Not Just Monkeys: German Automakers Also Sponsored Diesel Emissions Experiments on Humans

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Over the weekend, we reported that German automakers funded research where monkeys were exposed to diesel exhaust fumes from an emissions-cheating VW Beetle. Volkswagen Group, Daimler and BMW all condemned the study — claiming to be appalled by the logistics employed for research they were funding.

Apparently, the situation is a little darker than we first thought. In addition to gassing 10 monkeys, the group hired by automakers to prove the worth of diesel was also testing on human beings. The European Research Group on Environment and Health in the Transport Sector (EUGT) had 25 people inhaling a gaseous byproduct of diesel combustion at a clinic used by the University of Aachen in 2016.

On Monday, German newspaper Stuttgarter Zeitung expanded on EUGT’s unsavory research practices — claiming it not only exposed animals to exhaust gases, but people as well. The German government is up in arms over the revelation. “These tests on monkeys or even humans cannot be justified ethically in any way,” said Chancellor Angela Merkel’s spokesman, Steffen Seibert, on her behalf.

Social Democrat Stephan Weil, who also happens to be a VW supervisory board member, called the testing “absurd and abhorrent … Lobbying can be no excuse whatsoever for such testing.”

Unlike the exhaust testing on monkeys, specific details on the human experiment are quite a bit lighter. While subjects were exposed to the irritant gas nitrogen dioxide (which is prevalent in diesel exhaust), exactly how remains unspecified. The 25 subjects are believed to all have been young adults in good health and were exposed to various concentrations of the gas for several hours at a time at a facility run by Aachen University.

Automakers are, once again, in the position of having to explain the matter. Daimler condemned the research, saying it had no say in establishing how EUGT conducted itself. “We are appalled by the extent of the studies and their implementation,” a spokesperson said. Daimler previously mentioned it would conduct an investigation into the group’s decisions.

Volkswagen has also distanced itself from the research, saying it will look into the situation. However, as the European Research Group on Environment and Health in the Transport Sector was basically asked by German automakers to counter a 2012 decision by the World Health Organization to classify diesel exhaust as a carcinogen, they hold some of the blame. How much blame is yet to be decided; all three have claimed to have limited knowledge of the group’s proceedings.

That’s not good enough for the growing number of outraged politicians. Many, like Stephan Weil, are demanding automakers immediately provide details on what the goals of these types of exhaust studies were.

“At the end of the day, the purpose of such experiments is the decisive factor. If for example, safety and health in the workplace were being tested, as Aachen University has suggested, and ethical standards were adhered to, it is defensible,” Weil told a news conference on Monday. “Where experiments served the purposes of marketing and sales, however, I cannot think of an acceptable justification for such an approach.”

[Image: Ruben de Rijcke/ Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY-SA 3.0)]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 25 comments
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X '19 Nissan Frontier @78000 miles has been oil changes ( eng/ diffs/ tranny/ transfer). Still on original brakes and second set of tires.
  • ChristianWimmer I have a 2018 Mercedes A250 with almost 80,000 km on the clock and a vintage ‘89 Mercedes 500SL R129 with almost 300,000 km.The A250 has had zero issues but the yearly servicing costs are typically expensive from this brand - as expected. Basic yearly service costs around 400 Euros whereas a more comprehensive servicing with new brake pads, spark plugs plus TÜV etc. is in the 1000+ Euro region.The 500SL servicing costs were expensive when it was serviced at a Benz dealer, but they won’t touch this classic anymore. I have it serviced by a mechanic from another Benz dealership who also owns an R129 300SL-24 and he’ll do basic maintenance on it for a mere 150 Euros. I only drive the 500SL about 2000 km a year so running costs are low although the fuel costs are insane here. The 500SL has had two previous owners with full service history. It’s been a reliable car according to the records. The roof folding mechanism needs so adjusting and oiling from time to time but that’s normal.
  • Theflyersfan I wonder how many people recalled these after watching EuroCrash. There's someone one street over that has a similar yellow one of these, and you can tell he loves that car. It was just a tough sell - too expensive, way too heavy, zero passenger space, limited cargo bed, but for a chunk of the population, looked awesome. This was always meant to be a one and done car. Hopefully some are still running 20 years from now so we have a "remember when?" moment with them.
  • Lorenzo A friend bought one of these new. Six months later he traded it in for a Chrysler PT Cruiser. He already had a 1998 Corvette, so I thought he just wanted more passenger space. It turned out someone broke into the SSR and stole $1500 of tools, without even breaking the lock. He figured nobody breaks into a PT Cruiser, but he had a custom trunk lock installed.
  • Jeff Not bad just oil changes and tire rotations. Most of the recalls on my Maverick have been fixed with programming. Did have to buy 1 new tire for my Maverick got a nail in the sidewall.
Next