Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - The Poisoned WEB

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

http://wsmcsn.s5.com/mcsweb.htm

 

MCS - The Poisoned WEB

 

by Don Richard Paladin

 

The obstacles to understanding Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) provide

mankind an opportunity to extend its knowledge about health and scientific

issues. It also provides us all an opportunity to learn to listen to the wisdom

of our bodies as we interact with the nature around us. As a former educator,

the issues of learning and understanding become the context through which I

filter the issue of chemical injury. We need to recognize the problems before we

can find a solution There are a variety of perspectives on this issue. This

paper has mine. Once we come to accept that although there may be some

psychological overlay to MCS, it is an affect, the symptoms, of reactions to

acute and/or low level chemical exposures. I attempt to explain what I see as

the problems in preventing understanding of the issues and then suggest some

explanations and direction for action. Ultimately, open, independent search for

truth and understanding about chemical injury will be beneficial to us all.

 

The Hystorical Pattern

 

" Experience never misleads; what you are misled by is only your judgment, and

this misleads you by anticipating results from experience of a kind that is not

produced by your experiments. " - Leonardo Da Vinci

 

 

In 1995 while going to my environmental physician for an appointment for

treatment of my chemical sensitivity, he asked me sign a release to send copies

of his office notes because the " benefits manager " at my Health Maintenance

Organization (HMO) had requested them to determine whether she would approve

reimbursement of my treatments. I told my doctor to go ahead and send copies and

asked him for the name and phone number of the lady who requested this

information. I wanted an open dialogue with her...to educate her about MCS.

 

The next day I called her at the HMO office. She at first became defensive when

I asked her why she needed the records. I got into a discussion about MCS and

the fact that there was new promising research linking MCS with a disorder of

porphyrin metabolism. I told her that I had gone to conference at which Dr.

William Morton of Oregon Health Science University presented his research (1) on

the relationship. She became unusually interested. I told her I had both a copy

of the research and a video of his presentation. She asked to see them. I

dropped them off at her office with a note to return them to me when she was

through viewing them

 

To my surprise all my visits to my environmental physician and the tests he

prescribed were approved. After not hearing back from the HMO risk manager for

several months, I called her at her office. She was very apologetic for keeping

the video and research paper so long. She promised she would drop them off at my

home the next day. And she did. We chatted briefly about the information I had

shared. I told her about the problem people with environmental illness have with

conventional doctors and insurance companies. She told me she knew and

understood.

 

This is when she shared with me her experience with her own environmental

illness. Before she had move to the Northwest, she had lived in Ohio and

Tennessee . When she lived in Ohio, she said she had some strange facial

swelling and visual irritation that she felt was from reaction to the pollution

there. She went to the doctor to find out what was bothering her and for

treatment. As she was with the doctor, she saw him write in her file, " neurotic

female. " She said she was very upset with him. Later she decided to move away

from the pollution in Ohio to Tennessee. Her symptoms from the pollution in Ohio

ended. Before she left, she gave me her business card and asked me to fax or

send her any of the latest research on MCS.

 

I tell this story because in the years I have been involved with support groups

with people with MCS, I have often heard the females report similar mistreatment

by male (and yes, some female) doctors. It is an old pattern of sexist attitudes

toward female illnesses. It is a result of ignorance and being too arrogant to

admit that. Over the years I would cut out newspaper articles of the latest

illness in which females (and males) were dismissed away by doctors as having

psychological problems only to be find out that there was something

physiologically wrong with them. I call this pattern of male lack of awareness

and understanding of female related illnesses the " " hystorical " pattern. " There

is a pattern throughout history where female problems are referred to as

hysterical and dismissed away rather than understood and treated. MCS fits in

the " hystorical pattern. " It often happens in illnesses in which the incidence

is predominantly women.

 

It was reported in the ATSDR MCS Draft Report on " Epidemiological Studies " (line

477) that there is an incidence of 77% females. It is no surprise that MCS has a

77% incidence of females; and, it has been consistently dismissed away as a

psychological problem. MCS fits this " hystorical pattern. " If one thinks this

" hystorical pattern " is not real, let me simply cite three newspaper articles I

have collected over the years. I have three, but one article I did not write the

date I cut it out . Still I will quote from it. All articles are from The

Bellingham Herald in Bellingham, WA.

