Tag Archives: Sick Building
$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
The risk of developing Multiple Chemical Sensitivity from exposure to photocopiers and laser printers
Posted on Feb 13, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Guest Bloggers, MCS, Worker's Rights
Some persons suffering from Multiple Chemical Sensitivity may have developed their conditions or worsened them due to exposures to the toxic chemicals given off by photocopiers and laser printers in their office jobs.
By guestblogger M.R.E.
The following is information for the readers of The Canary Report concerning potential risks of exposure to photocopiers and laser printers. I have suffered a devastating respiratory condition from exposure to these types of machines, and so I am trying to raise awareness about this health hazard to hopefully receive feedback and get in touch with other persons who suffer the same.
Due to exposure to photocopiers and laser printers, I have suffered a devastating respiratory condition which produces in an extreme degree: difficulty for breathing, chest pain and oppression, fatigue, cough, mucosal dryness, inability to sneeze and plenty of disturbances in the throat, nose, mouth, eyes, skin, stomach and other systems plus an extreme, lasting intolerance to all chemicals in the air. After a lot of troubles it was diagnosed in two university hospitals as non-specific bronchial hyper-reactivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS). The syndrome was caused by the irritant vapors released by a photocopier and a laser printer in my jobs and this appears very obvious from the full details of my story, too long for this page. Although my illness was initiated within 24 hours of intense exposure to these gases, it has not been officially recognized as occupational for any purpose. As many other sufferers with MCS, I have lived a nightmare of sickness and social neglect, but thanks to my family, who financially and psychologically supported me, I did not fall into marginality and eventual tragedy.
From my own experience of nearly three decades with this problem I see that the following points should be carefully taken into account:
Continue Reading
More blogging canaries
Posted on Feb 09, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, MCS, Susie Collins
I’ve discovered a couple more blogs by canaries!
On her blog After Gadget, Sharon blogs about life after the loss of her beloved service dog Gadget. After Gadget is a new blog with only a few posts, but if you get hooked like I did, you’ll read every page and then subscribe so you don’t miss the next entry!
Along with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Sharon also suffers myalgic encephalopathy (ME), also called chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) or chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome (CFIDS). Her bio is here. An excerpt from the page about how MCS affects her life:
In my case, the low-level, constant exposure to the sick building was the initial trigger. If I had recognized what was happening and taken steps to lower my toxic burden, I might have regained my health and not become disabled. Instead, I moved into an apartment with freshly painted walls, bought cheap pine furniture (which is usually imbued with fungicides, insecticides, and formaldehyde), and then painted the new furniture. My symptoms increased in severity and number, and still I didn’t see the connection. Being so ill, I was forced to stay home from work and from teaching; I didn’t know this was the nail in the coffin of my health. The ancient gas stove and furnace in my kitchen and living room were leaking. As a result, I suffered several months of low-level, chronic carbon dioxide poisoning. By the time I found a doctor who diagnosed me with MCS and told me to shut off my gas, I’d developed severe MCS and CFIDS/ME.
Here’s Gadget delivering a message for Sharon to someone in another part of the house:
Because Sharon has speech disabilities, when she lost Gadget, she also lost this way of communicating with others in her home, which increased her sense of isolation and loss. But she’s adapting to life after Gadget, and while her heart still mourns for him, she’s also looking forward to bringing home a puppy in the very near future.
~~~
Faith at An Ocean of Joy gave The Canary Report two shout outs, so nice of her! First post here and second here. In the more recent, she explores biochemist Martin Pall’s MCS research. Faith has mast cell problems, and through process of elimination, has recently come to the conclusion that she has Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. I’m not familiar with mast cell problems, so I welcome the education I’m getting from her blog on that topic.
Pall explains how mast cells can be triggered by the cycle in the context of MCS, which may be of interest to anyone with Mast Cell Activation Disorder. In addition, he lists the 6 genetic polymorphisms associated with a susceptibility to MCS, including the UGT1A1 polymorphism associated with the heretofor ‘benign’ Gilbert’s Syndrome.
