Re: From the Duke List Serv Sickbuilding syndrome, isn't

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Agus:

My name is Haley Mack and I'm a member of a listserv on called

'Sickbuildings.' Your review below went around this week, and I believe I can

speak on behalf of the several thousand of us who read this site that the

article you reviewed appears to be junk science.

The term 'sickbuilding' is rather a bit out of date these days as science has

done a great deal to identify the mycotoxins and bacterial exposures that create

the illnesses once lumped into the unquantifiable 'sickbuilding' pile.

Not all of us have had our exposure at work - most days in the US there are

stories somewhere about schools with mold contamination and the effect is has on

the students as well as teachers - according to this article, we should tell the

children their schools are too stressful and not supportive enough rather than

remediate the mold-filled buildings.

Many of us have been affected in our homes, and it might be amusing to see a

study that similarly lumps our family lives as 'unsupportive.'

In my case, I found this group after doing research on behalf of my neighbor

when we suspected her 36-year-old son died due to his exposure to mold and

bacteria after a sewer pipe leak under our apartment building. Forensic

pathology has demonstrated that my neighbor had an enormous amount of the

mycotoxin Trichothecene in his lung tissue that could only have gotten there

through direct exposure to mold. Here is a CDC link to explain what this is, so

you can see this isn't just because we had a negligent and 'unsupportive'

landlandy: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/trichothecene/casedef.asp. My neighbor

developed many ailments that became pronounced in the year before his death and

were documentable, including fungal skins sores, asthma, and a seizure disorder.

I have different symptoms than my neighbors did - yes, that's plural. We all

had one thing or another, some respitory, some neurological, some allergic, some

memory related. Our differing symptoms have to do with our genetic

susceptibilities and predispositions - if you haven't read Ritchie Shoemaker's

book Mold Warriors, it will really open your eyes to the spectrum of symptoms

people have in response to exposure to these elements. You can find the book at

www.moldwarriors.com. In my case, in addition to horrific dizzy spells, blood

pressure drops and bleeding complications (which are a serious and sometimes

life-threatening problem since I take bloodthinners), my renal function has

decreased more than 30% - here's a link to an article about the connection

between polycystic kidney disease progression and mold and nanobacterial

exposure: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no2/miller.htm.

We know in this group that we can have similar exposure and yet have differing

symptoms - or even be bothered differently by symptoms, so our self-reports

would look very different. However, most of us would probably have indications

of elevated immune responses in our bloodwork. In my case, I suspect there are

mycotoxins in the cyst fluid in my kidneys, but fluid aspiration is complex and

dangerous.

I note the study you reviewed didn't look for any hard physical indicators of

illness - not even simple blood or urine work - only self-reports of their

complaints.

What we are missing from this snippet of the study is what the hypothesis was

from the experiment - I suspect that they expected to 'prove' exactly what they

found. Since they did no physical epidemeological workups, they have no idea

whether there is anything non-psychosocial affecting the people they studied.

We already know that most workplaces in the US and the UK don't tend to be

supportive to workers and that employers attempt to drive workers to produce the

most possible. That's simply not news.

Without exception, ALL of us on the Sickbuildings listserv have been told

repeatedly by doctors that our illness is in our heads - many of us do have

mental confusion, memory loss and extreme depression on our list of symptoms,

but what we have are very physical ailments, and we are searching for ways to

make our minds and bodies fully functional again and to allow us to be

relatively pain free.

Comments like yours make it much, much harder for us to have our doctors

really listen to us when we describe our symptoms, and if you'll take just a

minute to look at this tiny bit of information I am passing along to you,

perhaps you'll see that in addition to the study being 'unsupportive' to those

of us with very real and discernable symptoms, it is also simply unsupported

scientifically and arguably flat out inaccurate.

On behalf of all of us who have been affected by toxic indoor environments,

please reconsider your words and exposure yourself to a more complete and

current scientific picture - when you do, please consider retracting your

remarks and sending them to the folks to whom you passed this along.

