October 2011-- During the next six months, The Canary Report will be dedicated solely to me sharing my experiences while on the Gupta Amygdala Retraining program for MCS. If you'd like to be notified by email when blog entries are made, please subscribe in the right hand column below. During the entire six months, this blog will remain online but Our Canary Report network and forum will be offline and inaccessible to our members. Thank you for all your support! Aloha, Susie
 

Exclusive interview for Medicine.Org with Dr. William J. Rea, MD, FACS, FAAEM, founder and director of the Environmental Health Center-Dallas.

Rea_2001Medicine.org reports on an interview with Dr. William Rea conducted in 2006. Dr. Rea discusses the controversy surrounding the name “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity,” the multi-system complexity of chemical sensitivity, his contributions to creating less toxic housing, and more.

Medicine.org: On your website you have an illustration called the Principles of Chemical Sensitivity. However, there appears to be no universally accepted medical definition of chemical sensitivity. Why is this and how would you define chemical sensitivity?

WJR: I would define Chemical Sensitivity as the adverse reaction to the ambient dose of toxic and non-toxic chemicals, and it can be manifested in any system in the body. The definition problem stems from the work of Cullen from Yale.1 We’re not sure whether he worked for the chemical companies or whether he just was ignorant. [In any case] …he didn’t come to any of us. He created something called “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity” and this was defined as an entity that has only clinical symptoms and no signs and no laboratory data. Of course he was very wrong about that. And that has fueled the controversy for the last twenty years. And that’s been part of the problem. But I think everybody working in the field agrees on the definition that I gave.

Medicine.Org:
That’s particularly interesting because most of the people we know with chemical sensitivity refer to their problem as “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.”

WJR: Yes, I know, and that’s always been a problem because they don’t realize the legal implications. The legal implications are that it is psychosomatic because you have no physical findings and no laboratory data. Every chemically sensitive patient we see has physical signs and laboratory data.

Link to the full interview at Medicine.org

Link to Dr. Rea’s Environmental Health Center-Dallas

Link to Dr. Rea’s bio

Thanks, Christi!

If you enjoyed this post, please read these related stories:

  1. Experts say everyone is affected by chemical sensitivity
  2. The challenge of multiple chemical sensitivity
  3. Editor perpetuates myth about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
  4. The naked truth about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, in English
  5. Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in a hospital setting

   
©2008-2012 The Canary Report Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha