Let me live!

Patrick is 19. His American football gear is in his closet, and in the corner of his room his electric guitar lays on the shelf next to the brilliant lyrics he wrote. His songs have a meaning, not just modified, banal versions of some well-worn songs that were eventually on the top of the charts. No way. Patrick’s music gets down to business and strongly suggests that the songwriter is not a wimp, but instead confident and that he has something significant to say. When Patrick wrote the songs/music, he went to high school, which earlier posed no problem for him, and he enjoyed a life outside of school as well. His buddies were always with him. Life then was to be lived! But now the American football equipment, the guitar, the unfinished recordings, and song books remain on the dusty shelves.

Those were the times

When Patrick lies on his bed in his room it seems like decades since he was with his band buddies on the stage. Sometimes he has flashbacks where he again sees the faces of the girls in front row of the stage, glowing, looking reverently up and so moved by the band’s damn good music. When these flashbacks return, Patrick is reminiscent of the life he used to live. Patrick would like to scream really loud so everyone can hear:

“My body and my pain hold me prisoner. I cannot leave and live like others. A broken body makes me a cripple. It forces me to not always do things that I would like to do. But I want to live.”

Causes and effects

Patrick is sick from chemicals and his body has developed an extreme form of chemical sensitivity (MCS). Some chemicals have the capacity to sensitize the body. In medicine, this is well known that some chemicals like formaldehyde, isocyanates, and some pesticides are able to cause illness. Everything has played a role in Patrick’s current condition. His father was a chemist and had 30 years of contact with chemicals which are capable of damaging genes. No one can define precisely the effects of the countless years of exposures from the not so harmless chemical cocktails where Patrick’s father worked. The fact is, that Patrick’s father, because of work-related health issues, no longer has his health and is seriously ill. Perhaps the house where the family lived also played a role in the illness. Seven times they had high water which left mold on the walls. The walls were washed extensively with chlorine, a highly toxic chemical. Also the wood preservatives in the house could have played a part in Patrick’s state of health.

Others have lived at least

The average age of people who are chemically sensitive, is from 35-45 years, according to studies. There are also sufferers who are much older and some who are still toddlers, but the majority of sufferers had a life before MCS. For Patrick, it’s different:

“Excuse me, I don’t want to offend the others, but the other MCS sufferers were allowed to enjoy prior life experiences (youth, school, training, travel, friends, partnership, etc.), but I was denied everything from the beginning. The best time of life, my youth, has not been granted to me. On the contrary, I am going through hell, but no one is interested, because they do not believe me.”

Ciao buddy

After Patrick broke down completely, the compassion of his buddies and classmates was just great. They came to visit him and provided him with information from school. That gave him the opportunity to continue his school for awhile. When that was no longer possible, he tried getting his education on the internet, via a correspondence school. But now that is over. No more calls, no more visits. Patrick experiences unbearable pain as he feels like he too is covered in dust like his guitar. The girlfriend he had whom he wanted to build a life with, now also lives a life without him, perhaps with someone else. Patrick experiences pain on another level besides just the excruciating physical pain of the illness. He is furious and says:

“I cannot believe that since I’m not out there, I must not be forgotten and do not exist. My struggle must not be in vain.”

“It is hard to accept that everything I have achieved to this point is destroyed.”

“I have resigned myself that I will probably always remain living alone. There is no compassion for this disease. In fact, on the contrary, I am immediately excluded. What girl or young woman is prepared to make such a sacrifice, and how will I even find a person when I need to live a life of isolation? Forget it. This also applies to other friendships as well. ”

“Although various people helped me earlier, now only two friends remain – I’ve always given everything and now … I’m just dropped, since I cannot keep up and have become too annoying or too complicated to all the others.”

To go out at least once

Besides all the bad luck Patrick and his parents experienced in the past, they also lost their most faithful companion too. So Patrick’s mother bought a new dog so that her son has some life in the house and finds some comfort through the love of an animal. The decision was good for the dog and he is very fond of Patrick:

“As much as I would love to be in nature for a couple of hours with our dog for training or just playing only with him, I am not even granted this.”

Simply cut the strings and let the frustration out

If Patrick was frustrated, it was hard to miss. He grabbed his guitar and the sparks were flying as he sang until the walls shook. That has not happened often, but when it did, everyone in the house knew after two minutes. Music is life and a way to express yourself, to let out what the mind has suppressed. But even allowing the frustration and the anger to be let out, is no longer possible for Patrick:

“Playing guitar and singing means so much to me, but my damn body does not even allow that. The muscle weakness and pain again slow me down, and of course, my dream of American football is over.”

MCS means in the worst stage of a “life” in total isolation

Patrick is one of the MCS patients who having a life outside the four walls is impossible. It should not be confused that these people do not want to be, among others, but on the contrary, the wish and desire to do something with other people remains every day around the clock. It is not a psychological problem or fear of people. The body simply gives up when exposed to chemicals. Car exhaust, heater exhaust gases, perfumed people, houses, from which wafts the cleaning products. All chemical cocktails present a difficulty for chemically sensitive people to have a chance to move about.

