MCS - a detailed description
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover
May God protect all of us who speak out on the dangers of chemicals
from the Snake-oil / Healthfraud Team.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Snake-oil.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
This description of MCS is the most accurate I have seen yet. I have
reprinted it from the Australian Chemical Trauma Alliance website:
http://journals.aol.co.uk/bettineolive/Pesticidesinblood/entries/2008/01/18/mcs-
--a-detailed-description/993
Home Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)
MCS is a disorder triggered by exposures to chemicals in the
environment, both outdoors and indoors. It is the almost inevitable
consequence of toxic episodes for a substantial number of people. At
best, its sufferers are never truly well, never truly ill - at worst
the severity of MCS can be prostrating. As a result of what is known
as the "spreading phenomenon", patients may react with increasing
sensitivity to a variety of products which are totally unrelated to
the original antigen. The worst affected in this group may find it
necessary to isolate themselves, having become unable to tolerate the
minutest of exposures to the common chemicals present in daily life,
such as perfumes, tobacco smoke, and vehicle exhaust. The good news is
that it is possible to adapt to MCS.
The bad news is that, at the present time, there is no known cure,
although some medics may prescribe a regime of therapy, including
massage, heat depuration, antioxidants, special diets and so on to
alleviate the worst extent of the problem. Beyond this, the only
recommendation is, avoidance, avoidance, avoidance, of the exposures
which are known to precipitate symptoms. Some lucky people eventually
recover but most never return to being completely well and their
health continues a downward spiral.
It has been estimated by the American National Academy of Sciences
that some 15% of the US population is adversely affected by chemicals
and the general opinion is that the numbers are growing. There is no
reason to suppose that the situation is any different in Australia,
where many chemicals which have long since been banned overseas are
still freely being used. Independent research into the mechanisms that
cause MCS has been inadequate, while that which has been done is very
often skewed because it is financed by industries which benefit from
chemical proliferation.
MCS is an insidious complaint which can affect every part and system
of the body with instant or delayed reactions. Its effects range from
mild, flu-like lethargy, to full scale coronary, respiratory and
gastric symptoms. Sufferers also experience fatigue, mood swings,
forgetfulness and an inability to concentrate. As MCS worsens,
reactions become more severe and increasingly chronic. Many patients
with this condition have to isolate themselves for fear of
recontamination which may result in an exacerbation or recurrence of
their symptoms. Special diets are often necessary. Nutritional
supplements which may be necessary quite often trigger a new set of
symptoms.
Substances involved in the development of this disease can range from
petroleum products and industrial chemicals, through formaldehydes and
anaesthetics, to pesticides and herbicides. The variety of causal
agents is almost endless. Very often, due to what is known as the
"spreading phenomenon", serious reactions can develop to substances
which are either related to, or completely distinct from the original
antigen. Thus, for instance, someone who has become ill through
exposure to pesticides may find that they have become sensitive to
tobacco smoke, perfumes, and foods which they were previously able to
tolerate. Many of the chemicals which trigger MCS symptoms are known
to irritate or to be toxic to the nervous system.
Illness may occur through one massive exposure, or by repeated small
doses, but the final results are all too similar. Unfortunately,
because the media is heavily into drama, it is only events such as
chemical spills, fires or explosions that are deemed newsworthy.
Fleeting attention is paid to the human component in these incidents.
As a result, the long term consequences of human contamination are
only occasionally glimpsed, which has led to the term "iceberg
syndrome" being coined by chemical victims, who are only too aware
that the public sees just the visible tip of a human tragedy of
monumental proportions.
Survivors of mechanical accidents may find themselves bruised, scarred
or more seriously injured, but their return to a semblance of
pre-trauma normality is almost always assured through the
interventionof modern medical and prosthetic techniques. This is not
the case for sufferers of chemical contamination, who often never
recover to enjoy normal health. The ramifications of their disease
extend to every quarter of their existence, affecting their earning
capacity, family and community life. They are additionally
disadvantaged because they are seldom able to display outward signs of
their injuries or illnesses, and become vulnerable to abuse as
bludgers or cranks. Their offspring are often at risk because of the
reproductive effects of exposure to chemicals.
Since there are no germs to signify its presence, this disease is not
easily or readily identified by doctors. Consequently, sufferers are
often tagged as malingerers or as being in need of psychiatric help.