 

Title: " Rare heart disease hits mostly women, " January 17, 1990, and I quote,

" San Antonio (AP) -Tens of thousands of American women are being misdiagnosed as

suffering from psychiatric disorders when they are in fact suffering from an

unusual form of heart disease, a researcher says.

 

The women, who have chest pain but not signs of heart disease by conventional

tests, are suffering from a treatable disorder of the small arteries, said Dr.

Richard Cannon of the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute in Betheseda, Md. "

 

This is the most classic example of the " hystorical " pattern. Survey a few

hundred females with MCS and ask them how they were treated by many of the

conventional allopathic physicians to whom they went to seek diagnosis and

treatment. The next example relates a story about an illness in which 90% of

patients are female.

 

Title: " Bladder ailment disrupts lives of thousands, " (no date, sorry) , and I

quote, " Washington (AP) -- A painful, debilitating bladder condition -and not

always taking seriously by the medical profession -is a real disease that

disrupts the lives of thousands, experts say.

 

The fist major study of the impact of the disease, released at a two-day

National Institutes of Health meeting that ended Saturday, estimates that as

many as 90,000 Americans have been diagnosed with the condition which

undoubtedly afflicts many times that number.

 

At least 90 percent of those who suffer with interstitial cystitis, or IC, are

women and the remainder are men and children, specialists said. ...

 

.. . . Dr. Vicki Ratner, founder and president of the Interstitial Cystitis

Association and an IC sufferer herself, said the condition long went

unrecognized because it is difficult to diagnose and has no obvious cause.

 

In addition, she said in an interview, some doctors dismissed it as an imaginary

" women problem " stemming from emotional difficulties rather considering it a

life-disrupting disease. "

 

This pattern of unenlightened disdain is exactly what people with MCS must face.

Although, as a male, I was always treated respectfully by the allopathic doctors

to whom I went to for diagnosis and treatment, I had to on occasion force them

to admit that they did not know what was going on with me. I eventually went for

alternative treatments because the allopathic physicians refused to look for an

answer beyond their current level of understanding and attempt to understand

what was happening with my environmental illness.

 

The third article is not particularly about women...but the " hystorical " factor

is reported in this one, too. Title: " Neurological disorder often misdiagnosed

as psychological, " June 5, 1991, and I quote, " New York (AP) -People whose

hands cramp only when doing certain tasks, whose voices break or tremble or

whose eyes shut uncontrollably often are misdiagnosed with a psychological

problem when they really have a treatable neurological disorder, researchers

say.

 

The condition, called dystonia, can also twist the neck, limbs or body,

hampering walking and other actions.

Some patients see psychologist for years before getting the correct diagnosis,

said neurologist Stanley Fahn of Columbia University in New York. ... " It makes

one wonder how many of the patients with dystonia are female.

 

 

Historical Pattern - Looking for a Pattern throughout History

 

Any piece of knowledge I acquire today has a value at this moment exactly

proportioned to my skill to deal with it. Tomorrow, when I know more, I recall

that piece of knowledge and use it better. - Mark Van Doren

 

 

All our knowledge has its origins in our perceptions. - Leonardo Da Vinci

 

 

Although I have alluded to an unawareness, another problem is presumptuousness

and a belief that " all " essential information is already known. Interestingly

these two human limitations and patterns are the real culprit to impeding the

understanding of new information. Throughout human history the gatekeepers of

truth assume that they have access to all the fundamentals of truth. They are

limited by their own ability to understand beyond the limits of what has already

been learned. The information they know becomes their " belief system " and the

filter through which they evaluate all new information. Many times these

gatekeepers cannot reason past their own limited understanding, dogmatic views,

and rigid protocols. They are not the innovative thinkers of their time. They

discover nothing new. Often the gatekeepers of truth are motivated by their own

power and maintaining it. They assume they have the " truth " and their role as

gatekeeper is to protect others from the false prophets who exist to challenge

the conventional wisdom. Look at human history and find this pattern continually

repeated. When The Church was the absolute power, it was the gatekeepers of

conventional wisdom then who were obstacles to new knowledge being accepted.

