Environmental Illness

Environmental illness: certain health professionals and clinical ecologists claim it impacts and inhibits 15 percent of the population. Its afflicted are led to believe environmental illness (EI) originates with food, chemicals, and other stimuli in their surroundings -as advocates call for drastic measures to remedy the situation. What if relief proves elusive-and the patient is sent on a course of ongoing, costly and ineffective "treatment"? Several hundred individuals who believed they were suffering from EI have been evaluated or treated by Herman Staudenmayer since the 1970s. Staudenmayer believed the symptoms harming his patients actually had psychophysiological origins-based more in fear of a hostile world than any suspected toxins contained in the environment. Staudenmayer's years of research, clinical work-and successful care-are now summarized in Environmental Illness: Myth & Reality. Dismissing much of the information that has attempted to defend EI and its culture of victimization, Staudenmayer details the alternative diagnoses and treatments that have helped patients recognize their true conditions-and finally overcome them, often after years of prolonged suffering.

People who have Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) are often disbelieved and misdiagnosed. The interaction of low-level chemicals that are constantly present in our environment cause sufferers of MCS to develop symptoms such as fatigue, depression, headaches, sore throats, asthma, chest pains, and circulation problems. In "Living With Environmental Illness", the authors discuss how the growing numbers of chemicals we're exposed to daily have contributed to the sharp rise of environmental illnesses in recent years. They provide a checklist for determining whether you may be suffering from MCS, describe the ten developmental stages of the disease, tell how to determine who is most at risk for developing symptoms, and detail lifestyle changes that should be made for living with environmental illness. In addition, five patient profiles of actual MCS sufferers reveal the highly individualized nature of the disease, and an extensive resource section lists suppliers of nontoxic products and organizations that can help.

The United States is among the wealthiest nations in the world, but it is far from the healthiest. Although life expectancy and survival rates in the United States have improved dramatically over the past century, Americans live shorter lives and experience more injuries and illnesses than people in other high-income countries. The U.S. health disadvantage cannot be attributed solely to the adverse health status of racial or ethnic minorities or poor people: even highly advantaged Americans are in worse health than their counterparts in other, "peer" countries. In light of the new and growing evidence about the U.S. health disadvantage, the National Institutes of Health asked the National Research Council (NRC) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to convene a panel of experts to study the issue. The Panel on Understanding Cross-National Health Differences Among High-Income Countries examined whether the U.S. health disadvantage exists across the life span, considered potential explanations, and assessed the larger implications of the findings. U.S. Health in International Perspective presents detailed evidence on the issue, explores the possible explanations for the shorter and less healthy lives of Americans than those of people in comparable countries, and recommends actions by both government and nongovernment agencies and organizations to address the U.S. health disadvantage.

Gulf War Syndrome: Is It a Real Disease? asks a recent headline in the New York Times. This question—are certain diseases real?—lies at the heart of a simmering controversy in the United States, a debate that has raged, in different contexts, for centuries. In the early nineteenth century, the air of European cities, polluted by open sewers and industrial waste, was generally thought to be the source of infection and disease. Thus the term miasma—literally deathlike air—came into popular use, only to be later dismissed as medically unsound by Louis Pasteur. While controversy has long swirled in the United States around such illnesses as chronic fatigue syndrome and Epstein-Barr virus, no disorder has been more aggressively contested than environmental illness, a disease whose symptoms are distinguished by an extreme, debilitating reaction to a seemingly ordinary environment. The environmentally ill range from those who have adverse reactions to strong perfumes or colognes to others who are so sensitive to chemicals of any kind that they must retreat entirely from the modern world. Bodies in Protest does not seek to answer the question of whether or not chemical sensitivity is physiological or psychological, rather, it reveals how ordinary people borrow the expert language of medicine to construct lay accounts of their misery. The environmentally ill are not only explaining their bodies to themselves, however, they are also influencing public policies and laws to accommodate the existence of these mysterious illnesses. They have created literally a new body that professional medicine refuses to acknowledge and one that is becoming a popular model for rethinking conventional boundaries between the safe and the dangerous. Having interviewed dozens of the environmentally ill, the authors here recount how these people come to acknowledge and define their disease, and themselves, in a suddenly unlivable world that often stigmatizes them as psychologically unstable. Bodies in Protest is the dramatic story of human bodies that no longer behave in a manner modern medicine can predict and control.

Environmental illness: certain health professionals and clinical ecologists claim it impacts and inhibits 15 percent of the population. Its afflicted are led to believe environmental illness (EI) originates with food, chemicals, and other stimuli in their surroundings -as advocates call for drastic measures to remedy the situation. What if relief proves elusive-and the patient is sent on a course of ongoing, costly and ineffective ""treatment""? Several hundred individuals who believed they were suffering from EI have been evaluated or treated by Herman Staudenmayer since the 1970s. Staudenmayer believed the symptoms harming his patients actually had psychophysiological origins-based more in fear of a hostile world than any suspected toxins contained in the environment. Staudenmayer's years of research, clinical work-and successful care-are now summarized in Environmental Illness: Myth & Reality. Dismissing much of the information that has attempted to defend EI and its culture of victimization, Staudenmayer details the alternative diagnoses and treatments that have helped patients recognize their true conditions-and finally overcome them, often after years of prolonged suffering.

Chemical sensitivity (or "multiple chemical sensitivity") describes people with numerous troubling symptoms attributed to environmental factors, from simple housepaint to complex building structures and materials in offices and schools. Many such people are seeking special accommodations, applying for disability benefits, and filing lawsuits claiming that exposure to common foods and chemicals has made them ill. Their efforts are supported by some physicians who refer themselves as clinical ecologists. They use questionable diagnoses and treatment methods, while critics charge that these approaches are bogus and that "chemical sensitivity" is not a valid diagnosis. The complaints associated with chemical sensitivity include depression, irritability, poor memory, fatigue, drowsiness, constipation, sneezing, wheezing, skin rashes, headache, chest pain, pounding heart, swelling, upset stomach, paralysis, AIDS-like illnesses, psychotic experiences, and just about every other symptom noted in medical textbooks. One prominent clinical ecologist even claimed that chemical sensitivity patients may well be human "canaries" on an increasingly poisoned planet, and others have actually labeled chemical sensitivity as a disease. While some people are adversely affected by exposure to some chemicals, there is an overwhelming increase in false claims and reports from misled obsessive patients and opportunistic doctors. Chemical Sensitivity examines this phenomenon in depth and the scientific, legal, ethical, and political issues that surround it. The authors explore the speculations about environmental exposure in the light of scientific knowledge of human physiology, allergy and immunology, pathology, toxicology, and clinical medicine. They evaluate cases of chemical sensitivity relative to controlled tests, and reveal that symptoms were brought on by psychological factors rather than physical ones. Chemical Sensitivity also critically assesses claims related to "sick building syndrome," "mercury-amalgam toxicity," "yeast allergy," and Gulf War syndrome.

The authors up-close and personal account of their process of recovering from environmental illness.

Environmental illness: certain health professionals and clinical ecologists claim it impacts and inhibits 15 percent of the population. Its afflicted are led to believe environmental illness (EI) originates with food, chemicals, and other stimuli in their surroundings -as advocates call for drastic measures to remedy the situation. What if relief proves elusive-and the patient is sent on a course of ongoing, costly and ineffective ""treatment""?Several hundred individuals who believed they were suffering from EI have been evaluated or treated by Herman Staudenmayer since the 1970s. Staudenmayer believed the symptoms harming his patients actually had psychophysiological origins-based more in fear of a hostile world than any suspected toxins contained in the environment.Staudenmayer's years of research, clinical work-and successful care-are now summarized in Environmental Illness: Myth & Reality. Dismissing much of the information that has attempted to defend EI and its culture of victimization, Staudenmayer details the alternative diagnoses and treatments that have helped patients recognize their true conditions-and finally overcome them, often after years of prolonged suffering.