Who’s chirping about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity today?

The Southeast Texas Record reports that a “Worker claims chemical fumes exposure led to asthma and an extreme sensitivity to common household chemical fumes.”

Gregory Scott Johnson has filed suit against Arkema, alleging a chemical in new equipment the company installed caused him to develop asthma and an extreme sensitivity to common household chemical fumes. [...] Arkema installed new equipment in the Waco bottling facility, the suit states. Part of the equipment Arkema installed contained Certincoat, a glass coating made from monobutylin trichloride, according to the complaint.

In July 2007, a timing malfunction occurred on the line, and Johnson claims he was called in to repair the issue. The work took several hours, and by the time Johnson was finished, he was short of breath and experiencing chest pain, according to the complaint. Another timing malfunction occurred on July 15, 2007, and Johnson was again called in, the suit states. Johnson alleges he again experienced the same symptoms. Johnson went to a doctor where he was informed his lungs were scarred, according to the complaint.

“He was diagnosed with occupational asthma and is extremely sensitive to common household chemical fumes,” the suit states. “He had been assessed as having a 25 percent whole-body impairment.”

Religious Cause posts a story about a church that ministers to people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. The church has been denied a special use permit and variance that it requested to build a religious center. In “Michigan Court Upholds Zoning Denial; Defines Church,” it’s pointed out that the court ruled the Ecclesiastical non-profit corporation was indeed a church, but the group still could not construct a building in the chosen location.

In Great Lakes Society v. Georgetown Charter Township, (MI Ct. App., Oct. 30, 2008), the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the Georgetown Zoning Board of Appeals’ denial of an application for a special use permit and a variance that had been requested for a religious center. The court first concluded that the proposed building was a “church” for zoning purposes and that the trial court had applied an incorrect standard in holding otherwise. Great Lakes Society ministers to persons who have chemical sensitivities to common environmental pollutants. It also has a phone book listing under “Nutritionists”. Its proposed building would contain space for a number of activities related to its ministry. The appellate court held that it is sufficient that the building is primarily used for public worship and reasonably closely related activities. The Court of Appeals went on to find that the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Township “properly decided not to grant a variance with respect to the proposed building location and that they did not violate the RLUIPA or any constitutional guarantees by making that decision.”