The Canary Report | Tag Archive

Tag Archives: Law

$100K awarded to woman with chemical sensitivity denied proper accomodations at work

Posted on Mar 10, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Susie Collins, Worker's Rights

Woman with chemical sensitivity awarded $100K for being denied proper accommodations at work; her coworker’s perfume made it difficult for her to breathe.

Modern perfume contains known toxic chemicals that can cause serious cognitive and respiratory problems in people with chemical sensitivity.

On Point reports a Detroit city planner with an allergy to perfume is savoring the sweet smell of legal success after the city agreed to pay her $100,000 and be more sensitive to the chemically sensitive.

The agreement -– obtained by On Point through a public records act request — settled Susan McBride’s lawsuit under the Americans With Disabilities Act which alleged the City of Detroit failed to reasonably accommodate her allergy after she complained that a co-worker’s perfume made it difficult for her to breathe.

Some critics attacked McBride for being overly sensitive and abusing the court system. But many workplaces are now perfume-free and a judge in November 2008 denied the city’s motion to dismiss, ruling McBride could proceed with a disability claim “based on the major life activity of breathing.”

As part of the settlement, which the parties signed last month, the city will post a notice on bulletin boards in its offices announcing that “Our goal is to be sensitive to employees with perfume and chemical sensitivities”

Let’s hope it sets precedent for future cases. If you have Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and are having trouble with your employer giving you proper accommodations, you might like to share the agreement with them. This is an access issue, the same as any other disability protected under the ADA.

<a href=”http://www.flickr.com/photos/momoe365photos/4154731316/”>Photo credit.

Continue Reading

Tags: Air, Chemicals, Environmental Illness, Fragrance, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Perfume, Personal Care, Policy, Sick Building, Stink, Toxic, Work

Please sign Italian petition for recognition of Multiple Chemcial Sensitivity

Posted on Mar 07, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Social Justice, Susie Collins

Our fellow canaries in Italy are asking for our support: Please take a minute to sign this petition for the recognition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Italy.

Italian flag

There are just a couple more days left to sign in support of the Italian petition to recognize Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. In the middle of March, the Association for Chronic and/or Environmental Diseases by Intoxication (AMICA) will meet with Senators to present the petition. Please sign; last day to sign is March 10.

Click here to sign– it’s all in Italian, so once you get to that page, click on “Firma,” then fill in the fields for First Name, Last Name, Email, Telephone (not necessary), and postal code (CAP). Direct link here to sign the petition.

THE PETITION TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH:

Petition promoted by the Association for Chronic and/or Environmental Diseases by Intoxication (AMICA) www.sensibilitachimica.it

To the Presidency of the Senate of the Italian Republic

To the President of the Chamber of Deputies

To the XII Committee of the Social Affairs at the Chamber of Deputies

To the XII Commission of the Senate Health and Hygiene

Since the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) is a chronic disabling condition that involves multiorgan reactions to exposure to various chemicals in quantities normally tolerated by the general population and that the diagnostic criteria were established by international consensus in 1999;

Seen that from 2 to 10% of the population is hyper-sensitive to environmental chemicals and products in common use and an increasing proportion is affected by multiple substances – that is suffering multiple chemical sensitivity, or MCS – with impaired capacity for work, social life and autonomy that varies from mild to very severe depending on the stages of the disease;

Since the MCS is recognized in the United States by federal law for the Disabled American with Disabilities Act, federal agencies – such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Housing and Urban Development, the Social Security Administration – and many local governments;

Since the MCS is recognized by Canada federal and Provincial government agencies;

Since the MCS is classified by Germany since 1998 in the International Code of Diseases by the T 78.4 in Chapter 19 (Injury, poisoning and other consequences resulting from external causes) and Section T66-T78 (Other and unspecified damage from external factors);

As the Ministry of Welfare and Labor of Germany, who had classified the MCS in the of list of motor disability (as compared to those for the inability of patients to move), has removed the description of illness as psychosomatic (of psychological origin / Psychiatry), putting an end to discrimination of this disease environment;

As the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (Japan), which for years have recognized the sick building syndrome – similar to the MCS, said insert MCS October 2009 in the list of diseases covered by the insurance of the National Health Service;

Since in Italy there is no law that equalize the rights of the environmental patients (not only MCS, but also of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, to Elettrosensibilità of Fibromyalgia, Sick Building Syndrome, etc..) Than those of any other form of disability in terms of job protection, the right to treatment, the right to a home “safe”, etc..;

The petitioners demand that are challenged with the highest priority of the six bills initiative of the House of Representatives (No. 1621 August 5, 2008, No. 1654 of September 18, 2008, No. 1667 of 18 September 2008, N . 2287 March 12, 2009) and Senate (NS1019 of 17 September 2008, No. 1165 of 28 October 2008) for the recognition of MCS as a social disease, using the international consensus in 1999 as a benchmark for the diagnosis, as in the world.

Thanks Rose and Francesca! Keep up the good work!

Continue Reading

Tags: Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Support

Anatomy of a toxic chemical spill

Posted on Feb 25, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Environment, Government Regulation, Guest Bloggers

On February 17, 2010, in Alameda, CA, a garbage or recycle truck owned by Alameda County Industries blew its hydraulic line at the corner of Oak Street and San Jose Avenue, spewing hydraulic fluid all over the street. I had to walk through it to get to my house.

By guestblogger Steph.

~~~

02-17-10

February 17, 2010 - Alameda, CA. That's not snow - it's 57F outside. Alameda County Industries garbage or recycle truck blew its hydraulic hose earlier in the day, and their crew came out with an absorbent material to pick up the spill. That material was like fine grain sand and immediately went airborne. Now it's on the cars and everything, and likely in my house since I had to open the front door to go inside.

~~~

02/18/10

On February 17, 2010 in Alameda, CA, a garbage or recycle truck owned by Alameda County Industries (ACI) blew its hydraulic line at the corner of Oak Street and San Jose Avenue, spewing hydraulic fluid all over the street.

