Skip to main content

CNN's Erin Burnett Falls for Erin Brockovich and the Tooth Fairy

Last night on CNN, Erin Burnett had Erin Brockovich on as a guest. Yes, that Erin Brockovich. It was a pretty typical segment, with Burnett chatting up Brockovich about her new book, "Hot Water," a thriller she co-authored with CJ Lyons. In the course of the interview, which you can watch by clicking here, Brockovich started throwing out all sorts of accusation concerning illnesses being caused by nuclear facilities including power plants.
What really caught my attention was when Brockovich mentioned the "Tooth Fairy Project," that inexhaustable fountain of junk science fronted by Joseph Mangano. Said Brockovich: "There was a facsinating study that was done called the 'Tooth Fairy,' where they were actually studying baby teeth. And they were finding 33% increase in disease just in and around these nuclear facilities."

Yes, we've seen studies like that before -- and we've managed to debunk them. What has me shaking my head is why journalists like Burnett refuse to do the work of delving into what real scientists have to say about the Tooth Fairy Project?

Eight state departments of health have investigated Mangano's claims, and all eight states (Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Michigan) refused to validate them. Here's what the New Jersey Commission on Radiation Protection had to say about Mangano's research:
The Commission is of the opinion that "Radioactive Strontium-90 in Baby Teeth of New Jersey Children and the Link with Cancer: A Special Report," is a flawed report, with substantial errors in methodology and invalid statistics. As a result, any information gathered through this project would not stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific community. There is also no evidence to support the allegation that the State of New Jersey has a problem with the release of Sr-90 into the environment from nuclear generating plants: more than 30 years of environmental monitoring data refute this.
And here's what Scientific American had to say about one of Mangano's more recent papers concerning radiation and Fukushima:
[A] check reveals that the authors’ statistical claims are critically flawed—if not deliberate mistruths.



Only by explicitly excluding data from January and February were Sherman and Mangano able to froth up their specious statistical scaremongering.

This is not to say that the radiation from Fukushima is not dangerous (it is), nor that we shouldn’t closely monitor its potential to spread (we should). But picking only the data that suits your analysis isn’t science—it’s politics. Beware those who would confuse the latter with the former.

We've taken on Mangano repeatedly over the years, and made sure to share that information with any journalist who was inquisitive enough to ask about it. So while we're not surprised that Brockovich -- who makes a living trolling for plaintiffs no matter what the science might say -- might try to leverage Mangano's nonsense, Burnett doesn't have the same sort of excuse.

The Tooth Fairy Project has been debunked by serious scientists all over the country, yet journalists -- and in Burnett's case it's clear we ought to use that term loosely these days -- fail to ask any tough questions about the quality of its science. Why no tough questions? Isn't that what she and her producers are paid to do? Or are they just in the business of helping Brockovich sell books?

UPDATE: We just got a tip that Brockovich will be on MSNBC at 4:00 p.m. EST. We'll be watching.

Comments

John said…
About 1:36, does she say the "...Perry Nuclear Facility as I've said in Semi Valley California..."

Did I hear that right?
Brian Mays said…
Ohio ... Simi Valley ... eh ... close enough. For a blonde, that's pretty good. At least she got the right continent. ;-)

The quality of CNN has been steadily deteriorating for a long time. Thus, I'm not surprised that they put an air-head like Brockovich on one of their programs.

What surprised me is the little skull-and-crossbones pendant around her neck. What's up with that?!
jimwg said…
Ever slam them hard on these malacious seeds of doubt and misinformation. I regret there's no nuclear energy Cronkite or Carl Saagn out there to refute these uncontested accusations. Your agenda is clear, CNN.

James Greenidge

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…