A short contact with the outside world means having extreme pain, seizures, difficulty breathing, collapse, or unconsciousness. The same applies for visiting. If someone comes to visit, the joy for Patrick can quickly lead to disaster. The deodorants or residues from the dry cleaners in the jacket, fabric softeners, which cannot be totally washed out will make the visit impossible. Utter nonsense? Not at all. Who will make the effort to find appropriate ingredients for “everyday products” that will bring about severe consequences for a man whose body is hypersensitive? What companies will makes the effort to accommodate hypersensitive individuals as they produce products? Not even most doctors will attempt to understand this chemical hypersensitivity. This is due partly out of ignorance, because they have never heard of the disease, and simply because they lack time to investigate further. And if doctors are not smart and declare the disease as a quirk of convenience, how can ordinary people understand those with MCS?

Patrick’s opinion on MCS:

“MCS is the worst disease out there; sometimes I wish I was a paraplegic. I know this sounds harsh, but I would not be so isolated, left alone, not credible, and would have no pain. I could travel in spite of this handicap, going almost everywhere, going to concerts, meeting friends, and possibly make training, and, and. “

The whole family is ruined

Patrick’s parents are willing to do anything for their son, so he can have his life back. But MCS is too complex to just fight the disease with medicine and a few natural remedies. One must start by establishing a clean living environment. Patrick and his father would need a living space that is chemical-and mold-free as much as possible. But how do you implement that? The house in which they have is hard to change due to the financial loss due to his father’s illness.

Help from authorities? No

Patrick should actually have a good case for the authorities to help, but because he has no education, there is no funding, no basic security, which is humiliating for the young man. His mother says:

“We get help from nowhere, in fact, it is quite the opposite. We are harassed by authorities and they make demands on Patrick which he cannot satisfy. Anyone who can count to three must see that. But nobody takes the trouble to look at the misery, instead, decisions are made that are devoid of any humanity. Yes, Patrick virtually exists only on the card. This illness ruined my two men and those who might know how to help and change things for us, look away too easily! ”

“Many people ask me, how has this total isolation been for over the last two years? They say to me, “I would go mad …. I would go crazy … I imagine the bad, and, and …” They also ask, “Where does Patrick, or where do you get the strength to keep going?”

The response from Patrick’s mother: “You can see that Patrick lives and we also manage. Somehow we are probably fighting spirits and do what we try to be bold, brave, and strong willed to survive. The struggle for justice makes us stronger. “That’s what Patrick’s mother says to the outside world, but inside she often thinks, how long does will the body last, like the heart muscle. Every day she must be available around the clock for her men. Every day is actually a struggle for survival, for Patrick, as well as his father.

Optional: a human decision

That which was given to Patrick and his parents since March 2009, is staggering. His parents submitted an application to determine his level of disability. Now a court ruling says that the 19-year-old man who is suffering from unbearable pain all day, and reactions to chemicals must go into a hospital. The hospital has assured the court that it is equipped for emergencies so there shouldn’t be any problems.

• What if he’s there and collapses completely? Who bears the responsibility for him then?
• Who pays to stay in a hospital environment abroad, because in Germany there is no help?
• Can a normal emergency procedure help him to bounce back?
• What if not?

There are no environmentally controlled hospitals for MCS patients in Germany. No hospitals can assure a complete freedom from chemical exposures at all. The hospital rooms discussed in a previous CSN article which are in Hamburg for the environmentally ill, are still not in full operation and they are also only for medical intervention, not for environmental treatment. Thus Patrick’s health would possibly be further compromised by this current court ruling the way it now stands.

So far, instead of support costs caused

Administrative expenses have already cost a fortune for Patrick, a 19 year old, with unbroken will to live. Legally, there is the possibility of seriously ill people remaining in their homes, and being examined within the safety of their own four walls. For Patrick, allowing this would be an act of humanity. This young man wants nothing more than for his disability to be determined. His disability and disease are detected nowhere better than in his own home where everyone can see with their own eyes what the illness actually means for Patrick and his family.

Authors: Silvia Müller and K. Kira, CSN – Chemical Sensitivity Network, 9 July 2011

Translation: Christi Howarth

Note: Patrick’s documents are complete before CSN.

Related articles:

• Environmental Diseases are not unexplained mysteries
• School integration for those with MCS is possible
• Research on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)
• Environmental Illnesses: Petition received the support from 26 countries more than 200 Health Experts and more than 240 NGOs

A Real Santa Claus Does Not Wear Perfume

Santa has an ear for the needs of all children, including children with allergies, asthma and chemical sensitivity (MCS). Santas are always open to hear everything a child desires, meaning their secrets, worries and concerns. For many children this seasonal private talk with Santa is an important event when they can privately disclose what is really on their mind.

