A young chemically sensitive woman is in need of help due to pesticide spraying

Elvira Roda lives in the Spanish region of Valencia and is in great need. Her family and friends are asking for international help. The 35-year-old woman is suffering from Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, MCS. The humidity and heat where she lives means an increased number of bugs and mosquitoes. The officials from her area are using highly toxic organophosphate pesticide spraying in the trees and roadsides (see video). These neurotoxins are very harmful to humans and animals. Elvira’s family drew up a petition on July 1st, 2010 to ask for assistance.

Treatment success from the specialty clinic is now destroyed, instead she faces danger

Elvira was treated at one of the world’s best environmental clinics, the Environmental Health Center in Dallas. Her physical health was stabilized and hope returned to her family. Her case was in the media for some time.

This young woman who is disabled with severe reactions by small traces of perfume has already broken down several times due to highly toxic pesticides that are being applied by the officials outside of her home. These pesticides are particularly dangerous for her because they disable a specific detoxification enzyme and the body then poisons itself.

At the moment Elvira is brought to the sea every day. It is difficult for her because she has severe sensitivity to light among other things. She gets spasms, has immune damage, and suffers from fibromyalgia. She spends the whole day on the beach, not enjoying the sand and the water, but instead staying still in a “bed” due to her bad health. There is no other solution. It is the only way to protect her from being exposed to dangerous toxins. Unfortunately there are no emergency headquarters in Spain for the chemically sensitive or in any other countries for that matter.

Young women in danger

Eliva’s parents have designed her a safe “bubble” where her living space is free of harmful substances, so that this 35 year old woman can normally cope and get along well. She has a sauna there for detoxification so Eliva has a safe haven to live in. She had a safe oasis, but that was before. Now toxic pesticides are sprayed a few yards from the house and the trees are fogged from top to bottom.

The family has informed the authorities of the danger of this pesticide spraying for the young woman. They requested notification of this spraying beforehand. Many don’t understand that these sprays used can penetrate through sealed windows and doors of apartments. These types of pesticides remain active for a long time and they can release gases for several days or weeks.

Not only are those who are chemically sensitive are threatened by these pesticides, but everyone who lives in the environment, especially babies and children whose immune systems and detoxification systems are not fully developed. The main objective of this class of pesticide is to attack the nervous system, but they can also damage the immune system as in the case of chlorpyrifos, which is one type which is known to cause multiple chemical sensitivity.

Petition in support of Elvira Roda

In order to stop this spraying of pesticides, Elvira, and the family have written a petition to the City Council. Anyone can also sign this petition and make a comment. It is important that Elvira receives international assistance. Please post on Facebook, in newsgroups, and on Twitter to help the family spread the news.

Petition for Elvira Roda: http://www.gopetition.com/online/37492.html

You can sign and comment here:

http://www.gopetition.com/online/37492/sign.html

Give Elvira support, strength and hope

Details regarding Elvira’s situation are on the Website Elvira Roda There you can see what her family has built for her. It would be wonderful to write Elvira and her family to give them courage to move forward in any language. English and Spanish are preferred if possible, but your own language can be translated by computer. Anyone who suffers from MCS can relate to the incredible pain Elvira must be dealing with now.

Since Elvira also suffers from electrical sensitivity, she cannot answer herself, but gets all her letters read aloud. Elvira is trying to maintain contact through her website. She writes by hand on paper, and the family and friends help to refresh the page. It can sometimes take a while to get online information, because of the intensive care for the young woman.

All the best for Elvira!

We wish you much strength and hopefully Elvira will assist in the quick understanding on the part of the City Council to move on to non-toxic pest control methods that would benefit of all inhabitants of the Spanish city.

Author: Silvia K. Müller, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, 11 July 2010

Translation: Christi Howarth for CSN

• German Original
• Japanese Translation

Please feel free to add this article to your website or blog. Thank you!

