Medical Conditions That Don’t Really Exist
April 4th, 2010
|
| Share |
Perhaps saying that the following medical conditions “don’t exist” is a bit overly simplistic, but I needed something short for the title. There are a number of conditions which large numbers of people claim to have but which the scientific consensus and the weight of evidence indicates do not exist as an actual discrete condition with an organic cause. That’s not to say that people don’t actually suffer the symptoms of these conditions, because some clearly do, but for those who do suffer the symptoms, their symptoms are either entirely psychosomatic or may be other disorders that have been misdiagnosed.
The umbrella term for physical symptoms reported as the result of a mental disorder or delusion is somatoform disorder. Somatoform disorders can be difficult to treat when the person is insistent that their condition is “real” in the physical sense. The most effective treatments for somatoform disorders are cognitive behavioral therapy and antipathetic medications, but some may be very unreceptive to the very suggestion that such measures be taken, even becoming hostile.
Those who present the symptoms of somatoform disorders are commonly prone to delusional hypochondriasis. Anyone who has interacted with a hypochondriac knows that it’s a very tough thing to deal with. In many cases, it can be hard to figure out to draw the line between hypochondria simply being a personality trait of a self-absorbed individual versus when it becomes a real mental illness.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders make it clear that a somatoform condition is not the same as malingering. Malingering is defined as “fabricating or exaggerating the symptoms of mental or physical disorders,” and is usually done for a secondary gain, often for sympathy or attention. In reality, however, the line between somatoform and malingering is not always as well defined. Many with somatoform disorders manifest a need for attention or sympathy which may result in a self-delusional condition that fulfills the desire to be a victim. The line between what is conscious and subconscious is also prone to being blurred, especially when a person has a great deal riding on a delusion.
There are also circumstances where the condition and the symptoms seen in patients are very real, but the condition they are attributed to is false. For example the condition “shell shock” was believed to be cause the symptoms seen in World War I veterans, when really the symptoms were not related to the shock of shelling at all.
Electrosensitivity - (Also known as electrohypersensitivity, Electromagnetic hypersensitivity, EHS) This condition is allegedly the sensitivity to non-ionizing radiation, including radio frequency energy, inductive fields and microwaves. Like many of these conditions, it has a number of general symptoms that are highly subjective and rarely produce observable physical changes. These include body pain, headaches, fatigue, dizziness, skin pain, itch, tinnitus.
Also, like many somatoform conditions, there is very little, if any, consistency in the claims of causes and symptoms. Some insist that the syndrome makes them sensitive to both radio frequency emissions and to the low frequency fields produced by alternating-current electricity. Others claim that the problem is limited to uhf and microwave emissions, such as mobile phones, wireless networking and other devices of this type. Still others seem to feel their condition is only triggered (or is worst triggered) by 3G and 4G devices that use advanced digital modulation. Some seem to believe that infrastructure, such as cell towers, are the problem, even when they are at distances that make the total field emissions similar to ambient levels.
Similarly, the effective treatments reported are inconsistent. Some claim that various charms or pendants can improve their condition, despite these devices violating the laws of physics. Others insist that shielded clothing or Faraday cages are the only relief. Many even seem to believe that Faraday cages reduce their symptoms from low-frequency electromagnetic energy, even-though Faraday cages are not generally effective at blocking this kind of energy.
Not surprisingly, repeated Provocation and case-control Studies have found that those who claim to have this condition are not capable of detecting electromagnetic radiation any better than would be expected by random chance.
One review of the avaliable study data stated:
There was no evidence that EHS individuals could detect presence or absence of RF-EMF better than other persons. There was little evidence that short-term exposure to a mobile phone or base station causes symptoms based on the results of eight randomized trials investigating 194 EHS and 346 non-EHS individuals in a laboratory. Some of the trials provided evidence for the occurrence of nocebo effects. In population based studies an association between symptoms and exposure to RF-EMF in the everyday environment was repeatedly observed. This review showed that the large majority of individuals who claims to be able to detect low level RF-EMF are not able to do so under double-blind conditions. If such individuals exist, they represent a small minority and have not been identified yet. The available observational studies do not allow differentiating between biophysical from EMF and nocebo effects.
The condition appears to have been invented in Denmark in the mid 1990’s. It began to go mainstream in 1995 with the “Second Copenhagen Conference on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity.” Curiously, there is very little information on the “First Copenhagen Conference on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity.” Presumably, the “Second” conference would have been preceded by a “First” conference, but it is only mentioned in passing on websites about this alleged condition.
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity – Before there was EHS, there was MCS. In the 1980’s and early 1990’s , before wireless technology was as ubiquitous, MCS was more in vogue. However, many still claim to have the non-existent condition, and not surprisingly, there’s a considerable amount of overlap between EHS and MCS. Those who claim to have the condition say that all manner of “chemicals” set them off, with these chemicals generally being of the man-made variety.
Of course, those who understand chemistry realize that any substance is a chemical. Chemicals that do cause allergies are most often those which are biological in origin and have complex structures. However, for MCS, it’s generally chemicals which are generally perceived as artificial, especially those which have a strong “chemical-like” oder.