Cars continued driving, as San Jose Ave is a thoroughfare, and the oil spread all up and down both streets. ACI sent a cleaning crew, who applied a thin sandy ‘absorbent’ material all over the road, which got picked up by passing cars and went airborne immediately, with the oil particles on the sand.

The scene above is what I had to walk through to get to my house.

Please google hydraulic fluid toxicity to learn more, and also check out a news story about a woman who died after a similar accident.

I have also uploaded photos here. My lips were stinging when I got back into the house last night after taking pictures. I should have worn a mask of course. Of course. I shed all my clothes in the kitchen and put them in a garbage bag. I took a shower immediately.

Last night I filed complaint with the Alameda Department of Public Works and the City Clerk’s office for Boards and Commissions. This morning, following Susie Collins’ advice, I phoned up the police department to make sure they’d been notified. They said they had, and seemed indifferent to me. They routed me over to the fire department, where I was told I’d get a call back. I got a voicemail saying they’d send someone over to check out the street, but I didn’t see anyone come by in a Fire Department uniform or vehicle.

At 3pm today, I received the following email:

Good afternoon Steph,

I am responding back to your e-mail that was sent to ACI this morning, at approximately 2:30pm on February 17,2010 one of our fully automated trucks had a hydraulic hose rupture and leaked fluid onto the street, our driver immediately contacted our dispatch center and a field supervisor.

Upon notification of the spill we immediately contacted the City of Alameda, Public works department. Both the City of Alameda Fire and Police department were called and responded to the scene to assist us with the cleaning of the street and traffic control.

After meeting with the fire department and the urban run-off group they released the scene back to us for our cleanup process. We responded with 7 ACI employees to put dry sweep on the on the fluid and swept up all the areas effected. The hydraulic fluid can become slippery and that’s why we reacted to get it cleaned up immediately. The fluid that was on the ground is a premium hydraulic oil that is commonly used in hydraulic systems. The absorbent that was used is called select sorb professional multi purpose spill aid (MSDS_SelectSorbProfessional.pdf).

We are keeping in contact with the city of Alameda and the urban run-off Manager, today we had street sweepergo thru the areas that were effected and he will be returning again tonight after cars have left the street. As far as the City of Alameda and ACI is concerned there are no direct health hazards as a result of the spill.

I apologize for any inconvenience this matter may have caused you, please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions or concerns.

Best Regards,

Guy Martinez

Safety Manger

I sent an email back to Mr. Martinez, asking for specifics on the hydraulic fluid; “Thank you for your response. Can you tell me what type of hydraulic fluid had spilled, aside from it being ‘premium’? Was it mineral oil, organophosphate ester, or polyalphaolefin?”

And now I wait.

[...]

Continue Reading

Tags: Air, Children's Health, Environment, EPA, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Pollution, Products, Toxic

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity associations in Spain meet with Ministry of Health officials

Posted on Feb 05, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, Guest Bloggers, MCS, Social Justice

Eva Caballé reports on the meeting between Multiple Chemical Sensitivity associations and Ministry of Health officals in Spain, Feb. 4, 2010

Translated from Spanish by Eva Caballé

On February 4th 2010 at 12:00h has been held the meeting with Ministry of Health to state the situation of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity sufferers in Spain.

Mr José Martínez Olmos, Secretary General of the Ministry of Health, Mr Alberto Infante Campos, General Director of Professional Planning, Cohesion of SNS and High Inspection and Mr Francisco Valero Bonilla have attended to the meeting representing the Ministry of Health. One person by almost each MCS association has attended to the meeting and also Jaume Cortés, lawyer of Colectivo Ronda, and Dr. Pablo Arnold, immunologist specialized in MCS.

• ACAF: Cristina Montané
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Tránsito Rodríguez
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Laura Domínguez
• MERCURIADOS: Mª Carmen Miravete
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro

A petitions document done by MCS associations under David Palma coordination has been submitted. This document has been signed by:

• ABAF: Margarita Pascual
• ACAF: Maite Ribera
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Irene Escudero
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Rosa de Gabriel
• MERCURIADOS: Servando Pérez
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro
• Eva Caballé

Also a copy of Desaparecida: Una vida rota por la Sensibilidad Química Múltiple (Missing: A life broken by Multiple Chemical Sensitivities) has been hand delivered on behalf of Eva Caballé, who couldn’t attend to the meeting, as an example of what MCS sufferers have to go through in Spain.

The meeting with Ministry of Health has meant an agreement on minimum standards by the Ministry, but a big hope for all MCS sufferers.

Representatives of Ministry of Health have committed to contact MCS associations within 2 weeks to jointly agree on experts to form a Scientific Committee to create a document of consensus on the MCS. They have stated that this is the first step to make possible the inclusion of the MCS in ICD-10, i.e. its official recognition as disease in Spain. They have demonstrated that later there would be necessary to start creating the protocols.

All people who have been part of this process are thrilled by the result of the meeting, because doors have opened us to obtain the recognition of the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Spain and to achieve that MCS sufferers have the same rights as the other chronically ill people.

Link

Continue Reading

Tags: Children's Health, Environmental Health, Environmental Illness, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Research, Work

US Senate committee holds hearing on public exposures to toxic chemicals

Posted on Feb 04, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Environment, Government Regulation, Susie Collins

Now available: Transcript and webcast of today’s hearing at the United States Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health entitled, “Current Science on Public Exposures to Toxic Chemicals.”

Led by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), at left, the United States Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health held a hearing today entitled, “Current Science on Public Exposures to Toxic Chemicals.” I urge you to become familiar with Sen. Lautenberg’s work on the hill; along with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), he’s the greatest advocate in the U.S. Senate for toxic chemical policy reform. For those of you who follow The Canary report, you’ll remember a post I did on Sen. Launtenberg back in February 2009 when he assumed the chairmanship of this committee. Lautenberg is the senator who introduced the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act, a proposal to overhaul federal restrictions on toxic chemicals.

