RE: Erin Brockovich

["Grant Wilton" <gwilton@chem.swri.edu>]

It would be prudent for all parties to step back from the "Érin Brockovich"
affair for a moment and examine the scenario. It's Hollywood.....pure and
simple.  A plot we've all seen a thousand times before: down trodden
everyman goes on a crusade against the bad guy(s)( slimy businessman, big
faceless corporation, etc.) pulling even the most cynical skeptics into the
fold.  Without having seen the movie, I 'm gathering that "pure and applied
science" was not the main focus but that Julia Roberts was.  Hexavalent
Chromium is carcinogenic but also rather unstable in the environment, I
assume that's why the EPA established a 24 hour holding time for this
analysis.


In my own words,

Grant Wilton
Senior Research Scientist
Southwest Research Institute
gwilton@chem.swri.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
[mailto:radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu]On Behalf Of Erik C. Nielsen
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 10:43 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Erin Brockovich


At 08:37 AM 3/29/00 -0600, you wrote:
>Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 23:00:40 -0500
>From: "D. Kosloff" <dkosloff@ncweb.com>
>To: <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
>Subject: Erin Brockovich
>Message-ID: <001e01bf9933$59a30160$5c0d4ecf@pavilion>
>
>According to Slate e-magazine, the Wall Stree Journal op-ed page for
3-28-00
>carried a column arguing that although Erin Brockovich is an enjoyable
>movie, the real woman wasn't much of a scientist. The problem is, argues
the
>author, Michael Fumento, that Chromium 6, the suspected toxin in the case,
>could not have caused the wide range of symptoms described, if for no other
>reason than that it's a carcinogen only when inhaled. So its mere presence
>the town water supply is not dispositive. According to the piece, PG&E
>settled the case for $333 million not because of the evidence against it,
>but because of the possibility that in facing the high-powered trial
>attorney hired by the plaintiffs, the utility could have lost a great deal
>more.
>
>Don Kosloff dkosloff@ncweb.com
>2910 Main St, Perry OH 44081
>440 289 5371
>
>It's not about dolts,
>It's about thrust.

Someone did not watch the movie closely.   The cooling towers for the water
produced a white precipitate over a large area.  This was only briefly
mentioned in the movie....must pay attention to details.

If inhalation was the only hazardous pathway why are there drinking water
regulations??? Ever heard of pathway analysis???? Cooking??? Showers?? Lawn
watering?????  The GW exceeded DW regulatory limits......thus fault.

Erik

Erik C. Nielsen
Radiochemistry Group Leader
mailto: enielsen@stl-inc.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Severn Trent Laboratories
628 Route 10
Whippany, NJ 07981
Voice (973) 428-8181  ext 6461
Fax    (973) 428-5222
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Standard denials apply.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Analytical Laboratory Services: Mixed Waste, Radiochemistry, Waste
Characterization.
Visit us at:  http://www.stl-inc.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html