Studies have indicated that those who claim to have MCS do not respond to chemical stimuli which do not have a scent, but respond almost universally when stimuli had a scent or where there are other indicators that “chemicals” are present. Skin tests, such as are used to determine the presence of true allergies also do not indicate the condition has an organic basis. As such, all credible scientific bodies consider MCS to be most likely idiopathic in origin.
Morgellons -The invention of the condition “Morgellons” can be traced to one person and one incident. In 2001, Mary Leitao, a woman with no scientific background began to insist that her sons were suffering from a skin condition that had not previously been described by medicine. She pulled “fibers” from their skin and examined them under an eight dollar toy microscope. She then declared that she had discovered a new and as yet uncatalogued skin condition, characterized by strange fibers extruded from the skin and a constant feeling of small vermin crawling just under the skin surface. She named the condition after an obscure 17th century reference in a letter by Thomas Browne.
Had it not been for the internet, a crackpot like Leitao would probably have gone nowhere with these claims, but thanks to information technology, self-diagnosis and conspiracy theories, a community of self-proclaimed sufferers has arisen and so has a cottage industry of snakeoil products to treat the condition. All examinations by scientific and medical researchers have found zero evidence that the condition exists. Instead, it appears to have all the markings of a known condition called delusional parasitosis.
Those who say they have the condition can’t seem to agree on what it is. Some say that they have bugs crawling under their skin while others state that they only feel like there are bugs, but that’s part of the condition. Most manifest “legions” and sores on their skin, although this is most likely caused by constant picking. The online community has strongly encouraged those who believe they have the condition to avoid mainstream medical care, often citing a conspiracy of denial. This goes along with claims that the condition is caused by chemtrails, nano-machines or some other grandiose conspiracy.
This topic was covered here before.
Shell Shock - After the First World War, a number of soldiers returned home suffering from a variety of symptoms which made it difficult to return to normal society. These included panic attacks, insomnia, extreme anxiety, depression, fatigue, extreme sensitivity to being startled, mood swings and other acute conditions. These symptoms had been observed in previous conflict, but it was not until World War I that they were seen in such huge numbers of veterans.
The prevailing hypothesis at the time was that these were the result of the concussions caused by bombs or shelling and that the extreme vibrations, loud noise and bursts of pressure had somehow unsettled the nervous system of soldiers. Various treatments were proposed and tried. Some of these included isolation in quite environments, to allow “nerves to settle down” while others even included the idea that sufferers needed to be “shocked back to normal,” sometimes by electrical currents. The most common treatments were disciplinary. It was believed that strict discipline was necessary to force the veterans to pull themselves together.
Around this time, modern psychology was in its infancy, and some did begin to recognize that these conditions were caused by mental trauma and the extreme anxiety of combat. However, this remained a minority opinion for many years.
Modern medical science recognizes that the symptoms shown in combat veterans are not the result of shell concussions and thus the term “shell shock” is considered to be inaccurate and antiquated. “Combat stress reaction” is used as an umbrella term for the mental, emotional and social concequences of combat. These include acute stress reaction and post-traumatic stress disorder. It is also recognized that the reason for the high rates during the First World War were not due to the use of explosive shells, but rather due to the nature of trench warfare, which results in long periods under stress, limited sleep and the constant threat of death. As many as 10% of those who fought in European trenches were killed, more than twice the mortality of Second World War ground infantry.
Fan Death - This supposed condition appears to be entirely confined to the nation of South Korea. It is believed that sleeping with a fan in a room with the doors and windows closed can cause one to die, either by the fan “using up all the oxygen” or by some other mechanism. It is not entirely clear whether it is always fatal or whether it can result in a “near-fan-death” experience. In reality, it’s never fatal because it does not exist. Despite complete lack of evidence, it is taken fairly seriously in the country even eliciting a government response.
One mechanism proposed is hyperthermia (overheating). A person stuck in a closed room during a heat wave could be susceptible to overheating. A fan would not actually contribute to this effect, but it has been suggested that it could cause someone to have a false sense of security, believing that the fan would keep them cool, when it does not actually reduce the temperature. This is quite a stretch, since even with a fan, a person would experience considerable physical discomfort before dying from hyperthermia and would be unlikely to simply lay down and die from heat, although this may happen with some who are elderly or in poor health to begin with.
This topic has been covered here before.
Gulf War Syndrome – After the first Gulf War of 1991, a number of combat veterans began to report a variety of abnormal health problems. The most common complains were non-specific symptoms such as chronic headache, fatigue and memory problems. However, a small subset of those who reported illnesses suffered from much more serious conditions, including organ failure and birth defects in children conceived after returning from the Gulf.
These conditions were collectively dubbed “Gulf War Syndrome.”
There is absolutely no doubt that many veterans of the Gulf War do have legitimate medical issues and many do indeed suffer from conditions that may be related to their service. However, they do not appear to be related to a single “syndrome” and do not appear to be specific to the Gulf War or to any single cause. Indeed, a studies of veterans found that there was no increased hospitalization or mortality in Gulf War vets over other military service personnel. However, there have been some small, but statistically significant increases in a few areas, including certain birth defects and car accidents.
The avaliable data is compelling in indicating that there is no single “Gulf War Syndrome.” The vast majority of veterans who served during the 1991 conflict remain in good health. Those who do suffer medical conditions are not all experiencing the same condition. Many are likely suffering from conditions unrelated to their service, while others may still be experiencing the health concequences of the Middle Eastern battlefields, including stress, post traumatic stress disorder, combat fatigue and exposure to substances ranging from burning oil well fires to incinerated chemical weapons dumps.