Canaries will recognize the name of one other of our heroes among the panel members: Ken Cook, president at the Environmental Working Group.

Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health hearing entitled, “Current Science on Public Exposures to Toxic Chemicals.”
Thursday, February 4, 2010
10:00 AM EST
EPW Hearing Room – 406 Dirksen

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics, and Environmental Health, will convene a hearing to examine the current science on public exposures to toxic chemicals.

Majority Statements
Barbara Boxer
Frank R. Lautenberg

Minority Statements
James M. Inhofe
Witnesses

Opening Remarks

Panel 1

Steve Owens
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Environmental Protection Agency

Henry Falk M.D., M.P.H.
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

John Stephenson
Director, Natural Resources and Environment, U.S. Government Accountability Office

Linda Birnbaum Ph.D., D.A.B.T., A.T.S.
Director
National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences

Panel 2

Molly Jones Gray
Participant in a Biomonitoring Study

Ken Cook
President
Environmental Working Group

Charles McKay MD FACMT, FACEP, ABIM
Division of Toxicology, Department of Emergency Medicine, Hartford Hospital

Tracey J. Woodruff PhD, MPH
Associate Professor and Director
Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco

I don’t know how much change is going to be made as a result of these hearings, but I can tell you that trends are moving in the direction of toxic chemical policy reform. If President Obama manages to hang on to a second term despite the discontent that is brewing due to the economic problems, we will have a much better chance at stronger reform. I can tell you though, that even though the wheels of Washington, DC, move painstakingly slow, I’ve seen more happening to enforce the Clean Air Act and to put progressive environmental policies in place over the past year than I saw in the entire eight years of the Bush administration.

Link to transcript and webcast of today’s hearing.

Continue Reading

Tags: Air, Chemicals, Environment, Food, Law, Policy, Pollution, Products, Research, Toxic, Water

MCS groups in Spain to meet with Secretary of Health

Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, MCS, Policy, Social Justice, Susie Collins

A coalition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Groups in Spain will meet with the Secretary General of the Ministry of Health to discuss formal recognition of MCS.

Eva Caballé at NO FUN reports that a coalition of MCS groups in Spain will meet with the Secretary of the Ministry of Health on Feb. 4 to discuss the formal recognition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as a physical illness. The groups also will ask that all people with MCS have the same rights as the other chronically ill people.

The meeting will be held on February 4th 2010 in the Ministry of Health. Mr José Martínez Olmos, Secretary General of the Ministry of Health and Mr Alberto Infante Campos, General Director of Professional Planning, Cohesion of SNS and High Inspection will attend to the meeting representing the Ministry of Health. Following the Ministry of Health instructions, one person by each MCS Association will attend to the meeting and a lawyer and a doctor specialized in MCS too.

David Palma is coordinating this process selflessly.

We are now working on petitions document that will be signed by all MCS associations. This document will be given to the Ministry during the meeting, along with medical information about MCS.

List of MCS associations that are part of this process:

* ACAF
* AFCISQUIM
* Alas de Mariposa
* ALTEA – SQM
* APQUIRA
* ASQUIFYDE
* AVASFASEM-AVASQ
* ENA
* MERCURIADOS
* PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional

Link to read more about Eva’s book.

Link to read about Eva’s essay in Delirio’s “Silence” issue.

Link to read about Eva’s essay in Delirio’s “Naked” issue.

Continue Reading

Tags: Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy

Canadian teacher fights for her right to workplace accommodations

Posted on Jan 07, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Worker's Rights

“The battles for those of us with disabilities, and especially for those of us with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, are huge.”

Elaine Willis reports on her blog about Arbitration: Final Day… just waiting for a decision. Elaine has been in a lawsuit for years about workplace accommodations: SCHOOL DISTRICT 36 vs BC TEACHERS’ FEDERATION, ELAINE WILLIS, DUTY TO ACCOMMODATE, which will set precedent in Canadian arbitration law.

The battles for those of us with disabilities, and especially for those of us with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, are huge. There are many false beliefs about our abilities and the nature of our disabilities. The truth remains that we are people, to be treated as all people, with dignity, equality and respect. We are not to be shut away in our homes as society continues to demand of us.

Education is enlightenment. I WILL CONTINUE TO BE A TEACHER! This process may enable me to do so for a living as well!

Here’s the statement Elaine read in court during the second day of arbitration back in August: I AM a teacher.

Brava, Elaine, for your warrior spirit and sense of what’s right! We are proud to have you as one of the flock.

Photo used with Elaine’s permission.

Continue Reading

Tags: Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Work

Environmental illness and disability law proposed in Italy

Posted on Dec 27, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, MCS, Policy, Social Justice, Susie Collins, Worker's Rights

Silvia Müller at the Chemical Sensitivity Network wrote to tell me there’s an Italian law proposal for environmental illnesses and disability. The proposed law includes definitions of various environmental illnesses such as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Electromagnetic Sensitivity, diagnosis and prevention guidelines, guidelines for health care professionals, building and planning rules, employment protections, and financial coverage.

This is really good news. We are seeing country after country enact these types of laws, most recently Germany and Japan. Getting these laws enforced is another story, but we should still celebrate this forward momentum toward global recognition of environmental illnesses, moving us closer to full rights given to those who need medical care, safe housing, financial, and other support.