These views are naturally reflected by the lay community with
destructive impact on the chemically ill, who find themselves stranded
without sympathy, support, or recourse to the law for compensation in
the absence of medical testimony.
The thousands of patients around the world who are suffering from MCS
are tired of hearing that their symptoms are due to "idiopathic"
responses to imaginary events. The most strenuous denials of the
reality of MCS seem to emanate from chemical manufacturers and users,
regrettably including mainstream medical practitioners. They cast
about for evidence to undermine the idea of MCS, a predictable
reaction of those whose products and theories may be suspect, and who
may have much to lose. To protect their position, they are not averse
to using pejoratives, seeing ridicule as a weapon, and they are
prepared to go much further. Their denials, however strenuous, cannot
erase the truth. A few short years ago, it was incredible that man
would walk upon the moon, and such a prospect attracted scorn. The
story of ill founded cynicism and scepticism has been consistent
throughout the ages, dating from the dawn of mankind.
Yet even now, irrespective of doubters or theorists, several common
mysteries exist which defy explanation, but are taken for granted,
such as electricity and magnetism, gravity, why the sun rises in the
east, or for that matter why it rises at all.
It is time that the sceptics and cynics realised that, in bending
facts to fit their theories, or clinging desperately to fixed and
familiar ideas, they themselves appear ridiculous and insecure. They
would do well to abandon their biases and narrow prejudices, rather
than wasting time and energy on self indulgence. Scientists and medics
have much to gain by forsaking their ivory towers for the realities
that are there for those who choose to see them. It is fatuous
nonsense to claim that MCS doesn't exist simply because no germs can
be found, or no currently acceptable explanation made to fit the
condition. There are countless people worldwide who belong to
organisations and institutions such as the Australian Chemical Trauma
Alliance. They all claim to suffer from the same symptoms, and the
language and geographic barriers that separate them exclude the
possibility of a global conspiracy.
Yet their experiences are written off by vested interests as
"anecdotal" evidence, simply because their condition does not neatly
correspond to expectations or existing theories of disease. These
patients are only relating what has happened to them.
It is no use applying to humans extrapolated data obtained in
laboratories using rats and mice, who cannot complain that they have a
headache or feel miserable. Many of the chemicals that are involved in
the development of MCS are only tested on these laboratory animals,
the wider community being used (generally without appreciating the
fact) as a final testing ground. This in itself is scandalous. It is
the easiest thing in the world to convene a cosy gathering of
"experts", none of whom suffer the condition themselves, to make
weighty pronouncements about something they have never personally
experienced. Time will duly reveal and normalise recognition of the
connection between chemical exposures and the development of MCS.
Already, signs are becoming evident of the adverse effects of a
plethora of materials that have invaded the environment since the end
of WWII.
Many of these commonplace substances were thought to have contributed
to and enhanced the convenience of modern life. Only now is their
negative impact being understood, with a declining human reproductive
capacity and an epidemic of children's disabilities and dysfunctions
resulting from parental exposure.
It is an innate understanding of most chemical victims that everyone
succumbs eventually, and that chemically induced illness is only time
and dose dependent. Some collapse immediately after apparently
harmless exposures that may seem not to affect others. Those others
may take years to develop cancers and other illnesses as a result of a
prolonged seriesof exposures to environmental chemicals, none of which
may have had an instantaneous effect. However much the apparently
impervious members of society may sneer at their more sensitive
colleagues, the fact that all humanity stems from the same biological
sources is undeniable. Everyone is vulnerable, and instead of
sneering, those who are not presently affected should give thanks that
they have managed to escape until now the fate that has befallen their
less fortunate fellows. There, but for the grace of God, go they.
The One True Zhen Jue - 19 Jan 2008 19:38 GMT
> MCS - a detailed description
A psychiatric disorder wherein sufferers react to the belief they are
being exposed to chemicals. In contrast to an organic condition, this
disorder is a conditioned response.
Now you know!
Debbee - 19 Jan 2008 20:48 GMT
On Jan 19, 11:38 am, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> A psychiatric disorder wherein sufferers react to the belief they are
> being exposed to chemicals. In contrast to an organic condition, this
> disorder is a conditioned response.
>
> Now you know!