Those veterans who are experiencing health problems do deserve care and treatment, but lumping them all together and declaring it a mysterious syndrome does them no service. Gulf War Syndrome was created for political reasons and survives for political reasons.
Chronic Lyme Disease – Lyme disease is a bacterial infection transmitted by parasite bites. Although the bacteria has been found in a number of insects and arachnids, it is nearly always transmitted by ticks, with the primary North American vector being the deer tick. Lyme disease can be a very unpleasant condition and has symptoms that include headache, soreness, fattiness and muscle and joint pain. As the disease progresses, it causes soreness and inflammation of joint tissue and in extreme cases may also causes localized muscle paralysis. (It’s no fun, believe me – I’ve had it.)
The condition is treated with antibiotics, and most known strains respond well to a number of drugs including Doxycycline, Ceftriaxone, Amoxicillin and Cefotaxime. Relief from the symptoms usually occurs within a few days of treatment, although complete elimination of the infection requires upwards of two weeks of treatment. In some some cases, damage caused by the infection may result in arthritis symptoms continuing even after the infection has been cured.
While Lyme Disease is very real, there are those who claim to have a variation of the condition which remains unproven to science and rejected by most doctors. Persistent or chronic Lyme disease is claimed to be an ongoing condition that continues despite treatment with antibiotics known to be effective against the bacteria. The claims of symptoms include headache, fatigue, nausea and other non-specific symptoms. A review of avaliable data published in the New England Journal of Medicine found no credible evidence for the existence of the condition. All credible medical bodies consider the condition unproven (and many consider it to be probably ficticious) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Academy of Neurology, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, and the National Institutes of Health are all in agreement in recommending against long term treatment with antibiotics for those who claim to have chronic Lyme disease.
Like many such conditions, diagnosis and treatment for the alleged condition is almost always self-administered or is gained through questionable alternative medicine practices. Common treatments include megadoses of antibiotics, the use of hyperbaric chambers, IV chelation and various “naturopathic” treatments. The condtion has always spawned a number of other strange theories and claims, including connections to everything from autism to cancer as well as various conspiracy theories. Advocacy groups for the condition have been investigated criminally for deceptive buisiness practices and have harassed infectious disease researchers who refuse to recognize the condition due to lack of evidence.
This entry was posted on Sunday, April 4th, 2010 at 2:21 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Conspiracy Theories, Culture, History, Quackery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
April 4th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
Lets not forget Penis panic.
Medically known as genital retraction syndrome it is a pathological belief the genitals are shrinking, most common in South East Asia where it is called koro or shook yong. It can occur in any community that believes it to be real. Sufferers believe in it with such conviction that they think they see it happening, break out in sweats, have heart palpitations and tremors. Often, in the hysteria of desperation they tie a weight to the end of it or safety pin it to the inside of their thigh to keep it in place.
Sadly, through the wild attempts to prevent the imagined contraction sufferers maim themselves so violently that they often permanently damage the very thing they are trying to save–further validating the belief that the disease actually exists.
Koro strikes down whole communities, with epidemics of thousands of men flooding hospitals clasping their dick in a panic. In southern coastal areas of China there have been more than five epidemics in the last fifty years. In 1984, one outbreak spread across 15 cities affecting 3,000 people.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Hmm, I must be dead many times over. I sleep with a fan on and when its to cold the window closed. Thus I must be talking to you from beyond death. Meh.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
DV82XL said:
Not real??? You obviously have never been swimming in cold water. It is very very real! No need to weight it down or pin it, though, he’ll come back out eventually, once things warm back up. It’s not really much of a problem unless you live in a nudist colony, but I guess in that case the women would probably all have seen it enough times to realize that it’s a temporary thing. He’s still there – he just got cold and tucked back in to keep warm.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
The same kind of delusional nonsense exists in many non-medicine related fields. Self-described “audiophiles” are among the worst offenders.
Drawing a ring with a marker pen around the edge of a CD to improve audio quality. Endless squabling over whether said ring should be green or purple for best effect(sadly I’m not making **** up).
Buying cables with ‘optimized hybrid geometry’ and ‘continous casting for crystal-free copper’(metallic glasses/amorphous metals do exist, but none of them are made of pure copper or would be expected to be especially good conductors AFAIK). There exist “audiophile” cables that cost thousands of dollars; there have been a few double blind tests over the years and they all point in the direction of not being able to hear the difference between “high-end” cables and garden variety zip-cord or even wire coat hangers.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Yeah, I’ve written about that before. People who don’t understand subjectivity and the need for double-blinding are one of the big issues of “bad science”
For audio cables, there are some times when it does matter to have descent cables. The cables that most equipment comes with OEM are really crappy, they’re like 22 gauge and made of aluminum, and not even coaxial. Especially in a noisy enviornment those do make a difference. Upgrading from those to some descent cables (maybe ten or fifteen dollar/euro interconnects) does make a difference. I’ve experienced it being very obvious. The OEM cables pick up a hiss soft from cross talk with other stuff. It can attenuate the signal or cause distortion if the cable run is really long as well.
