|Posted on January 23, 2022 at 6:55 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 23, 2022 at 6:50 AM||comments (0)|
Disturbed epigenetic mechanisms, which developmentally regulate gene expression via modifications to DNA, histone proteins, and chromatin, have been hypothesized to play a key role in many human diseases. Recently it was shown that engineered nanoparticles (NPs), that already have a wide range of applications in various fields including food production, could dramatically affect epigenetic processes, while their ability to induce diseases remains poorly understood. Besides the obvious benefits of the new technologies, it is critical to assess their health effects before proceeding with industrial production. In this article, after surveying the applications of NPs in food technology, we review recent advances in the understanding of epigenetic pathological effects of NPs, and discuss their possible health impact with the aim of avoiding potential health risks posed by the use of nanomaterials in foods and food-packaging.
Keywords: Epigenetic effects; Impact on health; Nanomaterials in food; Nanoparticles; Risk assessment.
Indexed for NIH Pubmed by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 8:35 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 8:30 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 8:25 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 6:10 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 6:00 AM||comments (0)|
Journal of Bioelectricity
Volume 10, 1991 - Issue 1-2
Electromagnetic Field Sensitivity
William J. Rea,Yagin Pan,Ervin J. Fenyves,Iehiko Sujisawa,Hideo Suyama,Nasrola Samadi & show all
Pages 241-256 | Published online: 07 Jul 2009
A multiphase study was performed to find an effective method to evaluate electromagnetic field (EMF) sensitivity of patients. The first phase developed criteria for controlled testing using an environment low in chemical, particulate, and EMF pollution. Monitoring devices were used in an effort to ensure that extraneous EMF would not interfere with the tests. A second phase involved a single-blind challenge of 100 patients who complained of EMF sensitivity to a series of fields ranging from 0 to 5 MHz in frequency, plus 5 blank challenges. Twenty-five patients were found who were sensitive to the fields, but did not react to the blanks. These were compared in the third phase to 25 healthy naive volunteer controls. None of the volunteers reacted to any challenge, active or blank, but 16 of the EMF-sensitive patients (64%) had positive signs and symptoms scores, plus autonomic nervous system changes. In the fourth phase, the 16 EMF-sensitive patients were rechallenged twice to the frequencies to which they were most sensitive during the previous challenge. The active frequency was found to be positive in 100% of the challenges, while all of the placebo tests were negative. we concluded that this study gives strong evidence that electromagnetic field sensitivity exists, and can be elicited under environmentally controlled conditions.
Indexed for Taylor and Francis and Journal of Bioelectricity by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 5:50 AM||comments (0)|
It is rare to find a patient with electrical sensitivities who does not already have multiple on-
going sensitivities to chemicals, volatiles and particulates.
Cyril W. Smith, Ph.D.
A shortened and edited version of notes written for and in cooperation with The
Breakspear Hospital, Hemel Hempstead, HP2 4FD, U.K. The writer has been helping
their electrically hypersensitive patients since 1982
What are Electrical Sensitivities?
Many persons suffer from sensitivities to certain foods and environmental chemicals which
cause them discomfort, or even in extreme cases prevent them from functioning in any
effective manner. Even the most minute amounts of these substances may on occasions
‘trigger’ reactions which are specific to each individual. Warnings regarding nuts, peanuts or
gluten are commonly found displayed on food products. When a sensitivity reaction occurs,
some regulatory system within the body has ceased to function properly and gives alarm
signals, calling for an unjustified panic reaction. Usually, it is the autonomic nervous system
(ANS) which is the first to become compromised in this way. This system controls all the
involuntary body functions. Thus, any part or function of the body might become affected by
the same allergen acting in different people which is why such effects do not show up in
Those who have already acquired several chemical hypersensitivities and which are ‘on-
going’, are at particular risk of acquiring electrical sensitivities as an additional problem. The
allergen ‘triggering effect’ may transfer from a minute amount of some chemical in the
environment to some patient-specific frequency of an electromagnetic field in the
environment. Usually, it is the same patient symptoms that continue to be ‘triggered’. It is
the frequency of the electromagnetic field that matters, once some patient-specific threshold of
intensity or field strength has been exceeded. The range of effective coherent frequencies
extends from below a thousand seconds per cycle (circadian rhythms) through audio- and
radio- and microwave-frequencies to visible light. All these effects are ‘non-thermal’: the
electrical power is insufficient to produce any significant heating. It is the frequency that
matters. In technical terms, it is the spectral power density or the watts per cycle of bandwidth
of the radiation which matters. The more precise the frequency – the less power is needed to
produce an effect.
Germany has introduced the WHO International Classification of Diseases Code T78.4 for
‘Chemical-Sensitivity Syndrome Multiple’, against which this can be reported and statistics
collected. There is no electrical equivalent WHO Classification to date but it would seem
reasonable for these cases to be recorded as a complication of the multiple chemical
sensitivities which precede the electrical sensitivities. Sweden regards electrical sensitivity as
a disability with the implication that all public places must be fit for the electrically sensitive
disabled person to be in.
The Electrical Environment
Such persons may experience problems from the natural electrical environment beyond what
is normal such as the influence of light on melatonin levels. Electrical or acoustic (even sub-
audio) frequencies from approaching weather fronts or thunderstorms may become
troublesome. Eventually, there may be a hypersensitivity to sunlight.
Fluorescent lighting and lasers at check-outs may make shopping difficult, particularly if
inhalants such as chemicals on in-store fabrics provide an initial chemical sensitisation. The
patient may experience problems when near any electrical equipment such as power lines,
radio- TV- or mobile phone transmitters, tape or DVD-recorders, computers, mobile phones,
satellites or in fact any one of the multitude of electronic devices in the modern environment.
