Celebrities catch our attention. They cause us to pay attention too -- which is likely why the media uses celebrities and prominent people to send messages about all sorts of issues, like breast cancer.

It's not just the real-life survivor celebrity stories -- about Melissa Etheridge and Elizabeth Edwards and Sheryl Crow -- that make headlines and attract ratings. It's also the portrayal of cancer survivors on television that raises awareness about this disease. It's not a new trend -- it started long ago when All in the Family's Edith Bunker (Jean Stapleton) experienced a breast cancer scare, marking one of the first times the issue of breast cancer was discussed openly on TV.

Tough cop Mary Beth Lacey (Tyne Daly) of the TV show Cagney & Lacey traveled a breast cancer journey. Sisters eldest sister Alex (Swoosie Kurtz) was diagnosed with breast cancer and survived chemotherapy with family by her side. Beverly Hills, 90210 character Brenda Walsh (Shannen Doherty) found a lump in her breast and shed light on the fact that young women are not immune to breast cancer. Sex and the City's Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall) developed breast cancer and proudly pulled off her wig on television. The L Word's Dana Fairbanks (Erin Daniels) lost her battle with breast cancer. And on Angela's Eyes, FBI agent Angela Henson recently learned her mother once had breast cancer -- and that it has come back.

There are many others television story lines woven with the thread of breast cancer. They draw viewers and boost ratings. They also raise awareness -- because people pay attention to celebrities.

Here's why you should never believe everything you read -- and why you should always ask who is behind the research study. In 1997, an article was published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine that claimed chromium-contaminated water was not causing high rates of cancer in China. The study reversed an earlier finding by the same Chinese researchers that linked hexavalent chromium to cancer. Nine years later, the medical journal is planning a retraction of the article. Nine years is a long time for erroneous information to be sitting there as research-based fact. It's not a case of OOPS! this is what we knew then but here is what we know now, and what we know now is different than what we knew then -- no no NO -- it's more potentially sinister than that. You be the judge. I quote from The Wall Street Journal, "The article in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine was conceived, drafted and edited by consultants for PG&E Corporation. The PG&E consultants submitted the article for publication without letting on they or PG&E were involved."

Why, isn't this the same chromium that contaminated the groundwater of Hinkley, that led to the fearless and determined investigator Erin Brockovich to uncovering a cover-up by PG&E that led to the widely-publicized lawsuit against PG&E during the same period in time, the 1990s, that the above scientific article was published. And just so we are all on the same page of thank goodness for the good guys, it was the Environmental Working Group and The Wall Street Journal who lodged an objection to the published research in the medical journal. 

Erin Brockovich-Ellis traveled to Ithaca to tell local homeowners she thinks they have a strong legal case against Emerson Power Transmission for damages resulting from the plant's contamination of the area with the industrial solvent, trichloroethylene, or TCE, a potentially potent carcinogen. It seeps into groundwater. According to Brockovich-Ellis, "the residents are not dealing with a rinky-dink amount of TCE," and went on to indicate that the TCE numbers are some of the highest she has ever seen. A spokesperson for Emerson is quoted as saying that the company was not aware of any lawsuit and had no comment. They might not have a comment but I seriously doubt they are unaware of the potential lawsuit or the arrival of Brockovich-Ellis.

Neither a lawyer or scientist, she has become legendary for her activism and work regarding environmental issues related to cancer incidence. What made her famous was the curious, relentless, tenacious, and fearlessness of her pursuit in exposing the truth of the incident involving Pacific Gas and Electric who had been knowingly exposing residents groundwater to the cancer-causing agent chromium 6 and the cancer deaths that followed. Like I said, because of who she is and the reputation that precedes her, I have difficulty believing the Emerson spokesperson when he states they are not even aware of the arrival of Brockovich-Ellis and the lawsuit her firm is interested in taking on against the company.

In an earlier post, TCE: groundwater contamination in toxic triangle of cancer, we shared a story about residents in Texas who plant small purple crosses in the front lawns of those who have been diagnosed with cancer. They believe they have been poisoned by the TCE that was dumped at a military base for decades and subsequently spread for miles through a shallow aquifer under the 22,000 nearby homes where they live. 

Three days ago, I went all Erin Brockovich about the news that wasn't being reported in the news reports about the Nevada Cancer Institute opening offices in Elko and Fallon. As initially reported by the local Nevada television and print media, this was an effort to help provide outreach, education and support to the projected 11,000 Nevadans who will be diagnosed with cancer this year. At that time, not one of the news reports mentioned anything about the water supply, or the fact that Fallon is classified as a cancer cluster town, or why the offices were being opened. Days later, you can go here, and here, and even here, to be told that University of Arizona scientists think they may have a found the reason for the unusually high number of childhood cancer cases in Sierra Vista and Fallon, Nevada.