Of course, this is limited to analog interconnects and also, it’s really just when the sound is amplified. Speaker cable makes much less difference. The only big issue with speaker cable is that if you go with super light duty cable and pump 200+ watts through it, you can actually melt the cable (yeah, it has been known to happen).
But I mean… I’m talking about getting descent interconnects for a few bucks making a possible difference. thousands is ridiculous. Even worse is idiots who use thousand dollar power cords. Yeah, thousands of dollars on a cord they plug into a outlet that is wired to standard copper wire that is hooked up to an old wire-round pole transformer and runs hundreds of miles to a power plant.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
I was rather surprised to see chronic lyme disease on here. I had heard of the condition once before from a next-door neighbor who said she had it, that it caused headaches and body aches, and that she periodically underwent chemotherapy for it. I had no reason at the time to doubt the disease’s existence. If the diagnosis has such limited acceptance, then it seems shocking that a doctor would put her through chemo. Maybe she was actually undergoing some naturopathic treatment, but used the term chemotherapy because she was tired of trying to explain chelation therapy. Or maybe she didn’t know the difference.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Shafe said:
CHEMOTHERAPY??????? Jesus Christ, man!
No, there’s no reason for Lyme disease to be treated like that. Lyme disease is caused by a bacteria. The most common North American bacterial species is called Borrelia burgdorferi, but there is a closely related bacteria Borrelia afzelii that can also cause the condition.
The bacteria is a gram negative spirochaete. It’s fairly easy to cure with antibiotics. it’s not like one of those strains of staph that are resistant to multiple classes of antibiotics. As far as treatment, it is still pretty easily susceptible to a number of antibiotics. Doxycycline and Amoxicillin are both very common cheap antibiotics that are effective against the bacteria.
In the abnormal circumstance that a strain did not respond to these or if the person is allergic or something, then there are cephalosporin-class antibiotics that can be used as an alternative. If those fail as well, there are even more powerful and exotic antibiotics that can be used.
The infection can be a bit persistent, if it gets to the point where it’s in the very very late states. At the last stages of the disease it can begin to infect brain tissue and get deeply embedded in soft tissues in the body and possibly bone marrow. If it gets that bad, it may need upwards of a month of antibiotic therapy, sometimes by IV to completely kill off the bacteria.
However, I have to doubt it ever gets to the point of being very very late stage like that. It’s a miserable condition. At first you might think you’re just achy and overtired, but after a week of the infection your joints get so inflamed and full of fluid you can barely walk.
One problem with Lyme is that the tests for it have a high rate of false negatives and sometimes it has to be pretty far along before it gets to the point of being detected by the standard test.
I actually tested negative for it when I had it, but by doctor put me on the antibiotic treatment anyway. I live in Southern Connecticut, and my doctor has seen it enough to know when someone in otherwise good health comes in during the summer with my symptoms, 90% of the time, it’s Lyme. Here’s a map of the occurrence, by the way: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr4807a2.htm
It was discovered three towns over from me. There’s more Lyme disease in my area than anywhere else on earth.
Once the infection is cured, it can rarely have lingering effects. This is because of the damage it can cause that takes time to heal. In very very bad very very late stage cases, there could be neurological damage. That’s very rare though. The most common complication is that it damages the joint tissue. In older individuals who are already developing arthritis, it can exacerbate the condition.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
drbuzz0 said:
Yeah, I’ve got to figure that either she or a quack doctor was misusing the term. Maybe her herbalist told her he was giving her “chamomile therapy” and she misunderstood.
Quote Comment
April 4th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
You’re blog’s subtitle is well-chosen because you’ve done some bad science writing here. Unless you prefer misinforming people about MCS and Gulf War Syndrome, you should do some proper research before you write. You could start with the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses 2008 report, Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans, particularly the section on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. This report can be found here: http://www1.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/Committee_Documents.asp
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 12:13 am
MCS Sufferer said:
I’ve read it, have you???
Look, I go out of my way to point out that there are gulf war veterans who have medical conditions. A subset of those may be from something related to combat or deployment. The only two artificial factors that have not been conclusively ruled out as causes are pyridostigmine bromide and pesticides. (the possibility of the later being a direct result of the ban on the ultra-safe DDT-based pesticides) Really neither of these would be consistent with all the cases.
By the current definition used by most Gulf War Syndrome sufferers are any Gulf War veteran who has “chronic multisymptomatic illness”
By this definition any number of individuals with totally different symptoms could be considered to have “Gulf War Syndrome”
If a vet has chronic acid reflux, cataracts and dandruff, that’s GWS
If a vet has arthritis, persistent sinus infections and diabetes, that’s GWS
IF a vet has chronic back pain and psoriasis, that’s GWS
If a vet has leukemia, that’s GWS
The problem is that all those counted as having “Gulf War Syndrom” clearly don’t have the same condition and the problems reported to be especially associated with it are not nearly as prevalent as is often implied.
Many of the classifying criteria for the biggest surveys are very subjective. These include things like “Fatigue”
More than 75% of Gulf War vets have no major health problems.
But as for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity – Well that’s a simple one to answer: It just plain does not exist as an actual physical, organically-originating condition. It exists only as a psychosomatic condition. It never did exist.