 

When religious power was displaced by scientific power in society, its adherents

became the possessors of conventional knowledge of their times. They had acted

as obstacles in the movement to greater understanding about what was then not

known. The doctors and scientists of their times knew what they knew. Each new

leap in understanding never came any easier than it ever has.

 

Look at the historical pattern and one will understand why MCS has not been

recognized as an disorder. The opponents of MCS could not reason beyond their

current level of understanding. They most often functioned from a premise that

MCS was a psychogenic, psychological disorder that was not an illness that

responded to " treatment. " This premise absolved them of any responsibility to

treat something that was in their opinion not an illness. They became vested in

the belief system that MCS was psychological. It was the only possibility that

offered them an explanation they understood. Their objective conventional

testing protocols demonstrated that most people with MCS did not have cancer,

infections or antibody mediated allergies. This major premise was so strong that

any new information which was not part of their conventional knowledge and

training was rejected. Because they are in the power structure, they can reject

any new knowledge submitted to their peer reviewed journals that contradict

their current level of understanding.

 

This is not to imply that proponents of MCS as an illness understood the issues

completely. If they did, they could have satisfactorily explained it to the

skeptics in the opposition who needed " objective evidence " that this is truly an

illness. The MCS proponents did better understand the issues and did try to

explain with new objective measures to document the disorder.

 

The problem was that anything new immediately became suspect because its

association with what had already been determined was a psychological condition

reinforced by quacks.

 

Many who discovered new information in their times did not receive immediate

acceptance of this new knowledge. Ignaz Semmelweis (the relationship between

germs, hand washing, and infection) , Joseph Goldberger (the relationship

between niacin and pellagra), Kilmer McCully (the relationship between heart

disease and homocysteine) and Barry Marshall (the relationship between

Heliocobacter. pylori and ulcers) all faced the dismissal of their new

discoveries by their peers because the information they presented was not part

of the conventional wisdom and understanding by those within the established

order. Unfortunately, those without personal experience with MCS know what their

perceptions and understandings tell them is the truth. Their knowledge and

experience tell them it is not possible to be sensitive to low levels of

volatile chemicals.

 

The greatest hole in the logic of those who use a long held, rigid protocol or

belief system to explain problems is the assumption that the current

understanding and knowledge reflect what is always going on. One must assume

that the biochemical issues of MCS and other similar disorders have always

existed. The explanation that they had a purely psychological cause is a result

of that lack of understanding of what is happening at the cellular and

biochemical level. The opponents of recognition of MCS and other similar

disorders often go back to history to point to the diagnosis of psychological

problems in the past. This is tantamount to the expert mechanical engineers of

the Motel T Ford being used to explain with their level of understanding the

mechanical problems of a Boeing 777. The basic problems may be recognized. The

solutions will not.

 

Using " stress " as a cause or explanation of any illness or " ailment " does not

explain what is specifically happening. There is no significant explanation why

someone reports the symptoms they have. This translates into a medical diagnosis

that there is NO problem except a psychological one. Even purely psychological

problems have been found to have a biochemical component.

 

The real question becomes: What causes the symptoms of MCS?

 

Finding the Root Cause

 

The issue of attempting to explain a cause of MCS is most crucial. There may be

some psychological overlay; but, there is with many illnesses. Symptoms are not

causes

 

The research by Dr. Robert Haley (2) on Gulf War Vets helps in understanding the

issue of detoxification. Haley investigated a genetic deficiency of the enzyme

serum paraoxonase. A deficiency is implicated in the inability of some to

detoxify organophosphates and similar toxins.(3)

 

 

 

" One of the biggest questions about Gulf War syndrome has been why one person

got sick when the person next to him didn't, " Haley said. " That is one of the

major puzzles that made many people think the symptoms were just due to stress.