It is not necessary for an electrical device to be active, any passive resonant circuit may
suffice; this could be the resonant frequency of a row of metal railings in the street. Persons
may become aware of actually having electrical devices malfunction when they handle them
or, even when in their vicinity.
The female characteristic is towards chronic sensitivities appearing at an early stage, resulting
in being labelled as “over-anxious”; the male characteristic is for no reaction until the onset of
a sudden and disabling crash which may result in the person becoming completely unable to
The hazard of chronic over-exposure to electrical frequencies is one of adaptation to
symptoms triggered by a particular pattern of frequencies until they become indistinguishable
from a disease condition. The problem seems to arise when the frequency pattern of a toxic
chemical in the body matches that of the person’s electrical environment. It is the frequencies
in the electrical environment which makes the body think it is under chemical attack
Typical Subjective Symptoms Relating to Electrical Sensitivities
Drowsiness, malaise and headache, mood swings, tearfulness and eye pain, poor
concentration, vertigo and tinnitus, numbness and tingling, nausea and flatulence,
convulsions, noise sensitivity, alteration in appetite, visual disturbances, restlessness,
Clinical Observations Relating to Electrical Sensitivities
Changes in respiration, heart rate changes (heart rate variability analysis is a good indicator of
the status of the ANS), eye pupil dilation, perspiration or lack of it, muscular weakness, loss
of visual acuity, speech or writing difficulties, loss of consciousness, convulsions.
At the Breakspear Hospital, about 10% of all patients with chemical, nutritional or particulate
sensitivities had acquired electromagnetic sensitivities. Tests often showed stress coming
from some common environmental frequency such as the power supply (50Hz in UK, 60 Hz
in North America) or the 2.45 GHz frequency of microwave cookers and other devices using
Patients’ reactions were triggered over a very wide range of frequencies for which at first
there was no recognisable pattern. Then it was realised that 7.8 Hz often appeared.
Measurements quickly revealed that 7.8 Hz was the endogenous frequency of the heart
acupuncture meridian. The endogenous frequencies of other acupuncture meridians also
appeared when these were under stress. The frequencies on acupuncture meridians are very
precise; for 53 heart meridian frequencies from 38 patients, the mean was 7.788 Hz (standard
deviation ± 0.92%). This frequency is used in some therapeutic or environment protection
devices and it occurs in radiation from the Schumann Bands in the upper atmosphere to
which we are all exposed.
Sensitivities to Foods and Chemicals
About 1-in-6 of a ‘population’ is usually considered to have some degree of impaired function
due to an allergic reaction to the environment or to food. Repeated exposure to a frequency
while a person is reacting to some other allergic trigger may link that specific sensitivity
pattern to that frequency, so that the same reaction is triggered on encountering either the
frequency or the allergen on a subsequent occasion. In general, the patient’s pattern of
response is the same whether the trigger is chemical, biological, particulate, nutritional or
electrical – it is characteristic of the patient.
Exposure to pesticides or herbicides seems to enhance or even create electrical sensitivities.
Formaldehyde is a very good sensitizer. Ionising radiation exposure (e.g. long-haul flights)
represents an additional stress factor. A few persons may become hypersensitive to light,
some to sunlight, or to the light of the mercury vapour spectrum, which is superimposed on
the emission from fluorescent tubes and energy-saving lamps.
Dental fillings may cause problems due to electrolytic currents between amalgam fillings containing different mixtures of metals or, between fillings and surrounding tissue. Patients
have been seen with black stains on the palate due to the electrolytic transport of mercury.
Amalgam-to-tissue contacts may detect environmental frequencies such as radio transmissions
just like a cat’s-whisker crystal set. There has been a case where a dentist heard music coming
from a patient’s mouth. The mercury toxicity frequency and a mobile phone frequency
unfortunately happen to stress the parasympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system.
A common feature of electrical hypersensitivity is that its sufferers complain vigorously that
nobody does anything for them, such as turning off an electrical source which they know is
“triggering” their reactions but, which seems to have no effect on anyone else. When a
hypersensitivity to sunlight is acquired, the futility of this approach is realised but perhaps not
before the sufferer has become almost paranoid about these problems.
When patients have acquired a high degree of sensitivity to many factors in foods and/or the
chemical environment (multiple-sensitivities), they are very likely to have acquired an
abnormal sensitivity to their electrical environment as a part of this ‘package’ of symptoms.
It is rare to find electrical sensitivities without on-going chemical sensitivities. This electrical
sensitivity can become so severe that a person becomes incompatible with technology and
unable to function in the modern environment. Electrical sensitivity is not mutually exclusive
of other clinical conditions; it can co-exist with and even trigger physical or mental illness.
Electrical sensitivities make diagnosis and therapy more difficult. Medications may produce
abnormal responses or side effects, even chronic sensitisation to the electrical environment.
A therapy for alleviating allergic reactions is called provocation/neutralisation
therapy. It was developed from earlier work in the USA by Dr. Joseph Miller of Mobile,
Alabama, and further developed at the Environmental Health Center, in Dallas, Texas, by Dr.
W. J. Rea and at the Breakspear Hospital, Hemel Hempstead, England by its Medical
Director, Dr. Jean Monro. This therapy relies on successive serial dilutions of the substance
having in sequence the effects of stimulating and/or quelling the reactions that they produce.
