3 ms·
> There are several types of proof. Nick Ashford and I observed the same patterns of inexplicable new-onset intolerances across very different toxic exposures i
by wdewind 12y ago
> There are several types of proof. Nick Ashford and I observed the same patterns of inexplicable new-onset intolerances across very different toxic exposures in over a dozen countries. Sheep dippers using organophosphate pesticides in rural areas of Europe, radiology workers inhaling chemicals while developing films in New Zealand, Gulf War veterans, EPA workers in a remodeled and poorly ventilated office building in 1987, cleanup crews breathing fumes after oil spills. Many would get ill, and a small percentage never recovered. They became exquisitely sensitized, as well as disabled.
This doesn't really sound that crazy to me. People working with industrial chemicals need protection. This is a widely known and accepted fact. It doesn't point to the entire population getting sick from small doses of chemicals in their day to day lives, like the flame-retardants in their mattresses, as the article opens up claiming.
- Scoundreller 12y agoI see similar complaints about risk to health and personal safety from emergency services personnel, but their life expectancies suggest otherwise. What I would really like to see is an estimation of the life-expectancy of the workers in these industries. Is it actually lower than average, or does it appear that the exposure has a minimal effect on health? Do the benefits of working in the industry out-weigh the risks (e.g. good health insurance benefits for treating other diseases out-weigh harms from exposure)? Are life insurance companies requiring higher premiums?
- DanBC 12y agoFarmers dipping sheep in organophosphates may have many years of reduced quality life before dying at about the same age as other people. Farm workers are traditionally poor so that might be a confounding factor.
- mod 12y agoI worked in lawn/pest control and my boss said that after a time, some guys take a hit from the chemicals, and become 'exquisitely sensitized' as is referenced here. Chemicals that had no noticeable effect previously, suddenly have immediate consequences, like rashes or illness.
- nitrogen 12y agoIt's at least conceivable that chronic exposure to a chemical that isn't being properly removed could cause eventual sensitization. With the "bath salts" phenomenon, there were stories posted to HN of certain compounds acting similarly to known stimulants, but that certain people never came down from due to the molecules getting stuck in whatever receptor they targeted.
- disputin 12y agoNot even industrial chemicals - colgate plax mouthwash causes my tongue to develop weird flat patches within a day of a single use. Takes two weeks to clear up. There was a Bloomberg article not too long ago about them using, iirc, triclosan in their Total toothpaste, which is considered dodgy by many. This chemical soup experimentation is way too close to home for me.