 

" But now we know that there appears to be a genetic reason why some people got

sick and others didn't, and this genetic difference links the illness to damage

from certain chemicals. "

 

Haley's study showed that people with a gene that causes them to produce high

amounts of a particular enzyme did not get sick after exposure to certain

chemicals in Operation Desert Storm, while others who produce low amounts of the

same enzyme did get sick.

 

The culprit gene is the one that controls production of type Q paraoxonase, or

PON-Q, an enzyme that allows the body to fight off chemical toxins by destroying

them. This particular enzyme is highly specific for the chemical nerve agents

sarin and soman as well as for the common pesticide diazinon.

 

It is highly likely that many individuals with a deficiency of the enzyme PON Q

will have problems detoxifying this poison. Please note that scientist have

known since around 1976 that a PON 1 deficiency predisposed one to an inability

to detoxify organophosphates. We are just now learning who those people are who

carry this genetic predisposition.

 

Professor Michael Aviram, a biochemist, head of the Lipid Research Laboratory,

Faculty of Medicine at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology and at Rambam

Medical Center in Haifa, Israel has the following to say about paraoxonase: 'The

real function of the enzyme has been something of a mystery since it was

discovered more than 40 years ago. Its previously known function was to break

down organophosphates, chemicals that are used as insecticides and poison

gasses. That activity was obviously not the complete story of paraoxonase, as

humans do not normally contain these substances in their blood, Aviram

realized. " [source]

 

If one thinks that genetic differences in ability to detoxify a variety of

substances is not a real problem, then one has not heard about a 1998 study in

The Journal of the American Medical Association about people becoming ill and

dying from drug reactions. (4) On July 29, 1999 CBS News reported:

" Approximately two million people are hospitalized each year for drug reactions

and nearly 100,000 die. Now doctors are paying more attention to the fact that

nearly thirty percent of the population may be taking drugs their genetic makeup

can't handle " (5)

 

All these drugs, like many toxic chemicals, have been tested and approved for

use. The problem with most research conducted by industry is that they don't

consider biochemical individuality and that we all cannot detoxify the same

chemicals.

 

Both environment and nature (genes) have an impact upon all lives. In the case

of some of us, genes like the gene for the PON Q enzyme that detoxifies

organophophates existed in humans and animals way before the creation of these

synthetic poisons. The fact that some of us CANNOT detoxify these synthetic

poisons does not necessarily mean our genes are defective. It probably means

that the synthetic poisons should not be imposed upon the living. Think about

it!!!

 

Chemical-Induced Porphyrinopathies

 

Although serum paraoxonase may not explain and/or be implicated in the cause of

all detoxification issues of MCS, researchers need to follow a path that

suggests a connection to a disorder. William E. Morton, M.D. tried to follow a

connection to the pattern he saw in individuals with environmental

sensitivities. His research on over 100 subjects with chemical sensitivity and a

disorder of porphyrin metabolism was rejected by those gatekeepers of

conventional wisdom. He found a 90% congruence between MCS and porphyrinopathy,

so that he believes porphyrinopathy could be used as a biomarker. (source) Dr.

Morton shares more in common with the likes of Barry Marshal and Kilmer McCulley

than many of his peers who could not reason beyond their current level

understanding in the discovery of new information. He will long be remembered

after all the gatekeepers of conventional wisdom have been forgotten.

 

There is a controversy surrounding the diagnosis of a porphyrin disorder as it

relates to MCS. The Washington State Department of Labor and Industry in

collaboration with others changed their reference range of lab results used for

acceptance of a disorder of porphyrin metabolism. (7) When I took statistics as

a college student, I learned one fact that gives me hope. In a normal

distribution, abnormal is abnormal. It may be " economically correct " to change

the reference ranges to prevent individuals documenting their abnormal responses

to a toxic induced porphyrinopathy, but the normal distribution that exists in

the real world population will not be changed with this kind of manipulation.

 

The major controversy is about the amount of porphyrins in our blood, urn, and

stool tests. I will let the experts split hairs about this issue. The

porphyrinologists say we cannot have " true porphyria " because those of us with

MCS don't have acute levels in all three tests. Rather than being able to

discern a continuum of response, they have defined a rigid set of criteria that

excludes out only the most extreme possibilities. Although MCS is not likely an

acute porphyria, the similarities and diagnostic evidence suggests a

relationship that must be followed and researched.

