Media Reviews
EHS scientists and fellows critique media coverage.
Factual article explains Dow Chemical's dioxin legacy.
A Chicago Tribune reporter writes an excellent article about dioxin contamination along the Saginaw River in Michigan.
Dioxin contaminating Vietnam is a carcinogen.
An article released by Agence France Presse news service understates dioxin's cancer effects.
Poisonous planes' story needs description of "poison."
A news report about aero-toxic syndrome was thorough in most aspects. But it lacked basic background information on the chemical that might cause the health problem.
Reporter thoroughly covers pesticide controversy.
A Fresno Bee reporter clearly and accurately relates the science, health risks and controversy of using methyl iodide.
Households still a source of phosphorus.
Readers would benefit from knowing Lake Erie's main sources of phosphorus, a nutrient that may be responsible for the recent rash of algal blooms.
Agent Orange distracts from diabetes story.
A recent article heads a little off track when it states that Agent Orange and DDT both are linked to diabetes.
Left out and forgotten? Refinery's health risks.
The ArgusLeader missed a chance to explain the risks of air pollutants in an article about the air quality permit being issued for a new oil refinery in South Dakota.
Highest levels ever seen or just a typo?
China Daily articles that report milligrams – not micrograms – of lead in children's blood are most likely a translation problem.
Herbicide may not cure weeds in Lake Lily.
A recent article ignores the past lessons learned from using herbicides as a quick cure to manage aquatic weeds.
The grass isn't always greener with biofuels.
Corn-based biofuels are all the rage and often lauded as an "environmentally friendly" alternative to fossil fuels. But are they?
BPA-free story neglects children's health concerns.
Children's unique vulnerability to bisphenol A is left out of an otherwise excellent news story that reports the chemical was measured in bottles marketed as BPA-free.
Fish story needs fleshing out.
A recent pair of articles in the New York Daily News didn't go far enough to tell people why eating fish from local waters can be harmful.
Chemicals linked to male breast cancer, but which ones?
Few details about the chemicals that the men with breast cancer drank in their water while at the Camp Lejeune marine base makes this otherwise exceptional article seem murky and vague.
Electronic cigarettes and your car's radiator: what they DON'T have in common.
In recent articles about electronic or e-cigarettes, reporters tie the chemical propylene glycol – a main ingredient in the devices – to products such as antifreeze and hand sanitizers. Although accurate, the statements are unintentionally misleading and do not productively contribute to the debate on the health implications of e-cigarettes.
Twisting concerns over BPA.
The reporter and a quoted industry representative ignore a major point of a recent BPA study.
Some forms of mercury more toxic than others.
An article describing high levels of mercury in the Mackenzie River missed the chance to explain how the metal is connected to human health risks and that one form of mercury is of greater risk than the other.
Remember methane and its dual persona?
Methane's animal sources and its heavy impact to climate change is sidestepped.
Recharged energy ignores larger health issues of lead.
The disposal costs and health hazards of reusable batteries should not be overlooked.
Glyphosate: public health vs profit in Argentina.
Argentina's herbicide controversy pits health against the economy, but a Financial Times article fails to capture the issue's global importance.
Proposed legislation regulating tobacco not so simple.
Congress is ready to give the US Food and Drug Administration the power to regulate tobacco, but an article tackling the issue needs a more thoughtful analysis of the health impacts behind the proposed legislation.
