April 6, 2000
Letters to the Editor
'Erin Brockovich,' Affirmed
Given the enormous popularity of the movie "Erin Brockovich," it was
probably inevitable that someone like Michael Fumento would try to
debunk
it (" 'Erin Brockovich,' Exposed," editorial page, March 28). Mr.
Fumento
targeted the plaintiff's attorneys who sued Pacific Gas & Electric and
the
scientific evidence they marshaled to prove that the company's use of
Chromium 6 contaminated groundwater and thereby damaged the health of
countless people who lived in and around Hinkley, Calif., in the 1960s,
'70s, and '80s.
Letters intended for publication in the print edition of the Journal can
be
e-mailed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] All letters are subject to
abridgment. For more reader responses, see Voices.
Despite Mr. Fumento's claims to the contrary, Chromium 6 kills. It has
been
labeled as a human carcinogen by the EPA, the International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC), and the state of California. PG&E's own
documents concede "the material is toxic." Indeed, it is so toxic that
California no longer permits its use even in cooling towers.
Mr. Fumento is also wrong when he claims Chromium 6 is a problem only
when
inhaled. The EPA, IARC and numerous medical researchers agree Chromium 6
can also cause injury as a result of ingestion and dermal exposure. And
he
is way off base when he says the amount of Chromium 6 in Hinkley's water
never exceeded 0.58 parts per million. PG&E itself measured
concentrations
as high as 20 parts per million -- some 40 times higher than Mr.
Fumento's
supposed maximum.
Mr. Fumento also asserts that "no one agent could possibly have caused
more
than a handful of the symptoms described" by the Hinkley plaintiffs.
This
blithely ignores thousands of pages of medical records, the testimony of
medical experts and scientists, and interviews with the workers who
inhaled
Chromium 6.
How does Mr. Fumento support his position? By citing William Blot. Mr.
Blot
is a paid "expert" for PG&E, who has earned as much as $400 an hour
testifying on behalf of the utility. Mr. Fumento also cites a study that
supposedly showed that Chromium 6 did not harm PG&E workers. He neglects
to
mention that PG&E funded the study. Nor does he acknowledge that unlike
the
unfortunate residents of Hinkley, PG&E workers did not drink Chromium
6-laced water for decades or mix their baby formula with it every day
for
years on end, or that the study itself conceded that "high levels of
exposure to hexavalent chromium have been associated with increased
risks
of lung and nasal cancer. . . ." He also mentions some rodent and dog
studies that seem to exonerate Chromium 6 as a health hazard, but
doesn't
note that these are vastly outnumbered in scientific literature by
animal
studies that positively establish the compound's toxicity.
If the case against Chromium 6 is as weak as Mr. Fumento claims it to
be,
how is it that PG&E "coughed up" (his words) $333 million in settlement
payments? Mr. Fumento insists it's because the studies "came in after
the
settlement." Chromium 6 has been studied for more than a century. To
suggest that the scientific consensus on the subject has suddenly been
turned on its head is nonsense.
Mr. Fumento cynically suggests Erin Brockovich "had to convince
thousands
of people that they've been poisoned for decades and will continue to
suffer for the rest of their lives." Nobody had to "convince" the
plaintiffs of their own palpable suffering. PG&E did wrong. As its own
documents reveal, the company contaminated the groundwater and then
tried
to cover it up. In the words of Robert Glynn, the utility's chairman and
CEO: "PG&E did not respond to the groundwater problem as openly,
quickly,
or thoroughly as it should have. . . . It is clear, in retrospect, that
our
company should have handled some things differently. . . ."
It wasn't bad timing that scared PG&E into arbitration, nor was it
"slick
lawyers and sympathetic witnesses," as Mr. Fumento tries to imply. It
was
the facts of the case: PG&E poisoned people. These people are rightfully
outraged. And the rest of us should be, too.
Erin Brockovich
Gary A. Praglin
Los Angeles, Calif.
(Ms. Brockovich was the lead investigator in the Hinkley case. Mr.
Praglin,
along with Edward L. Masry, Thomas V. Girardi and Walter J. Lack are the
attorneys who represented the plaintiffs against PG&E.)
________________________________________________________________________
Start an Email List For Free at Topica. http://www.topica.com/register
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