Thank you,

Haley Mack

snk1955@... wrote:

Reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor at the University of

Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

March 23, 2006

MedPage Today Action Points

* Advise patients who believe they are suffering from sick building syndrome

that this study suggests the condition is associated with having a demanding

job and lacking supportive colleagues more so than the physical environment of

the workplace.

Review

LONDON, March 23 - Sick building syndrome might be more aptly named " lousy job

syndrome, " a study here suggested.

Syndrome symptoms correlated only weakly with the environmental properties of

office buildings, but the symptoms correlated strongly with having a demanding

job and lacking social support at work, said

Mai Stafford, M.D., of the University College London Medical School here.

" The results, " Dr. Stafford and colleagues concluded in the April issue of

Occupational and Environmental Medicine, " imply that if sick building syndrome

is reported in a building, management should consider causes beyond the

physical design and operation of the

workplace and should widen their investigation to include the organization of

work roles and the autonomy of the workforce. "

....

= -- = -- = --

_http://oem.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/63/4/283_

(http://oem.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/63/4/283)

Building health: an epidemiological study of " sick building syndrome "

in the Whitehall II study

A F Marmot1, J Eley1, M Stafford2, S A Stansfeld3, E Warwick2 and M G Marmot2

1 AMA, Linton House, London, UK

2 Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College

London Medical School, London, UK

3 Centre for Psychiatry, Barts and the London, Queen 's School of

Medicine and Dentistry, Medical Sciences Building, London, UK

Correspondence to:

Dr M Stafford

Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College

London Medical School, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK;

m.stafford@...

Objectives: Sick building syndrome (SBS) is described as a group of

symptoms attributed to the physical environment of specific buildings.

Isolating particular environmental features responsible for the

symptoms has proved difficult. This study explores the role and

significance of the physical and psychosocial work environment in

explaining SBS.

Methods: Cross sectional data on the physical environment of a

selection of buildings were added to individual data from the

Whitehall II study—an ongoing health survey of office based civil

servants. A self-report questionnaire was used to capture 10 symptoms

of the SBS and psychosocial work stress. In total, 4052 participants

aged 42–62 years working in 44 buildings were included in this study.

Results: No significant relation was found between most aspects of the

physical work environment and symptom prevalence, adjusted for age,

sex, and employment grade. Positive (non-significant) relations were

found only with airborne bacteria, inhalable dust, dry bulb

temperature, relative humidity, and having some control over the local

physical environment. Greater effects were found with features of the

psychosocial work environment including high job demands and low

support. Only psychosocial work characteristics and control over the

physical environment were independently associated with symptoms in

the multivariate analysis.

Conclusions: The physical environment of office buildings appears to

be less important than features of the psychosocial work environment

in explaining differences in the prevalence of symptoms.

Keywords: sick building syndrome; office environment; psychosocial

work characteristics

[Guest guest]

this is insane. omg, talk about junk science.well, I guess this

explains my many years exposed at my homes, and re-exposer 3 times ,

were I'd fell better than not when I was re-exposed again. it also

explains why I have gotten some what better after getting out. I

guess, me,my and myself put to much pressure on ourselfs. hardy-har-

har.

>

> Reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor at the University

> of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

>

> March 23, 2006

>

> MedPage Today Action Points

>

> * Advise patients who believe they are suffering from sick

> building syndrome that this study suggests the condition is

associated

> with having a demanding job and lacking supportive colleagues more

so

> than the physical environment of the workplace.

>

> Review

> LONDON, March 23 - Sick building syndrome might be more aptly named

> " lousy job syndrome, " a study here suggested.

>

> Syndrome symptoms correlated only weakly with the environmental

> properties of office buildings, but the symptoms correlated

strongly

> with having a demanding job and lacking social support at work,

said

> Mai Stafford, M.D., of the University College London Medical School

> here.

>

> " The results, " Dr. Stafford and colleagues concluded in the April

> issue of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, " imply that if

sick

> building syndrome is reported in a building, management should

> consider causes beyond the physical design and operation of the

> workplace and should widen their investigation to include the

> organization of work roles and the autonomy of the workforce. "

>

> ...

