Are you a fan of ordinary, household tap water? I'm really not (no matter how much the local water authorities try to convince me) just based on the sources my local water comes from -- which are not the cleanest by any means.

Well, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently stated that a type of chromium can cause cancer in lab animals when they drink it in water. Surprised? I'm not, oddly. Hexavalent chromium has already showed to be cancerous to the lungs when inhaled -- and now, findings are that it is just as dangerous when consumed in water. Who here does not drink water? No hands went up -- I thought so.

Avoiding the possibility of this in your drinking water means finding a natural (and generally expensive) water source from which to consume. In other words, bottled and shipped to you in many cases.

Nearly 20 percent of women and eight percent of men with lung cancer have never smoked, say researchers involved in a study of one million people in the United States and Sweden. The likely culprit in these lung cancer cases is secondhand smoke.

It's not yet clear why women are more likely to develop the disease. Perhaps they are more susceptible to all forms of smoking -- whether direct or secondhand -- or maybe because more men smoke than women, women are more likely to be exposed to secondhand smoke.

While smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer, there are other factors to blame for disease incidence. Radon, asbestos, chromium, and arsenic are all associated with lung cancer.

According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer will be diagnosed in 213,000 Americans in 2007. The disease will kill 160,000.

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.