MeP DOMENICO SCILIPOTI (IDV): “HOW TO HELP PEOPLE AFFECTED BY ENVIRONMENTAL DISABILITY”

PRESS RELEASE, Rome 21.dec.09

“In order to help people with Environmental Disabilities whose survival and quality of life depend not on drugs, but on avoiding certain environmental factors, today I presented a project of law about this issue”, comments On. Scilipoti. “The law is meant for environmentally triggered diseases such as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), involving a loss of tolerance of chemicals, or Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS), forcing the affected ones to get far from electromagnetic fields emitted by mobiles, Wi-Fi, electric cables, etc. But the law is also meant for genetic, metabolic, neurological or immunological disorders such as fibromyalgia or CFS (involving chemical intolerances) or favism, which gives serious reactions to legumes. Other cases of environmental disability are seen in autism, epilepsy, migraine and lupus that involve reactions to fluorescent lighting”. “It’s important to discuss this law as soon as possible in order to give an answer to these people”, Scilipoti concludes.

Link to read entire law proposal.

Thanks, Silvia!

Continue Reading

Tags: Environmental Illness, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Support, Work

A victim of my own environment

Posted on Nov 12, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Linda Sepp, MCS, Media/Videos

The story of my life was published today, it would have been nice if they got it right.

Post by Linda Sepp.

The Star reports on my housing situation:

A victim of her own environment: Linda Sepp fought being evicted because of her allergies. But now she’s being poisoned at home.

To read the article, click on photo to enlarge.

And here is my Letter to the Editor in response:

I’m really disappointed by these articles.

The reporter had all the information, including letters from doctors about my situation and medical need for “safe” housing, which does not exist and should be provided by the health care system for people who are severely chemically injured as a primary part of our required health care.

And how the landlord has placed impossible to overcome obstacles into his seemingly generous offer, and that I owe the rent money because the landlord moved my mother out from the downstairs unit with an offer she couldn’t refuse, while knowing that I could not afford it here alone.

And how the province is refusing to provide the type of assistance one would expect from a social safety net, that I almost froze to death here as a result, that I have no safe warm clothing to wear because I cannot afford chemical free safe clothing, which is another prescription from my doctors, or wash it here without whole house water filtration.

Also, that Martin Pall’s paper about Multiple Chemical Sensitivities / Environmental Sensitivities being caused by toxic chemicals, and the info about it in the Toxicology text with all kinds of peer reviewed documentation debunking the industry line about MCS/ES being a psychological condition.

The articles also completely minimized my symptoms, which are completely disabling, and neglected to mention the Human Rights Commission’s recognition of the disability.

Other relevant links are below:

A victim of her own environment.

A poisoned home life: Woman with environmental sensitives struggles to find safety.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission Policy on MCS/ES.

The Medical Perspective on Environmental Sensitivities by: Margaret E. Sears (M.Eng., Ph.D.).

The Housing Challenge in MCS.

Toxic chemicals found in common scented laundry products, air fresheners.

Dr. Steinemann’s research: “Fragranced consumer products and undisclosed ingredients.”

Synthetic chemicals on tap: A new USGS study finds low levels of pesticides and fragrances in drinking water.

When Neighbours Smoke: Exposure to Drifting Second-hand Smoke in Multi-unit Dwellings.

NOTE: fragrance chemicals and other VOC’s migrate in exactly the same ways.

Pollution & air quality – Indoor air quality – Scents.

Health Care Without Harm and Cleaners, Pesticides, and Fragrances: Global Overview.

General and Applied Toxicology, 3rd Edition, Chapter 92: “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: Toxicological Questions and Mechanisms,” by Martin L. Pall:

Breakthrough study on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity shows MCS is an epidemic caused by toxic chemicals; peer-reviewed paper is published in prestigious toxicology reference work.

A major paper on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity by Professor Martin L. Pall (at left) is to be published Oct. 23 as chapter 92 in a prestigious reference work for professional toxicologists, General and Applied Toxicology, 3rd Edition (2009, John Wiley & Sons). Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) is also known as chemical sensitivity, chemical intolerance, and toxicant-induced loss of tolerance, with this last name emphasizing the role of chemicals in initiating cases of this disease. Pall’s paper, entitled “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: Toxicological Questions and Mechanisms,” establishes five important facts about MCS:

1. MCS is a stunningly common disease, even more common than diabetes. This has been shown in a series of nine epidemiological studies from the United States and one study each from Canada, Germany, Sweden and Denmark. In the U.S., approximately 3.5% of the population is affected by severe MCS, with much larger numbers, at least 12% of the population, being moderately affected. MCS is, therefore, a very large international disease epidemic with major implications in terms of public health.

2. MCS is caused by toxic chemical exposure. Cases of MCS are initiated by exposure to seven classes of chemicals. These include three classes of pesticides and the very large class of organic solvents and related compounds. In addition, published studies implicate mercury, hydrogen sulfide and carbon monoxide as initiators. All seven of these classes of chemicals have been shown in animal studies to produce a common response in the body, excessive activity of a receptor in the body known as the NMDA receptor. Furthermore animal studies have demonstrated that chemicals belonging to each of these seven classes can have their toxic responses greatly lowered by using drugs that lower this NMDA response. Because excessive NMDA activity is implicated in MCS from other studies, we now have a compelling common response that explains how such diverse chemicals can produce the disease that we call MCS.

3. The role of chemicals acting as toxicants in MCS has been confirmed by genetic studies. Four such studies have shown that genes that determine the rate of metabolism of chemicals otherwise implicated in MCS, influence susceptibility to becoming ill with MCS. These four studies have been published by three research groups in three countries, the U.S., Canada and Germany, have collectively implicated six genes in determining susceptibility to MCS. Each of these six genes has a role in determining the rate of metabolism of MCS-related chemicals. The German studies by Schnakenberg and colleagues are particularly convincing on this because of the extremely high level of statistical significance of their studies implicating four of these six genes. There is only one interpretation for the role of these six genes in determining susceptiblity to MCS. It is that chemicals act as toxicants in initiating cases of MCS and that metabolizing these chemicals into forms that are either less or more active in such initiation, influences therefore, the probability that a person will become ill with MCS. It is clear, therefore, that MCS is a toxicological phenomenon, with cases being caused by the toxic response to chemical exposure.

