SCOOP: The EPA has a plan to reduce pollution-related deaths. The plan does not involve reducing pollution.
"Unfounded medical assumptions." "Not scientifically sound." This is an important scoop: The EPA is fiddling with the math to claim that coal pollution won't kill people. By
Several decades of research has pointed to fine particulate air pollution being a health hazard even at low concentrations. Now, to benefit coal interests, the US EPA wants to simply ignore the health impacts that occur below their self-imposed limit:
Because when the facts are inconvenient, change the facts. via ⁦
Too many poor people? Change the formula for who counts as poor! Too many people dying from pollution? Change the modeling method used to estimate how many people die from pollution! Starting to notice a pattern here.
The Environmental Protection Agency plans to adopt a new method for projecting the future health risks of air pollution, one that experts said is not scientifically sound
The E.P.A. has a new plan to reduce pollution-related deaths. It does not involve reducing pollution.
Important story here by my colleague How the E.P.A. counts deaths and costs to society caused by coal-burning power plants is critical to the decision of how tightly to regulate them.
The EPA thinks it’s found a way to bring 1,400 people back to life. All it has to do is change the way it calculates the harms from air pollution. Read
Here's the blog post I wrote () when the Trump first hinted at the radical reversal of the long-accepted PM2.5 air pollution-mortality link, a reversal that the ' confirms will adopt.
E.P.A. Could Make Thousands of Pollution Deaths Vanish by Changing Its Math - Experts say it is unsound.
Long Live Coal is what this is about. This is an end run around any sensible approach to CO2 by discounting air benefits. via ⁦⁩ ⁦
If the results don'e suit you, change the assessment parameters. That's not how science, or health, works. E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math
More terrible #airquality news, this time from US, where EPA will try to change the math calculating air pollution-linked deaths via ⁦⁩. My podcast on the effects of air pollution:
Great piece by on the 's latest efforts to undermine its own mission
E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math
Reminder: "Science was a Democrat thing." E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math to something unjustifiable
Changing the math on how the EPA calculates the dangers of air pollution is the latest example of this administration putting industry interests over the American people.
E.P.A. Plans to reduce pollution deaths... by redefining deaths from pollution. Downward.
Fossil fuel pollution kills. The EPA & corps who own them know that, but they want laxer emission rules for $. This will kill MORE ppl. But that’s inconvenient. What to do? Change the math. This is what happens when we sell gov to the high bidder.
(1) The ACE rule won’t acknowledge dead people. Particulates are harmful even at low levels, but the administration is attempting to erase these deaths by using alternative thresholds below which it’ll say deaths no longer count.
"The EPA plans to adopt a new method for projecting the future health risks of air pollution, one that experts said has never been peer-reviewed and is not scientifically sound, according to five people with knowledge of the agency’s plans."
The EPA will remove thousands of pollution deaths from its records, under Trump "new math".
Defining death downward: another EPA scoop from
Yes, that would be the EPA "death math" scoop, leading tomorrow's NYT front page. Read it here:
The spread of alternative facts and science that isnt science: Trump E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math
(1) The ACE rule won’t acknowledge dead people. Particulates are harmful even at low levels, but the administration is attempting to erase these deaths by using alternative thresholds below which it’ll say deaths no longer count.
Another day, another EPA scoop from : EPA's new rules for reducing pollution won't, uh, reduce pollution
There is a growing mountain of evidence on the adverse health effects of low levels of air pollution. Rather than solving this public health problem, EPA is considering explicitly ignoring it in regulatory analysis.
After all, if you can show there are fewer benefits to reducing pollution, then it's easier to relax pollution standards. For more, read here
The E.P.A. plans to get thousands of pollution deaths off the books by changing its math. 🤔 #EPA #ClimateChange #ClimatePolicy #PollutionDeaths
pop quiz: What African river helped solve a pollution related health crisis? Denial!
"...the proposed methodology would assume there is little or no health benefit to making the air any cleaner than what the law requires. Many experts said that approach was not scientifically sound..."
Economic modeling might be wonky but has impt implications on what US regulations get through. These regs have life & death implications. Just ask ex-OIRA Here explains scary developments in #CleanAir policy that seek to hide deaths
Basically, 's team of poisoners is declaring that soot is healthy.
U.S. plans to get thousands of deaths off the books by changing Its math to a method that "has never been peer-reviewed and is not scientifically sound"
E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math
Is this outright lying to the people or just extremely misleading? via
E.P.A. Plans to Get Thousands of Pollution Deaths Off the Books by Changing Its Math
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reduces deaths attributed to air pollution by assuming that legal levels cause little or no harm to health.