Doctor Loses Challenge to Pa. Fracking Gag Rule
Judge rules he hasn't made a case
A Pennsylvania doctor cannot fight a "medical gag rule" that he says forces physicians to keep the public ignorant of the health dangers of hydrofracking, a federal judge ruled.
In a July 2012 complaint, nephrologist Alfonso Rodriguez had taken aim at Act 13 of 2012, an amendment of the Oil and Gas Act signed on Feb. 14.
Rodriguez, who specializes in renal diseases, hypertension and advanced diabetes in Dallas, Pa., said the law prevents doctors from telling patients or the public about the health dangers of hydraulic fracturing. More commonly known as "fracking," the practice involves using toxic fluids to release natural gas by power-drilling through underground shale rock.
The nephrologist "has recently treated patients directly exposed to high-volume hydraulic fracturing fluid as the result of well blowouts," including one "with a complicated diagnosis with low platelets, anemia, rash and acute renal failure that required extensive hemodialysis and exposure to chemotherapeutic agents," according to the complaint.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Is it just me, or are there a hell of a lot of assumptions packed into those paragraphs?
TBS, I would think that the law, as described here, is a 1st Amendment violation.