Toxic Fumes on Airline Flights: What's It All About?

In a recent post Becoming More Aware of Toxins In Our Environment, I referred to an article published on June 10, 2007 by The Independent called, "Toxic fumes on planes 'threaten thousands of passengers each year". This article reports that scientific research has shown that fumes present in planes have rendered pilots incapable of flying their aircraft safely. One of the symptoms cited was fatigue, along with many others which coincidentally are all typical of those experienced by people with chemical sensitivity.Two more articles have appeared on this subject since then. On June 19, 2007 NewScientist published an article titled: "Toxic fumes impairing our ability to fly, say pilots". It reports that pilots say that toxic fumes on planes are poisoning them, rendering them unable to fly and that they are campaigning for 'aerotoxic syndrome' to be recognized as a disease. The article also refers to symptoms: "Symptoms related to long term exposure purportedly include neurological and respiratory problems, memory loss, difficulties with speech, and chronic fatigue." This list of symptoms is remarkably similar to those experienced by people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.

A third article was released today, June 25, by the BBC: "Tired pilots 'compromise safety'". This article makes no mention of the extended symptoms referred to in the other two articles cited above. Far along in the article it qualifies fatigue as 'chronic fatigue', which is known to be a common way of referring to a symptom related to an ongoing health condition, rather than incidental tiredness from lack of sleep. The paragraph with this reference reads: "Dr. Ian Perry, one of the country's leading consultants in aviation medicine, says the number of pilots coming to see him who are chronically fatigued has doubled over the last five years to four or five people a fortnight, he said."

This means that five years ago the doctor was seeing at least two pilots a fortnight who were chronically fatigued. This illustrates that this isn't a new problem. Given the importance of it, both from the perspective of pilots who are becoming ill in statistically significant numbers, and secondly, to passengers, it would be reasonable to expect the aviation industry to have taken faster action to remedy the situation.

There is another BBC article published 9 years ago, dated September 1998, "Health Cover up over pilot fatigue" in which the same Dr. Ian Perry, the examiner of pilots for the Civil Aviation Authority and the Federal Aviation Authority, tells that many doctors are grounding pilots for fatigue, but are giving another reason on official reports. The article says: "He admits he himself covers up the extent of the problem, which could be a factor in plane crashes." The article continues: "Research shows 70% of crashes are due to pilot error."

The last paragraph of the NewScientist article from the 19th of this month, (mentioned above) quotes Jonathan Nicholson, a spokesperson for the UK's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) as saying: "Everybody recognises that there are incidents where fumes enter cabins. We will look at further work on the issue if long-term health issues are proven."

In his blog, Seth Godin recently wrote a really relevant post called Responsibility. He calls marketing people to attention with examples, demonstrating just how influential marketing tactics are. He says: "If you get asked to market something, you're responsible. You're responsible for the impacts, the costs, the side effects and the damage. You killed that kid. You poisoned that river. You led that fight. If you can't put your name on it, I hope you'll walk away. If only 10% of us did that, imagine the changes. Imagine how proud you'd be of your work."

That is great advice, not just for marketers, but for every single one of us to strive for -- a call to live honestly, courageously, truthfully.

Becoming More Aware of Toxins In Our Environment

There are many sources of toxins that are not within our immediate ability to control. The Independent published an article today entitled "Toxic fumes on planes 'threaten thousands of passengers each year'". The article reports that scientific research has shown that fumes present in planes have rendered pilots incapable of flying their aircraft safely.

A technology is used in which hot air is taken from the engine, cooled down and then fed, without being filtered, into the plane's cabin and cockpit. Sometimes it becomes contaminated with engine oils containing many different chemicals. These enter the air in the entire plane and are breathed by passengers and crew alike.

At University College London in a study of 27 affected pilots, 26 of them were found to suffer chronic health problems, including fatigue, sleep difficulties, fluctuating gastrointestinal problems, numbness and tingling in fingers and toes, memory loss and word-finding difficulties. Some of them reported cognitive failures, such as the inability to retain numerical data, confusing information provided by air traffic control, and being unable to remember events such as whether the undercarriage had been raised or lowered.

These symptoms are typical of those experienced by many people with chemical sensitivity. In this case, it has taken the discovery of pilot illness, and their consequent inability to fly an airplane safely, to induce studies which, it would seem, should be a routine requirement before flight.

As increasing numbers of people report health difficulties with the large numbers of chemicals we encounter daily, hopefully much more will be done proactively, by industry and regulatory organizations, to monitor environments and products more rigorously.

There are many circumstances that result in exposures to chemicals we are unaware of. Many of these, as yet, have not been officially deemed unsatisfactory for our health and well-being. Our society leads us to take for granted that our welfare is factored into the sale and creation of technologies and products that we use. Air quality during routine and repeated flights is not something we would generally question or doubt.

Many people with MCS are unable to travel by plane. For someone suffering from the symptoms of multiple chemical sensitivity, it isn't possible to ignore the effects on their bodies that they experience in different environments. It's a natural result to question much more frequently whether the official standards are being set appropriately.

For someone who doesn't experience chemical sensitivities, reading such an article might seem less compelling from a personal viewpoint with regard to exposure to toxins. However, there are other factors it does well to consider. What happens to the pilots when they are no longer able to fly, even as passengers, without becoming ill? What if this happens to frequent flyers? What happens to people who live close to busy airports where such emissions into the environment are routine? What if the cumulative exposure to other chemicals of a similar nature makes a person more susceptible to problems in the future? What if that person is you or someone you love?The pilot mentioned in this article, who now becomes ill even when traveling as a passenger, can no longer go to work as a pilot in these circumstances. Like the airplane where passengers and employees are forced to breathe the air that is piped in, there are many environments we come across where the air quality cannot be controlled by the individual. Many people who are affected by chemicals drop off the radar screen of society because they become ill in many public places, including their workplaces.