This therapy is not a substitute for eventually reducing the total body loading of triggering
substances to a level that the individual can cope with which can be done by simultaneously
increasing the rate of detoxification and reducing the rate of toxin intake until the body can
function normally, assuming that the enzyme systems for detoxification are still intact.
However, while this can produce an alleviation of the symptoms and thereby assist achieving
eventual normalisation, it may not be possible to achieve this without some change in the
patient’s lifestyle. It is also labour-intensive and therefore expensive.
The general concept introduced by Dr. W. J. Rea is to seek to reduce the total body load of
stressors. Which stress factors one seeks to reduce may be a matter of choice although some
stresses are involuntary through exposure to the general environment. Dr. Rea has
demonstrated the reality of electrical sensitivities in double-blind trials1
. The equivalent
therapy for alleviating reactions to electrical frequencies involves trying to find one or more
frequencies which will turn-off the body’s abnormal frequency sensitivity. This is not a
cure but it can help stabilise the body for more effective allergy therapy. As foods and
chemicals sensitivities are brought under control and the body detoxifies itself, the electrical
sensitivities usually disappear as well. Symptoms usually disappear in the reverse order to
their appearance. However, it is worth noting that if a person is working or sleeping in a zone
of ‘geopathic stress’, which may be electrical in origin, then their problems may persist and
Reducing the Impact of the Electrical Environment
The sensitive person is best able to determine what affects them. It is impossible to get away
from the natural electromagnetic radiation from the sun, the ionosphere, the weather and the
geomagnetic field. It is almost impossible to get away from man-made electromagnetic radiation. Persons who find a deep canyon or go to the ‘out-back’ still get zapped when a
satellite comes over the horizon. The best indicators for safer places are – mobile phones do
not work, TV reception is poor and there are no overhead lines.
In the home, electricity supply meters emit large fields and may be located in a passage on the
other side of the wall from a bed-head. From where the power supply reaches the house, its
cable may run on an outside wall but, close to a bed. Power lines on overhead poles may act
as antennae for radio and microwave transmissions and channel them into the house wiring. It
is good practice to turn off all non-essential electrical circuits at night. Power frequencies
may have the same effect as daylight in the arctic summer depressing the level of melatonin
(an anti-cancer agent). Some biologically based shielding may be provided by pine trees
which have terpene problems, cacti or spider-plants.
The power supply frequencies are in effect impossible to shield with any practical measures.
Higher frequencies can be shielded by metal wire mesh, metallised fabric or aluminium foil,
although these may act as mirrors to reflect the radiation elsewhere. They can also reflect
self-radiation emitted by a person having an allergic reaction making it even worse. A very
sensitive person may react to a quantum component of the electromagnetic field called the
magnetic vector potential and this cannot be shielded2
It is rare to find electrical sensitivities without previous and ongoing chemical sensitivities. If
a person is sensitised chemically, the electrical sensitivity can be enhanced. Remember that
electronic equipment emits chemical fumes and as these may be a trigger for reactions so they
need to be ventilated. For example, a person may tolerate the electromagnetic radiation from
a television set if it is enclosed in a glass-fronted box ventilated to the outside keeping fumes
from the hot plastic out of the room.
Computers have different clock frequencies usually specified in terms of their speed of
operation. These frequencies will be sub-divided in the process of carrying out the various
computational functions. It may be possible to find a model/manufacturer whose equipment is
tolerated. The flat screen displays are likely to have less emission. The pulses emitted when a
mobile phone dials-up a number can imprint frequencies into the head if it is held against the
ear before dialling is complete.
The eye can also be a pathway for frequencies to enter the body such as when viewing TV or a
computer. Most acupuncture meridians are stimulated/stressed while viewing a light source
flashing at a frequency equal to the endogenous frequency of the meridian. Frequencies
greater than 0.05 Hz and less than 47 kHz have this effect as do strong visual patterns and
colours. The body as a whole is sensitive to resonances in its environment, so metal structures
or even electronic equipment which is not switched on may cause problems.
Computer keyboards can have a long cable or an infrared optical link to the computer unit
enabling the latter to be kept at a distance. A whole building or public area may be fitted out
with a wire-less internet link which cannot be avoided. There is software which enables one to
dictate to a computer, so that the process of typing in a lot of text can be circumvented; only
error correction and editing need be done at the keyboard.
It is rare to find a patient with electrical sensitivities who does not already have multiple on-
going sensitivities to chemicals, volatiles and particulates. To avoid becoming electrically
sensitive, one must be careful about acquiring a body load of chemicals which happen to be
toxic to you because your body cannot get rid of them quickly. Then, if the frequency pattern
of such substances happens to match a pattern of frequencies in your electrical environment
this will make the body think it is under further chemical attack. That is why only some
people are affected by their electrical environment. Engineers (chemical or electrical) work to
specifications, unless they are told that certain environmental frequency patterns cause.
1. For evidence that electromagnetic field sensitivity actually does exist and can be elicited under
environmentally controlled double-blind conditions with 100% reactions to an active frequency and 0% to
the placebos, see: Rea WJ. Pan Y. Fenyves EJ. Sujisawa I. Suyama H. Samadi N. and Ross GH.
“Electromagnetic Field Sensitivity”, Journal of Bioelectricity 10(1&2): 241-256 (1991).
2. Smith C.W. Is a living system a macroscopic quantum system? Frontier Perspectives, 7(1), 9-15 (1998),
(Temple University, Philadelphia, 1997 lecture to Frontier Sciences Department).
