Thank you Myrl Jeffcoat!!! The Never-board-certified Stephen Barrett, MD (Part 2)
in [MCS]
|
Prev: Thank you Myrl Jeffcoat!!! The Never-board-certified Stephen Barrett, MD (Part 1)
Next: Fresh air
From: Ilena Rose on 17 Apr 2008 17:32 Note from Ilena Rosenthal, Health Lover: After 6 long years of ugly litigation ...I prevailed against the legal assaults of Stephen Barrett, who Myrl Jeffcoat advertises for. I did not write the following, although Jeffcoat attributes this blog to me .... These are mine: www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/myrl.html http://www.stephenbarrettmd2.blogspot.com/ January 16, 2007 Objective Medical Findings in the Chemically Sensitive that were Never Disclosed by Stephen Barrett Posted below is a list of objective medical findings in chemically sen- sitive patients. It appears after an introduction and the narration of a recent case study. The introduction illustrates how objective medical findings can be entirely missed dur- ing cursory exams. And the case study reminds us that, simply be- cause corporate attorneys allege something in a workman's comp case, it doesn't mean it's true. Not Detected by the Standard Chest CT Scan. Yet Detected via the End-expiratory CT Scan. A January 2002 article that remains posted on the Fox News website declared it "junk science." It was/is the emergent ill- ness which afflicted persons exposed to the debris of the World Trade Center collapse. Unofficially called "World Trade Center Syndrome," its distinctive feature is the "the WTC Cough," and its symptoms include shortness of breath. The article attributed the ills of the afflicted WTC cleanup crew members to the 2002 "flu season." It furthermore at- tributed the ills of affected Manhattan residents to "anxiety salted with hypochondria." Its conclusion was that only "minor and transient health effects from the site" were to be expected. A newly emerged illness had just made the scene, and just as quickly on the scene was a political operative ridiculing people's notice of it. Then came November 30, 2004, when a press release reported that some of the afflicted crew members of the ground zero cleanup operation were actually suffering from the trapping of air. They had Small Airways Disease. And it was the end-expiratory CT scan that confirmed it. The standard chest CT scan entirely overlooked it. The Fiberoptic Rhinolaryngoscopy Detects that which the Garden Variety Cursory Exam Overlooks The upper airway endoscopy is recognized by mainstream medical science as an effective means by which pathologies of the septum, turbinates, mucosa, nasopharynx, adenoids, eustachian tube orifice, tonsils, posterior tongue, epiglottis, glottis, and vocal cords can be easily seen. And it was the fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam which resulted in re- searchers realizing (in the early 1990s) that the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome which was presumed to involve no objective medical findings showed signs of a physical pathology. In addition, the golden rule for diagnos- ing Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction came to be that of a flexible fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam per- formed upon a patient while the patient is symptomatic. The human body is regarded as exceptionally complex. There- fore, the reasonably minded person should understand that the cursory physical exam and garden variety testing do not detect everything. This understanding, in addition to the preceding paragraphs, offers insight as to why a number of chemically sensitive persons have been declared to have no objective medical findings. The account posted directly below should offer more detailed insight to this. It involves a recent case study. And, as was previously stated, the lesson derived from it is that simply because defense attorneys assert some- thing in a workman's comp case, it doesn't automatically mean that it's true. She Was Claimed to Have No Objective Medical Findings to Verfiy Her Symptoms. Multiple Medical Findings Were Documented in One Day. A woman whose workplace was a former coal tar research building became ill six months after having worked there. A laboratory would come to confirm that her workplace was laden with very fine monofilament fibers. And the smaller the molecular agent, the greater is its potential to infiltrate and afflict the inner recesses of the complex human anatomy. Furthermore, there is also the matter of pesticide exposure, ambient solvent exposure, and mold exposure to take into account, concerning the woman's workplace environment. After the woman had initially become ill, she kept going to work. Her condition