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 2:02 am
Is a tripling in the number of expected birth defects small or large?
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 2:57 am
James Salsman said:
That’s a surprisingly good question. The answer is that it depends on the rate expected, the sample size and the way risk of the “expected” number is computed for a given demographic.
Saying something is “three times more likely” sounds like a big deal, and it’s a great way of making something very insignificant seem very significant, but if the risk is low to begin with, then statistically, it can be a tiny fluke caused by random variability.
Like for example, lets say we have a risk of one in ten thousand of a given condition. We take a sample group of 10,000 and find that there are 3 instances of the condition. Is this small or large? Actually, given the sample size and the expected number, it would be considered a very small variation from the expected. Even if there are six found in a sample of 20,000 it could pretty easily be a fluke.
I think you might be thinking of some of the reports of Goldenhar syndrome?
In any case, there’s a reason why statistics is a profession onto itself. Normally things are not as simple as the 10,000 example I gave above. If you’d like more information on the breakdown for a study group, I can provide you with the contact info of a couple of excellent PhD level statisticians who do consulting work in this field.
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 10:02 am
I actually have an idea what “morgellons” can be related to.
I got a terrible case of poison oak, and since then I occasionally will get a minor flare up of just a few red bumps that take forever to heal, I think because I scratch them in my sleep. The serum (the yellow fluid taht seeps out) is very sticky as it dries, and it seems to attract all sorts of fibers, which get stuck in there.
In addition the itching can feel like a bug crawling under the skin.
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
I was referring to the odds ratio of 2.8 for females reported in http://www.annalsofepidemiology.org/article/PIIS1047279701002459/abstract which provides the 95% confidence interval as 1.26 to 6.25.
Dr. Kang, the lead author of that paper and the Chief Epidemiologist for the U.S. Veterans Administration, went back 3 years after that 2001 study directly to more than 800 individual medical records from servicemembers and their families, and found an additional 20% increase. With the 20th year anniversary of the February 1991 invasion coming up in less than a year, I hope the long term retrospectives are complete. Uranium toxicologists such as Elana Craft at Duke say it takes about 20 years for most cancers resulting from uranyl exposure to become apparent. We haven’t had a report of cancer rates from 1991 Gulf War vets from Dr. McDairmid — who’s was supposed to be, and had been, reporting on them annually before she stopped without explanation — for almost 10 years now.
I don’t think it’s fair to call those 3x increases “small” or “modest”.
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 5:52 pm
drbuzz0, if you had a good case you wouldn’t need to make things up, such as your ridiculous “If a vet has chronic acid reflux, cataracts and dandruff, that’s GWS …” paragraph. If you’ve read the first page of the report you will know there are typical symptoms. It says, “This complex of multiple concurrent symptoms typically includes persistent memory and concentration problems, chronic headaches, widespread pain, gastrointestinal problems, and other chronic abnormalities not explained by well-established diagnoses.”
If you had read the section on MCS you would know it says, “Japanese investigators have reported that MCS patients have significantly elevated plasma levels of substance P and other neuroinflammatory mediators, levels that are further increased with exposure to volatile organic compounds.804 Researchers have also suggested that MCS is associated with other immune and neuroendocrine abnormalities,604,808,891,1014 although none of the proposed biological mechanisms for MCS have been extensively studied.” The report also says, “General similarities may be reflected in indicators of autonomic dysregulation and neurocognitive impairment in Gulf War illness, FM, and CFS, and by indications that Gulf War illness and MCS are linked to genetic variants of the PON1 enzyme.” (p. 287)
Six genes have been found to be involved in MCS. This doesn’t fit with your psychosomatic hypothesis. Neither do animal models. For example, “The Flinders Sensitive Line (FSL) rats were established by selective breeding for increased responses to an organophosphate. It was subsequently found that these FSL rats were also more sensitive to direct-acting muscarinic agonists and had elevated muscarinic receptors compared to the selectively bred parallel group, the Flinders Resistant Line (FRL) rats, or randomly bred control rats. Increased sensitivity to cholinergic agents has also been observed in several human populations, including individuals suffering from chemical intolerance. Indeed, the FSL rats exhibit certain behavioral characteristics such as abnormal sleep, activity, and appetite that are similar to those reported in these human populations. In addition, the FSL rats have been reported to exhibit increased sensitivity to a variety of other chemical agents.” Overstreet, D.H. and Djuric, V. (2001) A genetic rat model of cholinergic hypersensitivity: Implications for chemical intolerance, chronic fatigue, and asthma Ann N Y Acad Sci 933:92-102 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12000038
As for your earlier drivel on MCS, people with MCS don’t react to the smell of chemicals – they react to chemicals. People with MCS can react to chemicals that don’t have a smell and there are people with MCS who don’t have any sense of smell. Also, see, for example, Millqvist, E., Bengtsson, U. & Lowhagen, O. (1999) ‘Provocations with perfume in the eyes induce airway symptoms in patients with sensory hyperreactivity’ Allergy, 54(5):495-9 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10380782
Your statement, “Skin tests, such as are used to determine the presence of true allergies also do not indicate the condition has an organic basis” is a particularly stupid. Skin tests can only indicated that MCS does not involve allergies that show up in skin tests. There are a lot of medical conditions that don’t show up in skin tests.
