courage of one of my brothers. In 1952, at age 6, my brother Rick was selected to be in the first human test group for the Salk vaccine. He was offered the possibility of never having to worry about polio again. He was a human subject and there was a real benefit from that human experimentation.
In the section describing the mandatory benefit that must be offered to the human subjects, EPA’s PM2.5 “informed consent” baldly states “there is no benefit.” Worse, the form never informs the subjects that they will be inhaling diesel fumes, never tells them the gas is a carcinogen, never tells them about all the other toxic substances in diesel exhaust pouring into their lungs, never tells them that because PM2.5 is genotoxic, it might cause disease in children they might wish to have.
Medical ethicist, Professor John D. Dunn, MD, JD, called EPA’s human experimentation “scandalously unethical and immoral” and said “There can be no further tolerance of this misconduct.” This is not the EPA I knew. This is not the University of North Carolina I knew. This is not the American Tradition of our nation. But, this is why I traveled to the U.S. Courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia – to put a stop to it.
David W. Schnare, Esq., MSPH, PhD.
Director
Environmental Law Center
American Tradition Institute.
=============================================================
Steve Milloy will have a related major announcement tomorrow at junkscience.com

I was hoping to read this was in reference to the deaths, from starvation and drought, of people in the third world, due to the growing of biofuels and displacement from their land. Deliberately depriving humans of food in order to grow fuel is heinous! Even in the developed world the continual raising of green taxes is affecting the poor and elderly as they are having to choose between eating and heating during the Winter.
The touting of green energy as the saviour of mankind is a sick joke to those who know anything about the realities of the world nowadays. I cannot understand why this has not been done already.
Anyone who thinks this is a hoax should go to junkscience.com and have a look. Milloy has been working on this issue for some time, and he has plenty of credibility. He’s been around for over a decade debunking the junk and is far from being an alarmist or fantasist.
Streetcred: You can review the documents at JunkScience.com … the documented evidence has been posted there for some time already courtesy of Mr Milloy.
I dunno, I spent more time looking for that quote at JunkScience than is justified, but I haven’t found it. Would be interested if someone knows exactly where.
Just because the EPA provided the picture of someone attached to a lung function tester does not necessarily mean that is a picture of the experiment or even the equipment used in the experiment.
However it would be completely unethical to purposefully expose a subject to diesel fumes for the sole purpose of an experiment (there are many harmful components to diesel fumes). Even if particulate levels were similar to a truck loading dock it is the action of intention to expose the subject to potential harm that is unethical. If the EPA investigated the effects of exposure to diesel fumes of a subject while working on a truck loading dock then that may ethical.
The EPA aren’t THAT stupid are they?
Yeah Velcro, something very odd indeed. Good to see my first instincts were correct, and that this is nothing other than junk. Of course, the appearance of the Nazis very early on should have triggered Godwin’s law – which makes me feel like an idiot for reading on…
Really doubt this is true, and the lead in of concentration is way over the top.
BTW, any animal or human research at US universities is approved by a group at each university that includes ethicists, members of the general public, and college professors.
These are papers from NC on the topic, cannot tell if it is the same group but this is certainly not concentration camp stuff:
http://journals.lww.com/co-pulmonarymedicine/Abstract/2012/03000/Diesel_exhaust_particles_and_airway_inflammation.10.aspx
http://oem.bmj.com/content/69/3/170.short
AND THIS ON DIESEL: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/225088115_Controlled_human_exposures_to_diesel_exhaust
ON DIESEL: http://ajrccm.atsjournals.org/content/185/2/179.short
Pretty normal stuff folks!
Here is a review article on Diesel: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/221737638_Diesel_exhaust_particles_and_airway_inflammation
I consider a lot of the PM2.5 stuff to be anti fossil fuel wedge issues used by the eco activists.
The real facts are that the healthiest people live in the cities….. undisputed fact. If particulate matter from combustion engines were deadly…. Cities would be the unhealthiest places with the lowest life expectancy….. But statistically the complete opposite is true.
Something that has always bugged me about the EPA’s position on Diesel… Aren’t diesel engines used(or at least used to be used) in mines and submarines because they were “safer”? So, while running down every miner in the country might be a rather large task, shouldn’t it be rather easy to find at least what happened with most of the US sailors that served aboard a diesel sub? And how many died from cancer above the average for the rest of the US?
And now, after they have declared diesel “evil”, they want to run tests to see if they were right?
Brad says:
September 24, 2012 at 1:37 am
Really doubt this is true, and the lead in of concentration is way over the top.
BTW, any animal or human research at US universities is approved by a group at each university that includes ethicists, members of the general public, and college professors.
==========================================
Brad, did you bother reading Milloy’s information? http://epahumantesting.com/
Umm, Brad, I think you are missing the point. The EPA is the one saying diesel/particles from diesel are “always” fatal…so therefore they shouldn’t be exposing their test subjects to what they “know” will kill them, now should they? So which is it? diesel isn’t as bad as they say, or they are exposing these folks to certain lung cancer?