then worsened and she had to quit work entirely. A fellow employee also quit working, and he moved to Arizona. Other fellow employees mentioned that they were being sickened, too. In fact, the business no long- er operates in the former coal tar research building. And it is a large corporation that is involved in this matter, even though the antics of a small fly-by-night business are de- scribed. In fact, the corporaton's total stockholder equity was marked at over eleven billion dollars in 2005. Her Symptoms The woman's symptoms included: [1] a stinging tongue. [2] shortness of breath. [3] burning nasal passages. [4] a metallic taste in the mouth. [5] an adrenal-like stream throughout her solar plexus. [6] headaches accompanied by the bruised feeling at the cheekbones and temples. [7] ice-like numbness pervading her upper-respiratory tract (on specific occasion.) She would be able to detect the presence of certain airborne agents, simply because she unavoidably tasted them on her tongue. She could no longer go to the places she used to frequent without becoming severely symptomatic. A number of airborne agents would trigger her ills. And this included solvents, fragrances, engine exhausts, and musty cardboard boxes. In addition, she lived in the american state which presently has the fourth worse air quality in the entire United States. Plus, she had no prior history of asthma, no prior history of chronic upper-respiratory ills, and no history of allergies. She received the diagnosis of agoraphobia & panic attacks, by a "mental health person." And the corporate attorneys in- volved in her workman's comp case asserted that she had no objective medical findings to support her claims. However, an allergist & immunologist gave her the diagnoses of Asthma, Rhinitis, and Chemical Sensitivities, while a cytopathologist gave her the additional diagnosis of Reactive Hyperplasia. In fact, in ER settings she received the Asthma and Rhinitis diagnosis. Yet, assertions of mental illness had been set forth on record and asserted in court depositions as the cause of her ills. The assertions were significantly weakened in less than an hour. Grossly Enlarged Turbinates, for Starters On October 13, 2005, a fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam was performed on her. It was conducted by an Ear Nose Throat & Allergy Specialist who was also a fellow of the American College of Surgeons. The woman who was said to have no objective medical findings to support her symptoms was found to have: [1] postauricular adenopathy. [2] grossly enlarged turbinates. [3] shoddy posterior cervical adenopathy [4] some erythematous changes of the uvula. [5] some mild edema of the true vocal cords. [6] thickened coating over the dorsum of the tongue. The physician's impressions, as are stated on record, were: [1] multiple chemical and irritant sensitivities. [2] rhinitis and turbinate hypertrophy. [3] glossitis (tongue inflammation). Whatever be the medical condition that this woman has, it is one of a physical origin and mechanism. It is not a mat- ter of mental illness. Therefore, if she were not made ill from workplace exposure, then she was made ill by some other physical cause. Gruntled Breathing and Rales Were Already Observed The story isn't over, of course. Objective medical findings had been entered into her records even before the October exam. She was documented as having "gruntled breathing" during one ER visit. She was recorded as having wheezed and crackled during other ones. And she had already been found to have the previously mentioned adenopathy. In fact, tachycardia, erythema of the oropharynx, and hypopotassemia had also been entered into her medical records before the October 13 rhinolaryngoscopy. Yet, she was branded with the "mental illness stigma," especially by the corporate attorneys and independent medical exam- iner involved in her workman's comp case. Furthermore, after she had become ill, she tested severely positive for dust mites and no other high weight molecular agent (such as ragweed, tree pollen, etc.) And she has no prior history of allergies. Now, she was exposed to inordi- nate amounts of dust at her former place of work, and a person can become sensitized to dust mites. In fact, there are cases where barn workers became sensitized to storage mites. The account of the chemically sensitive woman who has over a dozen objective meidcal findings attached to her medical re- cords can be accessed by clicking on the web link provided directly below. Narrative of the chemically sensitive woman with over a dozen objective medical findings Chemical Exposure During Testing is Often a Necessity There is one thing to note