-

More articles about Chemical Sensitivity:

• Spanish Workgroup met with Ministry of Health to create a MCS Consensus Document
• Join the project “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity uncovered” / Lola Vicente
• New Housing Non-Profit Forming with Focus on Environmental Sensitivities
• MCS in Japan: A lecture at the House of Representatives of Japan
• The naked Truth about MCS – Multiple Chemical Sensitivity – Including Foreword about German Situation

Dr. Martin Pall’s theory about MCS confirmed

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Portland, OR – July 5, 2010 – The physiological mechanism for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity proposed by biochemist Martin L. Pall has been confirmed with the recent findings of an independent research group in Rome.

Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), also known as chemical sensitivity and toxicant-induced loss of tolerance (TILT), is a disease initiated by toxic chemical exposure, leading to toxic brain injury that produces high level sensitivity to the same set of chemicals that are implicated in initiation of the disease. Sensitivity responses in other areas of the body are also often seen.

“Epidemiological studies show that MCS is a stunningly common disease, even more common than diabetes,” said Pall, professor emeritus of biochemistry and basic medical sciences at Washington State University. “My review of the literature and other research I’ve conducted over the past eleven years shows the probable central mechanism of MCS is a biochemical vicious mechanism, known as the NO/ONOO- cycle.”

Pall’s work is widely published in books and articles, the most recent of which is a chapter in the authoritative international reference manual for professional toxicologists, General and Applied Toxicology, 3rd Edition, 2009.

The NO/ONOO- cycle

The NO/ONOO- cycle, pronounced no-oh-no, is named for the chemical structures of nitric oxide (NO) and peroxynitrite (ONOO-). This biochemical vicious cycle mechanism predicts that each of the elements linked together in the cycle are elevated in patients suffering from MCS and related diseases. Most of the elements of the cycle have been shown to be elevated in such related diseases as chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia and also in animal models of MCS. However, several cycle elements have never been measured in MCS patients.

The recent study conducted by the research group in Rome is significant in regard to the NO/ONOO- cycle theory because it shows that three elements of the cycle are elevated in MCS patients (De Luca et al, Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 2010, April 27 Epub ahead of print). Those elements are the inflammatory cytokines, nitric oxide, and oxidative stress. Each of these measurements provides important confirmation of the disease mechanism proposed by Pall.

The inflammatory cytokines and nitric oxide elevation have never before been measured in MCS patients, although they have been shown to be elevated in animal models of MCS. Oxidative stress has been reported in two earlier studies of MCS patients, but the data provided in the De Luca et al study are much more extensive than are the earlier data. Consequently, these new data all provide important confirmation of the NO/ONOO- cycle as the central disease mechanism in MCS.

The NO/ONOO- cycle also is useful in understanding the role of toxic chemicals in MCS and the role of treatment. Each of the seven classes of chemicals implicated in MCS are thought to act indirectly to increase the activity of the NMDA receptors, which are glutamate receptors for controlling synaptic plasticity and memory function. This activity, in turn, leads to rapid increases in intracellular calcium (Ca2+), nitric oxide and peroxynitrite (ONOO-), acting to greatly stimulate the NO/ONOO- cycle.

“Many of the agents used by environmental medicine physicians to treat MCS patients can be viewed as lowering different parts of the cycle, and thus are validated in part by this mechanism,” Pall said. “Consequently, the NO/ONOO- cycle mechanism can be viewed as validating therapeutic approaches used in environmental medicine in the U.S., in Germany and some other areas of Europe and in some other countries.”

Contact:

Martin L. Pall, PhD

Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences

Washington State University

(1*) 503-232-3883

martin_pall@wsu.edu

Main web site: www.thetenthparadigm.org

German Website: www.martinpall.info

Related Articles:

• MCS – Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, a disease caused by toxic chemical exposure
• Martin Pall about genetic evidence and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
• Chemical Sensitivity – MCS and a number of medical conditons respond positively to Sauna Therapy
• MCS-Multiple Chemical Sensitivity at “General and applied Toxicology 3rd Edition”

People must be protected from exposure to fragrance ingredients that may cause cancer or fetal, hormonal or reproductive toxicity, the Cancer Prevention Coalition warned today. But federal agencies are not regulating these ingredients, leaving the public at risk due to the “recklessly irresponsible” behavior of the fragrance industry, says CPC Chairman Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.