 

In " The Porphyrias " (Disease-a-Month, January 1989, Year Book Medical

Publishers, Inc. p. 9-10.) Drs. Joseph R. Bloomer and Hebert L. Bonkovsky write,

" It is also important for the clinician to realize that several different

diseases, particularly hepatobiliary disorders, may be associated with a mild to

moderate increase in urinary porphyrin excretion, especially coproporphyrin.

This is termed secondary porphyrinuria. Since some of these patients may have

symptoms that suggest porphyria, they may be misdiagnosed unless careful

biochemical studies are performed. Most importantly, the secondary

porphyrinurias can be separated from true Porphyrias by measuring the urinary

level of ALA and porphobilinogen. These compounds are not elevated in the second

porphyrinurias. "

 

Am I the only one who wonders why no one sees a relationship between the ability

for the liver to detoxify and a mild to moderate increased level of porphyrins?

 

In the same article they go on to write about the " Clinical and Biomedical

Features " (p.35) that, " The hallmark of HCP is moderately to markedly increased

excretion of coproporphyrin III in the feces, and to a lesser extent in the

urine. During acute attacks, urinary excretion of ALA and PBG are also

increased. Unlike AIP, acute attacks of HCP typically are characterized by

urinary ALA excretions exceeding those of PBG (in mg/24 hr). "

 

Many porphyrinologists believe that MCS with a lower range of abnormal levels of

porphyrins cannot be " true porphyria " because there must be high levels of

aminolevulince acid (ALA) and porphobilinogen (PBG) to have Hereditary

Coproporphyria (HCP). Much of the controversy over the relationship of MCS to a

disorder of porphyrin metabolism, particularly acute attacks of HCP, hinges on

this diagnostic criteria. I would like to present what Dr. Dave C. Downey,

D.M.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, Oregon Sciences

University, School of Dentistry in Portland, Oregon wrote on this issue.

 

In a paper titled " Hereditary Coproporphyria " Dr. Downey writes in his

" discussion, " " Moore (1) describes the urine finds as variable if the patient is

not in an attack. Bissell (3) agrees saying heme precursors vary widely in

carriers. Wintrob (11) states urine Coproporphyria may be profoundly increased

during symptomatic periods but usually is normal during remissions. Stool

porphyrins appear to be most critical in identifying Coproporphyria according to

Berger(12) and Cripps.(13). Even in Acute Intermittent Porphyria where it is

thought that urine porphyrins are always elevated, Tishler (14) found 18

patients in a mental hospital with diminished uroporphyinogen-1-synthase levels

while only 8 had elevated levels of porphobilinogen in the urine. "

 

Dr. William. Morton , as mentioned, is a proponent of the relationship between a

disorder of porphyrin metabolism and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. Dr. Morton

reviews his research in his paper presented on 6-6-95 at the Second

International Congress on Hazardous Waste: Impact on Human and Ecological Health

titled: " Redefinition of Abnormal Susceptibility to Environmental Chemicals. "

Dr. Morton shares the view with Dr. Downey that, " Quantitative 24-hour urine

and stool porphyrin excess will identify metabolically active cases. Excess

24-hour urine porphobilinogen (PBG) and/or aminolevulince acid (ALA) will

usually be present in acute attacks of porphyria but not in cases with chronic

or absent symptoms (Moore 6, Ellefson 7). "

 

On table 5, Comparison of Abnormal Deficiencies of Blood-Cell Porphyrin Enzymes

by Excess Urinary and Fecal Porphyrin Excretion, Dr. Morton documents this

pattern of elevated porphyrins in the stool but not necessarily in the urine of

MCS patients who were test for Coproporphyria CPG-O deficiency. In a population

of 16 subjects that test positive for Coproporphyria eight test with excess

porphyrins in their stool and 4 with it in their urn. Four had no porphyrins in

their stool and eight had none in urn.

