Comments On The CARB Diesel And Small Particles Research And Policy Making.

I submit that:

1. The studies on air pollution listed in the report as key studies and relied on by CARB and its experts propose death data that do not meet the requirement for proof of anything. The studies listed fail to meet the requirement of a relative risk of at least 2 for observational studies. The researchers who promote and rely on such studies have decided not to even attempt to explain or excuse such nonsense

2. The other alternative science proposal being foisted on the public by CARB is that the death studies that assert acute deaths can propose a short period lag time for death from air pollution. That is nonsense, and Dr. Utell, a physician expert on the CARB panel, a critical care physician, knows it. Sudden death from cardiac arrhythmia is not in play here, and Dr. Utell or any reasonably competent physician could keep a person with end stage lung disease alive for an indefinite period. People don’t drop dead in the streets from dust or diesel. Studies that propose short lag times are preposterous.

3. The CARB research ignores that null effect of the Enstrom study which is specific for Californians, and the null effect shown in the later half of the Pope ACS study. Those two studies, when combined with the null Western U.S. and California effect of the Krewski map, create evidence that cannot be ignored by the CARB.

4. Studies that falsify a scientific assertion are more pertinent to the scientific inquiry than studies that support a proposition, since the goal of science is to avoid a type one (false positive) error.