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 5:30 AM||comments (0)|
[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 141 (Friday, October 9, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY
HON. BERNARD SANDERS
in the house of representatives
Thursday, October 8, 1998
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the issue of
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as it relates to both our civilian
population and our Gulf war veterans.
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity or MCS is a chronic condition marked by
heightened sensitivity to multiple different chemicals and other
irritants at or below previously tolerated levels of exposure.
Sensitivity to odors is often accompanied by food and drug intolerance,
sensitivity to sunlight and other sensory abnormalities, such as
hypersensitivity to touch,
heat and-or cold, and loud noises. MCS is often accompanied by impaired
balance, memory and concentration.
As a member of the Human Resources Subcommittee, which has oversight
jurisdiction for the Veterans' Affairs, I have been involved in the
issue of Gulf war illness and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. I have
been concerned for many years about the role that chemicals may be
playing on human health, not only in Gulf war veterans and their
families, but in civilian society as well. I have talked to many people
who are suffering symptoms not dissimilar from the symptoms that our
Persian Gulf veterans are experiencing because of chemicals in their
homes or workplaces.
As has been well-documented, the military theater in the Persian Gulf
was a chemical cesspool. Our troops were exposed to chemical warfare
agents, leaded petroleum, widespread use of pesticides, depleted
uranium and burning oil wells. In addition, they were given a myriad of
pharmaceuticals as vaccines. Further, and perhaps most importantly, as
a result of a waiver from the FDA, hundreds of thousands of troops were
given pyridostigmine bromide. Pyridostigmine bromide, which was being
used as an anti-nerve agent, had never been used in this capacity
before. In the midst of all this, our troops were living in a hot,
unpleasant climate and were under very great stress.
The Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs have
downplayed the presence of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Gulf war
veterans. In the very beginning, the Defense Department and Veterans'
Affairs actually denied that there was any problem whatsoever with our
veterans' health. Then, after finally acknowledging that there was a
problem, they concluded that the problem was in the heads of our
soldiers--of psychological origin. The DOD and the VA responded very
poorly to our veterans' concerns. Tragically, our veterans were
discounted. They were called malingerers.
Ever so slowly, the truth about chemical exposure in the Persian Gulf
has begun to surface. On July 24, 1997, the Defense Department and the
Central Intelligence Agency gave us their best estimate--that as many
as 98,910 American troops could have been exposed to chemical warfare
agents due to destruction of ``the Pit'' in Khamisiyah, an Iraqi
Not waiting for the DOD and VA, many other Federal, State, and local
government agencies have recognized the existence of Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity. I want to submit for the Record the latest ``Recognition
of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity'' newsletter which lists the U.S.
Federal, State, and local government authorities, U.S. Federal and
State courts, U.S. workers' compensation boards, and independent
organizations that have adopted policies, made statements, and-or
published documents recognizing Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
Recognition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity or MCS is a chronic condition
marked by heightened sensitivity to multiple different
chemicals and other irritants at or below previously
tolerated levels of exposure. Sensitivity to odors is often
accompanied by food and drug intolerances, photosensitivity
to sunlight and other sensory abnormalities, such as
hypersensitivity to touch, heat and/or cold, and loud noises
and impaired balance, memory and concentration. MCS is more
common in women and can start at any age, but usually begins
in one's 20's to 40's. Onset may be sudden (from a brief
high-level toxic exposures) or gradual (from chronic low-
level exposures), as in ``sick buildings.'' The syndrome is
defined by multiple symptoms occuring in multiple organ
systems (most commonly the neurological, gastrointestinal,
respiratory, and musculoskeletal) in response to multiple
different exposures. Symptoms may include chronic fatigue,
aching joints and muscles, irritable bowel, difficulty
sleeping and concentrating, memory loss, migraines, and
irritated eyes, nose, ears, throat and/or skin. Symptoms
usually begin after a chronic or acute exposure to one or
more toxic chemical(s), after when they ``spread'' to other
exposures involving unrelated chemicals and other irritants
from a great variety of sources (air pollutants, food
additives, fuels, building materials, scented products,
etc.). Consistent with basic principles of toxicology, MCS
usually can be improved, although not completely cured,
through the reduction and environmental control of such
exposures. Many different terms have been proposed in medical
literature since 1869 to describe MCS syndrome and possibly
related disorders whose symptoms also wax and wane in
response to chemical exposures.
Alternate Names Proposed for MCS
Acquired Intolerance to Solvents, Allergic Toxemia,
Cerebral Allergy, Chemical Hypersensitivity Syndrome,
Chemical-Induced Immune Dysfunction, Ecological Illness,
Environmental Illness or ``EI,'' Environmental Irritant
Syndrome, Environmentally Induced Illness, Environmental
Hypersensitivity Disorder, Idiopathic Environmental
Intolerances or ``IEI,'' Immune System Dysregulation,
Multiple Chemical Hypersensitivity Syndrome, Multiple
Chemical Reactivity, Total Allergy Syndrome, Toxic Carpet
Syndrome, Toxin Induced Loss of Tolerance of ``TILT,'' Toxic
Response Syndrome, 20th Century Disease.
Disorders Associated With Single or Multi-Organ Chemical Sensitivity
Akureyri Disease (coded as EN), Asthma, Cacosmia, Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome, Disorders of Porphyrin Metabolism, [Benign
Myalgic] Encephalomyelitis, Epidemic Neuromyastenia (EN),
Fibromyalgia Syndrome, Gulf War Syndrome, Icelandic Disease
(coded as EN), Mastocytosis, Migraine, Neurasthenia, Royal
Free [Hospital] Disease, Sick Building Syndrome, Silicone
Adjutant Disease, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Toxic
Listed alphabetically below are the U.S. Federal, State,
and local government authorities, U.S. Federal and State
courts, U.S. workers' compensation boards, and independent
organizations that have adopted policies, made statement,
and/or published documents recognizing MCS disorders under
one name or another as a ligitimate medical condition and/or
disability. An introductory section summarizes recognition or
MCS in peer-reviewed medical literature, and the last section
lists upcoming MCS conferences as well as past conferences
sponsored by Federal Government agencies.