4. We have, a detailed and generally well supported mechanism for MCS. This mechanism explains both the high level chemical sensitivity that is the most characteristic symptom of MCS, as well as many other symptoms and signs of this disease, can be generated. This mechanism is centered on a biochemical vicious cycle, known as the NO/ONOO- cycle, which interacts with other mechanisms previously implicated in MCS, notably neural sensitization and neurogenic inflammation. These act locally, in various tissues of the body, to generate local sensitivity in regions of the brain and in peripheral tissues including lungs, upper respiratory tract and regions of the skin and the GI tract. Because of this local nature, different MCS patients differ from one another in their sensitivity symptoms, because the tissues impacted differ from one patient to another. In addition to the evidence discussed above, this general mechanism is supported by various physiological changes found in MCS and in related illnesses, by studies of MCS animal models, by objectively measurable responses of MCS patients to low level chemical exposure and by therapeutic responses reported for MCS and related illnesses.

5. For over 20 years, some have falsely argued that MCS is a psychogenic disease, being generated in their view by some ill defined psychological mechanism. However this view is completely incompatible with all of the evidence discussed earlier in this release. While such incompatibility is more than sufficient reason to reject these psychogenic claims, the MCS toxicology paper lists eight additional serious flaws in the psychogenic arguments. There is a long history of false psychogenic claims in medicine, where such diseases as asthma, autism, Parkinson’s disease, ulcers, multiple sclerosis, lupus, interstitial cystitis, migraine and ulcerative colitis have been claimed to be generated by a psychological mechanism. The 2005 Nobel prize in physiology and medicine was give to Drs. Robin Warren and Barry Marshall for showing that ulcers are caused by a bacterial infection, and are not of psychogenic origin. It is clear, now, that MCS is physiological disease initiated by toxic chemical exposure that has been falsely claimed to be psychogenic.

Martin L. Pall is Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Science at Washington State University.

He is located on Pacific time in the U.S. and can be contacted at: 503-232-3883 and at martin_pall@wsu.edu. His web site is: thetenthparadigm.org.

Linda Sepp

Continue Reading

Tags: Air, Chemicals, Environmental Health, Environmental Illness, Home, Indoor Pollution, Law, MCS, Mold, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Research, Sick Building, Support, Toxic

A story about discrimination and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

Posted on Nov 03, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Guest Bloggers, MCS, Social Justice

I have learned not to apologize for asking for the simple right to raise my health issue when looking for safe housing.

By Guest Blogger Missy Gluckmann.

Living with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity can be a challenge, sometimes more so than others. We know that it can also be incredibly inconvenient– having to duck and weave like Muhammad Ali when you are presented with a chemical that wants to take you down. MCS can send you to bed, even to the hospital. But this past weekend, MCS hurt the most when I realized that I was being discriminated against because of it.

While in the process of selling my house, my boyfriend Tony (who is incredibly supportive and sensitive of my MCS) and I have been diligently looking for an apartment in a new community. Which community was not the issue; we found a lovely town north of the city that would meet both of our needs beautifully. The apartment, however, is a bit more tricky. We all know the list: wood floors, good ventilation, no signs of water damage, more recent construction, no basements, not recently painted, away from parking lots/auto repair shops/dry cleaners– anything that can spew an obvious toxic chemical our way. Tony and I found what we thought was a perfect place: a 1st floor apartment with wood floors in a beautifully renovated building. We began negotiations for the rent and lease terms, determined an amount and were told that the lease would be drafted this week. We were even willing to pay a significant finder’s fee for this place as it appeared to be “MCS friendly.”

While packing on Saturday and preparing to move to a temporary apartment for one month while the owners of the co-op we’d be renting found their new apartment, we received a call from the agent. I heard Tony on the phone exclaim loudly, “What?!? You’re kidding me!” It was Halloween after all– perhaps whatever she said was some sort of ghoulish joke. It wasn’t. We were not going to be able to take the apartment after all. Why? Apparently because I had asked the agent to have the owner consider giving us a three month escape clause in the event that something in the apartment seriously threatened my health– and, unfortunately, I could not know if that would be the case until I lived there. I had thought about it the previous week– one possible issue with this apartment is that there was a common laundry room in the basement and we were on the first floor. Would I be smelling those evil dryer sheets daily? Would I be feeling the laundry room chemicals as I slept? Would I be sick again, possibly for weeks, because I didn’t ask a hard question?

Now, having been a landlord, I realize that owners have a mortgage obligation. I was not asking these people to consider my request as a last minute deal breaker– we would have taken the apartment because we had generally done our homework and we thought it would be fine. Other apartments that we have taken have been fine, and I told them this with my written request. I explained MCS and stated that obviously I would not want to have to move because of my illness– and that while I didn’t anticipate anything happening with the apartment, I did have an obligation to pose the question because health comes before a mortgage payment. I indicated that if I did feel unwell that we would give three months notice and provide a detailed letter from an environmental medicine MD to confirm that I was not just being difficult. I emphasized that Tony and I had carefully selected the apartment based on my MCS needs and that we did not anticipate any issues and certainly wouldn’t take a request to move lightly as it would result in stress on my health, loss of a significant agent finder’s fee, moving costs, etc.

When the agent called us yesterday, she essentially said they don’t want to take a risk on me because of my health. They did not say, “No, we cannot commit to an escape clause.” We would have signed a lease regardless as we really believed the apartment would be fine– and as you know, if you live with MCS, you learn to live dodging bullets all day long. Yesterday was the first time that someone directly told me that my health was going to be cause for denying me access to an apartment. I felt like I was slapped in the face, hard. Tony and I told them, as politely as possible, what to do with their apartment and quickly scrambled to cancel our mover the next day, find a new apartment, cancel our temporary housing (which we had just paid in cash that morning!), sell furniture that we thought we would need and now no longer do need for the newer, but smaller space. It was a very good exercise in going with the flow and responding to the challenges of MCS.