So this year we wish that all children, including those who suffer from allergies, asthma and chemical sensitivity (MCS), will have the opportunity to whisper something special into Santa’s ear. We have designed an action card for printing. (The best way to print the cards out is on more solid paper or light cardboard).

And because Santa Claus is known for really loving ALL children, with some help, we can make sure every Santa Claus may share the Christmas warmth with every child. Hand the Santa a Christmas card, asking them to give up after-shave, cologne, fabric softener, strong smelling deodorant, and other fragrances this season. Whisper in the ear of the Santa Claus when presentating the card, that this small favor of being fragrance free will make all children’s hearts and eyes glow with gratitude.

ACTION CARD >>>

The real Santa Claus does not wear perfume, because he loves all children. Even those with asthma, allergies, or chemical sensitivity.

-

Spanish Action Card >> El verdadero Papá Noel no usa Colonia

German Action Card >> Der echte Weihnachtsmann trägt kein Parfüm

Facts about Perfume, Scented Products:

• Scented consumer products shown to emit many unlisted chemicals
• The Reckless Self-Interest of the Fragrance Industry
• Secret Chemicals Revaledin Celebrity Perfumes, Teen Body Sprays
• New Discovery on the Causes of Contact Allergy
• Toxic Beauty – What you don’t know Can Hurt you…In Fact, It Already does

Dr. William J. Rea, founder and director of the Environmental Health Center-Dallas (EHC-D) and world renowned specialist in treating chemical injury, has been featured in several articles of late about the health effects of the BP Oil Spill on cleanup crews and local residents.

The latest, “BP blamed for toxification” by Dahr Jamail of Al Jazeera, details how the 1.9 million gallons of toxic chemical dispersants used to break up the oil released by the explosion at one of BP’s deepwater oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico last summer has caused a wide array of disturbing symptoms in people exposed to the chemicals. The article states “Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin and eye contact. Health impacts include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdom- inal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitisation, hyperten- sion, central nervous system (CNS) depression, neurotoxic effects, cardiac arrhythmia and cardiovas- cular damage.

The chemicals are also teratogenic, mutagenic and carcinogenic.”

Also being reported in other articles* is the onset of Toxicant-Induced Loss of Tolerance (TILT) – another name for Chemical Sensitivity, a disabling condition that makes life very difficult for sufferers who react to very low levels of chemicals, mold, and other substances. As chemical use in our culture is so ubiquitous and deeply woven into the fabric of daily life, managing the illness can be a life-long struggle.

BP Oil Spill Protest Banners © Infrogmation

Dr. Rea is an expert on Chemical Sensitivity, having treated many thousands of patients with the condition (including those exposed to toxic chemicals in crude oil and dispersants) since his treatment center opened in 1974. Regarding the BP Oil Spill victims, Dr. Rea explains his treatment approach:

‘We first try to eliminate people’s symptoms, and that is organ specific,’ Rea explained at his clinic, which is one of the oldest and most advanced centres in the world for addressing health as it relates to the environment. ‘We try to lower their toxic load by giving them intravenous nutrients, oral nutrients, sauna, and have them live in quarters that are less polluted, eat organic food and have them get safe drinking water.’

Rea has treated many people from the Gulf that have been made sick by BP’s toxic chemicals.

“I have multiple concerns now about people in the Gulf being affected by these chemicals,’ he said. ‘First, they are all fatigued and not able to work. When your muscles are all fatigued and tired, it’s hard to function. People are getting cloudy brains, others are having heart problems because of the chemicals. Others have broncho-spasm and asthma from this. Others bloat and get sleepy after eating, diarrhea, constipation, irritable bowel syndrome and other gastrointestinal problems.”

Dr. Rea stresses that it is critical to remove patients from the area of contamination in order for treatment to be effective.

In Ricki Ott’s article “BP, Governments Downplay Public Health Risk From Oil and Dispersants” published by Huffington Post last July, she reminds us that Dr. Rea treated some of the sick Exxon Valdez cleanup workers as well.

Planet Thrive is proud to host Dr. Rea’s free question and answer column and welcomes questions from those affected by the BP Oil Explosion tragedy, as well as those suffering from other forms of chemical exposure.

Source:

Planet Thrive, Dr. William Rea recognized as expert for BP Oil Spill victims, November 10, 2010

Related articles:

• Evidence mounts of BP spraying Dispersants
• Oil Spill: Kids in the Gulf
• * Huffington Post: Gulf Coast Oil Spill Work
• * Southern Studies: Tilt the Illness afflicting Workers exposed to BP’s Oil Desaster
• * WOAI: Mysterious Illness plagues Gulf Oil Disaster

In Denmark, as well as internationally, MCS sufferers are angry and indignant with the Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity, which was established in 2006 by the Danish Ministry of Environment. Its main aim was to conduct research into the connection between MCS and chemicals. There is a good reason for this indignation since it is evident that the Research Center’s aim is not to find any real knowledge about MCS, least of all a connection between exposures to chemical substances and MCS.

