There is increasing evidence that human exposure to levels of chemicals once thought to be safe—or presenting insignificant risk—are, in fact, harmful. So-called low-level exposures are now known to be associated with adverse biological effects including cancer, endocrine disruption, and chemical sensitivity. This requires that we change both (1) the way we design research linking chemicals and health, and (2) the solutions we devise to address chemically caused injury. The new and emerging science of low-level exposure to chemicals requires appropriate social policy responses which include regulation of toxic substances, notification of those exposed, and compensation and reasonable accommodation to those affected. Research and social policy need to be focused towards two distinct groups: (1) those individuals who could become chemically intolerant as a result of an initiating exposure, and (2) those individuals who have already become chemically intolerant and are now sensitive to chemicals at low levels.
ACP (American College of Physicians). Clinical ecology: position statement. Ann. Intern. Med.1989: 111: 168-168.
2.
AMA (American Medical Association, Council of Scientific Affairs). Clinical ecology. J. Am. Med. Assoc.1992: 268: 3465-3465.
3.
AOEC (Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics). Advancing the understanding of multiple chemical sensitivity. Toxicol. Ind. Health1992: 8 (4): 1-1.
4.
To be published in: (Raffensperger C. and Tickner J., Eds.), The Precautionary Principle. Island Press, 1999.
5.
Ashford N. A., and Miller C. S.Chemical sensitivity. A report to the New Jersey State Department of Health, Trenton, NJ, 1989.
6.
Ashford N. A., and Miller C. S.Chemical Exposures: Low Levels and High Stakes. Wiley Press, New York, 1998: 440-440 pp.
7.
Ashford N., Heinzow B., Lütjen K., Marouli C., Mølhave L., Mönch B., Papadopoulos S., Rest K., Rosdahl D., Siskos P., and Velonakis E.Chemical sensitivity in selected european countries: an exploratory study. A report to the European Commission, Ergonomia, Athens, Greece, 1995.
8.
Toxicol. Ind. Health1994: 10 (4/5): 25-25.
9.
Bascom R. Chemical hypersensitivity syndrome study: options for action, a literature review, and a needs assessment. Prepared for the State of Maryland Department of Health, February 7, 1989.
10.
Bell I. R., Miller C. S., and Schwartz G. E.An olfactory-limbic model of multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome: possible relationships to kindling and affective spectrum disorders. Biol. Psychiatry1992: 32: 218-218.
11.
Chester A. C., and Levine P. H.Concurrent sick building syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome: epidemic neuromyasthenia revisited. Clin. Infect. Dis.1994: 18 (Suppl. 1): S43-S48.
12.
Cullen M.The worker with multiple chemical sensitivities: an overview. In: (Cullen M., Ed.), Workers with Multiple Chemical Sensitivities. Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 4. Hanley & Belfus, Philadelphia, 1987, p. 655-655.
13.
Datta M.You cannot exclude the explanation you have not considered. Lancet1993: 342: 345-347.
14.
Doty R. L., Deems D. A., Frye R. E., Pelberg R., and Shapiro A.Olfactory sensitivity, nasal resistance, and autonomic function in patients with multiple chemical sensitivities. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg.1988: 114: 1422-1422.
15.
Miller C. S.White paper: chemical sensitivity: history and phenomenology. Toxicol. Ind. Health1994a: 10 (4/5): 253-253.
16.
Miller C. S.Multiple chemical sensitivity and the Gulf War veterans. NIH Workshop on the Persian Gulf Experience and Health, National Institutes of Health, April 27-29, 1994. 1994b.
17.
Miller C. S.Letter to the Editor. J. Occup. Med.1995: 37: 1323-1323.
18.
Miller C. S.Toxicant-induced loss of tolerance: an emerging theory of disease. Environ. Health Perspect.1997: 105 (Suppl. 2): 445-453.
19.
Miller C. S., and Mitzel, H. C.Chemical sensitivity attributed to pesticide exposure versus remodeling. Arch. Environ. Health1995: 50 (2): 119-119.
20.
Miller C., Ashford N., Doty R., Lamielle M., Otto D., Rahill A., and Wallace, L.Empirical approaches for the investigation of toxicant-induced loss of tolerance. Environ. Health Perspect.1997: 105 (Suppl. 2): 515-519.
21.
NRC (National Research Council). Multiple chemical sensitivities: addendum to biologic markers in immunotoxicology. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 1992.
22.
Randolph T.Human Ecology and Susceptibility to the Chemical Environment. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL. 1962.
Simon G. E., Daniell W., Stockbridge H., Claypoole K., and Rosenstock L.Immunologic, psychological, and neurophysiological factors in multiple chemical sensitivity. Ann. Intern. Med.1993: 19 (2): 97-164.
25.
Sparks P. J., Daniell W., Black D. W., Kipen H. M., Altman L. C., Simon G. E., and Terr A. I.Multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome: a clinical perspective: I. Case definition, theories of pathogenesis, and research needs. J. Occup. Med.1994: 36 (7): 718-718.
26.
Staudenmayer H., Selner M. E., and Selner J. C.Adult sequelae of childhood abuse presenting as environmental illness. Ann. Allergy1993: 71: 538-546.
27.
Thomson G. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Environmental Hypersensitivity Disorders, Ontario, Canada. 1985.