 

Dr. Morton does not draw a conclusion that MCS is an acute porphyria. Instead,

he believes that, " The MCS syndrome overlaps to a strong degree with the

clinical symptoms and courses of chronic Porphyrias. The activating

environmental chemicals, medications, and foods are virtually the same for MCS

and the Porphyrias. "

 

Although many of the opponents of MCS, and those with rigid belief systems,

would like everyone to believe that there are no valid biomarkers for MCS, many

of the lab results on patients reflect abnormal porphyrin levels. Some of these

tests are criticized by the opponents as being invalid because they are not in

the upper limits (acute levels) of abnormal. They also exclude the possibility

that people with chemical hypersensitivity REACT to low levels of toxic

chemicals. It would seem perfectly logical that an abnormal response at less

extreme levels would reflect the pattern of the unique sensitivity of the

individual to the " chemical-induced porphyrinopathy. " In other words one would

expect that lab results would reflect a low but abnormal level of porphyrin

metabolism commensurate with the quantity of the porphyrinogenic substance. Have

the porphyrinologists ever considered the possibility that lab results are

porphyrinogenic substance dose dependent? Have they ever considered that a liver

dysfunction may be implicated in both detoxification and porphyria?

 

The questions an investigator with an open mind would propose would be: What is

the mechanism by which those who are chemically sensitive become ill? What are

potential biomarkers that indicate both physiological and emotional imbalance?

Are individuals with MCS a reflection of a continuum of response from the

porphyrin mechanism or are they a secondary (type II) and only peripherally

related illness? There are many more questions to be answered than we presently

have answers for now. RESEARCH must be funded.

 

Searching for the Elusive Biomarker

 

Without validating and corroborating objective evidence the opponents of

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) as a disorder can persist in denying any

relationship between low level toxic chemical exposure and the symptoms they

trigger. We must set the burden of disproof of the existence of MCS at an even

higher level If evidence of reactions at a physiological level to low level

toxins can be consistently demonstrated, then the use of argument that MCS is a

purely psychological condition cannot be used to neutralize those with and those

who support the existence of MCS. Because at this point there is no " universally

accepted " diagnostic marker for MCS that demonstrates a relationship between low

level exposure and symptoms, we must use all available tests that indicate a

possible biochemical imbalance. We must use a number of objective assays to

challenge the notion that there is no evidence of a physiological disorder. If

we can find objective evidence that is universally accepted then all other

related issues will be resolved.. A cause for the mechanism must be found

through active research in order to prevent further injury and to remediate and

treat those who presently are impaired. In order to find solutions of problems

faced by the chemically injured, let us all resolve to advocate for the research

to find these biomarkers

 

How can low levels of mixed volatile chemicals impact humans?

 

All things are connected. Whatever befalls the Earth befalls the sons of

Earth. Man does not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it.

Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself. - Chief Seattle

 

It is always important to recognize the pattern and the relationships between

things. Often we dismiss off hand those things that are not apparently obvious.

It just does not seem logical to us that a mixture of low level toxic chemicals

could have a detrimental impact on humans. People do not immediately die from

exposure to them. For many, there is no " noticeable " effect of the thousands of

daily exposures. It does not seem possible than anyone could be sensitive to

small amounts of air borne, water borne and material borne toxics. For most of

us, it is not our experience.

 

There is research to indicate that human, like lower animals respond to low

level volatiles. Anyone with doubts about this ability should review the

research on human pheromones. Although pheromone research may not explain a

mechanism for MCS, it may demonstrate that humans, like lower animals, respond

to very low level volatiles, in this case human hormone odors..

 

We don't understand the mechanisms; but, humans, as demonstrated by research,

respond to and are unconsciously aware of other human's pheromones. In an

article on CNN on August 17, 1998, they report: " Study: Male substance affects

women's mood. " According to their report, " Women who breathed in substance

related to testosterone stayed in a better mood than when they weren't exposed.

.... The study suggests such hidden chemical signals may affect people's minds

more than scientists have assumed, said psychologist Martha McClintock of the

University of Chicago. ...Scientists have long known that smells affect how

people feel. The new work is the best evidence yet that undetected olfactory

signals can do it too, McClintock said. "

 

Anyone with chemical sensitivity who is aware of their interactions with their

environments will not find it difficult to believe that we can detect and

respond to low level exposures of chemical combinations in our environment. Dr.

