Time courses of sensory irritations due to 2-butanone and ethyl benzene exposure: Influences of self-reported multiple chemical sensitivity (sMCS)

Thriel, Christoph van; Haumann, Katja; Kiesswetter, Ernst; Blaszkewicz, Meinolf; Seeber, Andreas

doi:10.1078/1438-4639-00112

Cited by 24 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…22 In other studies investigators exposed participants to chemicals at or below odor thresholds. 10,29,32,40,44 Most of these failed to demonstrate that subjects with MCS were better at detecting active provocations compared with healthy participants; however, they did tend to confirm increased states of autonomic arousal or MCS symptoms, independent of type of provocation, when compared with control subjects.…”

Section: When Is a ''Double-blind'' Study Not Truly Double Blind?mentioning

confidence: 70%

“…20 Studies were categorized by the quality of blinding used: double-or single-blind studies that also included an odorous masking agent to prevent identification of the stimuli (Table I), [21][22][23][24][25][26] double-blind studies without masking (Table II), 11,12,[15][16][17][18][19][27][28][29][30][31][32] single-blind studies without masking (Table III), 13,14,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] and open-label studies or studies with unclear blinding (see Table E1 in the Online Repository at www.jacionline.org). 10,[45][46][47] Studies using olfactory masking agents or nose clips Three studies testing 70 chemically sensitive participants incorporated blinding and an olfactory mask and failed to show any significant effects on subjects with MCS after provocation with chemicals. One of these studies demonstrated that subjects with MCS were more likely to react adversely to placebo over active substances.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…9 Duplicate publications were included as one study. [10][11][12][13][14] However, assessment of certain duplicate publications was not always clear-cut. For example, we have included 3 articles by as separate studies, given that they appeared to report slightly different results.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multiple chemical sensitivities: A systematic review of provocation studies

Das‐Munshi

Rubin

Wessely

2006

Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: When Is a ''Double-blind'' Study Not Truly Double Blind?mentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiple chemical sensitivities: A systematic review of provocation studies

Das‐Munshi

Rubin

Wessely

2006

Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The exposure chamber had a volume of 2.7 m 3 (height: 200 cm, width: 90 cm, depth: 150 cm) and the exposure concentration of n - butanol was 11.5 mg/m 3 (3.7 ppm). The odorant n - butanol was chosen for the exposure procedure based on a pilot test in which MCS sufferers judged the compound to be symptom-eliciting and because it had been used successfully in previous challenge studies with MCS participants 37 38. The concentration of n - butanol was clearly detectable (above the olfactory threshold 0.012 mg/m 3 39), but well below its threshold for sensory irritation (75 mg/m 3 40).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gene expression profiling in persons with multiple chemical sensitivity before and after a controlled n-butanol exposure session

Skovbjerg¹,

Andersson

Claeson

et al. 2017

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo investigate the pathophysiological pathways leading to symptoms elicitation in multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) by comparing gene expression in MCS participants and healthy controls before and after a chemical exposure optimised to cause symptoms among MCS participants.The first hypothesis was that unexposed and symptom-free MCS participants have similar gene expression patterns to controls and a second hypothesis that MCS participants can be separated from controls based on differential gene expression upon a controlled n-butanol exposure.DesignParticipants were exposed to 3.7 ppm n-butanol while seated in a windowed exposure chamber for 60 min. A total of 26 genes involved in biochemical pathways found in the literature have been proposed to play a role in the pathogenesis of MCS and other functional somatic syndromes were selected. Expression levels were compared between MCS and controls before, within 15 min after being exposed to and 4 hours after the exposure.SettingsParticipants suffering from MCS and healthy controls were recruited through advertisement at public places and in a local newspaper.Participants36 participants who considered themselves sensitive were prescreened for eligibility. 18 sensitive persons fulfilling the criteria for MCS were enrolled together with 18 healthy controls.Outcome measures17 genes showed sufficient transcriptional level for analysis. Group comparisons were conducted for each gene at the 3 times points and for the computed area under the curve (AUC) expression levels.ResultsMCS participants and controls displayed similar gene expression levels both at baseline and after the exposure and the computed AUC values were likewise comparable between the 2 groups. The intragroup variation in expression levels among MCS participants was noticeably greater than the controls.ConclusionsMCS participants and controls have similar gene expression levels at baseline and it was not possible to separate MCS participants from controls based on gene expression measured after the exposure.

show abstract

“…Subjects rated the appropriateness of these items on a 6-point scale. This questionnaire was composed of 67 statements concerning reactions to various environmental stimuli (8 items for sMCS), and it served to determine self-reported multiple chemical sensitivity (sMCS) in previous experimental exposure studies investigating local irritants (Haumann et al, , 2003Kiesswetter et al, 2005;van Thriel et al, 2002van Thriel et al, , 2003van Thriel et al, , 2005. In these studies, the personality trait sMCS is defined as in agreement with at least one out of eight statements describing strong physical responses (e.g., nausea) to chemicals (e.g., lacquer vapor, gasoline), and subjects were selected for these experiments based on their questionnaire scores.…”

Section: Chemical Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Odor Annoyance of Environmental Chemicals: Sensory and Cognitive Influences

Thriel

Kiesswetter

Schäper

et al. 2008

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In low concentrations, environment pollutants like volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may be perceived via olfaction. Modulators of odor-mediated health effects include age, gender, or personality traits related to chemical sensitivity. Severe multi-organ symptoms in response to odors also characterize a syndrome referred to as idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI). One prominent feature of IEI is self-reported odor hypersensitivity that is usually not accompanied by enhanced olfactory functioning. The impact of interindividual differences in olfactory functioning on chemosensory perceptions is sparsely investigated, and therefore this study addressed the influences of different types of modulators, including olfactory functioning. In a psychophysical scaling experiment, an age-stratified sample of 44 males and females was examined. After controlled application of nine concentrations of six chemicals by flow-olfactometry, the participants rated four olfactory and nine trigeminal perceptions. Weak effects were found for gender and age, as well as some modulating effects of self-reported chemical sensitivity and odor discrimination ability. For chemical sensitivity, the results were as expected: Subjects with higher sensitivity reported stronger perceptions. The individual odor threshold (n-butanol) exerted no influence on the subjects' ratings of olfactory and trigeminal perceptions. Surprisingly, above-average odor discrimination ability was associated with lower ratings of odor intensity and nausea. This particular aspect of olfactory functioning might be a reflection of a more objective odor evaluation model buffering emotional responses to environmental odors.

show abstract

Time courses of sensory irritations due to 2-butanone and ethyl benzene exposure: Influences of self-reported multiple chemical sensitivity (sMCS)

Cited by 24 publications

References 5 publications

Multiple chemical sensitivities: A systematic review of provocation studies

Multiple chemical sensitivities: A systematic review of provocation studies

Gene expression profiling in persons with multiple chemical sensitivity before and after a controlled n-butanol exposure session

Odor Annoyance of Environmental Chemicals: Sensory and Cognitive Influences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About