Protection of the public would be implemented by passage of Senator Frank Lautenberg’s Safe Chemicals Act of 2010, Dr. Epstein advises. This bill requires manufacturers to provide information on “chemicals of concern” in consumer products.

The bill would provide the public with information on the dangers of these products, especially, says Dr. Epstein, “as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recklessly failed to do so since passage of the 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.”

Perfumes and fragrances are the single largest category of cosmetic and personal care products, especially products used on the hair, face, and eyes. These products represent nearly 50 percent of all prestige beauty dollars now spent in the United States. Fragrances are also extensively used in a wide range of everyday household cleaning products.

Exposure to toxic ingredients in cosmetics and personal care products is predominantly through the skin. In contrast, exposure to toxic ingredients in household cleaning products is predominantly through inhalation.

The FDA has direct authority under the terms of the 1938 Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act to regulate toxic ingredients in cosmetics and personal care products. However, seven decades later, it has still failed to do so. Similarly, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has also still failed to regulate these toxic ingredients in household cleaning products.

“In the disturbing absence of any federal regulations,” Dr. Epstein says, the policies and practices of the cosmetics and personal care products industries are determined by its International Fragrance Association (IFRA). This is an international trade organization of over 100 perfume and fragrance manufacturers, representing fifteen regions including the U.S., Europe, South America, Australia, and the Far East.”

The primary objective of IFRA is to protect the self-regulatory practices and policies of the industry by the development of a Code of Practices and safety guidelines, Dr. Epstein says. However, these include maintaining the “trade secret” status of perfume and fragrance ingredients, and pre-empting international legislative labeling and safety initiatives.

Of the more than 5,000 ingredients used in the fragrance industry, approximately 1,300 have so far been evaluated by the industry’s International Research Institute for Fragrance Materials. This institute is a “non-profit” organization, created by IFRA in 1966 to conduct research and testing of fragrance ingredients.

“However,” Dr. Epstein warns, “this testing is minimal and restricted to local effects on human skin, and short-term toxicity tests in rodents.”

Evaluation of ingredient safety is then made by a board of toxicologists, pharmacologists, and dermatologists, identified by the institute as “independent” without disclosure of their qualifications, let alone conflicts of interest.

Their findings are presented to IFRA’s Scientific Advisory Board, and then published in its trade journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology. The information reported in this journal is the basis on which IFRA formulates its own “safety guidelines.” However, Dr. Epstein points out, due to the “trade secret” status of fragrances, manufacturers are still not required by the FDA to disclose their ingredients on product labels or in any other way.

“These ingredients include a wide range of allergens. They also include synthetic musks, particularly tonalide and galaxolide, designed to mimic natural scents derived from musk deer and ox,” Dr. Epstein explains. “They are persistent and bioaccumulate in the body, have toxic hormonal effects, and have been identified in breast milk.”

In 1973, in efforts at damage control, IFRA created a Code of Practice listing prohibited ingredients, based on its own safety analyses. This listing has been periodically updated.

In May 1999, in response to repeated complaints of respiratory, neurological, and other toxic effects following the use of Calvin Klein’s Eternity perfume, the Environmental Health Network of California hired two testing laboratories to identify the ingredients in the perfume.

Analysis of these results by the Cancer Prevention Coalition, summarized in Dr. Epstein’s 2009 book Toxic Beauty, reveal the following:

• 26 ingredients whose “Toxicological properties have not been investigated,” or “toxicology properties have not been thoroughly investigated.”
• 25 ingredients that are “Irritants.”
• 5 ingredients that are “Skin sensitizers,” or allergens.
• 3 ingredients that show “Fetal, hormonal, and reproductive toxicity.”
• 2 ingredients that “May cause cancer.”