McClintock's research documents that some odors (low level odors) can have a

positive impact upon the receptor. It should be no stretch of logic to realize

that other chemicals, particularly estrogen mimickers and other endocrine

disrupters, have a negative psychological and physiological reaction upon some

receptors. It is highly likely that it is a function of evolution that certain

odors trigger an aversive reaction (both emotional and physiologically) so that

we have a fail-safe protection against potential harmful environmental triggers.

There are some of us who are just more sensitive to chemical messages in our

environment.

 

This is why it is critical to understand and accept the relationship between

environmental triggers and symptoms of psychological and physiological distress.

These messages received have been programmed throughout evolution to both

protect and propagate the species. Some odors attract and enhance life. Other

odors repel because they were designed to deplete life or are detrimental to the

processes of evolution. The common denominator becomes biochemical

responsiveness. The fact that humans react to very low levels of hormone like

substances has been recognized and documented. ( source). It should be not

surprise to anyone that many of the environmental triggers for MCS are endocrine

disrupters like pesticides and plastics.

 

The Co-factors: Nature and Nurture

 

When evaluating the impact of human response to an environmental stimuli, we

must consider both the environmental trigger and the responder's biochemical

tolerance for that particular trigger. It has been suggested by some that odor

intolerance can be a conditioned " chemophobia. " In other words, the responder

has learned to avoid a chemical odor for which s/he has developed an aversion.

This may be possible; but, it must be taken in context of learned behavior in

response to biochemical individuality. Nature and nurture work together.

 

For example, when I was sixteen and thought I was very cool, I became extremely

drunk on Four Roses Whiskey. I did not like the taste; so, I drank it down as

fast as I could. Being my very first experience with hard liquor, I did not know

what to expect. I got the lesson of my life. I became extremely sick. I vomited

and vomited. I remember before becoming sick, gagging at the smell of the last

drinks of whiskey I took. In fact, gagging was my most powerful memory of that

experience. After I could vomit no more, I went to my bed and passed out. The

next morning I awoke still dazed and somewhat depressed from the experience. I

walked past the empty glass with the smell of whiskey still in it. It caused the

gag reflex. In fact, for two years after that, the smell of whiskey would cause

me to gag. It is obvious that my experience set up a conditioned response to

whiskey. I never drank it again.

 

Knowing now that I was never a fast metabolizer of alcohol, I realize that my

body's response to the alcohol was its way of protecting me from a nonessential

and possibly harmful substance. If milk was non bio-compatible with my chemical

predisposition, I probably could develop an aversion to it in the same manner.

It would be much more unlikely that I would develop a gag response to pure

water. When looking at the impact of any environmental stimuli, one must also

consider the unique tolerances of the responder. We are all unique.

 

One wonders why it is so hard for our logical scientists and medical

professionals to accept that toxic chemicals cannot be detected and responded to

with negative symptoms by those who have a more highly evolved level of

sensitivity and a lower level of tolerance. Common sense tells us that it is not

illogical for living organisms to respond negatively to synthetic chemicals and

biocides that have never been a function of evolution. Toxic chemicals do impact

all life, including humans. There are many of us who can detect and respond

adversely to them. Our bodies scream at us to avoid them. Do not discount the

elegant wisdom programmed into our bodies.

 

The best hope is that those with a short term economic self interest to prevent

recognition of MCS because of the potential liabilities caused by their products

realize that it is in their best interest to find the cause of MCS and find a

treatment for those who suffer from it. It is highly likely that since MCS is

not an allergy, is not an infection, and is not cancer; but, that it may be a

metabolic problem with some psychological overlay. I realize it might be naive

to think that those with a vested interest in maintaining a strong " bottom line "

would ever consider stopping their campaign and lobbying against recognition of

MCS unless they realized that it was in their long term best interests to treat

the symptoms of this illness.

