The claim that PM2.5 kills people is utter fraud. That fraud being used to wreck the US economy via EPA air quality and climate regulations. The intrepid Dr. James Enstrom gives the Communist China-funded Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health another chance to get on the right side of science, reality and America.

January 4, 2022

John Quackenbush, PhD
Professor and Chair, Department of Biostatistics
Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health (HTHCSPH)
johnq@hsph.harvard.edu

Re: Scientific Misconduct by HTHCSPH Professor Francesca Dominici

Dear Dr. Quackenbush,

I am herewith submitting to you a formal complaint of scientific misconduct against Francesca Dominici, PhD, Clarence James Gamble Professor of Biostatistics, Population and Data Science at the HTHCSPH
(https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/francesca-dominici/). My complaint consists of the following nine points that challenge the scientific validity of her EPA-funded claims that inhaling about 100 µg of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) per day causes premature deaths without any proven causal mechanism:

1. Her deliberate falsification of the research record on PM2.5 deaths obscures the many NULL findings
2. Her opposition to transparency in EPA research hinders reproducibility of all PM2.5 death findings
3. Enstrom 2017 challenges the validity of PM2.5 NAAQS and her findings of Medicare PM2.5 deaths
4. Smith 2021 reanalysis of Di JAMA 2017 challenges her findings of PM2.5 deaths below 12 µg/m³
5. Her service on the EPA-funded NASEM NAAQS Committee violates NASEM conflict of interest policy
6. Her advocacy for tightening the PM2.5 NAAQS is erroneous given the existing low US PM2.5 levels
7. She misuses Medicare records for weak ecological epidemiology and unjustified causal conclusions
8. Her access to confidential Medicare records is without the informed consent of 69 million Americans
9. Her 30+ Chinese co-authors are a concern for HIPAA violation of Medicare records confidentiality

I have very strong evidence to support all nine of the above points, such as, my 36-page December 10, 2021 Comments to EPA CASAC (http://scientificintegrityinstitute.org/PMPanel121021.pdf) and my September 15, 2021 request to remove Dr. Dominici from the NASEM NAAQS Committee (http://scientificintegrityinstitute.org/NASEMDominici091521.pdf). I can submit additional evidence once you agree to examine my complaint.

I commend you for expressing strong support for transparent and reproducible scientific research by co-authoring the October 14, 2020 Nature commentary “Transparency and reproducibility in artificial intelligence” (doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2766-y). Transparency and reproducibility are urgently needed in PM2.5 epidemiology.

Time is of the essence regarding my complaint because the EPA CASAC and its PM Panel are now preparing to formally recommend tightening the PM2.5 NAAQS and the NASEM NAAQS Committee is preparing (via secret meetings) a report on causality that is highly relevant to the PM2.5 NAAQS. Also, my complaint is relevant to the Federal lawsuit challenging the composition and legality of the current EPA CASAC (https://junkscience.com/2021/12/wall-street-journal-editorializes-on-young-v-epa/).

The scientific misconduct of Dr. Dominici is one example of “The Ideological Corruption of Science: in American laboratories and universities, the spirit of Trofim Lysenko has suddenly been woke.” This corruption is described by renowned theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss in his July 13, 2020 Wall Street Journal Op-Ed (https://ift.tt/3fmmU0b). Dr. Krauss has appropriately noted that “Whenever science has been corrupted by falling prey to ideology, scientific progress suffers. This was the case in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union . . . .”

Thank you very much for your consideration of my complaint.

Sincerely yours,

James E. Enstrom, PhD, MPH, FFACE
Retired UCLA Research Professor (Epidemiology)
President, Scientific Integrity Institute
http://scientificintegrityinstitute.org/

cc: NASEM BEST Director Clifford S. Duke, PhD

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The long predicted collapse of the EU renewable energy push has finally arrived. The EU has effectively just admitted renewable energy does not work, by moving to extend their definition of green energy to include reliable power sources like natural gas and nuclear energy.

Fury as EU moves ahead with plans to label gas and nuclear as ‘green’

Brussels faces backlash and charges of greenwashing after publishing draft proposals on New Year’s Eve

Jennifer Rankin in Brussels
Mon 3 Jan 2022 23.18 AEDT

The European Commission is facing a furious backlash over plans to allow gas and nuclear to be labelled as “green” investments, as Germany’s economy minister led the charge against “greenwashing”.

The EU executive was accused of trying to bury the proposals by releasing long-delayed technical rules on its green investment guidebook to diplomats on New Year’s Eve, hours before a deadline expired.

The draft proposals seen by the Guardian would allow gas and nuclear to be included in the EU “taxonomy of environmentally sustainable economic activities”, subject to certain conditions.

The taxonomy is a classification system intended to direct billions to clean-energy projects to meet the EU goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

…

Austria’s government repeated its threat to sue the commission if the plans go ahead. Leonore Gewessler, the country’s climate action minister, said neither gas nor nuclear belonged in the taxonomy “because they are harmful to the climate and the environment and destroy the future of our children”.

She added: “We will examine the current draft carefully and have already commissioned a legal opinion on nuclear power in the taxonomy. If these plans are implemented in this way, we will sue.”

She also accused the commission of a “a night and fog operation” in the timing of the publication, a charge echoed by Luxembourg’s energy minister, Claude Turmes, who described the draft as a provocation.

However, opponents are not expected to secure the supermajority needed to block the plans.

…

Germany’s finance minister, Christian Lindner of the FDP, told the Süddeutsche Zeitung on Sunday that Germany needed gas-fired power plants as a transition technology because it was foregoing coal and nuclear power. “I am grateful that arguments were apparently taken up by the commission,” he said.

…

The plans have already attracted the ire of Greta Thunberg and other young climate activists, who say this “fake climate action” contradicts the EU’s goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

…

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/03/fury-eu-moves-ahead-plans-label-gas-nuclear-green

Greta Thunberg is throwing a tantrum – but nobody cares.

In the wake of Europe’s catastrophic September green energy crisis we all knew the EU’s commitment to renewables had to end, but I’m personally surprised the EU bureaucracy moved so quickly. The haste with which they made this decision is evidence of how worried EU leaders are about rocketing energy prices and blackouts.

We can only imagine how green groups are responding to this abrupt defeat, what frantic meetings and phone calls must be occurring. I mean, the EU was the most committed green energy champion on the planet, everything seemed to be moving their way, then suddenly with this one stroke of a pen, it is all over.