was published last December. This concluded, “12.7% of current childhood asthma nationwide is attributed to gas stove use, which is similar to the childhood asthma burden attributed to secondhand smoke.”, issued a press release trying to argue that the research was “not substantiated by sound science.”
Walking into this polarized debate has been Dr. Goodman. As she has done before, her job appears to be to downplay the health risks for her clients. To spread the doubt. To create uncertainty. As Tabuchi reports: “When Multnomah County in Oregon convened a recent public hearing on the health hazards posed by pollution from gas stoves, a toxicologist named Julie Goodman wasDr Goodman said that “studies linking gas stoves to childhood asthma, which have prompted talk of gas-stove bans in recent weeks and months, were ‘missing important context.’”reports that “what Dr. Goodman didn’t tell the crowd was that she was paid to testify by a local gas provider.”added that in recent months, Dr.
But Gradient and Goodman have a history of controversial research and of playing down the health risks. As Tabuchi outlined: “Gradient has a track record of working on behalf of its clients to push back against research on health risks associated with a range of products.” Goodman has, for example, acted as an expert witness for Philip Morris, when Judge Edward Leibensperger from the Massachusetts Superior Court said Gradient’s analysis “was shown to be inconsistent and contrary to the consensus of the scientific community.”
Just a psyop so American consumers don’t mind the rapid price increases as gas is profitably diverted to Europe after blowing up Nord Stream.
What is really motivating this anti-gas stove crusade? Does it have any thing to do with energy companies wanting to have more LNG available to sell to Europe?