On the contrary, the Research Center’s aim is to produce counterfeit/fraudulent research on MCS.

The center is a political instrument designed by a three—stage rocket:

A. Acquit the environment, i.e. “prove” that MCS is not caused by exposures to chemical substances from the environment.

B. ’Prove’ that MCS is associated with psychological factors in order to obtain psychiatrisation of MCS.

C. Get MCS sufferers to fall within psychiatry (liaison psychiatry) so that psychiatry can develop treatments for MCS sufferers: “Mindfulness” i.e. cognitive psychotherapy, perhaps electroshock (ECT) in severe cases, and soon the pharmaceutical industry, which probably is sitting poised, to develop psychoactive drugs for MCS sufferers.

And how has the Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity done this?

Well, here we must understand that their study and publication: “Attention to Bodily Sensations and Symptom Perception in Individuals with Environmental Intolerance” by Sine Skovbjerg, Robert Zachariae, Alice Rasmussen, Jeanne Duus Johansen, and Jesper Elberling in Environ Health Prev Med, DOI 10.1007/s12199•009•0120-y, is the key to the fraud.

1. GETTING RID OF THE CHEMICALS

Part 1: “Let’s change the name”

To begin with, the Research Center agreed on using the label “IEI” instead of “MCS”. This was smart thinking. At the meeting with the board of MCS-Denmark on May 18th, 2010, the Research Center argued that they used this label because IEI is a broader term than MCS and that they would not have been able otherwise to get the article published in an international journal. This is bullshit of course. The real reason is to be found on page 2 of Sine Skovbjerg’s PhD Thesis: “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity – psychological factors, patient strategies and healthcare practices”: “The label ‘MCS’ has been criticized for implying unproven assumptions about causation, and instead the label ‘Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance’ IEI has been recommended to replace it.”

The Research Center obviously wanted to exclude the idea of a causal connection between MCS and exposures to chemical substances. To complete this intention, in the same article the researchers went so far as to yield the misinformation that their MCS subjects were diagnosed with IEI by a physician. That, of course, is a lie – all subjects had been diagnosed with MCS by a physician.

When the board of MCS-Denmark confronted them with questions about why they had written that the patients were physician diagnosed with IEI, when they all were diagnosed with MCS already, they replied by handing over an article: ”International Programme on Chemical Safety / World Health Organization (IPCS/WHO), Conclusions and Recommendations of a Workshop on Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS)”, Geneva, Switzerland. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 1996; 188-189. According to the Research Center, this article describes the reasons for using label ‘IEI’. Now, the Research Center also refers to the article on their website.

However, there was a snag in the article that the Research Center “forgot” to discuss on their website. MCS-Denmark discovered this article is not a WHO article at all, as it might seem at first glance. It is also not disclosed who criticized the MCS label and instead recommended IEI either. However, it all falls into place if one scrutinizes the IPCS/WHO article, as Ann McCambell has done. The truth behind this article is that “WHO” was one of the sponsors of the workshop: “lnternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS)” on MCS held in Germany in February 1996. This workshop was dominated by participants associated with the industry and had no representatives from environmental, labor, or consumer groups. Instead the non-governmental participants were individuals employed with BASF, Bayer, Monsanto, and Coca Cola.”Representation came from individuals from the chemical industry and the pharmaceutical industry which often is the same thing. For example: “Monsanto, known for making Roundup and other herbicides, is a wholly owned subsidiary of a pharmaceutical company called Pharmacia. BASF makes pharmaceutical products and pesticides and Bayer, famous for making aspirin, manufactures the popular neurotoxic pyrethroid insecticide Tempo (active ingredient cyfluthrin).”

At this meeting the decision was made to try to change MCS into IEI.

”Besides getting the word ‘chemical’ out of the name, the workshop participants chose to add the term ‘idiopathic’, apparently because they thought it meant the illness was “all in people’s head” rather than of unknown etiology (cause). But lots of ‘real’ diseases are also considered ‘idiopathic’, such as idiopathic epilepsy (epilepsy not resulting from trauma, surgery, infection, or other obvious causes). Still, implying that MCS has no known cause helps the industry. They do not want to be held responsible for their products causing MCS, or for that matter triggering symptoms in people sensitized to them.”

However, what the Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity ‘just happened to forget’ to inform on their website and which MCS-Denmark discovered from the May 18th, 2010 meeting regarding the article not originating from WHO is quite the opposite. “The WHO issued a statement to the workshop participants after the meeting to try to put a stop to claims that WHO supported the name change from MCS to IEI. It stated, “A workshop report to WHO, with conclusions and recommendations, presents the opinions of the invited experts and does not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of WHO.” It goes on to say that: “With respect to ‘MCS,’ WHO has neither adopted nor endorsed a policy or a scientific opinion.” (World Health Organization. Note to invited participants in the MCS Workshop, February 21-23, 1996, Berlin, Germany 6/7/96.) ” “(1) (2) As Ann McCambell states: “Despite this explicit disclaimer, claims that the World Health Organization supports IEI continue to be made by MCS opponents”. (1)

It is thus evident that the Research Center’s justification for using the label ‘IEI’ for MCS does not stem from the WHO, but instead from the chemical industry. However, the Research Center ‘forgot’ to inform the public of WHO’s disclaimer both on their website and to MCS-Denmark. Consequently, the IEI label is the chemical industry’s manipulation trick — a lie label to hide the fact that MCS is induced by chemical substances. No serious MCS scientists use this fraudulent MCS label. The term ‘IEI’ is only used by scientists under the influence of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries, some parts of psychiatry and the Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity because they want to “demonstrate” that MCS has nothing to do with chemicals and that psychological factors and individual brain malfunctioning are involved in MCS etiology.

2. GETTING RID OF THE CHEMICALS

Part 2: “We do not know what is poisoning”

Simultaneously with these hoaxes, the Research Center inserted onto their website their scientific preconceptions and epistemological grounds for their research on MCS. Here they describe that MCS cannot be a poisoning condition. This is the second track of the lie that MCS has nothing to do with chemicals.

They state: “Some fragrant and chemical sensitivity sufferers experience their condition as a form of poisoning. Fragrance and chemical sensitivity cannot be explained by a toxicological mechanism. A toxicological mechanism requires a so-called exposure response (i.e. increasing effect and risk with increasing exposure) but there is no evidence that fragrance and chemical sensitivity appears more frequent among persons subjected to high chemical exposure levels, e.g. in their jobs.” (mcsvidencenter.dk)

This fundamental scientific preconception and epistemological paragraph in the Research Center’s approach to MCS regarding their understanding of poisoning is wrong because it does not take into account that this definition of poisoning is only about acute poisoning.

As a result, the Research Center completely ignores the fact that in much new research – especially in terms of environmental diseases, i.e. medical conditions triggered by environmental factors – this definition of poisoning has been abandoned in favor of a new paradigm. In this new paradigm, poisoning is not necessarily dose respondent with increasing effect and risk with increasing exposure, but low doses at repeated exposures are equally toxic.

The latter approach is represented by the French recognized cancer scientist, Professor Belpomme, President of the renowned French cancer research institute ARTAC (Association pour la Recherche Thérapeutique Anti-Cancéreuse) in Paris, France. Besides researching into cancer, ARTAC now also research into Electro Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) from which many MCS patients also suffer and have in 2009 by means of brain scans documented that EHS sufferers have hypo perfusion (low blood flow) in the brain by exposures to electromagnetic fields / radiation (EMF/EMR).

In his book “Avant qu’il ne soit trop tard” (“Before it’s too late”) Belpomme explains that it has now been clearly demonstrated that small doses of toxic substances can induce chronic diseases. Therefore, he says, those physicians and scientists – for example those at the Research Center who assert that MCS sufferers get sick of small doses of chemical substances that are completely non-toxic – not only are wrong but make double faults. First, in making a scientific mistake, because today we know that small doses of physical / chemical (radiation / chemical ) pollution may induce chronic diseases (e.g. cancer) and secondly in making an epidemiological mistake with fatal consequences for public health. Because waiting for the evidence of a poison mechanism (e.g. concerning MCS and EHS) is the same as to prepare for something much worse than today, both in terms of human and economic consequences.

In this light the Research Center’s fumblings are no less than a scandal. On completely unqualified grounds, they believe they know that MCS is not related to poisoning. For instance, Jesper Elberling said to an MCS patient that her symptoms are due to the circumstance that “her brain sensor is broken so that she overreacts and believes the smells are toxic although they are not.”

But Elberling and Skovbjerg make fatal errors, as well as scientific errors, since the rule of dose-dependent exposures response only regards acute exposures but not chronic poisoning. Likewise, they neither query the nature of the chemical substances in question nor the repetition of exposures which according to MCS sufferers are so very characteristic of their illness (due to the small doses).

As is seen, Elberling and Skovbjerg are neither interested in the duration of exposures to chemical substances (the time factor) nor in the organism’s state (the chronicity).

Belpomme writes: “It is evident in terms of environmental pollution with chemical substances that the majority of diseases they induce are not caused by acute toxicity. In these cases it is not the dose that makes the poison but the repetition. This concept is relatively new and it is not only a matter of chemical substances but also of radiation. Our prescribed regulations (the dose-respondent rule) do indeed protect us from acute poisoning, but do not protect us against chronic diseases caused by prolonged exposures to low doses. In case of chronic exposures, one must therefore consider the factor: time much more than the actual dose. The longer the exposures last, the higher the probability of developing a chronic disease, especially cancer.” (p.73) (3)

Virtually all MCS sufferers clearly declare that their MCS is being exacerbated over time by repeated small exposures to a variety of chemical substances. Many researchers (e.g. Martin Pall) point out the fact that a range of these chemical substances are extremely neurotoxic (toxic to the nervous system) and a host of other chemical substances are known to cause other toxic effects in the organism. On these grounds it is incredibly unqualified and amateurish for the Research Center to assert as a starting point that MCS cannot be caused by a toxicological mechanism.

