You have obviously have never lived in coal country(mines and/or coal plants) nor do you know any locals that can be living proof that this article is not true and is only pushing an agenda.
Actually I lived in crested butte Colorado for close to 10 years. While there is no mining there anymore there was a very large mine just over the pass in somerset Colorado. I passed thru there very regularly as we would ride dirt bikes on the western slope a lot. I'm not claiming to be or have been a full time resident of coal country, but I did live quite close to a large scale mine for a long time (although the pass was closed in winter). And I can't say I ever met anyone from somerset that I'd call healthy...
As for the study, you just say it's fake because it says something you don't like to admit. Look at the data, they provided all of their sources, listed limitations, identified what they used for statistical analysis and also declared in writing that all authors do not have any current or potential financial competing interests. Call it fake if ya want, but I'd say it's based on some pretty damn real data and has a lot less potential for bias than what is put out by the deniers.
I'd like to see ya come up with a scientific study based on that level of detail including a statement of no financial conflict from the authors that says it's all rainbows and unicorns from a health standpoint in coal country, especially Appalachia.
Last edited: