First let's read from OSHA's mission statement. OSHA??, you query, for you thought you were here for the ATSDR Report on MCS. Well you are, but first I'd like to take you through the writings of OSHA ... at least as they appeared when this was first put up in 1998.
Over 100 Million Workers Count On OSHA
The mission of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is to save lives, prevent injuries and protect the health of America's workers. To accomplish this, federal and state governments must work in partnership with the more than 100 million working men and women and their six and a half million employers who are covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
http://www.osha.gov/oshinfo/mission.html (This will open a new page, just close it to get back to EHN's page.)
Now, I hope you are as outraged as I am that OSHA, in its infinite wisdom, declared "MCS is clearly not occupationally related." This immediately after "Because the cause of MCS is not currently known, control methods could only be based on unproven theories." How praytell, if OSHA cannot possibly figure out that MCS exists in part because of :
How can OSHA then state categorically that "MCS is clearly not occupationally related"?
- Refinery blowouts;
- Diesel exhaust;
- Laboratory work with various chemicals;
- Dental and medical work with various chemicals;
- Industry work with various chemicals; and also because schools, workplaces, hospitals, places of worship ,... are laden with
- superfluous toxins, which exist in our commonly and unwittingly used personal care products, as well as in our household and janitorial cleaning and maintenance products, and these include pesticides and air "fresheners"
I JUST know, that IF it weren't for office workplace management decisions of yesteryear, today I'd not have MCS, nor a tumor. Luckily benign. Nonetheless, I was injured in the workplace. Anecdotal as that may be, it IS true. And sadly, I'm merely one of millions upon millions of people now disabled with MCS who were injured in their workplaces. OSHA, where are you? Do you not take to heart your Mission Statement?
OSHA also references the "The Interagency Workgroup on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Predecisional Draft" August 24, 1998. See Multiple Chemical Sensitivities http://www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/multiplechemicalsensitivities/index.html
The "ATSDR Report" -http://web.health.gov/environment/mcs/index.htm - was not formally released as a final document, and for good reasons -- just one of which is its industry bias is clearly in place and that raises quite a barnsmell to those of us who know MCS! To read some of the comments sent in by the REAL experts, link out to the opinions of the people/organizations given below -- Rebuttals and responses of various MCS experts and organizations
Next, take a moment to write to OSHA -http://www.osha-slc.gov/html/suggestion2.html. They obviously have not done their homework from a public health and well being aspect. They have done an excellent job of protecting industry. OSHA should hear from you ... the REAL experts, mustering all the credible documentation you can. And copy your comments to the political candidtates, while you are at it, as well as the sitting politicians. -- barb
MCS Report, Predecision Draft
This is the final release ... the draft! -- barb
Rebuttals and responses of various MCS experts and organizations to the MCS Report:
NOTE: Of 392 comments received, including form letters:
This, according to Appendix E: Tables and Charts at http://web.health.gov/environment/mcs/comments/appendE.htm#exhibite1a
- 14 were not supportive of the report and recommends no final report be written;
- 268 were not supportive of the report and recommends substantive changes in report;
- 98 were supportive of report but with editorial changes; and
- 12 were supportive of the report as written.
- EHN, Amy Marsh, President (5/98 - 5/00)
- Steve Chalmers
- Albert Donnay - MCS Referral & Resources
"MCS Referral Resources first learned about and complained to the Workgroup about Dr. Mitchell's ESRI affiliation in July 1996, after which his contract was not renewed. Despite a formal request that Mitchell's ESRI affiliation and key role as the report's primary author be disclosed, the Workgroup denies any conflict of interest and still lists him only as a 'consultant.' Dr. Mitchell was not hired as a consultant, however. He had recently retired as Chief Medical Officer of the Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry (ATSDR) and his old boss, Workgroup co-chair Dr. Barry Johnson, arranged for him to be rehired through a Postgraduate Research Program normally reserved for 'academic' scientists.
"The letter awarding Dr. Mitchell this appointment specifically states that any work to which he contributes should carry an acknowledgement that 'This research was supported in part by an appointment to the Postgraduate Research Program at the ATSDR administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the US Department of Energy and the ATSDR' -- but the Workgroup's Draft Report fails to mention any of this.
" 'No one should be lulled into a false sense of complacency by this report's extremely narrow and misleading view of MCS,' said Donnay. 'In commenting on this draft, Congress and the American public need to be aware of the many government policies and research findings on MCS that, like Mitchell's ESRI and ATSDR affiliations, are not disclosed.' "
- ECHO Ecological Health Organization
(Earth Angels Association/Health & Environment Resource Center)
- Environmental Health Policy Committee
"A Report on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Predecisional Draft for Public Comment prepared by the Interagency Workgroup on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Read the responses . . ."
- Richard Fox
- Health & Environment Resource Center (for a list of links to reply letters)
- Constance Archambault Holbrook, M.D.
A must read for all MCS disbelievers! -- barb
- Human Ecology Action League, Inc (HEAL)
Comment on A Report on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)
[Predecisional Draft August 24, 1998].
- Anne Jackson - EHA
(Environmental Health Association, LA area)
- Massachusetts Association for the Chemically Injured, Inc.
- Bonnye Matthews
- Ann McCampbell, MD, Chair, MCS Task Force of NM
- Don Paladin
- Toni Temple, Ohio Network for the Chemically Injured
- Sharon Wachsler, MCS Researcher
- Irene Ruth Wilkenfeld - SAFE SCHOOLS
Had been at page top, while still timely --
The Interagency Workgroup on
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)
Also known as The MCS Report.
Comment deadline was extended until Dec. 15, 1998.
Please read and send them your comments!
Remember, do not send any truly personal
information as comments may be made public.
If this has just come to your attention, past the
deadline, try using their forms for sending your
comments anyway. ("Nothing ventured, nothing
imho, They had five years to work on this draft
which does little to shed light on MCS -- except
to carry forth the wisdom of the chemical and
mainstream western medical industries, which
is all old hat to us anyway.
Don't worry about responding line for line. The
experts did that. Let them know how it is to live
with MCS . . . how it will affect the economy as
more and more become ill. Tell them how it is. -- barb
Comment deadline was: Dec. 15, 1998
Written comments relating to the report were to be mailed to:
ATSDR's Information Center
1600 Clifton Road, Mail Stop E57
Atlanta, GA 30333
attention Alice Knox
Unfortunately, the Workgroup did not see its way clear to extend the deadline until
Jan. 15, 1999, which would have better enabled students of all ages to respond.
A six months extension would better serve the MCS community, but thus far the
Workgroup doesn't seem to want to go beyond their extension of Dec. 15, 1998.
Please read the MCS report and send in your comments! Remember, do not send
any medical or truly personal information as comments may be made public.
If you'd like to view some suggestions for responding to ATSDR, please see How do I respond? (http://www.ehnca.org/www/ehnhompg/atsdrtip.htm).
Comments? (Barb's email is no longer valid, please contact EHN). Please put WWW in subject line. Thanks.