In these two ’wily’ ways, the Research Center, a priori, excluded the environmental factor – the chemical trail. But that obviously did not suffice. Now it had to be proved that there are psychological factors involved in MCS.

And how was that done?

3. GETTING RID OF THE CHEMICALS

Part 3:”Let’s falsely translate”

Well, as a starting point they manipulated the research and the questionnaire test of Eva Millqvist: “A Short Chemical Sensitivity Scale for Assessment of Airway Sensory Hyper Reactivity,” by Steven Nordin, Eva Millqvist, Olle Löwhagen, and Mats Bende in Int Arch Occup Environ Health (2004) 77: 249-254, DOI 10.1007/s00420-004-0504-7. This research contains a validated test to quantify SHR (Sensory Hyperreactivity, a subcondition of MCS). The SHR sufferers have symptoms primarily from the airways when exposed to chemical substances.

The Research Center chose this questionnaire, and sent it out to many MCS sufferers and non-MCS subjects. However, there was a snag in it because they deliberately translated seven out of eleven questions falsely into Danish. While the original questions of the validated CSS-SHR test, which together with the capsaicin test can diagnose SHR, ask about people’s behavioural and emotional reactions to exposures to chemical substances (”odeous / pungent substances”), the Research Center changed them in the Danish translation into questions on people’s behavioural and emotional responses to odors (“scents and chemical odors”). Clever.

Quite imperceptibly, the questions have been changed into people’s reactions to smells, but smells and chemicals are not synonymous concepts. And when people can only respond to the questions, the answers will of course respond to people’s responses to odors.

4. NEARLY IN THE BAG

MCS individualized and psychiatrized

Finally the way was paved to correlate these responses with a series of psychiatric tests and for a finding that MCS sufferers have idiosyncratic perceptions of smells and thus an increased unhealthy amount of attention to bodily symptoms, and they are also often sad. Hocus pocus, MCS has become individualized. It is the individual MCS sufferers that are said to have an increased unhealthy amount of attention (’enhanced internal information’) to non-toxic fragrances and with the correlation with psychiatric tests, the conclusion suggested that MCS sufferers’ symptomatology is psycho-pathological but that it is not known whether psychopathology and individual susceptibility to hypersensitivity reactions are part of the MCS etiology or merely amplifying factors. “It is likely that the etiology of IEI is multi- factorial, and as for somatoform disorders, it can be argued that the complexity of IEI is best studied from a bio-psycho-social perspective” (s.38).

It is hence concluded that MCS is a somatoform disorder and – hocus pocus – MCS is now psychiatrized.

Thus was the recipe for this indigestible dish in the cookbook:

“Lies and manipulation in preparation for dishonest and fake research”

The ingredients are:

• Faulty and outdated definition of poisoning
• New (old) chemical industry invented name (IEI)
• Forged medical diagnoses (IEI) (and toxicology and environmental medicine out of the picture)

To this must be added:

• Counterfeit questionnaires via mistranslation, thus turning chemical substances into scents and ’somatisation’, no, no: ’Bodily Distress Syndrome’ diagnosis.

Finally the dish is served: On the table is now a psychiatric disorder, i.e. a mixture of physical disorder (brain-related error: ’the brain sensor is broken’) and possibly genetics (individual susceptibility) and psychiatric illness (depression, anxiety).

And where does this big magic trick lead?

5. THE MAGIC COMPLETED

MCS falls within psychiatry and patients must be psychiatrically treated

Well, it leads to the powerful psychiatry movement which stands ready to receive patients – and especially money. MCS is now ’meaningfully’ called scent sensitivity in the special issue of the Danish Weekly Journal of Physicians (Ugeskrift for Læger no. 24, 14 June 2010) on functional disorders. Don’t miss that, and is now labeled as a functional disorder. The falsehood is complete, because that was what it was all about, wasn’t it?

Now, MCS patients do no longer pose a danger to society, the chemical industry and the insurance companies. But of course they need treatment that is self-evident, because we feel so sorry for them that some people think they malinger. So they obviously must have psychiatric treatment: cognitive psychotherapy and perhaps in severe cases electroshock. And just you wait, the next thing is of course, that the nice pharmaceutical industry is ready with some psychoactive drugs so that the poor MCS sufferers can have their “broken brain sensor” repaired and in addition their depression and anxiety.

The conclusion is therefore that the Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity is part of the powerful psychiatrisation campaign taking place worldwide at the moment.

In USA, a revision of the DSM diagnostic system has now for a long time been on its way. DSM is the counterpart to the international ICD-10. Here it has been understood that the patients who are ill from the ‘new’ conditions – Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), Fibromyalgia (FMS) and now MCS (and soon EHS – they have just not discovered it yet) – do not accept that their diseases are classified as “somatoform disorders”, i.e. mental disorders. So what to do instead? Well naturally they invented new ‘dignified’ names such as “Bodily Distress Syndrome,” for psychiatrists love fancy names for which they don’t have a shred of evidence. It is pure magic of words. (4) How stupid do they think we are, because the essence is of course identical.