Tell that Andrew to the first responders, the firefighters, the police
of
Ground Zero and they would laugh in your face. Tell that to the wives
and children and other family members of those that have died due to
toxic fumes or are still sick due to 9/11.
I am not buying your story, either are the people that lost their
lives
and lost the ability to work due to 9/11.
The One True Zhen Jue - 19 Jan 2008 21:58 GMT
> On Jan 19, 11:38 am, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> of
> Ground Zero and they would laugh in your face.
Why? They aren't claiming to have MCS, they have actual poisoning.
There is a big difference, Debbee.
By the way, since you claimed that you would no longer respond to me,
you've responded to about 12 of my posts.
Perhaps you should have simply accepted my modest proposal instead of
acting out and lying.
Tell that to the wives
> and children and other family members of those that have died due to
> toxic fumes or are still sick due to 9/11.
Tell what to them, Debbee? Tell them that their deaths have nothing
to do with a somatization disorder? They already know that.
> I am not buying your story, either are the people that lost their
> lives
> and lost the ability to work due to 9/11.
9/11 has nothing to do with MCS. Why in the world would you think
that id does?
Peter Moran - 19 Jan 2008 22:03 GMT
> MCS - a detailed description
>
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> recover but most never return to being completely well and their
> health continues a downward spiral.
This is the reason why it is a horrendous misdiagnosis, in at least many
cases. It offers nothing but social isolation and misery. There is hope
if patients can be shown that it is mostly their own perceptions that are
making them ill and they are encouraged in the direction of increasing
tolerance for chemicals.
The MCS industry fosters increasing ill-health by producing an expectation
of ever-increasing intolerance of chemicals. There is not only no known
mechanism for this (usually we become increasingly tolerant to poisons with
continuing low dose exposure), it becomes a self-fulfilling prohecy in
these often highly suggestible people.
Multiple chemical sensitivities: A systematic review of provocation studies.
Das-Munshi J, Rubin GJ, Wessely S.
Section of Epidemiology, Institute of Psychiatry, London.
spsljdm@iop.kcl.ac.uk
A systematic review of provocation studies of persons reporting multiple
chemical sensitivities (MCS) was conducted from databases searched from
inception to May 2006. Thirty-seven studies were identified, testing 784
persons reporting MCS, 547 control subjects, and 180 individuals of whom a
subset were chemically sensitive. Blinding was inadequate in most studies.
In 21 studies odors of chemicals were probably apparent; 19 of these
reported positive responses to provocations among chemically sensitive
individuals, and 1 study demonstrated that negative expectations were
significantly associated with increased symptom reporting after
provocations. Seven studies used chemicals at or below odor thresholds, and
6 failed to show consistent responses among sensitive individuals after
active provocation. Six studies used forced-choice discrimination and
demonstrated that chemically sensitive individuals were not better at
detecting odor thresholds than nonsensitive participants. Three studies
tested individuals by using nose clips/face masks and confirmed response,
possibly mediated through eye exposure. Three studies used olfactory masking
agents to conceal stimuli, and none of these found associations between
provocations and response. We conclude that persons with MCS do react to
chemical challenges; however, these responses occur when they can discern
differences between active and sham substances, suggesting that the
mechanism of action is not specific to the chemical itself and might be
related to expectations and prior beliefs.
PM
Debbee - 19 Jan 2008 22:51 GMT
> blah blah blah ---SNORE
>
> PM
Peter, apparently you do not get it either. I knew when I left that
post--it would bring out an array of disbelievers about the chemicals
at Ground Zero.
Let's talk about what kind of chemicals (plural) were at Ground Zero?
Name all of them please. Let's talk about what kind of protective
clothing everyone was wearing. (EVERYONE, not just a few).
Andrew says it is actual "poisoning." Wow--that's a no-
brainer...DUH
Did that poisoning occur from eating "too many bad tomatoes?" How
about eating too much bad fish?
Multiple Chemicals were in the air --- And the people that were
around all of it--were made sick, and some are going to get sicker in
years to come. An illness in your head? Hardly not.
Continue as you wish......remember there were Australian firefighters
on that scene as well.
Debbee - 19 Jan 2008 23:03 GMT
> MCS - a detailed description
Ilena, you might be interested in reading this site--it will make you
sick.....about the Police officers, and their symptoms, etc.
http://www.nycpba.org/wtc/blog/2006/07/world_trade_center_illnesses.html