about chemical sensitivity condi- tions. In order to acquire objective medical findings, you often have to be tested/examined while exposed to a chem- ical agent that assails you. You have to be tested while you are symptomatic. You will not acquire objective medical findings in a vaccuum, in most testing/examing. Thus, it is not an unheard event for a chemically sensitive patient to be found hunched over a waste basket after having been ad- ministered a skin prick test. Patch testing has resulted in a few occasions of anaphylaxis. And being made sympto- matic before a rhinolaryngoscopic exam is not a painless event. Moreover, the inhalation challenge test that mea- sures FEV1 and the such is not recommended for those who are extremely hyperresponsive. If the Detractors of MCS Admit to Even One Objective Medical Finding in any Type of Chemically Sensitive Patient, the Effect of their Propaganda Will Be Diluted If the detractors of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity disclose even one objective medical finding in chemically sensitive patients, they will risk extinguishing the disrespect and indifference that their literature serves to incite. This will incline people to take a respectful view of environmental illness. In learning that a number of chemical-specific & case-specific forms of chem- ical sensitivity have already been found to exist, people will surmise that it is only a matter of time before the controvesy involving Multiple Chemical Sensitivity will be resolved. In light of this, a list of objective medical findings in chemically sensitive patients is posted directly below: Objective Medical Findings in the Chemically Sensitive Bronchial hyperresponsiveness in inhalation challenge testing. This includes things such as the drop in FEV1: Forced Expiratory Volume after 1 second of time. Objective skin whealing resulting from skin testing; See the article in Part 1, titled, Visible & Measurable Wheals Have Been Repeatedly Documented. Simultaneous release of Leukotriene B4 and Interleukin-8; (LTB4 is a chemokine. IL-8 is a toxin to neutrophils.) Permeability of upper-respiratory epithelial cell junctions; found in biopsy studies, via the electron micrograph Abnormal liver function in the absense of viral infection. Exorbitant presence of n-acetyl-benzoquinoniemine; a toxic liver metabolite associated with P450 cytochrome inducers such as acetaminophen. Paradoxical adduction of the true vocal cords. Testing positive in traditional patch testing. Peripheral nerve fiber proliferation. Nasal and/or laryngeal erythema. Turbinate swelling/hypertrophy. Edema of the true vocal cords. Lymphocytic infiltrates. Glandular hyperplasia. Angioedema. Anaphylaxis. Dermatitis. Note 1: There are fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopic exam find- ings that were not posted above. In order to read of the additional findings, see: Rhinolaryngoscopic Examination of Patients with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome: Click here for the fiberoptic rhinolaryngoscopy article Note 2: There are also instances of hematotoxicity triggered by nontoxic benzene exposure. See: Hematotoxicity in workers exposed to low levels of benzene: Click here for the benzene hematotoxicity article Note 3: There is more that can be included, but the afore- mentioned things should suffice in proving a point. posted by Atlantic America | 1/16/2007 Case-specific Forms of Chemical Sensitivity, Plus a Proposed Mechanism for MCS Provided is an outline of the 2002 proposed mecha- nism for MCS. A pivotal feature was added to the diagram, in 2004. It, too, is discussed herein. The outline follows a listing of the case-specific forms of chemical sensitivity. Nine web links are also included in this post. Identified & Defined Forms of Chemical Sensitivity The forms of chemical sensitivity listed below are those which have already been identified and defined by main- stream medical science. The list automatically illustrates that nontoxic\ambient levels of chemicals are not univers- ally harmless. The list, therefore, illustrates the need for a plurality of people to avoid pertinent chemical exposures. The Merit in Making the List Known The list serves to counter that which anti-MCS literature serves to provoke. Needless to say, anti-MCS literature serves to: 1] provoke the powers-that-be into depriving chemically sensitive persons of reasonable accomodation; 2] provoke the powers-that-be into depriving severely impaired chemically sensitive persons of disability com- pensation; 3] persuade marketers into declining to provide consumer product lines free of those chemical-bearing agents which are known to trigger adverse