Highlights: A study this summer found that using a single gas stove burner on high can raise levels of cancer-causing benzene above what’s been observed from secondhand smoke.

A new investigation by NPR and the Climate Investigations Center found that the gas industry tried to downplay the health risks of gas stoves for decades, turning to many of the same public-relations tactics the tobacco industry used to cover up the risks of smoking. Gas utilities even hired some of the same PR firms and scientists that Big Tobacco did.

Earlier this year, an investigation from DeSmog showed that the industry understood the hazards of gas appliances as far back as the 1970s and concealed what they knew from the public.

It’s a strategy that goes back as far back as 1972, according to the most recent investigation. That year, the gas industry got advice from Richard Darrow, who helped manufacture controversy around the health effects of smoking as the lead for tobacco accounts at the public relations firm Hill + Knowlton. At an American Gas Association conference, Darrow told utilities they needed to respond to claims that gas appliances were polluting homes and shape the narrative around the issue before critics got the chance. Scientists were starting to discover that exposure to nitrogen dioxide—a pollutant emitted by gas stoves—was linked to respiratory illnesses. So Darrow advised utilities to “mount the massive, consistent, long-range public relations programs necessary to cope with the problems.”

These studies didn’t just confuse the public, but also the federal government. When the Environmental Protection Agency assessed the health effects of nitrogen dioxide pollution in 1982, its review included five studies finding no evidence of problems—four of which were funded by the gas industry, the Climate Investigations Center recently uncovered.

Karen Harbert, the American Gas Association’s CEO, acknowledged that the gas industry has “collaborated” with researchers to “inform and educate regulators about the safety of gas cooking appliances.” Harbert claimed that the available science “does not provide sufficient or consistent evidence demonstrating chronic health hazards from natural gas ranges”—a line that should sound familiar by now.

    • centof@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s more the sociopaths running the companies that are shit. They don’t give a damn about the people they exploit and the harm they cause. And every institution’s got their share of them, not just businesses.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And they’re in the positions they are because of capitalism. Capitalism dictates you should exploit as much as possible to increase profits.

        • centof@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          they’re in the positions they are because of capitalism.

          More specifically, they are in them because of human nature. Those who don’t care about others gravitate towards positions of power. That is not exclusive to capitalism. Any hierarchy is prone to sociopaths rising to positions of power. They seek them no matter what the economic system is.

          In other words, power corrupts. People without power who get power inevitably start to act like sociopaths.

          But feel free to blame capitalism if you like. It is the cause of many problems with our society. Any change that decreases its power should be welcomed at least in the context of American society.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It isn’t exclusive to capitalism or caused by it, but it is exacerbated by it. It is a system that rewards the worst parts of humanity. I never claimed it to be the cause, only part of the issue.

            If it’s inherent to hierarchy, how about we work to remove as much hierarchy as possible. That’s my preference.

    • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it’s going away ever. We need regulations that require companies to have greater, more powerful ethics oversight. Launching fake research like this should be criminal.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What is the better solution? What country has implemented something better than capitalism?

        • Rivers@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Capitalism is industrialised greed, it keeps the wheels turning, having people forever chase shit that they don’t need for the sake of feeling better than the man stood next to them. What an inspirational ladder to climb.

          You’re under the misunderstanding that it works.

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re under the misunderstanding that it works.

            Again, what works better? What country has implemented a better economic system?

        • TinyPizza@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          A system that fully accepts environmental realities and works against the wholesale ecocide of the planet as it’s first tenet. The rest is kinda whatever at this point. It could be a resource based economy or some sort of mixed planned/free market. Just gotta make sure that invisible hand doesn’t strangle us all in our sleep, ya know?

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            A climate-focused approach can be built into any economic system. This isn’t really an argument for ditching the economic system that has led to the least human suffering.