Final answer:
Without appropriate context, it's impossible to provide a true or false answer regarding the hygiene example and employee monitoring. In the case of colonial taxation, it is true that colonists objected to the use of tax money without representation. The second example likely alludes to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and ethical violations therein.
Step-by-step explanation:
In response to the question provided, it appears there is some confusion as no adequate context is given to determine the truthfulness of the statement regarding hygiene and employee monitoring. Hence, it is not possible to accurately answer whether the statement is true or false without additional information.
However, pertaining to the separate example provided regarding the colonists and taxation, it is true that the colonists objected not necessarily to taxation itself, but to how the tax revenue would be spent - specifically, they were against taxation without representation in the British Parliament, which guided how those taxes were used.
The second example referencing a control group seems related to a historical unethical study which might be the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, where indeed, infected individuals were not informed about their disease, highlighting a notorious case of ethical misconduct in medical research.