BuzzFlash has an interesting story which details some more examples of apparent dishonesty by Lott.
I was able to check one of them myself: Mary Rosh's defence of Lott's statement that the "the worst thing people can expect from dioxin is a bad rash". Rosh argues that this isn't Lott's claim, but that of Michael Fumento, whose book Lott was reviewing. However, if you read Lott's review, it is quite clear that he makes the claim his own. And if you read Fumento's book, you will also see that Lott exaggerates Fumento's position. Fumento argues (convincingly, in my opinion) that the dangers of dioxin have been grossly overstated, that while it might possibly be carcinogenic, the evidence for this is weak. But he is not saying that is safe to put it on your cornflakes.