List date(s) this work was published or aired.
December 2011, Winter Issue
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
a. In a time when readers (especially CURE readers) are overwhelmed by “everything causes cancer” news, this story provided what breaking news either does not or cannot: context. Readers of CURE spend a great deal of time thinking about what caused their cancer or what they might have done to prevent their disease. As a service to our readers, this story took on the complex ties between environment and cancer to help make sense of often conflicting reports. Rather than provide readers with breaking news, this story aims to provide perspective to understand and decipher contradictory news on the environmental causes of cancer. b. The accompanying sidebar provides readers with questions to ask to evaluate research that they read in the news. Not only does the sidebar discuss the types of studies and results readers may encounter but also how to examine biases in studies as well as how the study may fit into the larger context of medical research.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
a. Journal articles were consulted to trace the history of environmentally related cancers to form a backbone for the article. A British Journal of Industrial Medicine article explained the history of scrotal cancer while an article from The Journal of the American Medical Association discussed the history and research into cancers found in German dye workers. Information from the Memorial and Radford Universities’ websites provided the necessary history about the “Radium Girls.” b. Information from governmental institutions, such as National Cancer Institute’s website cancer.gov, provided the necessary background on environmental risks and possible carcinogens. The Food and Drug Administration’s website provided updated policy information regarding Bisphenol A (BPA). c. To explore industry reaction to research as well as public reaction, an article from the American Journal of Public Health was consulted as well as commentary from The Journal of the American Medical Association regarding radiation exposure from medical imaging.
Explain types of human sources used.
Experts who have investigated possible links between the environment and cancer, including the epidemiologist who has conducted three investigations in Hinkley, Calif., (of Erin Brockovich fame) and still found no excess of cancer. a. Sheila Zahm, ScD, deputy director of division of cancer epidemiology and genetics at the National Cancer Institute b. Regina Santella, PhD, of Columbia University and director of the Center for Environmental Health in Northern Manhattan, funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences c. John W. Morgan, DrPH, epidemiology and biostatistics professor at Loma Linda University and epidemiologist for the California Cancer Registry d. Devra Davis, PhD, founder and president of Environmental Health Trust and author of The Secret History of the War on Cancer
Results:
The story was published in December 2011, so results and reader responses are still coming in. However, we have received phone calls, tweets, FaceBook feedback and email responses expressing their appreciation for the article. One reader said that they believed this was the direction of future cancer research while another mentioned that she had participated in a study examining environmental influences. Here is an excerpt from a reader response: “I want to thank CURE magazine for the article, “Connecting the Dots”. It really highlighted the environmental cause-effect relationship between work hazards & agricultural cancer clusters with cancer […] I hope this opens some eyes to prevent other people from becoming cancer victims to such a careless practice. Thank you for sharing this with your readers.” An expert in the field also commented on the piece, saying: “This was a very well written piece which is very timely and relevant. It flows well, is balanced and pitched at the right level.”
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
None.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Sometimes it’s good to take a step back from the headlines and provide readers with a story that will help them be better consumers of news.