>

> =

[Guest guest]

excellent letter

haley

--- In , Haley <myhaze@...>

wrote:

>

> Dear Dr. Agus:

>

> My name is Haley Mack and I'm a member of a listserv on

called 'Sickbuildings.' Your review below went around this week, and

I believe I can speak on behalf of the several thousand of us who

read this site that the article you reviewed appears to be junk

science.

>

> The term 'sickbuilding' is rather a bit out of date these days as

science has done a great deal to identify the mycotoxins and

bacterial exposures that create the illnesses once lumped into the

unquantifiable 'sickbuilding' pile.

>

> Not all of us have had our exposure at work - most days in the US

there are stories somewhere about schools with mold contamination and

the effect is has on the students as well as teachers - according to

this article, we should tell the children their schools are too

stressful and not supportive enough rather than remediate the mold-

filled buildings.

>

> Many of us have been affected in our homes, and it might be

amusing to see a study that similarly lumps our family lives

as 'unsupportive.'

>

> In my case, I found this group after doing research on behalf of

my neighbor when we suspected her 36-year-old son died due to his

exposure to mold and bacteria after a sewer pipe leak under our

apartment building. Forensic pathology has demonstrated that my

neighbor had an enormous amount of the mycotoxin Trichothecene in his

lung tissue that could only have gotten there through direct exposure

to mold. Here is a CDC link to explain what this is, so you can see

this isn't just because we had a negligent and 'unsupportive'

landlandy: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/trichothecene/casedef.asp.

My neighbor developed many ailments that became pronounced in the

year before his death and were documentable, including fungal skins

sores, asthma, and a seizure disorder.

>

> I have different symptoms than my neighbors did - yes, that's

plural. We all had one thing or another, some respitory, some

neurological, some allergic, some memory related. Our differing

symptoms have to do with our genetic susceptibilities and

predispositions - if you haven't read Ritchie Shoemaker's book Mold

Warriors, it will really open your eyes to the spectrum of symptoms

people have in response to exposure to these elements. You can find

the book at www.moldwarriors.com. In my case, in addition to

horrific dizzy spells, blood pressure drops and bleeding

complications (which are a serious and sometimes life-threatening

problem since I take bloodthinners), my renal function has decreased

more than 30% - here's a link to an article about the connection

between polycystic kidney disease progression and mold and

nanobacterial exposure:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no2/miller.htm.

>

> We know in this group that we can have similar exposure and yet

have differing symptoms - or even be bothered differently by

symptoms, so our self-reports would look very different. However,

most of us would probably have indications of elevated immune

responses in our bloodwork. In my case, I suspect there are

mycotoxins in the cyst fluid in my kidneys, but fluid aspiration is

complex and dangerous.

>

> I note the study you reviewed didn't look for any hard physical

indicators of illness - not even simple blood or urine work - only

self-reports of their complaints.

>

> What we are missing from this snippet of the study is what the

hypothesis was from the experiment - I suspect that they expected

to 'prove' exactly what they found. Since they did no physical

epidemeological workups, they have no idea whether there is anything

non-psychosocial affecting the people they studied.

>

> We already know that most workplaces in the US and the UK don't

tend to be supportive to workers and that employers attempt to drive

workers to produce the most possible. That's simply not news.

>

> Without exception, ALL of us on the Sickbuildings listserv have

been told repeatedly by doctors that our illness is in our heads -

many of us do have mental confusion, memory loss and extreme

depression on our list of symptoms, but what we have are very

physical ailments, and we are searching for ways to make our minds

and bodies fully functional again and to allow us to be relatively

pain free.

>

> Comments like yours make it much, much harder for us to have our

doctors really listen to us when we describe our symptoms, and if

you'll take just a minute to look at this tiny bit of information I

am passing along to you, perhaps you'll see that in addition to the

study being 'unsupportive' to those of us with very real and

discernable symptoms, it is also simply unsupported scientifically

and arguably flat out inaccurate.

>

> On behalf of all of us who have been affected by toxic indoor

environments, please reconsider your words and exposure yourself to a

more complete and current scientific picture - when you do, please

consider retracting your remarks and sending them to the folks to

whom you passed this along.

>

> Thank you,

>

> Haley Mack

>

>