The way out of the cycle, according to Pall, is to reduce nitric oxide levels in the body, and he presents an experimental treatment protocol designed to do so.
Thanks for the education, Faith!
Continue Reading
Professor of chemical engineering urges students to go fragrance-free
Posted on Feb 03, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, MCS, Susie Collins
Chemical engineering professor at the University of New Hampshire encourages students to “be considerate to human canaries and help them to enjoy life to the fullest.”
Ihab Farag, professor of chemical engineering at the University of New Hampshire and member of our Canary Report community, wrote a letter to the editor at his school’s student paper to raise awareness about chemical sensitivity. And they published it! I’m a huge supporter of letters to the editor. Bravo, Ihab!
Many of us are familiar with canaries, the beautiful, colorful birds that tend to sing most of the time. Canaries also saved many human lives in coalmines. This is because canaries are much more sensitive to toxic gases than humans. Miners would take canaries with them in the coalmine. If the canary stopped singing and fell (or died), the miners knew to leave the coal mine quickly to safety.
There are individuals who have developed a very strong sensitivity to many common chemicals. These people can be very negatively affected and irritated by fumes, chemical cleaners, disinfectants, cigarette/cigar smoke, engine exhaust, solvents, etc. These people are often called “Human Canaries” of the modern world, because of the chemical sensitivity similarity to that of Canaries. Human Canaries of the 21st century tend to be very strongly irritated by everyday chemicals like perfumes, hair products, shampoos, shower gels, after shave lotions, antiperspirants, deodorants, hand sanitizers, chap sticks, finger nail polish, etc. Human canaries look the same as other people, and when you see one you probably will not recognize he or she is a human canary until an offensive toxic chemical triggers his or her sensitivity.
Please be considerate to human canaries and help them to enjoy life to the fullest. One way you can help the human canary and at the same time lower your exposure to undesirable chemicals, is to go fragrance-free: avoiding perfumes, and fragranced personal care products.
Ihab Farag
Professor, Chemical Engineering Department
Link to Dr. Farag’s home page at the University of New Hampshire.
Continue Reading
Poster for fragrance-free hospital care
Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Susie Collins
This poster was designed as a public service project for patients requiring in-hospital care at hospitals that are still lacking a proper fragrance-free policy for the staff.
The poster comes in two versions: one for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and one for Severe Allergic Asthma. Click here to download either one in print resolution.
I think the posters are FAB, but I knock off a couple points for using the word “allergen” in the MCS poster. As we all know, MCS is not an allergy, it does not have any of the physiological markers of an allergy. But that criticism aside, this poster rocks. I especially love the part where it says, “Patient is not a Fragrance Crash Test Dummy. Don’t just ‘come & see if it affects the patient.’”
Continue Reading
Perfume blogger dismisses concerns from a member of our community
Posted on Jan 19, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, MCS, Susie Collins
I love it when people who have absolutely no medical expertise make flippant comments about allergies and sensitivities to chemicals.
Now Smell This: A Blog About Perfume reports on Perfume is the Rodney Dangerfield of the Art World. Angela writes:
I look forward to the day when saying “perfume stinks” is seen as a sign of ignorance. Maybe, instead, that person will lean toward a friend discreetly wearing scent and say, “Your perfume is — interesting. Tell me about it.”
In the comments she writes:
“I know a few people, too, who claim to be allergic to fragrance, but I think they’ve just had a bad reaction standing next to someone soaked in something particularly loud. All of these people can wander into a Marriott or a Hilton, where fragrance is pumped through the air, without a hitch.”
Excuse me, who’s ignorant? I love it when people who have absolutely no medical expertise make sweeping, flippant comments about allergies and sensitivities to chemicals. The truth is many of us with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity cannot wander into a Marriott or Hilton without risking our health. Neither can we visit malls or casinos or walk through an airport without a mask. Scent marketing blocks our access to banks, office buildings and even hospitals.