The exact meaning of ``recognition'' varies with the
context as each listing makes clear. Recognition by a court
of law, for example, usually refers to a verdict or appeal in
favor of an MCS plaintiff, while recognition by government
agencies varies tremendously--from acknowledgement of the
condition in publications and policies to research funding
and legal protection of disability rights.
Recognition of MCS by 25 Federal Authorities
U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry in a
unanimously adopted recommendation of the ATSDR's Board of
Scientific Counselors, which calls on the ATSDR to ``take a
leadership role in the investigation of MCS'' [1992, 24
pages, R-1]. To coordinate interagency research into MCS,
the ATSDR co-chairs the Federal Work Group on Chemical
Sensitivity, which it convened for the first time in 1994
(see below). The ATSDR has helped organize and pay for
three national medical conferences on MCS: sponsored by
the National Academy of Sciences in 1991, the Association
of Occupational and Environmental Clinics in 1991, and the
ATSDR in 1994. The combined proceedings of these three
conferences are reprinted in Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity, A Scientific Overview, ed. Frank Mitchell,
Princeton NJ: Princeton Scientific Publishing, 1995 (609-
683-4750 to order). ATSDR also contributed funding to a
study conducted by the California Department of Health
Services to develop a protocol for detecting MCS outbreaks
in toxic-exposed communities via questionnaires and
diagnostic tests (see entry below on California Department
of Health Services). Officially, however, ATSDR has not
``established a formal position regarding this syndrome''
[1995, 1 page, R-2].
U.S. Army, Medical Evaluation Board on US Army Form 3947
(from the U.S. Army Surgeon General), Army Medical Evaluation
Board certified a diagnosis of ``Multiple Chemical
Sensitivities Syndrome'' for a Persian Gulf veteran on 14
April 1993 [1 page, R-3]. MCS is defined on this form as
``manifested by headache, shortness of breath, congestion,
rhinorrhea, transient rash, and incoordination associated
with exposure to a variety of chemicals.'' The Board's report
further recognizes that this patient's particular MCS
condition began approximately in April 1991 (while the
patient was serving in the Gulf and entitled to base pay),
that the condition did not exist prior to service, and that
it has been permanently aggravated by service. At least five
other active duty Persian Gulf veterans have been diagnosed
by the Army with MCS, as reported by the Persian Gulf
Veterans coordinating Board in ``Summary of the Issues
Impacting Upon the Health of Persian Gulf Veterans,'' [3
March 1994, 4 page excerpt, R-4]. The Army Medical Department
also has requested funding for a research facility to study
MCS (reported in an Army information paper on ``Post Persian
Gulf War Health Issues,'' 16 November 1993).
U.S. Congress in a VA/HUD Appropriations Bill for FY1993
signed by President Bush in 1992 appropriating ``$250,000
from Superfund funds for chemical sensitivity workshops.''
These funds were used by the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (see above) to co-sponsor scientific
meetings on MCS with various other organizations [1992, 3
page excerpt, R-5] and support an MCS study (see California
State Department of Health Services below). For FY 1998,
Vermont Congressman Bernard Sanders proposed and Congress
appropriated $800,000 to start a new 5-year civilian agency
research program into MCS among Gulf War veterans. Congress
also requested that the administration report back by January
1998 on how it planned to spend the funds (text of
appropriations is quoted in report; see below: U.S.
Department of Health Services, Agency for Health Care Policy
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, American Lung Association, and American
Medical Association (jointly) in a jointly published booklet
entitled Indoor Air Pollution
An Introduction for Health Professional [US GPO 1994-523-217/
81322] under the heading ``What is `multiple chemical
sensitivity' or `total allergy'?, these organizations state
that ``The current consensus is that in cases of claimed or
suspected MCS, complaints should not be dismissed as
psychogenic, and a thorough workup is essential.'' The
booklet is prefaced by the claim that ``Information provided
in this booklet is based upon current scientific and
technical understanding of the issues presented . . .``
[1994, 3 page excerpt, R-6]
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service in its Final
Environmental Impact Statement on ``Gypsy Moth Management
in the United States: a cooperative approach'', people
with MCS are mentioned as a ``potential high risk group''
who should be given advance notification of insecticide
treatment projects via ``organizations, groups and
agencies that consist of or work with people who are
chemically sensitive or immunocompromised.'' MCS also is
discussed in an appendix on Human Health Risk Assessment
(Appendix F, Volume III of V) under both ``Harzard
Identification'' and ``Groups at Special Risk'' [1995, 11
page excerpt and 1 page cover letter from John Hazel, the
USDA's EIS Team Leader, to Dr. Grace Ziem of MCS Referral
& Resources, R-130].
U.S. Department of Education in the enforcement by its
Office of Civil Rights of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973 which requires accommodation of persons with
``MCS Syndrome'' via modification of their educational
environment, as evidenced by several ``agency letters of
finding'' (including San Diego (Calif) Unified School
District, 1 National Disability Law Reporter, para. 61, p.