reactions such as asthma. When you illustrate that there are forms of chemical sensi- tiity that have already been found to exist, you illustrate the need of an entire class of people to avoid ambient levels of the chemical-bearing agents known to harm them. You don't have to wait for the universal recognition of MCS, in order make this illustration. The recognition of irritant- induced asthma alone, along with its subset condition, Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome, was all that was needed to accomplish this. Even if MCS comes to be declared a non-reality, there will still exist the ethical requirement to consider the needs of those who suffer from the case-specific forms of chem- ical sensitivity. Matters involving formaldehyde-releasing agents, the organophosphate\carbamate class of pesticide, perfume ingredients, additives, & reasonable accomoda- tion will still have to be addressed. Here is the list, con- structed in two parts: Generalized\Systemic and Localized Forms Irritant-induced Asthma Irritant Rhinitis\Rhinosinusitis Halothane-induced Hepatitis Photoallergic Contact Dermatitis Benzene-induced Aplastic Anemia Airborne Irritant Contact Dermatitis Formaldehyde-induced Anaphylaxis (chlorhexidine-induced & other forms) Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome Irritant-associated Vocal Cord Dysfunction (symptoms include shortness of breath) Acute Generalized Exanthematous Pustulosi Chemical Worker's Lung (a type of Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis) Occup. Asthma due to low-weight molecular agents Occ. Urticaria (due to low-weight molec. agents), as well as systemic forms of urticaria Chemical-specific Forms Pine Resin/Rosin Allergy Albietic Acid Sensitivity Peruvian Lily Allergy (Tuliposide A Sensitivity) Red Cedar Allergy (Plicatic Acid Sensitivity) Methyltetrahydrophthalic Anhydride Allergy IgE-mediated Triethanolamine Sensitivity Phthalic Anhydride Hypersensitivity (Acetylated) Salicylate Sensitivity Cyanuric Chloride Sensitivity Ethylene Diamine Sensitivity Acetaminophen Sensitivity Glutaraldehyde Sensitivity Chlorhexidine Sensitivity Methacrylate Sensitivity Sulfite Hypersensitivity Isocyanate Sensitivity Chromate Sensitivity Paraben Sensitivity ... etc., etc., etc. Note 1: The list of chemical-specific forms is long. None the less, the subset provided should suffice in proving a point. Note 2: Sick Building Syndrome was not listed because it is not exclusively caused by ambient chemical exposure. It can also be caused by viral and mold exposure. Note 3: Reactive Upper-Airways Dysfunction Syndrome doesn't appear in the list, being that Irritant Rhinitis was listed. None the less, RUDS is the subset of irritant-induced rhinosinusitis or rhinitis that works on the upper-respiratory tract the same way that RADS works on the lower respiratory tract. Note 4: Small Airways Disease was not listed, either. Yet, it was found to exist in some of the WTC clean- -up crew members who became ill during or after the clean-up. See: CT helps find cause of puzzling cough in WTC Rescue workers. It is found at: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=17093 Note 5: There are a multiplicity of contact sensitivity con- ditions that were not posted. They were omitted, in order to avoid the appearance of redundancy. Note 6: The diagnostic title, Reactive Intestinal Dysfunction Syndrome (RIDS), has been proposed. See: Reactive intestinal dysfunction syndrome caused by chemical exposure - RIDS. It is found at: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0907/is_n5_v53/ai_21230719 The Most Recently Proposed Mechanism for MCS The 21st Century proposed mechanism for MCS identifies two general categories of chemical sensitivity. They are Central Chemical Sensitivity and Peripheral Chemical Sensitivity. The outline goes as follows: Central Chemical Sensitivity This type of chemical sensitivity involves the central nervous system, and it's triggering point is proposed to be found in chemoreceptor activation (action potential.) Specific chemoreceptors, upon their activation, elevate nitric oxide levels in the body. The nitric oxide then reacts with superoxide, producing peroxynitrite. While the nitric oxide is engaged in producing peroxynitrite, it is simultaneously engaged in an additional function. That function is "retrograde signaling." Nitric oxide's role in retrograde signaling is proposed to be that of sending an electrical signal to the presynapse cells, thereby stimulating the release of two types of neurotrans- mitters. The neurotransmitters involved are glutamate and aspartate. Those types of neurotransmitters then stimulate receptors in the post synaptic