Everyone, including journalists and news outlets, makes mistakes from time to time. Most of us are eager to correct errors or inaccuracies when they are pointed out to us. 

When an article or op-ed contains a blatant factual inaccuracy, we ask the outlet that published the piece to take action to correct the record, and do so publicly. Many of them do.  But Environmental Health News (EHN) failed to meet even the lowest bar when we pointed out an error in a recent opinion piece. 

Here’s what happened: 

A few months ago, EHN published an op-ed from a chemistry student at Carnegie Mellon University claiming that children were exposed to dangerous levels of phthalates by eating Kraft Mac & Cheese. There was just one problem. The student had overestimated the level exposure by at least 1000%. He claimed that one serving would exceed the EPA’s reference dose. The truth is that a child would have to consume 15 servings, or two family-size boxes, per day over a lifetime of 70 years, to exceed the EPA’s reference dose.

We contacted Professor Linda A Peteanu, Chair of the Department of Chemistry at Carnegie Mellon University with a letter detailing the mistakes. And, after contacting the School, we contacted Brian Bienkowski, the Senior Editor of Environmental Health News to inform him of the errors in both the op-eds published by EHN and in the underlying research. 

Unfortunately, Mr. Bienkowski ignored our letter and shirked his journalistic responsibility to ensure that readers have the facts.

Of course, we understand that students, especially those studying highly technical subjects, can make mistakes or miscalculations. But it’s baffling that a publication like EHN, which claims to be “dedicated to driving science into public discussion,” would print these false claims at face-value without any significant scrutiny, and subsequently dismiss our attempts to ensure the public has the accurate facts. 

It would be a disservice to readers if an agenda-driven bias against phthalates of any kind allowed this piece to go forward and ignore any attempt to correct the record. 

But if EHN won’t act in the interests of its readers, we will.

***

UPDATE: After we published this blog post, Mr. Bienkowski responded to our correction request and refused to make any correction to the op-eds in question. Astonishingly, Mr. Bienkowski seems to believe that he, as editor, doesn’t not have any responsibility to ensure that fundamental facts are correct in “opinion” pieces. The New York Times and the Washington Post both agree that fact-checking standards should apply to opinion pieces. EHN claims to be “dedicated to driving science into public discussion,” but it seems they are really only dedicated to driving their own agenda. Even if it means promoting demonstrably false, junk science.