Comment Log Display

My trust of CARB's ability to objectively present the facts
regarding PM2.5 is waning rapidly.  

Starting with cherry picking data to support loss of life due to
PM2.5, it seems that upon being questioned about the data to
support the mortality rate, the data changes.  The answer depends
on whether the subject is diesel PM2.5 or background PM2.5.  CARB
conveniently combines the data when it supports their desired end
game.  CARB has ignored studies that show PM2.5 has no effects on
premature deaths.

So my suggestions:
1.  Hire a 3rd party scientific consultant with verifiable
credentials to review all existing PM2.5 data (within CA and other
states) and make conclusions/recommendations.  This person should
be vetted through the public arena to ensure true objectiveness and
competency.
2.  Hire a economist similarily qualified as the 3rd party
scientist above to give a true picture of the economic impact of
PM2.5 regulations on the local/state economy should it be
implemented.
3.  CARB should openly and honestly answer questions regarding this
legislation that is presented in local newspapers.  

Currently the public's confidence in CARB's ability to objectively
make decisions on its behalf regarding health issues is falling.