|
|
|
Reviews / Comptes Rendus
| David T. Jannigan, Environmental Illness in Nova Scotia, 1983–2003 (Halifax: Fernwood 2003)
|
| THIS BOOK DISAPPOINTS because the author is locked into a biomedical mindset and unable to really understand the health problem known as "Multiple Chemical Sensitivity" [MCS] or the precautionary principle. Jannigan simply needs to examine the growing body of scientific literature documenting conditions which come under this new health disorder. The Danish Environmental Protection Agency reported in 2005 that MCS is "a new health disorder which has been described during the last 20 years," and "is a real condition. MCS differs from the common scientific understanding of illness because the condition is always manifested by multiple non-specific symptoms from different organs at the same time and because these symptoms may occur after exposure to chemicals at very low concentrations." |
1
|
|
Jannigan uses similar tactics to companies defending themselves against accusations of causing occupational and/or environmental pollution problems. He discredits "physician-advocates" for workers with MCS complaints, implies repeatedly that MCS is psychogenic and that MCS "fears" were fanned by media reports, and denies that MCS is a recognized health problem. |
2
|
|
With the construction of energy efficient buildings, researchers developed an awareness of "Sick Building Syndrome" which involves physical reaction of staff to poor air flow and contaminants that are locked inside these sealed buildings. For example, when the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation moved into a new energy- efficient building in downtown Toronto, many staff presented with health problems related to emissions from the new building materials (formaldehyde in many of the building materials such as carpets and furniture), volatile organic compounds in paints, and emissions from photocopiers, printers, and new computers. |
3
|
|
One of this review's authors was a member of the Occupational Health and Safety Committee at Athabasca University [AU], and concentrated on addressing health-related concerns in our air-tight building such as maintaining proper air flow and flushing contaminants (e.g., emissions from glues, paints, new carpets, photocopiers) from the building. We were fortunate to be able to consult with an architect who advised us on ecofriendly building design and building materials. Unfortunately, at the time, AU did not follow her advice and continued to use paints and glues and install new carpets that emit gas into a sealed building. The staff was granted one concession — they would be notified in advance about renovation projects involving new carpets, glues, and paints, etc. |
4
|
|
Jannigan lacks the ability to examine health problems through a holistic lens. He approaches the problem of MCS through an administrative approach, empathizing with administrative staff rather than with workers who present with complaints related to MCS. While he provides a detailed costing of the investigation, treatment, and renovations involved in several case studies in Nova Scotia, he fails to consider the long-term costs of MCS to individuals, their families, and society at large. These costs include the inability of people with MCS to reach their full potential in education or work productivity, and are likely much higher than what seems to be a large expenditure to detect and repair problems. It would seem to make sense to use precautionary principles in attending to air quality concerns in buildings before acute problems turn into chronic conditions. |
5
|
| | |
Ella Haley and Marilyn Thorlakson
Athabasca University |
|
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|