P.S. Clearly toxicology isn’t your strong point if you think DDT is ultrasafe. See, for example, this review of the health effects of DDT in Mexico: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17680058
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
MCS Sufferer said:
Dandruf might be a stretch, but chronic acid reflux qualifies as “gastrointestinal problems” and cataracts easily fits in “other chronic abnormalities”
Now look at the real “typical” symptoms that are listed: headaches, widespread pain, gastrointestinal problems, memory loss, sleep disturbances, anxiety. These are some of the most broad and completely generic and non-specific symptoms imaginable.
I’m not denying that vets are suffering. It’s simply not an issue of any one single health issue that can be labeled as a “Syndrome.”
MCS Sufferer said:
Your “study” shows nothing other than DDT and metabolites was found in samples. DDT has never been conclusively linked to any health problem in mammals except at extreme concentrations.
Studies of workers who had been exposed to concentrations over three times the standards for acceptable exposure found no increased risk of cancer or any other chronic diseases over many years of tracking.
DDT had been used in the past as an oral antidote for barbituate poisoning and had also been used for fumigation en mass without any reported acute ill effects.
DDT has been extensively studied with regard to birth defects and development, and the only thing any studies have been able to indicate is an apparent weak link between enormous doses of DDT and some birth defects. Let me stress again, enormous. In other words, no increase of any kind is detectable until you have ridiculously high concentrations and even then the increase in risk is small.
DDT has been studies extensively with regards to breast cancer especially with no conclusive data indicating it is a credible risk factor.
The ONLY thing that DDT seems to have a real relationship to with regards to chronic exposure is some thyroid hormonal issues and (maybe) a slight increase in the risk of diabetes. Again, as with birth defects, we’re talking about super-mega-dose stuff. It has been speculated that at enormous doses it could interfere with the body’s ability to absorb and iodine.
MCS Sufferer said:
Oh for Christ sake, don’t start trying to link MCS and the conditions Gulf War vets have. While I disagree that there’s a single syndrome, veterans are generally descent, honorable people who served their country and put their lives in danger. MCS is a condition that hypochondriacs like to have. Equating veterans with MCS is a disgrace to their honorable status.
Is this the best you can do for MCS support? Point to a study where they clipped someone’s nose and sprayed perfume in their eye? Christ.
Do you even know what a “Chemical” is? I’m surprised the plastic on the keyboard lets you type… or for that mater, the nitrogen in the air.
MCS Sufferer said:
Then there are those which don’t show up on ANY test and can’t be verified by ANY study, MCS being one of them.
Quote Comment
April 5th, 2010 at 9:28 pm
drbuzz0, you wrote, “Your “study” shows nothing other than DDT and metabolites was found in samples. DDT has never been conclusively linked to any health problem in mammals except at extreme concentrations.” I wrote it was a review and the abstract says, “Also, there are evidences on damages to the health, specially related to the reproductive area, and more recently damages at cellular level, as well as, alteration in the psychomotor development of children exposed in uterus. Even though many gaps exist concerning the other adverse effects on health, relating to DDT exposure and its metabolites, experience accumulated at this point, must be taken into account in Mexico and the rest from Latin America, so that following this precautionary principle they should legislate against DDT and other persistent organic contaminants with characteristics similar to those of DDT and its metabolites.” (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17680058)
People more knowledgeable than you don’t consider DDT “ultrasafe” and you’re wrong about the increase in diabetes being from “super-mega-dose stuff”.
‘”We have to put our concerns in the context of people dying of malaria,” said lead author Brenda Eskenazi, UC Berkeley professor of epidemiology and of maternal and child health at the School of Public Health. “We know DDT can save lives by repelling and killing disease-spreading mosquitoes. But evidence suggests that people living in areas where DDT is used are exposed to very high levels of the pesticide. The only published studies on health effects conducted in these populations have shown profound effects on male fertility. Clearly, more research is needed on the health of populations where indoor residual spraying is occurring, but in the meantime, DDT should really be the last resort against malaria rather than the first line of defense.” …
Of the studies published on human health, almost all have dealt with populations exposed to low, background levels of DDT. Nevertheless, some of those studies have suggested links between DDT and cancer risk, diabetes, developmental problems in fetuses and in children, and decreased fertility.’ http://www.physorg.com/news160660723.html
You wrote, “Oh for Christ sake, don’t start trying to link MCS and the conditions Gulf War vets have.” I was quoting the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses. They would know more about the subject than you do.
You wrote, “MCS is a condition that hypochondriacs like to have”. There are no studies listed on Pubmed linking MCS and hypochondria.
You wrote, “Is this the best you can do for MCS support? Point to a study where they clipped someone’s nose and sprayed perfume in their eye? Christ.” That’s all it takes to show that people with MCS are not reacting to smells.
You wrote, “Do you even know what a “Chemical” is? I’m surprised the plastic on the keyboard lets you type… or for that mater, the nitrogen in the air.” People with MCS react to many chemicals, not every chemical.
I notice you had nothing to say about genes being implicated in MCS or the animal models. You are like a Creationist – you are sticking to your beliefs and don’t want to consider evidence that contradicts them.
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 3:18 am
I’m fairly sure that there are many diseases which are known to science, but no one dares to discover them out of fear of getting the disease named after them. I mean, how fun is it to be Alzheimer today? How fun would it be to have Penis Elbow named after you?
