|
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/31/suppressed-rig.../
The results of rigged animal tests that have plunged the German car industry into renewed turmoil were suppressed because they showed the opposite of what car-makers wanted, it has emerged.
Edited by oldroverboy. on 31/01/2018 at 19:33
|
|
Scum. The testing procedure itself it pretty disgusting but then to not pay outstanding fees because you arent happy with the results is just absolutely horrendous.
|
|
The comments section is Hilarious on the DT article.
|
|
|
|
Looks like the New a Scientist report which concluded that diesels manufactured before 2006 are less harmful than the newer models, has been proved correct.
But how does this news affect the decision to introduce a scrap page scheme for older cars ?
|
|
What is the reason? I guess the particulate filters still let through the really small particles that will get deeper into your lungs.
|
|
|
|
|
I find the concept of any German entity restraining and gassing a living being (human or otherwise) to be abhorrent, it hits a spot very few things do.
|
|
Its difficult to avoid the temptation to post an emotive and perhaps crude response to this story, so I won't avoid it.
Let the monkeys go, and shove the diesel pipes in the big fat gobs of some of the people who commissioned the research. That would be a good result for me.
|
|
|
|
You'd think that, given the German people's sensitivity towards anything resembling gas chambers and its connotations, that SOMEONE would've spoken up from these car firms and got this stopped before it got off the drawing board. And, to top it all, they apparently (according to the DT reports) wanted to fudge the result because they showed the old diesel's fumes were less harmful. Unebelievable!
Dieselgate, and now THIS?! Talk about inept, in my view. (Proverbial) heads need to roll for this across all the firms involved.
Edited by Engineer Andy on 31/01/2018 at 23:50
|
|
I have no wish to engage with vituperative detractors of life sciences, but often the only way to advance knowledge in such matters is through experimentation.
The jury is still out on the extent of the significance of NO2, as it is almost impossible to separate its effects from the associated particles which also cause cardiorespiratory problems. If anyone is interested, here is an informative link...
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attac...f
See especially the italics in paras 11, 12 and para 15.
A major problem is our failure to detect and prosecute the significant percentage of HGV drivers who disable their SCR units.
|
|
John, please explain to me what you mean by "vituperative detractors of life sciences", and where these people can be found, if you'd be so kind.
Much obliged.
|
John, please explain to me what you mean by "vituperative detractors of life sciences", and where these people can be found, if you'd be so kind.
Much obliged.
By all means. Here's a link.
www.peta.org.uk/action/activist/
|
John, please explain to me what you mean by "vituperative detractors of life sciences", and where these people can be found, if you'd be so kind.
Much obliged.
By all means. Here's a link.
www.peta.org.uk/action/activist/
Righto, so you're referring to the PETA folks.
Just for a moment, I thought you might be referring to someone who uses this forum.
|
Another environmental disaster that was suppressed was the introduction of Ethyl lead into petrol.
Developed for GM by Thomas Midgley , the one man environmental disaster as a response from the company to turn a banger into a Cadillac.
We all know of the damage it did to children's development and also the workers including Midgley who developed it.
He then went on to develop CFC for GM so that they could introduce an affordable fridge under the Frigidaire .
So does this put diesel gate in perspective ?
|
|
Wow - that's really interesting - I'd never heard of him. A one man plague! Ironic that he was strangulated by his last invention.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure if you were referring to me, but I don't mind life sciences if done ethically - I'm certainly NOT one of those SJW activists protesting about all and sundry - its just I think its SO BAD PR of German makes, and especially VAG to be involved in this sort of thing and in the manner they did (never mind the trying to fudge the results) given their recent track record and the implications as regards their involvement as firms in 'similar activities' on humans in WWII.
In my view, they've gone about this whole issue in the wrong way, setting up a 'secret lab' (in my view, and it seems of media commentators) for testing cars, then trying to change the results and deflect blame once the story got out.
Not good.
|
the implications as regards their involvement as firms in 'similar activities' on humans in WWII.
Now that i didn't know.
|
|
Generally speaking I'm fine about experimentation on animals, as long as nobody tells me about it.
Once I'm made aware of something like this, my hands start to itch to get round the throats of those who think its OK to torture animals for the benefit of humankind, as well as having a stern word with their apologists.
I can stomach the use of laboratory animals to some extent if its about alleviating/ curing illness, and if it can be shown that there is no viable alternative, but not at all if its for naked profit; and less still if it all turns out to be a total waste of life and money.
|
those who think its OK to torture animals for the benefit of humankind, as well as having a stern word with their apologists.
No-one in their right mind thinks this. But don't equate humane experimentation with perverted Nazi behaviour. And remember, the 1930s Germans were not only streets ahead of everyone in automotive attainment, but also in public health (Ref: The Nazi War against Cancer - Robert Proctor). Our Richard Doll was erroneously credited with proving the link between smoking and cancer in the 1950s -the proof was already there from 1930s research work. Disgracefully, we were still experimenting on 'smoking beagles' in the 1970s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