cells, known as N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors. Abbreviated "NMDA receptors", they react by producing nitric oxide from their own sites, thereby maintaining the inordinately high level of nitric oxide al- ready present. Nitric oxide's ample presence proceeds to maintain the inordinately high levels of peroxynitrite. While the NMDA receptors are maintaining an elevated nitric oxide level, peroxynitrite is engaged in causing the cells that contain those receptors to be depleted of their energy pools. That which is being depleted is adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the carrier of energy in all living or- ganisms. Peroxynitrite inhibits mitochondrial function, and therefore, the production of ATP. When cells containing NMDA receptors become deprived of their energy pool's replenishment, the NMDA receptors become hypersensitive to stimulation. And while the cells containing NMDA receptors are being deprived of energy replenishment, peroxynitrite is engaged in yet another pro- cess; that of breaking down the blood brain barrier. This enables increased chemical access to the brain. Meanwhile, nitric oxide performs yet another function; that of inhibiting cytochrome P450 activity. Therefore, nitric oxide is proposed to inhibit the process by which chemicals get metabolized and become harmless. The result is heightened sensitivity to chemical exposure. The aforementioned scenario was proposed by Dr. Martin L. Pall, of the School of Molecular Biosciences of Wash- ington State. And the aforementioned scenario is called "a vicious cycle mechanism." A paper written by Dr. Pall which describes this vicious cycle can be accessed by clicking on the following web address: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2003/5935/5935.html Vanilloid Receptor TRPV1 Recently added to this proposed mechanism is the first member of the Vanilloid Receptor family, TRPV1. The involvement of TRPV1 in MCS is the subject of a paper written by Dr. Pall and a Dr. Julius Anderson, M.D., Ph.D., of West Hartford, Vermont. It is titled, The Vanilloid Receptor as the Putative Target of Diverse Chemicals in Multple Chemical Sensitivity. The bibliographical citation for it is Arch Environ Health. 2004 Jul;59(7):363-75. (I could not find it posted anywhere on the Internet, except for the abstract of it at the ncbi website. And that was only a paragraph or two in length.) The vanilloid receptor is implicated as a major target for a number of chemicals which can activate it. Therefore, vanilloid receptor activation is proposed to be the point where the vicious cycle begins. The vanilloid receptor paper also addresses the phenomenon of masking, a phenomenon duly noted in Central Chemical Sensitivity. Masking is the phenomenon where a chemical exposure scenario gets muted at the outset by the overshadowing effect of a previous and different one. That same chemi- cal exposure would have resulted in a notable adverse reaction if it were the first one of that day. That same chemical exposure will result in an adverse reaction when it becomes the first one, on some future day. The masking effect muted the presence of that one chemical exposure encounter for that particular day. The authors of the vanilloid receptor paper propose that masking occurs during a cyclic phase known as dephos- phorylation. It is a phase triggered by Ca2+ calmodulin phosphatease calcineurin. The hypothesis is that vanilloid receptor activity is decreased during that phase; the "de- sensitization" phase. Conversely, it is during the alternate phase, the one known as phosphorylation, when vanilloid receptor activity increases, and hypersensitivity reactions resume. Therefore, the phosphorylation state determines the activity or inactivity (desensitization) of the vanilloid receptors. In addition to the paper that Martin Pall co-authored, there is an article on the vanilloid receptor that he individually authored. Titled, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: towards the end of controversy. It was published in in the August- September 2005 edition of Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. It can be accessed by clicking on the fol- lowing web address: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0ISW/is_265-266/ai_n15688810/pg_3 The article cannot be regarded as a substitute for the recent paper on TRPV1. But, it does provide enough information to enable a reader to become familiarized with the recently added feature of Dr. Pall's proposed mechanism for MCS. In fact, clicking on the following web addresses can help familiarize a reader with the basic of elements of the bio- science involved in Martin Pall's proposed