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 9:56 am
MCS Sufferer said:
While I don’t usually debate loonies (okay, I do, but I tell myself not to) I can’t let this one go!
He’s right about DDT, especially when compared to the chemicals noted in the Gulf War Studies. DDT is an organochloride and a very safe one comparatively speaking to the ones they did use, which are organophosphates.
Organophosphates are NOT safe on humans even in small concentrations care needs to be taken. They are acutely neurotoxic and have chronic effects that are much worse than DDT.
What made DDT so remarkable when it was discovered is that it is selective in what it kills. Killing insects is easy if you use something that is just very toxic to everything. DDT is not. DDT acts directly on sodium ion channels in insects and does not have the same mechanism in vertebrates. You can practically swim in it with no apparent ill effects.
The only health effects that are reasonable from a long time exposure is that it (maybe) seems like it can antagonize some portions of the endocrine system because the molecule and the metabolites can create hormone-like effects, if there is enough of it.
This is a very small danger compared to organophosphates or to insecticides like carbamates and even to some other organochloride class insectacides.
DDT is arguably the safest general purpose synthetic bulk insecticide ever produced. Others may be as safe, but I doubt any could be considered to exceed its safety.
Why DDT was banned really has nothing to do with health effects. That may have some political clout, but it’s absolutely not science-based. The big thing with DDT is that it appears to interfere with the mechanism that forms egg shells and creates shells that are deficient in calcium and therefore weak. DDT can bioacumulate in fish and in birds that eat fish. In the US the big deal was the Bald Eagle especially. The bird eats small fish. If DDT is used in the area it can cause the eggs of the eagle to be non-viable. The bird can’t reproduce and therefore it causes the species to decline (When used heavily enough.)
That is the primary reason – not human health effects.
DDT also has unfortunately lost much of its effectiveness because it was so widely used in the mid 20th century, mostly because no other alternatives existed, that it lead to resistance development. Resistance to DDT is not so high that it makes it unusable for applications like fumigation, but it’s another reason why its not as favored as it once was.
You’re totally wrong about the issue of DDT safety, I’m sorry to tell you.
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Chem Geek Gregor said:
I thought that the shell issue had turned out to be acid rain, rather than DDT.
Hadn’t known about the egg viability issue, though. That would be problematic.
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 11:46 am
Matthew said:
Maybe “viability” was the wrong word. The only reason it’s not viable is that the shells were weak to the point that the egg turned into goo.
Yeah, acid rain has a part. DDT was blamed too, but I don’t know if they really ever proved that or just suspected it.
MCS Sufferer said:
Again, you’ve completely lost the context. DDT is extremely safe for an acute exposure when compared to organophosphates.
MCS Sufferer said:
They are a politically-appointed and politically answerable entity. They still did produce some pretty good scientific data, but the actual data does not indicate any singular syndrome associated with the Gulf War. It does suggest an elevation of some conditions, but that does not mean there is any one unified syndrome. Why is it so hard for you to understand the difference?
MCS Sufferer said:
A hypochondriac is simply a person who is self-obsessed with their own medical conditions and constantly thinks they are sick. They’re the kind who delude themselves into thinking they have conditions that don’t exist.
MCS Sufferer said:
No, it’s not! Scent is more complex than that. There are scent receptors in the upper sinuses and even if you plug someone’s nose, they can still perceive smell through the mouth and up into the nasal passages. Believe it or not, it is even possible to smell through one’s eyes. The nasolacrimal canal connects to the tear ducts and drains into the sinuses
MCS Sufferer said:
Sure it does! It’s well known that there’s a genetic basis for psychosis and other mental conditions. Besides, these results are, at their very best, suspect. There’s little or no confirming research.
MCS Sufferer said:
Didn’t we already go over the fact that organophosphates do produce responses in mamals and do have acute toxicity?
MCS is not about organophosphates – it’s a condition where the proponents claim that their bodies go crazy when exposed to damn near any chemical that has a “chemical like” order, is synthetic, has a media presence or is otherwise within their definition of what a scary chemical is.
MCS Sufferer said:
Right, only there’s no rhyme or reason to what an “MCS Sufferer” responds to except that all chemicals they respond to have a scent. Most chemicals are orderless but they won’t respond to those unless there is some other cue that they’re present.
People who claim to have MCS are very selective and favor responding to anything that is obviously artificial. Plastics, household cleaner, detergents, medications, dyes and so on. As soon as they encounter something that is supposedly natural or plant based they stop responding. They respond to chemicals that are basically inert and don’t have any effect on the body.
It’s well proven that if you give an “MCS sufferer” something like printed material, they’ll tell you that it’s making them very sick, but then give them the same newsprint and tell them its made from charcoal pigment in a simple vegetable oil-based binder and they’ll tell you it does not make them sick.
It’s crystal clear that it’s a delusion.
Here is a good rundown: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mcs.html
MCS Sufferer said:
Yes, but they test for what the “MCS sufferers” claim they are responding to. Skin tests are the gold standard for determining if there really is some kind of immune response to a chemical of any kind. If the body really does not tolerate certain substances, then this will show it.