As Evelyn Pringle writes, it’s the same old story of psychiatry trying to extend its diagnostic labels and drug treatment to new target groups and she quotes Toxicology Expert Dr. Lawrence Plumlee, President of the Chemical Sensitivities Disorders Association and Editor of “The Environmental Physician of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine”:

“This is an effort by psychiatry to psychiatrize physical illnesses and to try to suppress the complaints of these patients by prescribing psychiatric drugs. But experience is showing that psychiatric procedures and drugs are making patients worse. Using psychiatric diagnoses and drugs on diseases of neurotoxicity helps the chemical companies in two ways. It fools some people into thinking that poisoned people are crazy, thus getting the poisoners (chemical companies) off the hook, and two, it sells more chemicals (psychiatric drugs) to treat those who really need detoxification, not more chemicals in their bodies.”(5)

Do bear in mind: This is what we are up against.

Author:

Eva Theilgaard Jacobsen, MSc in Psychology, Specialist in Psychotherapy, October 2010

References:

1. Ann McCambell: “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Under Siege” Chair Multiple Chemical Sensitivities Task Force of New Mexico
2. World Health Organization: “Note to invited participants in the MCS workshop “21-23 February 1996, Berlin, Germany 6/7/96.
3. Dominique Belpomme: “Avant qu’il ne soit trop tard”. Fayard 2007.
4. Kroenke, Sharpe, Sykes: “Revising the Classification of Somatoform Disorders: Key Questions and Preliminary Recommendations”, Psychosomatics 48:4, July-August 2007.
5. Evelyn Pringle: “Tracking the American Epidemic of Mental Illness“, June, 22, 2010

- -

* It is part of the Research Center’s policy and methods that their communications and information are ambiguous. After all, one of their most important staff members is a journalist. Internationally, the Research Center’s name is: “The Danish Research Center for Chemical Sensitivities,” but for the home audience the Center’s name is “The Research Center for Fragrance and Chemical Sensitivity.” There is a purpose for this. The key to the fraudulent article, “Attention to bodily sensations and symptom perception in individuals with IEI” has now been reported to the Danish Ministry of Research for fraudulent research by MCS sufferers, primarily because of their forging Eva Millqvist’s research, by deliberately wrongly translating “Odeous/pungent substances”, i.e. chemical substances, into Danish “fragrances and chemical odors” in their translation of her validated CSS-SHR test in a questionnaire forwarded to many people, including MCS sufferers. In doing so, they have fabricated fraudulent data so that people’s reactions to chemical substances have been turned into reactions to fragrances/scents. In this way, they tried to remove the causal connection between chemical substances from the environment and MCS. This paved the way to individualization and psychiatrisation of MCS so that Danish psychiatrists now can diagnose MCS as a “functional disease” (cause unknown), doctors can refer MCS-sufferers for psychiatric treatment and diagnosis, and MCS-sufferers will be denied public disability pension and compensation from insurance companies. However, internationally the Research Center tries to appear as serious MCS researchers. But just ask them about Martin Pall’s article in Ballantyne, Maars & Syvertsen’s “General and Applied Toxicology”, and you will get the answer that they think it is too difficult to understand. If it was not so tragic, it is quite amusing. They are a bunch of amateurs with a nurse as leader. This is what Denmark has become after 10 years with a right-wing government, (the Research Center was founded and is paid for by the government).

Series:  “The Danish MCS Research Centre in the International Field of Vision”

• Part I: MCS – Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: A Report from Denmark
• Part II: Changes of the international science of chemical sensitivity at the Danish Research Centre for Chemical Sensitivities?
• Part IV: Paradox – Danish MCS sufferers are denied help because of the lack of scientific documentation – which nobody wants to obtain!
• Part V: Gloss: Electroc Shock, the Treatment of Choice for MCS

Today there are 100,000 different chemicals constantly circulating in the environment, and the impact of the vast majority of these chemicals on the human organism is not known.

According to physician Stephen Hawking, Earth is at risk of a devastating disaster, and life can only be carried on by colonizing outer space.

What concerns him most is a potential asteroid collision with Earth which would wipe out life. However, I do not think we need to wait for this disaster. Man already carries out the mission of wiping out life on Earth pretty well!

Life has existed on Earth, our planet, for more than 3½ billion years. Homo sapiens appeared about 50,000 years BC, and until about 100-150 years ago, mankind communed well with nature and had until then, a lifestyle that only intervened to a limited extent in nature’s sensitive ecosystems.

However, a drastic change occurred approximately 150 years ago. Industrialization started and manufacturing and refinement processes could be enhanced by using steam, gas, oil, and electricity as power sources.

In the 1950s, the consumption of chemicals exploded – it became trendy to produce food additives, chemicals, detergents to ease housewives daily chores, and personal care products full of chemicals, etc.