mechanism: Concerning Chemoreceptors, one can refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemoreceptors Concerning Action potential, one can refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential#Underlying_mechanism Concerning Synapses, one can refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapse#Signaling_across_chemical_synapses Now, the proposed mechanism of Dr. Pall is a hypothesis. It is a hypothesis which involves intricate details and in- tricate mapping. This means that the objective medical findings of chemically sensitive patients continue to carry the sole weight in proving that chemical sensitivity is a physiological condition and not a psychiatric one. The objective medical findings include instances of anaphy- laxis triggered by nontoxic/ambient/therapeutic levels of chemical-bearing agents. The findings include cases where two entirely different forms of localized chemical sensitivity were found co-existing in the same one patient. Such co-existence hints of the authentic existence of MCS. Peripheral Chemical Sensitivity This general type of chemical sensitivity is proposed to in- volve the peripheral tissues. Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome is placed in this category, as is Reactive Upper- airways Dysfunction Syndrome. The contact sensitivity conditions, such as Airborne Irritant Contact Dermatitis, are also placed in this category. This type of chemical sensitivity is proposed to involve neurogenic inflammation. One can obtain more informa- tion on this type of chemical sensitivity by clicking on the following links: Hypothesis for Induction and Propagation of Chemical Sensitivity Based on Biopsy Studies. http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/1997/Suppl-2/meggs-full.html Neurogenic Inflammation and Sensitivity to Environmental Chemicals. http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/1993/101-3/meggs-full.html posted by Atlantic America | 1/16/2007 Systemic Chemical Sensitivity and Dual Chemical Sensitivity Anaphylaxis: It impairs multiple body systems in one systemic fashion, and it has been triggered by a number of chemicals at nontoxic levels. The chemicals which have thus far been documented as having triggered ana- phylaxis ( at nontoxic levels) include: [01] the hair bleaching agent, Ammonium Persulfate. [02] the antimicrobial agent, Chlorhexidine (0.05%). [03] the medical disinfectant, Ortho-phthalaldehyde. [04] the fungicide, Chlorothalonil (0.01% aqueous). [05] the analgesic ingredient, Polyvinylpyrrolidone. [06] the diagnostic agent, Isosulphan Blue Dye. [07] the dialysis ingredient, Ethylene Oxide. [08] the additive, Sodium Benzoate. [09] the analgesic, Acetaminophen. [10] the xanthine dye, Flourescein. [11] the food coloring, Tartrazine. [12] the anesthesia, Propofol. [13] common aspirin. [14] formaldehyde. [15] nitrites. [16] sulfites. ... etc. The existence of Systemic Chemical Sensitivity has already been documented under the name, anaphylaxis. It is not a proposed hypothesis yet to be proven. An Assertion Negated by Evidence Gathered in the Field of Occupational Medicine An objection to the recognition of Multiple Chemical Sen- sitivity consists in the assertion that a chemical, whenever encountered at a nontoxic level, can not impair more than one body system in the same one person. However, chemi- cals have individually done this during anaphylaxis. And then there are documented instances in the world of occupational medicine, where the same one chemical, at an ambient level, has impaired two body systems in the same one worker (or subset of workers.) This phenomenon (one which can be regarded as Dual Chemical Sensitivity) has thus far involv- ed the integumentary system (the skin) in combination with the respiratory system in the following forms: [1] airborne irritant uritcaria (hives) accompanied by rhinitis; [2] asthma and rhinoconjunctivits accompanied by dermatitis; [3] asthma accompanied by dermatitis; [4] asthma accompanied by urticaria. Dual Chemical Sensitivity has already been documented, and it appears in documentation under the name "comorbid conditions," as well as under "coexisting conditions." It is not a hypothesis yet to be proven. The chemicals which have thus far been documented as having induced it, within the world of Occupational Medicine, include: [1] dental acrylates; [2] dusts of persulfate salts; [3] epoxy resin diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A; [4] leather tanning ingredient potassium dichromate; [5] spray paint additive, polyfunctional aziridine cross- linker CX-100. The coexistence of distinctly different forms of localized chemical sensitivity negates the