See this article here, especially the last two paragraphs http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/04/the-epas-unethical-pm2-5-air-pollution-experiments/
James-
Yes, I did go to your website…and for background I have both a Ph.D. and a J.D. I find the site to be scientifically poor and the arguments based on bombast with little fact, I also find the site legally insufficient as it shows no damage or harm that is real, it is only speculation based on little proof. I may look at the legal complaint tomorrow if I have time, but I expect this will get dismissed on summary judgment and never reach the merits.
Kinda looks like an election year stunt to me, but as I said I have not reviewed everything.
Flicka47-
While I believe diesel is very safe and our air some of the best in the world (been to Beijing? WOW!) I do not believe diesel was placed on subs as its particulate exhaust was safer but the fuel itself was less combustible and thus safer.
Also, some seem to think this the Obama administration is somehow after diesel, the EPA has been after particulates for decades under both Republican and Democratic administrations and much of what they have done is good work. Do you remember when acid rain was killing forests on the East Coast (and that was actually true and not just politically based “science”).
The question for the EPA is when have they gone far enough? I think we are much safer than we were and I would like to see them focus on rivers and get off the air binge, but….only my opinion.
There’s a load of information just a click away over at Steve Milloy’s. Steve’s done loads of work putting this together.
http://epahumantesting.com/2012/09/24/epa-sued-in-federal-court-over-illegal-human-testing/
The posted article seems to have cribbed the EPA’s own trademarked hyperbolic style. Something of a shame really as I’ve found Milloy to be credible in the past and there is, as always, the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and other sundry black marks of our own in US history.
That said, the legal defense should prove entertaining. Assuming minimal correctness of the facts: The only manner in which to defeat the ethical issues, given prior knowledge, is to state that the conclusions are hyperbolic bunkum. And thus calling into question the EPA in toto. But if this is not done then the EPA, as a matter of legal record, has jumped right into Mengele’s boots. And thus calling into question the EPA in toto. No matter which way it falls there is a significant PR issue at stake for science and the US government generally.
Dunno how this will work out but it should shine some light on Jacksons claim of 25% of US sudden death being through particulate inhalation.
If true then this is a scandal that needs shouted from the rooftops way before CAGW!
If false then this is also truly scandalous and should lead to severe criminal prosecutions.
Let the truth speak out.
TimC @ur momisugly September 23, 2012 at 9:05 pm
“May we be allowed to see a copy of the ATI v EPA complaint,…”
This is a great point. Especially for those that don’t live in N. Va. and have the time to go to the Clerk’s office to either read or copy the complaint. I.E., complaints are public documents and anyone can access them. Of course, if you made copies, they charge a per page copy fee. The complaint must cite the laws/rights violated. It would be interesting if a Civil Rights ACT and/or US Treaties, etc., are cited.
Given ATI’s background, this is certainly legit, especially if WUWT posts it without a cautionary note. One presumes service of process would be either Monday, September 24 or sometime this week. That begins the 21 day countdown for the defendants to respond to the complaint. However, Fed practice (rules of procedure) allow a party to aks for an extension. Given the upcoming election, any bets on the defendents answering before Nov 6? Oh, and I’m sure you’ll see it on the evening news, right after Fast and Furious.
Do we know when these events took place, and are they still current?
Clearly, not only is our government, but those who view themselves as being on the side of government (the “governing class”) think laws are for everyone else. This is yet one more danger signal that government is far too large.
The complaint claims that exposure to fine particulates is dangerous and potentially lethal. The complaint then asks the court on this basis to order the EPA to stop enforcing regulations aimed at controlling them. Eh? Only an attorney could think such twisted logic was reasonable. No wonder the article was so short of detail and full of Nazis and dying kids. He’s an attorney and he’s pounding the table .
The complaint claims that exposure to fine particulates is dangerous and potentially lethal. The complaint then asks the court on this basis to order the EPA to stop enforcing regulations aimed at controlling them. Eh? Only an attorney could think such twisted logic was reasonable. No wonder the article was so short of detail and full of Nazis and dying kids. He’s an attorney and he’s pounding the table .
Junkscience headline today:
EPA Human Testing
EPA sued in federal court over illegal human testing
Posted on September 24, 2012 | Leave a comment
But the comments are closed…
I have to say I’m with Julie D-B here. The issue isn’t the machine and focusing on it is to miss what the lawsuit is about. The lawsuit isn’t even about diesel, its about disclosure protocol, or more correctly, the lack of it. Most of the story is ambulance-chasing hyperbole.from Schnare’s(?) side in order to emotionalize the legal process. It would be hghly unusual for a university to stick its neck out as far as it is claimed to have in regard to human trials. Doesn’t mean they didn’t, but there has to be a lot more to the story then this.
April 1?
No.
Someone’s been had.