Now Smell This is a popular blog, and at about comment #180, a member of our community, Elaine Willis, left a comment for Angela:
People who CLAIM to be allergic to perfume most likely are! [Commenter] Klytaemnestra does not understand that someone can develop the sensitivity over time. Although I can appreciate the discussion here, I hope it can be appreciated that for 3 out of 10 people, perfume is a health hazard; and for a smaller but growing number – perfume and other petro-chemically enhanced products, are life-threatening.
Angela obviously thought Elaine was over exaggerating, and so flippantly replied: “Oh my! 3 out of 10 people! I guess I count myself as one of the lucky ones. I’d sure hate to be allergic to perfume when the world is awash in scent–everything from cleaning products to buses to malls and hotels seems to be scented these days.”
When another commenter recommends “a more judicious approach in putting perfume or scent into everything and everywhere,” Angela pronounces,”I think a lot of people don’t even notice it anymore, yet they squawk when they smell it on a person.”
The truth is that the toxicity of modern fragrance formulations is a serious health issue for everyone, not just people with Environmental Illness and/or Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.
Saying “I think a lot of people don’t even notice it anymore” about what is a serious disability rights issue is 15-20 years behind the times. In America, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, which include sensitivity to modern perfume and fragrance, is recognized as a disability by the Social Security Administration, Housing and Urban Development, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, among others. Click here for a list of published peer-reviewed articles documenting the “realness” of MCS.
This chemical sensitivity condition is not rare and the numbers of people who have it are growing. A national survey found 11.2% of respondents reported increased sensitivities to common chemicals and 2.5% had been medically diagnosed with MCS. Perhaps even more relevant to this discussion here is that this same survey found 31.1% of respondents said that sitting next to someone who was wearing a scented product was “irritating.” So going without perfume in schools, hotels, banks, airports and other public places is a good idea because it improves air quality and reduces potential harm to others as well as yourself.
Toxic modern fragrance is a health issue that affects everyone and a disability rights issue that affects people with respiratory illness including people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. Clean air is everybody’s business, and seeing this issue as a fundamental health issue is the only way we will ever get consensus on taking the necessary action to protect everyone.
Now Smell This is a blog with a lot of readers, why not go an tell Angela how you feel about a product made from unregulated toxic chemicals choked with phthalates known to cause reproductive harm and petrochemicals known to trigger asthma, migraines, respiratory distress, central nervous system problems and more. Tell her how you feel when your body is exposed to perfumes in public places and your eyes burn and itch, your throat and limbs swell up, your skin burns, or a migraine is triggered.
I would have forgiven Angela her blog topic had she not been so flippant when Elaine told her that perfume can indeed be life threatening. I wish Angela could experience Multiple Chemical Sensitivity for just one day, it might make her have second thoughts about flipping off someone trying to tell her perfume can be extremely dangerous for a large part of the population.
Continue Reading
New website launched on fragrance-free living
Posted on Jan 15, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Products, Susie Collins
New website warns of the dangers of toxic fragrance in personal care products and other consumer goods.
A new website just came up on my radar about Fragrance-Free Living. It’s run by former auto mechanic David Tywoniuk, who now owns an auto body shop in Edmonton, Canada. He and Judy Sterling put the website together.
Here is a really good reason as to why you might want to try “Fragrance Free Living”. Did you know that the ingredient “Fragrance” used in most of the above products can indicate the presence of up to 4,000 separate, mostly man-made ingredients? Many compounds in fragrance are human toxins and suspected or proven to cause cancer. Symptoms reported include: headaches, dizziness, rashes, skin discolorations, violent coughing and vomiting and allergic skin irritation. Observations by medical doctors have shown that exposure to fragrance can affect the central nervous system, causing depression, hyperactivity, irritability, inability to cope, and other behavioral changes. 100% of perfumes contain toluene, which can cause liver, kidney and brain damage as well as damage to a developing fetus.
Continue Reading
The woes of public restrooms
Posted on Dec 28, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Keith Carlson, MCS
Living with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity can make it an enormous challenge to use a public restroom.
Post by Keith Carlson.