Now, could I get a lawyer and make a big MCS stink about it? Yes, sure I could. Will I? No. I took the high road and quickly decided two things that would reflect how I want to live this life. I chose to send an email to educate the agent (and hopefully, therefore, the owners) about how their decision impacted many people and how their lack of communication about any concern caused incredible stress and financial burden to us. But most importantly, I thought of sharing this story with The Canary Report. Why? Because in my email to the agent I reiterated the following: “I have learned not to apologize for asking for the simple right to raise my health issue and that remains the case.” And today I got a lovely email back from the agent, thanking me for my note and apologizing for her client’s poor decision. I was true to myself and stayed an educator, which MCS cannot take away from me.

Canaries, I hope you all remember that you should NEVER EVER apologize for asking hard questions. If the world isn’t ready for them, too bad. Our health and our needs come first, and we will not be silenced. KEEP CHIRPING whether the world is ready for us or not!

A message from Missy Gluckmann: The fox is watching the hen house

Missy kicks ass, forces former employer to fix sick building

Continue Reading

Tags: Home, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

Interview with Eva Caballé about her new book on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

Posted on Nov 01, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, MCS, Susie Collins

It’s an honor to announce that a member of our Canary Report community has written a book about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, published this month in Spain by El Viejo Topo.

Editor’s Note: Spanish blogger Eva Caballé talks about her new book in an interview with Salvador López Arnal. This interview was first published at Rebelión. Translated into English by Clara Valverde, President of Liga SFC. Reprinted with permission of Eva Caballé.

Eva Caballé (at left) is the author of the recently published book in Spanish Desaparecida: Una vida rota por la sensibilidad química múltiple (Missing: A life broken by Multiple Chemical Sensitivities) published by El Viejo Topo, Barcelona, Spain, 2009.

By Salvador López Arnal
November 2009

“Yes, there is something hidden in this silence. It is the interests of the chemical and pharmaceutical companies so that people won’t know that their products are causing new and terrible illnesses like Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS). Actually, recently it has been demonstrated that MCS is not a psychological illness and that old studies that said so were fabricated to protect the interests of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries.”
Eva Caballé

Eva Caballé is a 37 year-old Barcelona economist who lives with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. She was a bank employee and was a member of the rock group Lefthanded and now is the author of the recently released book (in Spanish) released by the publishing house, Libros de El Viejo Topo, Desaparecida: Una vida rota por la sensibilidad química múltiple (Missing: A life broken by Multiple Chemical Sensitivities). In the book’s introduction, Clara Valverde, says: “…But Eva is not weird. It is known that 0.75% of the population now lives with severe MCS and that up to 12% have mild or moderate MCS. All those people who are bothered by smells, those are part of that 12%. But most doctos and the majority of society are not aware of this and that is why it has taken Eva so many years to receive the right diagnosis. That is why Eva only has the help of her immediate family. That is why there are no demonstrations about this out on the streets nor her case is on the front page news.”

Eva Caballé is also the author of the blog NO FUN. She says: “NO FUN is a blog about Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephelitis and Fibromyalgia with information and advice for people who are sick and for anyone who wants to live a healthier life free of toxics.”

López-Arnal: Let’s start with a definition. What is MCS?

Eva Caballé: MCS is an acquired chronic illness, not a psychological one, which manifests itself with multisystemic symptoms as a reaction to a very small exposure to chemical products, normal everyday chemicals but unnecessary ones, like perfumes, air fresheners or laundry softeners. The symptoms, which are chronic and they become acute in a crisis, include fatigue and respiratory, digestive, cardiovascular, dermatological and neurological problems. MCS is a syndrome with three grades of severity, so not all of us who are sick suffer the same level of disability and isolation. It is an illness which has been known since the 1950s, but it has yet to be recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO), despite that there are more than 100 research articles that support the organic basis of MCS, that the number of people affected is increasing rapidly, at a younger age, and that the European Parliament includes MCS in the growing number of illnesses related to environmental factors.

LA: You say that MCS is not recognized by the WHO despite the number of scientific articles that support the organic basis of this illness. Why do you think that the WHO is so skeptical, so cautious?

EC: We know that the WHO has been debating the MCS issue for years. But the process of recognizing the illness is taking longer than usual due to the pressure that the chemical and pharmaceutical industries are putting on the WHO, as they are not interested in having it known that they are directly responsible for this illness. Without going any further, in Germany, where MCS is recognized as an illness, the industries continue exercicing their control through tools like Wikipedia. This was denounced by the CSN Association in an article which I translated and published on my blog. The article about MCS in Wikipedia in German is edited each day, sometimes every few minutes, because the administrators of Wikipedia, who have interests in the industry, veto the information trying to make sure that MCS is not known or if it is, that it be thought of as a psychosomatic illness.

LA: You also say that the number of people with MCS is growing rapidly. Can you give us any data to illustrate this?

EC: I am quoting Dr J Fernández-Solà (an Internal Medicine specialist from the Hospital Clinic in Barcelona) who, in an interview that was done with him at the beginning of this year for an article on MCS in the Spanish magazine, Interviu, said that the amount of patients who were seeking medical help for this illness is growing rapidly. In his hospital, each year, they get between 50 and 60 new patients. That means one new patient a week.

LA: What symptoms could make one think that they have this illness?

EC: Perhaps the most common symptom is to notice unbearable smells which one did not notice before. One stops tolerating various chemical agents like cleaning products, perfumes, tobacco smoke, car emissions, etc. When you have MCS and you are exposed to these chemical agents, a series of symptoms are triggered automatically like choking, irritation of the respiratory tract, tachycardia, headaches, mental confusion, dizziness, nausea, diarrhea, extreme fatigue and/or pain. These symptoms don’t get better until you stop being in contact with the chemical agent that produced it. Normally you also stop tolerating alcohol, dairy products or gluten. You also develop intolerance to various foods and medications. Often there are other environmental intolerances: to heat, to cold, to noise, to sunlight and to electromagnetic fields (computers, high power lines, telephones, cellular phone atennas, microwaves, etc).

