91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳

By Peter Montague As the scientific evidence linking chemical exposures to serious human diseases piles up, many chemical-dependent industries, such as pesticide purveyors, are searching for a strategy to buy themselves some time. They needn't look far. The tobacco industry has demonstrated that 40 years of scientific bad news can be deflected and neutralised with relative ease. Roughly half a million people die each year from tobacco-related illnesses in the US. This assessment is not disputed by the US government, or by thousands of scientific researchers and physicians, or by the nation's mainstream medical and health organisations. Yet the tobacco corporations have successfully maintained their privilege of selling a product that kills 10% of everyone who uses it as directed. A key component of the tobacco strategy is "scientific research" designed to create and maintain a "scientific controversy" surrounding questions of tobacco and health. This gives the tobacco industry "plausible deniability" and allows it to insist that the case against their product is not conclusive. The pesticide corporations have now formed their own "cigarette-science" group called Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment. RISE is made up of executives from companies like Monsanto, Sandoz Agro, Dow Elanco, Dupont Agricultural Products and other pesticide manufacturers, formulators and distributors. The issue that has RISE's members worried is multiple chemical sensitivity. MCS is an adverse reaction to low levels of many different chemicals with symptoms that range from sniffles to coma. Typical symptoms include irritability, insomnia, difficulty concentrating, memory trouble, daytime grogginess, chronic fatigue, headache, joint pain, muscle pain, abdominal pain, constipation and ringing in the ears. For an MCS patient, life is hell. MCS afflicts 10% to 15% of people in the US and appears to be increasing. A recent article in Environmental Health Perspectives, published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, says MCS is a "syndrome with onset related to an environmental exposure, most commonly a solvent or pesticide. After the initial exposure, individuals become sensitive to low-level chemical exposures, with symptoms involving more than one organ system. Though this syndrome was described four decades ago, it remains highly controversial." But so long as MCS is surrounded by scientific controversy, the pesticide industry has room to make statements such as: "There is no scientific or documented evidence that pesticide application, when used in accordance with label instruction, has caused harm to human health". RISE's 1995-96 strategic plan describes four main objectives. Objective number three is "To promote the use of industry products as valuable pest management tools to enhance the quality of life and the environment". To achieve this, the plan identifies two "tactics" to be used by its "Communications Committee". First, "Host forums for industry user groups that are taking positive pesticide messages to schools". Secondly, "Conduct two 'MCS' phenomena seminars". On September 9, RISE sponsored a seminar on MCS. One of the speakers was Suellen Pirages, managing director of a new organisation, the Environmental Sensitivities Research Institute. ESRI is funded by chemical-dependent corporations "to pro-actively respond" to the rising number of MCS cases. Notice how the name of the institute shifts the problem from one of "multiple chemical sensitivities" to one of "environmental sensitivities" — the problem isn't chemicals, it's the environment. The executive director and founder of ESRI, Ronald Gots, openly scoffs at MCS patients and the physicians who treat them. Dr Gots has said MCS is "a peculiar manifestation of our technophobic and chemophobic society". In other words, MCS patients aren't really sick, they're just irrationally frightened by technology and chemicals. Gots is also director of the National Medical Advisory Service (NMAS), which provides expert witnesses to attorneys defending corporations in product liability lawsuits. ESRI and NMAS share the same offices and have the same fax number. On September 15, Gots testified on behalf of a corporate defendant in a lawsuit, "The MCS theory has been subjected to peer review evaluation and it has generally been rejected as junk science". Gots' recent book, Toxic Risks: Science, Regulation and Perception, was thoroughly trashed by a reviewer in the Journal of Occupational Medicine, an industry-dominated journal. The book was described as "of little value to public health professionals and scientists" and "replete with sweeping generalisations, overstatements, and exaggerations". Despite the obvious anti-MCS bias of Gots, Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore — one of the top research institutions in the US — in conjunction with the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (a federal agency) has co-sponsored a symposium with NMAS, assisted by ESRI staff. The symposium is called "Multiple Chemical Sensitivities: State-of-the-Science Symposium". The symposium is heavily weighted in favour of pro-industry, anti-consumer, anti-MCS-patient viewpoints. No attempt is being made by conference organisers to include or accommodate MCS patients. Meanwhile, some excellent scientific work is under way to find the causes of MCS. Recent published work indicates that MCS is a disease related to the olfactory nerves in the nose. This nerve system provides a pathway for chemicals to pass directly into the brain. Chemicals traversing this path may affect the limbic system in the brain, which in turn influences both the endocrine and immune systems and also influences a person's moods. Other recent scientific work implicates another mechanism in causing MCS — inflammation of body tissues caused, not by the immune system, which often causes inflammation to fight disease, but by a mechanism called "neurogenic inflammation." A great deal of controlled scientific experimentation is going on now to test these hypotheses.
[From Rachel's Health & Environment Weekly.]