In efforts at damage control, IFRA agreed that information on allergenic ingredients in perfumes like Eternity should be made available, but only on request from dermatologists, for diagnostic purposes. “This “Fragrance On-Call List” action denies the public its right to know,” Dr. Epstein warns.

More disturbingly, Dr. Matthias Vey, president of IFRA, failed to respond to repeated warnings from August to October 2003 from the Cancer Prevention Coalition. These urged “all fragrance products be labeled to the effect that, apart from the absence of known skin and respiratory allergens, they contain no known carcinogens, gene damaging, hormonal, or otherwise toxic ingredients.”

As reported in “What’s That Smell,” a June 2010 report by Women’s Voices of the Earth, faced with continuing criticism of unresponsiveness, IFRA initiated a “compliance program” in 2007. “However,” Dr. Epstein warns, “this is based on testing of a mere 50 fragranced products from the global market place to detect prohibited ingredients.”

A fragrance may be restricted by IFRA on a variety of grounds. These include: use in products at higher-than-recommended concentrations, sensitization, photosensitization, phototoxicity, allergenicity, neurotoxicity, carcinogenicity, undefined biological effects, and inadequate data.

“This restriction, though, works better in theory than in practice,” Dr. Epstein emphasizes. “There is no pre-approval process for ingredient safety other than that claimed by the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials.”

Literature: Cancer Prevention Coalition, Reckless Self-Interest Of The Fragrance Industry, CHICAGO, IL, June 28, 2010

Related Articles:

• Secret Chemicals revealed in Celebrity Perfumes, Teen Body Sprays
• Household detergents, Shampoos may harmful substance in wastewater
• Phthalate Concentrations and Use of Personal Care Products among Pregnant Women
• Open Letter: Perfumed Stamps constrain People with Disabilities

Following the World Trade Center (WTC) collapse on September 11, 2001, more than 40,000 people were exposed to a complex mixture of inhalable nanoparticles and toxic chemicals. While many developed chronic respiratory symptoms, to what degree olfaction was compromised is unclear. A previous WTC Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program study found that olfactory and nasal trigeminal thresholds were altered by the toxic exposure, but not scores on a 20-odor smell identification test.

To employ a well-validated 40-item smell identification test to definitively establish whether the ability to identify odors is compromised in a cohort of WTC-exposed individuals and, if so, whether the degree of compromise is associated with self-reported severity of rhinitic symptoms.

The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) was administered to 99 WTC-exposed persons and 99 matched normal controls. The Sino-Nasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-20) was administered to the 99 WTC-exposed persons and compared to the UPSIT scores.

The mean (SD) UPSIT scores were lower in the WTC-exposed group than in age-, sex-, and smoking history-matched controls [respective scores: 30.05 (5.08) vs 35.94 (3.76); p = 0.003], an effect present in a subgroup of 19 subjects additionally matched on occupation (p < 0.001). Fifteen percent of the exposed subjects had severe microsmia, but only 3% anosmia. SNOT-20 scores were unrelated to UPSIT scores (r = 0.20; p = 0.11).

Exposure to WTC air pollution was associated with a decrement in the ability to identify odors, implying that such exposure had a greater influence on smell function than previously realized.

Literature:

Altman KW, Desai SC, Moline J, de la Hoz RE, Herbert R, Gannon PJ, Doty RL.,Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Odor identification ability and self-reported upper respiratory symptoms in workers at the post-9/11 World Trade Center site, Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2010 Jun 30.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome a medically determinable impairment

One of the battles often fought by persons with CFS trying to obtain Social Security Disability Insurance and SSI benefits was resolved with the adoption of Social Security Ruling 99-2p. In this binding Ruling the Social Security Administration set out guidelines for adjudicators and judges to follow for claims based upon Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. This Ruling removes at least one of the barriers faced by Claimants.

What Was the Issue?

The Social Security Act allows for SSDI or SSI benefits to be paid to persons unable to work by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment (or combination of impairments)….” (emphasis added) The Act and Regulations define the phrase “medically determinable” as a condition that can be established by medical evidence consisting of signs, symptoms and laboratory findings. It cannot be based only on the Claimant’s description of symptoms.

In claims based upon CFS there are obviously a lack of medical signs, symptoms and laboratory findings. Therefore many claims were denied on the failure to prove the existence of a “medically determinable impairment.”

What Does the Ruling Say?

The Ruling states unequivocally that CFS can be a medically determinable impairment. It specifies medical signs and laboratory findings that will now constitute proof of a medically determinable impairment for persons suffering from CFS. However, whether the Claimant is actually “totally disabled” is a separate determination based upon the severity of functional limitations caused by the disease. That is the same as in any claim based upon any other medical problem.

This Ruling requires that any of the following medical signs, which are clinically documented over a period of at least 6 consecutive months, can establish a medically determinable impairment:

• palpably swollen or tender lymph nodes on physical examination;
• nonexudative pharyngitis;
• persistent, reproducible muscle tenderness on repeated examinations, including the presence of positive tender points; or,
• other medical signs consistent with medically accepted clinical practice which are consistent with the other evidence in the case record.

The following laboratory findings can establish a medically determinable impairment for individuals with CFS:

• an elevated antibody titer to Epstein-Barr virus capsid antigen equal to or greater than 1:5120, or early antigen equal to or great than 1:640;
• an abnormal MRI brain scan;
• neurally mediated hypotension as shown by tilt table testing or another clinically accepted form of testing; or,
• other laboratory findings consistent with medically accepted clinical practice such as abnormal sleep studies and abnormal exercise stress tests that are consistent with other evidence in the case record.

Finally, mental impairments documented by mental status examinations or psychological testing can also establish the presence of a medically determinable impairment.

What Evidence Can Be Used to Show these Signs and Findings?

As in any claim for disability benefits the focus is upon the medical evidence, especially the clinical records and test results from treating sources. SSA will try to obtain all medical records, generally beginning 12-months prior to the month of application. The Ruling notes that conflicts in the medical evidence are not unusual in cases involving CFS and clarification should be sought first from the treating sources. Treating source opinions about the severity of the impairment should be given deference if they are well supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory techniques and are not inconsistent with other evidence in the records. It is noted that any information regarding functional abilities before and after the onset of the impairment is helpful in evaluating the claim. Finally third-party sources may be useful in determining the credibility of the Claimant.

As in any claim, the focus is upon a longitudinal view of all of the medical evidence. Claimants must be actively treating with medical providers and must be completely describing all symptoms each time they see the doctor. The doctors must keep careful, legible, notes during each visit so that the signs and findings noted above can be documented. In addition, the physician should be willing to provide a written opinion to SSA regarding the patient’s ability to sustain even sedentary work activity on an 8 hour per day, 5 days per week basis.

SSR 99-2p does not provide that every claim based upon CFS should be approved. It does, however, set forth guidelines for evaluation of these claims so that Claimants, physicians and representatives can be assured of a fair evaluation of the impairment and its impact on the individual.

Literature: Jeffrey A. Rabin & Assoc, CFS Finally Recognized As ‘Medical Impairment’ Under Guidelines, 24-7, June 26, 2010

Article provided by Jeffrey A. Rabin & Assoc, Visit at www.rabinsslaw.com

-

Related Articles:

• CFS – Chronic Fatique Syndrome: FDA and NIH confirm ‘XMRV findings’
• MCS – Multiple Chemical Sensitivity recognized as physical disease at ICD-10 in Japan
• The Department of Health of the Austrian Government recognizes MCS – Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as a physical disease
• MCS recognized as physical disease in Germany