 

This may actually be feasible. One must accept the hypothesis that MCS is a

result of a deficiency of some metabolic enzyme(s) that prevents the natural

detoxification of toxic chemicals even at low levels. If this true, then like in

the case of those with diabetes with a deficiency of insulin, a natural

occurring enzyme may be given as a shot or worn as a patch as a treatment to

those who cannot effectively detoxify even low levels of chemicals.Athought MCS

is not an antibody mediated response, there may be yet undiscovered knowledge

that will help understand the overlapping of MCS and allergy.

 

The questions that flood my mind at the possibilities of solving a metabolic

problem are: Can enzyme enhancements be found that solve metabolic problems? Are

many of the chronic illnesses that don't respond to drug therapies really

metabolic and will they all respond to a new school of medical treatment: Enzyme

Enhancement Therapy? Are many emotional problems (also not cancer, not

infections, and not allergies) really metabolic deficiencies that will respond

to this new Enhancement Therapy? And so on....And so on.

 

Conclusions

 

Since I have developed chemical hypersensitivity, much of the processed food is

intolerable. The water, air, and soil are often intolerable. The roads, the

parks, and the buildings have become inaccessible. Why? We are presently living

under the assumption that we are smarter, we are wiser, and we are more clever

than the original Great Design. Some of us believe that we have found the " final

solution " to all our problems. Some believe that we need to kill the weeds, the

insects, and other living creatures to have a better world. We have interfered

with the natural ecological processes; and, there are consequences. Those of us

with toxic induced disorders are consequences of this reckless and short sighted

behavior.

 

Instead of looking upon negative information about chemically induced toxicity

as an obstacle to personal and corporate profit, we should be looking at that

information about the consequences of toxic chemicals not being metabolized as a

potential for solution to new problems and the creation of new products and new

and more effective treatments . We must always stay open in the investigation of

truth. MCS research must be FUNDED. Please, help us find effective treatments to

this illness. Please help us restore the planet.

 

REFERENCES/links

 

1. Morton, William E., Redefinition of Abnormal Susceptibility to Environmental

Chemicals, Paper presented on 6-6-95 at Second International Congress on

Hazardous Waste: Impact on Human and Ecological Health, Atlanta, Georgia.

2. News Release from UT Southwestern: UT Southwestern researcher finds gene,

http://irweb.swmed.edu/newspub/newsdetl.asp?story_id=144

3. Interviews with Dr. Clement Furlong on PON 1 deficiency ( " Mice lacking serum

paraoxonase are susceptible to organophosphate toxicity and atherosclerosis, "

Diane M. Shih et al, Nature, Vol 394, July 16, 1998, p. 284-287)

http://members.aol.com/wsmcsn/Enzyme.htm

4. Screening for Genes: Matching medications to your genetic heritage,

http://www.newsweek.com/nw-srv/issue/06_99a/printed/us/st/sc0106_1.htm

5. DNA Testing Flags Risky Drugs, Thursday, July 29,1999 - 10:28 PM ET,

http://www.cbs.com/flat/story_172752.html 6. Duehring, Cindy, Understanding and

Testing For Chemical-Induced Porphyrinopathies in MCS Patients, An Interview

with William E. Morton, M.D., Dr. P.H., Professor Emeritus of Environmental

Medicine, Dept. of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences

University, Portland, Oregon, Our Toxic Times, Vol. 10, #9, Issue 111, September

1999, p. 1-6.

7 Karl E .Anderson, Montgomery Bissell, Joseph R. Bloomer, William E. Daniell, .

Ralph D. Ellefson, Gary M. Franklin, Robert F. Labbe, Michael R. Moore, Claus A.

Pierach, William E Schreiber, Henry L. Stockbridge, Ayalew Tefferi,, James S.

Woods, Environmental Chemical Exposures and Disturbances of Heme Synthesism ,

Environmental Health Perspective 105(Supplement 1):37-53 (1997)

 

Return to MCS - The Poisoned Web Hub Page

 

 

 

addendum: A recent article - Scientists Identify A Cause Of Fainting Syndrome in

Science Daily magazine documents how a fainting syndrome found mostly in young

women which was once thought " hysterical " has discovered a physiological cause.

( http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010215074346.htm )

 

Index Links My Story Comments Hubpage

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...