Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
Something isn't right with this story. They way institutional review boards work, there is no way that anyone would approve a study that has a risk of death, unless the study involved incredibly sick people who needed a long shot type treatment. If this is true that UNC was doing this, they risk losing their entire IRB accreditation, and no one in their right mind would risk that, as human studies typically bring the most money in the door. Also, even if its an EPA funded study, the IRB is controlled by the institution at which the research is being performed, not by the funding agency. Leave it to the Washington Times to not make this clear. The way IRBs work isn't exactly common knowledge unless you're involved with them.