311, 24 May 1990; Montville (Conn.) Board of Education, 1
National Disability Law Reporter, para. 123, p. 515, 6 July
1990; and four letters (along with an individualized
environment management program) in the case of the Arminger
children of Baltimore County, MD [in 1991, 1992, 1993 and
1994; 20 pages total, R-7]. These accommodations also are
required under the terms of Public Law 94-142, now known as
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (CFR34 Part
300). The Department of Education as a whole, however, has no
formal policy or position statement on the accommodation of
students with MCS.
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in
being the lead sponsor of the 11th Annual Life Sciences
Symposium on ``Indoor Air and Human Health Revisited.'' This
1994 conference was co-sponsored by the US Environmental
Protection Agency and Martin Marietta Energy Systems'
Hazardous Waste Remedial Action Program. The proceedings are
published in Indoor Air and Human Health (Gammage RB and
Berven BA, editors, Boca Raton FL: CRC Lewis Publishers,
1996) and contain several peer-reviewed papers of critical
relevance to MCS by DoE, EPA and other federally funded
researchers. (4 page excerpt with table of contents, R-175)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Agency
for Health Care Policy and Research in a ``Report to Congress
on Research on Multiple Chemical Exposures and Veterans with
Gulf War Illnesses'' by agency administrator Dr. John
Eisenberg (who is also the acting Assistant Secretary for
Health). Dr. Eisenberg proposes spending $300,000 in 1998 for
a ``consensus building'' and research planning conference,
$400,000 for research into the health effects of chemical
mixtures, and $100,000 for an Interagency Coordinator in the
Office of Public Health and Science [January 1998, 7 pages
including MCS R&R press release, R-168]. Congress requested
the report in 1998, as part of an $800,000 appropriation for
a new civilian research into MCS (see U.S. Congress, above).
U.S. Dept. of HHS, National Institute on Deafness and Other
Communication Disorders in the funding of MCS-related
olfactory research by its Chemical Senses Branch since
NIDCD's creation in 1988; including $29,583,000 in fiscal
year 1998. The Chemical Senses Branch supports both basic and
applied research, with most of its funds going to just five
``chemosensory research centers'': the Connecticut
Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (860-679-2459), Monell
Chemical Senses Center (215-898-6666), Rocky Mountain Taste
and Smell Center (303-315-5650), State University of New York
Clinical Olfactory Research Center (315-464-5588), and
University of Pennsylvania Smell and Taste Center (215-662-
6580). Free information is available from NIDCD Information
U.S. Dept. of HHS, National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences in ``Issues and Challenges in Environmental
Health,'' a publication about the work of NIEHS, research
priorities are proposed for ``hypersensitivity diseases
resulting from allergic reactions to environmental
substances'' [NIH 87-861, 1987, 45 pages, R--8]. It is not
clear from the context if this statement was meant to include
or exclude MCS, since the condition was still thought by some
at the time to be an allergic-type reaction. In 1992, the
director Dr. Bernadine Healy responded in detail to an
inquiry from Congressman Pete Stark about the scope of NIEHS
research into MCS: ``It is hoped that research conducted at
NIEHS will lead to methods to identify individuals who may be
predisposed to chemical hypersensitivities. . . . NIH
research is directed toward the understanding of the effect
of chemical sensitivities on multiple parts of the body,
including the immune system.'' [1992, 3 pages, R-9]. In 1996,
director Dr. Kenneth Olden wrote US Senator Bob Graham that
``NIEHS has provided research support to study MCS. . . .
NIEHS has also supported a number of workshops and meetings
on the subject.'' [15 April 1996, 2 pages, R-101]. Dr. Olden
also states that ``Pesticides and solvents are the two major
classes of chemicals most frequently reported by patients
reporting low level sensitivities as having initiated their
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National
Library of Medicine . . . in the 1995 Medical Subject
Headings (MESH) codes used to catalog all medical references,
which started using Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (and its
variations) as a subject heading for all publications indexed
after October 1994 [3 pages excerpt, R-10].
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for
Civil Rights (OCR) . . . in the final report by the Regional
Director (of Region VI) regarding OCR's investigation of an
ADA-related discrimination complaint filed by a patient with
MCS against the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer
Center for failing to accommodate her disability and thereby
forcing her to go elsewhere for surgery. Prior to completion
of the investigation and the issuance of any formal
``findings,'' the OCR accepted a proposal from the Univ. of
Texas to resolve this complaint by creating a joint
subcommittee of the cancer center's Safety and Risk
Management committees. This subcommittee's three tasks (as
approved by the OCR) are to ``identify a rapid response
mechanism which could be triggered by any patient registering
a complaint or presenting a special need which is environment
related; develop a `protocol' outlining steps to be taken to
resolve environmental complaints by patients . . . ; and
inform the medical staff through its newsletter of the
mechanism and the protocol so that they will better
understand how to address such questions or concerns.'' The
OCR has placed the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center ``in
monitoring'' pending completion and documentation of these
changes, but it may initiate further investigation if M.D.