assumption that a chemical sensitivity reaction can only impair one body system in any one person. (Clicking on each of the following titles will connect you to the documentary evidence, concern- ing dual chemical sensitivity): Occupational allergic airborne contact dermatitis and delayed bronchial asthma from eposy resin revealed by bronchial provocation test. Occupational Asthma and Contact Dermatitis in a Spray Painter after Introduction of an Aziridine Cross-Linker. Allergic contact dermatitis and new-onset asthma. Occupational asthma and dermatitis after exposure to dusts of persulfate salts in two industrial workers (author's transl) Dentist's occupational asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and allergic contact dermatitis from methacrylates. Acrylates induced rhinitis and contact dermatitis. Pronounced Short-term Chemical Exposure Causing Long-term Illness in Dual Body Systems And then there are cases where pronounced chemical exposure (such as in the case of chemical spills) has resulted in adverse affects to dual body systems. It has furthermore resulted in hypersensitivity to a number of chemicals other than that which was encountered during the chemical over-exposures. One case study involves a tank truck hauler who developed symptoms during and after an eight and a half hour stay around a tank of par- affin, due to the fact that he experienced a tire blowout while driving and had to wait for a road crew to get him back on the road. Within one hour of the blowout, the driver underwent a racking cough, a severe headache, and an irritated throat. And within forty hours, his feet, hands, and abdomen started to swell. The swelling continued to the point where it even triggered shortness of breath and chest pains. The physical examination of the driver resulted in the following objective medical findings: [1] an elevated CD 26 cell count; [2] a protuberant/distended abdomen; [3] a decreased T-suppressor cell count; [4] the presence of the antinuclear antibody; [5] and the presence of the anti-thyroid antibody. [6] the presence of the anti-smooth-muscle anti-body; [7] liver function test results consistent with hepatotoxic injury. When the driver was examined a year after the blowout, he stated that chemical exposure scenarios precede gastrointest- inal distress, fatigue, weakness, arthralgia, & irritability. Now, this is a description of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, and this is pertinent to note, in light of the fact that the detractors of MCS have repeatedly claimed that persons manifesting signs of MCS have no objective medical findings to support their re- ported symptoms. This one driver had seven objective medical findings documented at the outset of his illness. In meeting rooms where position statements are drafted, the name, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, was changed to Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance. This substitute title is an entirely erroneous title in the case of the tank truck hauler, being that "iodiopathic" means "of unknown origin," and the hauler's ills originated at a known time and a known place, with already- identifed mechanisms, and objective medical findings. That case study and seven other ones are described in a medical article titled, Reactive Intestinal Dysfunction Syndrome Caused by Chemical Exposures - RIDS. It is already cited in the article posted above. However, for the sake of convenience, a link to the full text is reposted directly below: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ mi_m0907/is_n5_v53/ai_21230719 An Assertion in anti-MCS Literature Negated by Evidence Gathered in the Field of Occupational Medicine Needess to say, anti-MCS literature asserts that persons suf- fering from MCS are merely mentally ill, despite the fact that there is no consensus as to what particular type of mental ill- ness this might be. Nonetheless, a few anti-MCS propagandists assert that persons suffering from MCS are merely phobic of chemical exposure, and therefore, the fear of chemicals causes them to imagine illness. However, a number of persons suf- fering from MCS are those who worked in chemically laden environments. If such persons were phobic of chemical expo- sure, they would have never taken the chemically laden jobs that they took, in the first place. They would have never even applied for those jobs. posted by Atlantic America | 1/16/2007 The Bridge to Part 1 Part 1 can be accessed by clicking on the web address posted directly below. http://www.stephenbarrettmd.blogspot.com
|
Pages: 1 Prev: Thank you Myrl Jeffcoat!!! The Never-board-certified Stephen Barrett, MD (Part 1) Next: Fresh air |