IT DOES NOT
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Furious George said:
I think women know about that now because there has been an entire episode of Seinfeld dedicated to it.
Also, “MCS Sufferer” is obviously trying to prove it to their own self as much as anyone else. Some people thrive on being a victim. Multiple Chemical Sensitivity is not real. Get over yourself!
http://au.news.yahoo.com/opinion/post/-/blog/australianskeptics/post/323/comment/1/
Quote Comment
April 6th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
For someone who believes they have something like multichemical sensitivity, they will defend it to the death because they have so much of their life in it and are basically living under this delusion. No doubt they believe it on a conscious level, but there’s probably also part of them that is afraid they might be wrong and that would make them look like a fool. Nobody likes admitting to being susceptible to the placebo effect or something like that. They are trying to convince themselves as much as anyone else.
It’s a sad delusional state, but do not ever expect them to change it. They need to believe it. That’s what it amounts to.
Psychologists can have a field day writing papers about all the stuff that goes on in the head of someone with a condition like that. We’re strange creatures, humans.
Quote Comment
April 19th, 2010 at 2:58 am
I think this is one of the worst posts on here and it’s even worse than most which are bad. I glanced through this page. I want to say I hate this website. It’s nothing but a big ad for the government and for big corporations like chemicals and oil and radiation from products that you say are safe but dont even have any evidence and dismiss what is bad for the profits. It is narrow minded and dismisses all of what it disagrees with like it owns science. it does not and care about people either only big oil and nuclear and pharmasuiticals while people suffer and eat poison that is sold and advertised on missinforming places for example here and fox news.
I do not know who runs this but they need to be ashamed of all the lies they say and are not a very peaceful or good kind of person at all. This is a bad site and nobody should review it and take away information to use because likely it is more of a lie than anything else.
Quote Comment
August 15th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
[...] though. Serious bed bug infestations and chronic attacks can cause anxiety, stress, insomnia, even delusional parasitosis. I am assuming these psychological reactions are from the idea of being eaten alive in your semi [...]
Quote Comment
October 8th, 2010 at 2:24 am
The Lyme-Autism thing is hilarious. It’s like that Vaccine-Autism fad, or Flouride-Autism, or Plastic-Autism. Apparently everything in the freakin’ world causes Autism, except, you know – genetics. I think it’s a pretty clear case of parents lashing out at some boogey-man to blame, rather than just facing the fact that’s it’s more or less bad biological luck.
Quote Comment
November 4th, 2010 at 10:03 am
@drbuzz:
“I’m not denying that vets are suffering. It’s simply not an issue of any one single health issue that can be labeled as a “Syndrome.””
This is because the syndrome is manifested in many different ways, just like germ responses. Just as there isn’t a single “germ disease” that takes place in one part of the body with one constellation of symptoms, MCS operates in a similar way. And just because medical science does not have an adequate explanation for a syndrome does not mean the syndrome does not exist. When women were dying of childbed fever, they were not dying of a somatoform disorder because physicians refused to consider germ theory as plausible. When asthmatics, allergy sufferers, and Multiple Sclerosis sufferers complained of their ailments, they were not imagining them because science had not yet caught up to the human body to explain them. Eventually, TRUE scientists with open minds, concern, and a willingness to consider the possibilities, assumed the idea that these peoples’ reports may be correct and they found the answers. they theorized about possible mechanisms and performed challenge studies. This is how science works. It does not work by saying, “we can’t imagine how that could happen” and then denying it.
And this is how real science is working in the field of MCS. Martin Pall has developed a mechanism for how MCS starts and perpetuates. This year his theory has been confirmed with biologic markers. So in addition to the reams of confirmatory data that has been building over the years, a conclusive physiological origin for the disease has been realized. Science is finding the answer just as it did with germs and immunological disorders. Speaking of immunology . . .
@Chem Greek Gregor:
“Yes, but they test for what the “MCS sufferers” claim they are responding to. Skin tests are the gold standard for determining if there really is some kind of immune response to a chemical of any kind.”
MCS is not an immunological disorder so there will be no immune response.
@Neutrino:
For someone who believes multichemical sensitivity does not exist, they will defend it to the death because they have invested so much of their reputation in denying it and are basically living under this delusion. No doubt they believe it on a conscious level, but there’s probably also part of them that is afraid they might be wrong and that would make them look like a fool.
Dismissing many millions of people as hypochondriacs is hardly a scientific method. The backgrounds of MCS sufferers is varied, including yes, hypochondriacs as well as those who are trained in sciences like physicians. They are no less honorable or decent as a group than veterans. Comic book characterizations of people may help with rhetorical mud-slinging, but if honest understanding of human issues is of interest to you, then they really have no place.
Quote Comment
November 4th, 2010 at 10:11 am
I also want to point out that I do realize that Gulf War Syndrome is more than just MCS, though it often includes it.
Quote Comment
November 4th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Gulf War Syndrome doesn’t even exist let alone include Multiple Chemical Stupidity as a subset.
Quote Comment
November 7th, 2010 at 10:53 am
I can’t believe this was written in 2010.I have a great idea for a future blog:”The Holocaust,and Other Myths”.
Quote Comment
November 7th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
starman said:
Of course the difference being that there is enough forensic evidence to confirm the Holocaust many times over, and none to validate ‘fan death.’
Quote Comment