Living with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), it can be an enormous challenge to be in a public place and simply need to use a bathroom. These days, public restrooms in the United States seem to have been permanently inoculated with so-called “air-fresheners” that make relieving one’s self an adventure in being actively poisoned.
For me personally, my struggles with public restrooms are exacerbated by the fact that I have an underlying medical condition (enlarged prostate) that necessitates fairly frequent urination, and this, my friends, can lead to some exceedingly challenging scenarios.
Just the other day, I was in a Trader Joe’s store here in Atlanta, where we’re visiting for the holidays. Feeling the urge, I sauntered warily towards the men’s room, hesitant to open that door but feeling that I had no real choice in the matter. Pushing the door open, I was hit with that disappointing, maddening and altogether overwhelmingly frustrating sensation that I had discovered—yet again—another public rest room that is simply verboten for my use. Sigh.
While I have no problem with peeing outdoors (which, in fact, is altogether preferable on so many levels), there are numerous situations in which doing so could lead to embarrassment, dirty looks, and—worst of all—a permanent label as a sex offender. Bearing in mind that many states do indeed prosecute public urination as a sexual offense, I frequently find myself at a loss as to what to do in order to heed nature’s (increasingly urgent) call.
You may then be led to ask, “Why not just use the stinky bathroom anyway, Keith? What could possibly happen to you?”
And I would reply, “Well, first of all, the clothes that I’m wearing can very quickly become saturated with the toxic smell of the substance in question. Although I do not develop respiratory symptoms like my wife does, I will find myself incredibly irritable, often with confusion, dulled mental faculties, and a difficulty finding words when speaking. A secondary and unfortunate sequela of my exposure to such a substance is that my wife will then react to the aura of chemical toxicity surrounding me, and she will then begin to have bronchospams, headaches, and a host of other symptoms which would have been otherwise preventable had I not entered that rest room in the first place.”
As you can see, the fallout from a simple visit to a men’s room can have far-reaching health consequences for both myself and my wife, and now that we are traveling, it is even more crucial for us to continue to use the toilet in our chemically safe mobile home when we can. Still, we often find ourselves in situations where we are far from our mobile haven, in need of a rest room, and unable to do what so many other people take for granted on a daily basis.
A “rest room” should truly embody the literal meaning of its name—a place for rest, to relieve one’s self and emerge refreshed and ready for the next chapter of one’s day. For those of us who are canaries in the coal mine of the toxic world around us, they are far from a restful place of repose. From the scented sprayers on the wall to the deodorizers in men’s urinals, public rest rooms are dangerous, exasperating, poisonous places to be avoided at all costs. When a safe rest room is found, it is cause for celebration and relief (both mental and physical). But when one needs to go and there’s nowhere to do so, it is a maddening moment of living in a toxic world.
~~~
This post was originally published on my blog Digital Doorway, a digital venue for creative expression, nursing adventures, reflections, thoughtful reverie, thoughtless repose, and other flotsam and jetsam.
You can also visit me at Mary and Keith’s Excellent Adventure, where my wife and I blog about living full-time in our new RV, traveling the highways and byways of America, visiting intentional communities, and bringing Laughter Yoga and the benefits of health and wellness coaching to new and old friends along the way!
Continue Reading
Film review: Chemerical
Posted on Dec 26, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Healthy Living, Linda Sepp, Media/Videos
Review by Linda Sepp.
I would give a copy of this film to everyone if I could afford it.
I received a copy of the new documentary film Chemerical and wanted to share a few thoughts with you about it. The film shows how a family detoxifies and survives to tell the tale, AND not only that, they save money by cooking up some of their own products.
This is a really good film for people who haven’t thought about how they are poisoning themselves and just buy chemicals off the shelf for their kitchen, bathroom, cleaning and personal care use, either because they don’t believe there is a problem or they think buying healthy products is too inconvenient.
The film isn’t heavy, even though the subject is, and encourages the viewer to make changes instead of just hitting you on the head.
