QUOTING FROM the UC E-Health News today,we find Trump defending himself as a landowner against the science that proves asbestos is dangerous.

More in a series of very very serious evidence that this man makes his own reality.

Federal health agencies have mostly ignored the well-documented risk from asbestos-containing products for years, regardless who sat in the Oval Office.

Trump has often said that the danger of asbestos is overblown. Aside from his pro-business, anti-environment cabinet appointments, the 45th president brought with him a well-documented history of defending asbestos as safe.

Testifying as a New York landlord and developer, Trump touted the safety of the “miracle fiber” to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
2005.

He hammered home his belief in numerous speeches, tweets, and in his 1997 book “The Art of Making a Comeback.”

“I believe that the movement against asbestos was led by the mob, because it was often mob-related companies that would do the asbestos removal,” Trump wrote in that book. “Great pressure was put on politicians, and as usual, the politicians relented. Millions of truckloads of this incredible fire-proofing material were taken to special ‘dump sites’ and asbestos was replaced by materials that were supposedly safe but couldn’t hold a candle to asbestos in limiting the ravages of fire.”

However, the Centers for Disease Control and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration insist that there is no safe level of exposure to any asbestos fiber.

Expressing concern about Trump’s defense of asbestos and the disdain his nominee to head the EPA has for the agency’s laws, Monforton said it was irresponsible for EPA to not issue a warning before the change of administration.

SO MY TAKE ON THIS… is far deeper than the comment by Trump in bold above… it speaks to the values of this man.  That people get asbestosis, mesothelioma, and other respiratory diseases from this material had NO MENTION in the rant, rather it was about “waste” and “conspiracy” and “property”   — this is a sad commentary.

Secondly, and at least as sad, apparently when this man doesn’t understand the science behind the decisions he just blurts out nonsense, mainly an attempt at creating a smoke screen for his ignorance.  Many of the most awesome scientists I have ever met are fully comfortable with not knowing “everything”, it is honest and truthful, but I have also met those who will pull this same kind of smoke screen to cover their ignorance.  How frustrating for people who want to know the real facts… to be fed “alternative facts”