LA: What differences are there between MCS and, let’s say, Fibromyalgia?

EC: MCS, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephelitis (CFS/ME) and Fibromyalgia (FMS) are illnesses of the same family. In fact, many of us who have MCS, we actually have the three illnesses and more and more people with CFS/ME and FMS, with the years, also develop MCS. We have a lot of the same symptoms, but the biggest difference is that those with MCS do not tolerate even the smallest exposure to chemical substances, which is the reason why we have to maintain a strict environmental control and we cannot go outside without a mask with a carbon filter to filter out the environmental toxics.

LA: What medical treatment does a person with MCS receive from the Spanish health care system? Do you think it is adequate? Do you think it is fair?

[...]

Continue Reading

Tags: Air, Chemicals, Environment, Environmental Health, Environmental Illness, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Pollution, Products, Research, Support

Add your voice to a coalition fighting for toxic chemical reform

Posted on Oct 31, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Environment, Law, Susie Collins

Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families wants to hear your story.

I wanted to take a minute to tell you about a coalition of groups working hard to reform toxic chemical policy in the United States: Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.

At the end of the post, find a link to their website, where you can tell your story about how toxic chemicals have impacted your life. I urge you to add your voice and give your support to this organization.

Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families is a groundbreaking coalition of diverse groups united by their common concern about toxic chemicals in our homes, places of work, and products we use every day. Please take a moment to learn more about what we want:

A reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) would serve as the backbone of a sound and comprehensive chemicals policy that protects public health and the environment, while restoring the luster of safety to U.S. goods in the world market. Any effective reform of TSCA should:

Take immediate action on the most dangerous chemicals
Current laws aren’t protecting us from chemicals that are building up in our bodies and threatening our health. These persistent, bioaccumulative toxic chemicals should be phased out of commerce. Our exposure to other toxic chemicals that we know can cause serious health problems, should be reduced. Green chemistry research should be expanded, and safer chemicals favored over those with known health hazards.

Hold industry responsible for the safety of their chemicals and products
Due to serious limitations of the current law, very little is known about the vast majority of the tens of thousands of chemicals produced and used in the US. Over the past three decades, the EPA has required testing on just 200 existing chemicals and restricted only five. Companies that make and use chemicals should be required to provide full information on the impact of all their chemicals on health and the environment. The public, workers, and businesses should have access to information about the safety of chemicals.

Use the best science to protect all people and vulnerable groups
Chemicals should meet a standard of safety for all people, including children, pregnant women, and workers. The extra burden of toxic chemical exposure on people of color, low-income, and indigenous communities must be reduced and more studies must be done to detect which chemicals are present in our bodies.

Safer Chemical, Healthy Families wants to hear from us. Please click here to go to their website to tell your story about your chemical injury and why you believe that toxic chemical policy in the U.S. must be reformed. Tell them you support their work 100%, but urge them to do even more. Tell them you want more than just “safer chemicals,” tell them you want all products in the marketplace SAFE, period.

Continue Reading

Tags: Chemicals, Children's Health, Environment, Environmental Health, Environmental Illness, Indoor Pollution, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Policy, Products

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 6

Posted on Oct 21, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup

In addition to or instead of benefits under Social Security Disability Insurance or Title II of the Social Security Act, you may be entitled to Supplementary Security Income benefits.

Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.

In my last column, I discussed circumstances of re-filing your Social Security Disability Insurance application at the time of taking an Appeals Council appeal, while still pursuing that appeal. Let me talk a bit more about re-filing for SSDI, and then also discuss Supplementary Security Income in relation to SSDI and Medicaid.

Re-Opening Claim for SSDI

Again, as I have discussed in previously, many Multiple Chemical Sensitivity sufferers have older applications that they did not appeal or tried to return to work and dropped their claims. In some circumstances, these earlier applications can be reopened. If you file a new application for benefits, it’s considered a constructive request to re-open any prior claims. If you re-file within one year of the Initial Denial decision, the claim is automatically re-opened. The prior claims can also be re-opened if a new application is filed within four years of the Initial Denial and you submit new and material evidence that was not available at the time of the original application or was not obtained and used in the decision. You can also re-open at any time if there is a severe mental impairment, which prevented you from acting in your own behalf.

The advantage of re-opening is that all of the benefits which had accrued during the original application can be obtained if you are successful, not just the ones that accrue after filing the new application. This can mean a fairly large award can be obtained.

Bear in mind that the time is calculated from the first denial letter you received on your claim, not the Administrative Law Judge decision or Appeals Council decision.

Supplementary Security Income

In addition to or instead of benefits under SSDI or Title II of the Social Security Act, you may be entitled to Supplementary Security Income benefits, or SSI.

SSI is basically a welfare program and allows people who are disabled and also are poor enough to fall under the federal poverty guidelines, to receive benefits if they are unable to work. People over 65 who do not have other income or resources automatically get SSI.

An important difference between the SSI benefits and the SSDI program is that for SSI you do not have to have enough “current credits” in covered employment or to ever have had a work history. This can be an advantage to those people who may only have worked a short time, or were homemakers for many years before becoming disabled, or who did a lot of part time work or work in which they were paid in cash or were self employed and did not pay taxes.

However, to get SSI benefits, you have to also be poor enough, which tends to preclude people who are married with working spouses. Also, if you are receiving “in kind” support, such as having your rent covered by a friend or relative, it will reduce the amount you may receive.

Another advantage of the SSI benefits is that there is no “waiting period” between the time you became disabled and first month in which benefits can be paid. However, there is also no payment for retroactive benefits prior to the month in which the SSI application is made, whereas with SSDI you can get retroactive benefits for up to a year before the month in which you applied.

Medicaid is available if you are approved for SSI but not Medicare.

If your SSDI monthly payment is less than the current SSI monthly amount, you can receive enough SSI in combination with the SSDI to bring you up to the SSI payment if you otherwise qualify.