Anderson fails to complete this process within the 13 months
allowed. [27 March 1996, 11 pages, R-99]
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Social
Security Administration . . . in enforcement of the Social
Security Disability Act (see Recognition of MCS by Federal
Courts, below), and in the SSA's Program Operations Manual
System (POMS), which includes a section on the ``Medical
Evaluation of Specific Issues--Environmental Illness''
stating that ``evaluation should be made on an individual
case by case basis to determine if the impairment prevents
substantial gainful activity'' [SSA publication 68-0424500,
Part 04, Chapter 245, Section 24515.065, transmittal #12,
1998, 1 page excerpt, R-11]. In 1997, the U.S. District Court
in Massachusetts required Acting SSA Commissioner John
Callahan to spell out the agency's position on MCS in a
formal memo to the court (31 October 1997, 2 pages, R-164;
see Creamer v. Callahan below, under Recognition of MCS by US
Federal Court Decisions). With this memo, SSA now officially
recognizes MCS ``as a medically determinable impairment'' on
an agency wide basis. MCS is also recognized in several
``fully favorable'' decisions of the SSA's Office of Hearing
and Appeals: in case #538-48-7517, in which the
administrative law judge, David J. Delaittre, ruled that
``the claimant has an anxiety disorder and multiple chemical
sensitivity,'' with the latter based in part on the fact that
``objective [qEEG] evidence showed abnormal brain function
when exposed to chemicals'' [1995, 7 pages, R-12]; in case
#264-65-5308, in which the administrative law judge, Martha
Lanphear, ruled that the claimant suffered severe reactive
airways disease secondary to chemical sensitivity and that
this impairment prevented her from performing more than a
limited range of light work [1996, 8 pages, R-120]; in case
#239-54-6581, in which the administrative law judge, D. Kevin
Dugan, ruled that the claimant suffered severe impairments as
a result of pesticide poisoning, including ``marked
sensitivity to airborne chemicals,'' which prevent her from
``performing any substantial gainful activity on a sustained
basis [1996, 4 pages, R-135]; in case #024-40-2499, in which
the administrative law judge, Lynette Diehl Lang, recognized
that the claimant suffered from severe MCS and could not
tolerate chemical fumes at work (as a result of overexposure
to formaldehyde in a state office building), as a result of
which he was awarded both disability benefits and
supplemental security income [1995, 8 pages, R-140]; in case
#184-34-4849, in which administrative law judge Robert Sears
ruled that the claimant suffered from ``extreme environmental
sensitivities,'' and particularly ``severe intolerance to any
amount of exposure to pulmonary irritants'' [11 June 1996, 7
pages, R-156]; and in case #256-98-4768, in which the
administrative law judge, Frank Armstrong, classified the
claimant's ``dysautonomia triggered by multiple chemical
sensitivities'' as severe and said it ``prevents the claimant
from engaging in substantial gainful activity on a sustained
basis'' [18 March 1997, 8 pages, R-157].
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 4:25 AM||comments (0)|
William J. Rea Alfred R. Johnson, Gerald H. Ross, Joel R. Butler, Ervin J. Fenyves, Bertie Griffiths, and John Laseter
The study of the effects of the environment upon the individual is now feasible due to new technology developed in the construction of environmental units.1,2,3. Our observations reveal that individual or multiple organs may be involved. The brain is the target organ in only a subset of chemically sensitive patients, and its involvement should not be confused with psychosomatic disease.
Over the last 16 years physicians and scientists at the Environmental Health Center in Dallas have had an opportunity to observe over 20,000 patients who had chemical sensitivity problems. These patients were studied under various degrees of environmental control. This experience is unique in the world and has resulted in numerous peer-reviewed scientific articles, chapters in books, and books on this subject.
Studies have resulted in over 32,000 challenge tests by inhalation, oral, or injection methods, of which 16,000 are double-blind. Blood chemical levels and fat biopsies for organic hydrocarbons number over 2,000, while the measurement of immune parameters are over 5,000 tests. Objective brain function tests have been accomplished in over 5,000 patients. Other objective tests, like computerized balance studies, depollutant enzyme levels, and autonomic nervous system changes as measured by the Iriscorder, number near 1,000.
We wish to share our findings with the participants of the National Academy of Sciences Committee for the study of chemical sensitivity.
Definition and Principles
Chemical sensitivity is defined as an adverse reaction to ambient doses of toxic chemicals in our air, food, and water at levels which are generally accepted as subtoxic. Manifestation of adverse reactions depend on: (1) the tissue or organ involved; (2) the chemical and pharmacologic nature of the toxin; (3) the individual susceptibility of the exposed person (genetic make-up, nutritional state, and total load at the time of exposure); (4) the length of time of the exposure; (5) mount and variety of other body stressors (total load) and synergism at the time of reaction. (6) the derangement of metabolism that may occur from the initial insults.
To demonstrate cause-and-effect proof of environmental influence on an individual's health, one must understand several important principles and facts. These principles involve those of total body load (burden), adaptation (masking, acute toxicological tolerance), bipolarity, biochemical individuality. Each principle will be discussed separately.........
Indexed for NIH by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
Full document at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234807/
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 4:15 AM||comments (0)|
(MCS), including the recently proposed "evolutive framework."
Discuss the findings of the present review of recent research on MCS, including the types, characteristics, and findings of the studies identified.
Discuss the implications for patient evaluation and further research on MCS.
Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is currently included in the broader definition of idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI), which also includes physical risk factors such as electromagnetic fields. It is a complex disease, a multisystem disorder that manifests as a result of exposure to various environmental contaminants (solvents, hydrocarbons, organophosphates, heavy metals) at concentrations below the “Threshold Limit value” (TLV) that are considered toxic doses for the general population.1–4
At the beginning of the ’50, the allergist Theron G. Randolph5 was the first to note that some patients became sick after exposures to a wide range of substances, either job-related, either, broadly speaking, environmental, in concentrations below those considered toxic for most individuals. Dr. Randolph and his colleagues speculated the possibility of allergic reactions and maladjustment to explain the symptoms that are attributed to MCS. It is considered that chronic exposure to subtoxic doses, as well as any acute exposures, can, in some people with, perhaps, a particular metabolic and genetic predisposition, lead to a gradual process of substance sensitization.