I would have made a few more points, including some info on neuro-toxins and endocrine disruptors, as well as hammered in that air “fresheners” are poison instead of just not fresheners. The microbiologist made a comment about air fresheners, which showed he wasn’t a chemist. That should have been edited, but his other stuff was good. They didn’t mention that essential oils have to be USDA certified organic to be safe, and that EO need to be used carefully as they can be sensitizers even if organic. I might also have mentioned that not all soap is created equal, but that might be in the documentation that can be downloaded if you join the Chemerical Community from their website. (All the site’s pages might not be up and running quite yet.)
The film has a segment with a woman with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, and Dr. Lynn Marshall from the Environmental Health Institute in Ontario. Stacy Malkan is also there for a bit, as is Dr. Rick Smith from Environmental Defence. They mention the Environmental Working Group’s cosmetics safety database, too. And a few other experts, like one who tests their indoor air quality before and after they embark on detoxifying their lives from unnecessary chemical use.
I would give a copy of this film to everyone if I could afford it.
In Sweden a number of years ago, Dr. Karl-Henrik Robèrt, a Swedish doctor and cancer scientist, wanted to create a consensus among governments, business people and environmentalists as to what must at least be agreed to safe guard prosperous life.
“With the support of His Majesty the King of Sweden, Karl XVI Gustaf, this ‘consensus document’ and accompanying audio tape was sent to every household and school in Sweden.”
This eventually went on to become The Natural Step.
If only we had a King Gustaf who would help deliver films like Chemerical, we would soon have a safer world for all living beings.
Link to purchase Chemerical.
Continue Reading
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:
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.).
Toxic chemicals found in common scented laundry products, air fresheners.
Dr. Steinemann’s research: “Fragranced consumer products and undisclosed ingredients.”
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
PSA: Disinfectants Horror Show
Posted on Nov 11, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Home & Garden, Media/Videos, Susie Collins
Can too clean be hazardous to your health?
In addition to the video, be sure to read Women’s Voices for the Earth’s report on Disinfectant Overkill, saying disinfectant chemicals have a purpose and place, but should be used sparingly: “Scientific studies have shown that disinfectant chemicals have been linked to chronic health impacts like asthma, hormone imbalance, potential reduced fertility, and immune system problems.”
Continue Reading
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
How to green your campus
Posted on Oct 14, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Media/Videos, Susie Collins
Share with your favorite student!
And how about encouraging them to add organic cleaning and fragrance-free policies to their campus’s green initiatives?
Continue Reading
Documentary film: Allergic to the 21st Century
Posted on Oct 02, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Media/Videos, Susie Collins
Videos: Documentary on Electromagnetic Sensitivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity made for United Kingdom’s Channel-4.
“Allergic to the 21st Century” is produced and directed by Anne-Claire Pilley and features Sarah Dacre (at left), Roger Moller and Adrian Gray.
Continue Reading
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.
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
Welcome to The Canary Report!
The Canary Report is a blog and social network about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.
We compassionately bring you unfiltered and uncensored news and information you can trust directly from the source: people who have MCS. Dedicated to sharing, supporting, and inspiring with the Aloha Spirit, The Canary Report gives all canaries a voice. Come join us!
Aloha,
Susie Collins
Founder and Contributing Editor
Hilo, Hawaii
Let’s Connect on the Social Web
-
Why I boycott Breast Cancer Awareness Month
-
The Canary Report releases its 2010 wall calendar
-
The false promise of miracle cures for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
-
Warning: Avoid ozone generating air machines
-
The dangers of aroma technology
-
A statement from Lourdes Salvador about recent ad hominem attacks on Facebook
-
DIY: Skip the chemicals, get a buzz
-
The naked truth about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
-
Perfume blogger dismisses concerns from a member of our community
-
International Multiple Chemical Sensitivity awareness project is launched
-
Susie Collins: IH Man, I'll ignore the mean-spirited intentio...
-
-
-
Lisa: Such great news! Thank you for posting this. Ano...
-
IH man: The reason that women are more often labeled as ha...
-
Jeanne: Susie, This is such good news!! Coming off...
-
Connie Rae: this is such good news! anyone with MCS knows the ...
-
-
-