To be continued.

Link to all columns by Michael Walkup.

###

This series on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and disability rights is written by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.

Michael is an experienced disability practitioner with more than 25 years experience in the disability law field. In 2001, he became disabled due to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) and Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS). He now provides a service to advise clients with potential disability claims who have MCS, CFS and/or FMS. As these programs and law are usually federal, he is able to practice in all 50 states and, therefore, represent clients regardless of location.

Michael is a long time Sustaining Member of the National Organization for Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, the only national body for disability representatives. He is also certified as a Federal Trial Lawyer and is admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims.

Michael would welcome the opportunity to possibly help with disability claims. For more information, visit his website MCS Legal Help at walkuplaw.com. Contact info: email MJWalkup@Amertech.net or call 866-880-4878.

Continue Reading

Tags: Disability Rights, Indoor Pollution, Law, MCS, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Sick Building, Work

Film: Killing Fields

Posted on Oct 13, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Environment, Media/Videos, Susie Collins

Much of the cheap meat and dairy produce sold in supermarkets across Europe is arriving as a result of serious human rights abuses and environmental damage in one of Latin America’s most impoverished countries.

Ecologist reports on Killing fields: the true cost of Europe’s cheap meat. “Statistics compiled by pressure groups suggest that as much as 23 million litres of pesticides and herbicides are sprayed in Paraguay each year, including several that have been classified by the World Health Organisation as being ‘extremely hazardous’.”

Cheap meat has become a way of life in much of Europe, but the full price is being paid across Latin America as vast soya plantations and their attendant chemicals lead to poisonings and violence

Much of the cheap meat and dairy produce sold in supermarkets across Europe is arriving as a result of serious human rights abuses and environmental damage in one of Latin America’s most impoverished countries, according to a new film launched in conjunction with the Ecologist Film Unit. [...]

Industrial scale soy production, particularly for genetically modified (GM) crops – some 90 per cent of Paraguay’s soy is now thought to be GM – is dependent on the frequent application of powerful pesticides and other agri-chemicals which have been linked to environmental degradation and a host of negative health impacts on people living near to soy farms.

Crop spraying has polluted important water sources in many rural regions, say campaigners, poisoning both domestic and wild animals, threatening plant life, and resulting in a number of health problems in people, including diarrhoea, vomiting, genetic malformations, headaches, loss of sight and even death.

Continue Reading

Tags: Chemicals, Children's Health, Environment, Food, Law, Pesticides, Policy, Pollution, Products, Toxic, Video

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 5

Posted on Sep 26, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup

Appeals: You can estimate that it will take at least a year for the Appeals Council to render a decision.

Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.

Although each stage of the Social Security Disability process can be called an “appeal,” what I will be talking about here are appeals from adverse decisions following a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ).

An adverse ALJ decision will be called an “Unfavorable Decision.” You may also appeal a “Partially Favorable Decision,” which will be a decision in which you were awarded some, but not all, of the benefits you were seeking. If you won entirely, it will be called a “Fully Favorable Decision.” You cannot appeal a Fully Favorable Decision even if you don’t like the rationale that was used to award the benefits, e.g. mental impairment.

You have 60 days to appeal an adverse decision which is done by filling out a form and sending it to the Hearings Office. The entire file, including the decision and a disc of the hearing testimony, will be sent to the Appeals Council in Baltimore, Maryland. You can send in additional evidence and make additional arguments, which again are done in writing only, to the Appeals Council.

You can estimate that it will take at least a year for the Appeals Council to render a decision. You can keep updating your file and adding evidence while that is going on. The average amount of time the person reviewing your file will spend on your case for the review is about fifteen minutes, so keep any comments short and to the point.

To the extent that anything favorable happens at the Appeals Council it will be probably be to remand the case back for an additional hearing with instructions to the ALJ rather than an outright reversal. The exception to this would be if there is some definitive evidence of a non Multiple Chemical Sensitivity condition which is disabling, such as bi polar disorder, for example, that was not raised before, or some definitive testing. This will not tend to apply in MCS cases, so you should at best look forward to a remand for an additional hearing. The remand hearing will be in front of the same judge as denied the claim originally, unless you move out of that Hearing Office’s area, in which case it will be transferred to the new office and re-assigned to a different judge. Your chances will be better if you can get the remand heard by someone new, “hint hint.”

If you lose at the Appeals Council, you can file a lawsuit against the Social Security Administration in the Federal District Court for your area. These are again decided entirely on paper with briefs submitted by both sides. A transcript has to be prepared of the hearing testimony. If the audio disc is not audible, the case will be remanded for a new hearing automatically.

Federal court cases are difficult in MCS claims as the federal courts tend to follow more restrictive rules of evidence for admission of expert testimony. Even though there are no rules of evidence in Social Security Disability cases, I find that these rules tend to influence the thinking of the federal judges nevertheless, making it difficult to convince them to accept what may be considered non-standard tests and opinions. The decision from any federal appeal also will be published nationally, so it can create a bad precedent for others. I therefore tend to discourage federal court appeals in favor of advising my clients to re-file for benefits, where possible.

You may re-file your application at the time of taking the Appeals Council appeal, while still pursuing that appeal. As the Appeals Council will take a year or more to decide your appeal, and, at best, will probably be sending it back for another ALJ hearing, which will take time to schedule, the amount of time it will take on an entirely new application may not be that much different. Also, even if you are still living in the same area, the new application will be assigned randomly to one of six or more ALJ’s in that Hearing Office, so the chances are that you will be assigned a different judge than the one that denied the previous claim.

The exception to this is if your “Date Last Insured” for disability benefits had expired before the date of the ALJ Decision. In that case, you will not be able to re-file a new application and will have to take all available appeals.

I will talk about that more in the next installment.

To be continued.

Link to all columns by Michael Walkup.

###

This series on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and disability rights is written by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.