Uncritical Manufacturing and Consumption of Chemicals

The result of this development is that today over 100,000 different chemicals are constantly circulating in the environment, and we do not yet know the impact of the vast majority of these chemicals on the human organism. Yet, today the cocktail effect of chemicals is being gradually discussed. A number of various chemicals together are much more harmful than single isolated chemicals. However, the motivation to investigate into this problem is not particularly high. A number of chemicals have a hormone-like-effect thus resulting in presexual maturity, childlessness, etc. It is a known fact that some chemicals are cancer-producing, but even this fact is being ignored to a large extent.

Pesticides Are Sprayed by Greedy Farmers

Farmers spray increasingly more aggressively with a huge number of various pesticides – substances designed to kill living organisms: pests, weeds, and fungi. It is a known fact that these pesticides certainly seep down into the groundwater. But what is being done about it? Oh yes, limit values are set forth on how much pollution is allowed in our drinking water. Limit values are set for how much toxic waste our food may contain. That is indeed sheer madness. Without protest, we accept eating, drinking and breathing in toxic waste. If pesticides are designed to kill living organisms, what makes us believe that these harmful chemicals are harmless to humans?

Chemical Disasters Have Become Everyday Occurrences

Nearly every day we are being flooded with stories on TV and in newspapers about various chemical disasters. A tidal wave of poisonous mud buries entire villages in Hungary. Contaminated plots of land are detected and chemicals are dumped around in the open countryside. The industry sends huge quantities of toxic wastewater and toxic smoke out into the environment, thus causing harmful damage to humans and animals. Certain fish are no longer edible due to heavy metals contamination. Even polar bears, living so far away from civilization, are exposed to chemicals and pollution via their food, thus developing deformed genital organs. The air is thick with pollution, and we incinerate fossil fuels in increasing quantities. We have gradually developed ”immunity” to all these gruesome stories. The madness goes on, driven by man’s tendency toward greediness.

Environmental Diseases such as MCS Are Results of All This Chemical Production and Pollution

Over the last 50 years or so, gradually, increasing numbers of people turn up, developing environmental diseases such as MCS. No wonder that the weakest of us is defeated by this devastating chemical pressure, foreign to the human body, as well as by the increasing spread of wireless devices, also being a devastating and unnatural strain on the human organism.

Man was created to live commune with nature, so even if it feels ”natural” to live as society does today, having daily contact with and consumption of hundreds of chemicals, the body is of course, not geared to defend against all those substances foreign on the human body. Some members of society become ill from this overwhelming chemical build up of pressure and develop chemical sensitivity.

Why Do Politicians, Scientists, Physicians, and Others Deny the Existence of the Environmental Disease MCS?

• If animals become ill from chemical filth, why shouldn’t a number of people react likewise against this devastating chemical pressure foreign to the human body by becoming ill?
• Shouldn’t it be a natural thing to take environmentally sick people seriously?
• Shouldn’t society react by raising the alarm and by initiating serious research in this field?
• Shouldn’t the medical world immediately offer these seriously environmentally sick people fair and thorough medical examination, counseling and treatment for their disabling disease MCS?
• Why is there instead such an extensive and massive objection against accepting MCS as the environmental disease that it is? Who has a special interest to deny chemical sensitivity and instead attempt to explain it away by declaring it to be a mental disease?
• Could it be that the chemical industry, the insurance industry, and certain politicians have a huge interest in not recognizing MCS as an environmental disease due to chemicals?

If MCS was recognized as a disease caused by chemicals, the aforementioned groups would be in very big financial trouble. However, if instead these patients were diagnosed with psychiatric disorders, they would save huge amounts in loss of earnings, claims for damages, disability pension payouts etc., so it is obvious, here we find the reason why globally there is such vigorous objection of fair and thorough research of MCS, and why the limited number of environmental physicians have constant attempts to be discredited by any means possible.

There are always greedy research scientists and physicians who can be bought off to produce predetermined research results, as well as predetermined diagnoses. That was evident with regard to the impact of tobacco on health, and that is also evident with regard to the impact o f chemicals on health. Many physicians diagnose MCS sufferers with psychiatric disorders, but such misdiagnoses do not, of course, make MCS sufferers less chemically sensitive.

On the contrary, increasingly more people do develop MCS – and if the chemical problem is not taken seriously very soon, Stephen Hawking’s prophesy can easily come true. Man is the disaster about to destroy Earth and life on Earth.

MCS suffers are just the first victims. – They are the yellow canaries in the coal mines.

Author: Bodil Dam Bak Nielsen, Denmark www.mcsfokus.dk

English translation: Dorte Pugliese, Christi Howarth

Photo: Torben Bøjstrup / Topperfoto.dk

Related Articles:

• MCS Sufferers – The Lepers of Today
• A Politically Inconvenient Illness
• Without a Mask
• Dreams that kill
• Manifesto – We know they are lying to us