Just as being aware of the effect of human activity on the environment is vitally important to the future welfare of our planet, so is the need for our society to become aware of what is happening to a sector of its population. As long as we remain ignorant of it, it's not possible to take action to better protect ourselves, and our loved ones, by making informed choices.

What Is Multiple Chemical Sensitivity?

An article in the BBC News today reports that exposure to pesticides increases the risk of contracting Parkinson's Disease. Parkinson's Disease is a progressive, degenerative neurological condition. Many pesticides are neurotoxic and there have been other studies that have found associations with exposure to pesticides and various chronic neurological diseases.

Neurotoxic chemicals are prevalent in our society today. For example, we are exposed to solvents and pesticides almost every day, in our working environment or on our way to work, very often at home, and even in our food. Gasoline, diesel and the products of combustion are something we are regularly exposed to when we're on the road, and also when traffic passes close to where we live or work. These frequent and common exposures put us at risk of developing chemical sensitivities. This is even more relevant for children.
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, MCS, has been defined in a number of ways. It is difficult to define precisely because the mechanism of injury is not known and the specific symptoms can be very varied from one individual to another, and also varied in the same individual over time.

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity often begins with one high-dose exposure to a chemical which is toxic in large doses, but it may also develop with long-term exposure to low levels of a chemical, or chemicals. The significance of 'low level' used here refers to the fact that this level of such a chemical is generally held to be non-toxic to the human body at this concentration. However, for many of the chemicals that we are exposed to, conclusive tests, taking into account reactions inside the body with other chemicals we are exposed to, and/or the interaction of many 'low level' concentrations of chemicals forming further chemical products before they enter the body, have not been performed.

A few examples of the ways in which people who develop MCS are commonly exposed are: working in industrial employment; living or working in a poorly ventilated building; living in conditions of high air or water pollution. Chemicals most often associated with MCS include: formaldehyde, pesticides, solvents, petrochemical fuels, waxes, detergents, cleaning products, latex, tobacco smoke, perfumes and fragrances, artificial colors, flavors and preservatives.

Products that often precipitate symptoms of MCS are: air fresheners, aerosol deodorant, asphalt, after-shave lotion, colognes, perfumes, diesel, dry-cleaning fluid, furniture polish, gasoline products, hair spray, insect repellant, insecticide, many laundry detergents, marker pens, nail polish and remover, oil-based paint and associated products, many creams and cosmetics, many hair shampoos, gels, and dyes, public restroom deodorizers, many modern cleaning products, tar, varnish, creosote, paint products, chipboard, treated lumber, many treated leathers (depending on process used), soft plastics, mold, cotton and fabrics treated with pesticides and/or antibacterial agents, antibacterial soap, fabric softeners, rubber. This may seem like a phenomenal list, and there may be other items that can cause a problem that through oversight have not been mentioned here. But this gives a good idea of how difficult it is to avoid regular exposure to 'low level' harmful agents once chemical sensitivities have been triggered in an individual.
MCS symptoms can manifest in any or all organ systems including respiratory, neurological, endocrine, urinary, cardiovascular, immune. Some of the symptoms experienced, in any combination and in differing strengths at any given time, by someone with chemical sensitivities can be: fatigue, difficulty concentrating, memory loss, depression, anxiety, slow response, weakness, dizziness, tingling in fingers and/or toes, headaches, heat intolerance, irritability, numbness, burning sensation on the skin, itching skin, itching scalp, noise sensitivity, congestion, sore throat, hoarseness, shortness of breath, chest pain, cough, difficulty thinking and making decisions, stomach pains and cramps, insomnia, clumsiness, inability to gauge distance, coordination problems, muscle cramps, joint pain, trembling, faintness, nausea, vomiting, rapid increase in heartbeat, increased frequency in urination, diarrhea, confusion, blurred vision, eye irritation, rashes.

This may sound even more incredible than the number of products that can cause a problem, but people with chemical sensitivities experience many, if not all, of these symptoms at some time or another in varying intensities. However, more commonly, many people experience some level of these symptoms without necessarily understanding the cause.

When such symptoms occur at low intensity they are easy to dismiss, without realizing their significance, because they become an expected part of our ordinary daily life. Eliminating the use of some of these products and items mentioned above that are not essential to our existence can provide a way to investigate whether we actually feel better without them. If an individual is genetically predisposed to succumbing to chemical sensitivity then with every greater load we place on the body's toxic clearing mechanisms, the closer we get to triggering chemical sensitivities.

There is controversy in the professional medical field about chemical sensitivities and related syndromes. It is not a topic of research readily financed by commercially successful businesses manufacturing these products. The organized removal or alteration of the multitude of products that permeate almost every aspect of our daily lives would require a huge change in economics. Ultimately, consumer choice dictates largely what products are available on the market, and that is where each individual can make a difference in what is in our daily environments. Many of the products available today not only cause damage in human beings, but they also harm our environment and the ecosystem around us.

MCS is medically a poorly understood phenomenon; there is no known cure for it as yet. However, it is possible to make very significant improvements in a person's health and daily functionality by reducing regular exposures. And it is possible to decrease an individual's reaction to previously problematic products and chemical agents by reducing the overall load experienced by that individual. It is better, however, to reduce the load before really noticeable chemical sensitivities even occur.