However, because of the difficulty of finding unique and incontrovertible diagnostic markers, from the ‘60 to date, the syndrome was analyzed in its different aspects: metabolic, genetic, immunological, epidemiological, etiological, symptomatic, therapeutic, and the criteria for case definition were gradually revised. Currently, the Cullen criteria,6 with or without Lacour revision,7 and the year 1999 criteria of the consensus8 are the most accepted. To perform an initial screening, different questionnaires are used: “Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Intolerance” (EESI) or its short version “Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory” (QEESI),9–11 “Huppe questionnaire,”12 “Chemical sensitivity scale for sensory hyperreactivity” (CSS-SHR),13 German questionnaire on chemical and environmental sensitivity (CGES)..............
Indexed for NIH by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
|Posted on January 19, 2022 at 4:10 AM||comments (0)|
G. Latini, G. Passerini, R. Cocci Grifoni & M. M. Mariani
To understand the relationship between health and the environment, we must study a series of events that might begin with the release of pollutants into the environment and might end with the development of disease in an individual, or a population. Noticeably, many studies have demonstrated an association between environmental exposure and certain diseases or health problems. Amongst all pollutants, Cadmium, Mercury, Arsenic, Nickel and Lead are emitted from several industrial processes, energy production processes and most vehicles. Methyl-Mercury is a poisonous industrial derivative of Mercury, enters the food chain and is toxic to the nervous system. Cadmium, Arsenic, Nickel and Lead are considered carcinogenic. Lead also causes digestive problems and damage to the nervous systems, especially in children. Assessing the relationship between exposure to air pollutants and disease is complicated by the problem of multiple exposures to multiple pollutants. In fact, a controversial condition, known as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), is thought to arise only through the combined effects of a number of chemicals in concentrations that might not be harmful on their own. In this first Italian pilot study, sufficiently large population groups have been considered to evaluate levels of toxic trace metals stored in the body by means of a hair analysis technique. For a majority of toxic trace metals the hair analysis technique has proved to be a well-suited biological marker of environmental exposure of general population to such toxic metals. The results suggest that there is an explicit correlation between exposure to air pollutants and high levels of toxic metals in the body with consequent development of diseases.
|Posted on January 18, 2022 at 9:15 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 18, 2022 at 8:50 AM||comments (0)|
Keywords: immune system, vitamin D, vitamin E, n-3 PUFA, probiotics, green EGCG, zinc
The main functions of body's immune system are to protect the host against infection from pathological microorganisms, to clear damaged tissues, and to provide constant surveillance of malignant cells that grow within the body. Additionally, the immune system develops appropriate tolerance to avoid unwanted response to healthy tissues of self or harmless foreign substances. There is considerable heterogeneity among individuals in the vigor of their immunological function, largely owing to factors such as genetics, environment, lifestyle, nutrition, and the interaction of these factors. Nutrition as a modifiable factor in impacting immune function has been studied for several decades, and the research in this field has developed into a distinguished study subject called nutritional immunology. As with other bodily systems, the immune system depends on adequate nutrients to function properly. It is well-documented that nutritional status is closely associated with immunity and host resistance to infection. There is little argument that deficiency in both macronutrients and micronutrients causes immune function impairment, which can be reversed by nutrient repletion. Nutritional deficiencies are still prevalent in less developed regions and are a main contributor to a high incidence of morbidity and mortality from infectious diseases. Even in developed countries where general nutritional deficiencies are rare, nutrition issues such as specific nutrient deficiencies, less ideal diet composition, and excess calorie consumption are still a challenging reality......
Indexed for NIH by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
|Posted on January 15, 2022 at 4:45 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 15, 2022 at 4:30 AM||comments (0)|
Yoga has proven beneficial effects on various health domains including musculoskeletal conditions, cardiopulmonary conditions through the practice of asana and pranayamas as well as on mental health, as it is known to enhance the body-and mind coordination. There is paucity of data on the effect of yoga on functional capacity in literature using 6 min walk test. The present study aims to look at the effect of yoga on 6-min walked distance, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), recovery time following the walk and state of well being. This is a hospital-based longitudinal study where 30 physiotherapy students of the age group 18 - 22 years of either sex were enrolled.
Subjects having musculoskeletal problems, cardio respiratory disease and those who were not willing to volunteer were excluded They received Yoga intervention in form of Yogic practices which included a combination of asanas, pranayamas and omkar chanting for 1 h for 30 sessions. A baseline 6-min walk test was conducted on subjects and the 6-min walked distance, rating of perceived exertion (RPE) on modified Borg's scale were recorded. The baseline state of well-being was noted using the Warwick- Edinburgh mental well-being scale and similar recording was done post intervention after 30 sessions.
Of the 30 subjects, there were no drop outs as these were committed college students. Of them, 24 were females and 6 were males with a mean age of 21.5 years SD 2.38. Statistically significant improvements were observed in 6-min walk distance (P value = 0.000), RPE (P value < 0.000), recovery time (P value < 0.000) and sense of well being score (P value < 0.000). Yoga practices are beneficial in improving the functional capacity in young healthy adults.
Yoga can very well be incorporated in medical practice for increasing the patient's functional capacity, for those who have limitations in performing aerobic training due to various health reasons. The improved state of well being motivates the patients to adhere to yogic practices.
Indexed for NIH Pubmed by Dragonfly Kingdom Library
|Posted on January 15, 2022 at 4:25 AM||comments (0)|
|Posted on January 15, 2022 at 4:15 AM||comments (0)|