Recognition of MCS as a Legitimate Disease and Disability

From 1994 to 1998, MCS Referral & Resources compiled a detailed and fully referenced list of the legislative and administrative policies, court decisions, and policies of independent organizations that recognized MCS as a legitimate disease and/or disability. In 1999, MCS R&R's director Albert Donnay published a peer-reviewed summary of this research in the International Journal of Toxicology. This documentation of MCS recognition is invaluable for those seeking reasonable accommodation, benefits and/or compensation for MCS illness and disability.

Published Review Article (PDF) Details of MCS Recognition (PDF)

Who Recognizes MCS as a Medical Disorder or Disability ? (8/98)

25

Federal Government Agencies, Commissions, Institutes & Departments

28

State Government Agencies, Commissions, Legislatures & Departments

13

Local Government Agencies, Commissions, Councils & Departments

8

Federal Court Decisions

21

State Court Decisions

14

State Workers' Comp. Board Decisions

4

Canadian Federal Agencies

6

Canadian Provincial Agencies

Who Opposes Recognition of MCS ?

American Academy of Allergy & Immunology
(now AAAAI), based on position paper adopted in 1986.
American College of Occupational & Environmental Medicine,
based on a 1991 position paper, revised in 1993.
Environmental Sensitivities Research Institute
since 1995. ESRI is a "non-profit" organization with membership fees of $2,500 to $10,000 per year. The Board of Directors includes representatives of DowElanco, Monsanto, Proctor and Gamble, and the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association. It is chaired by executive director of RISE, a pesticide industry association opposed to MCS recognition.
ESRI promotes changing the name of MCS to "Idiopathic Environmental Intolerances" or IEI (oxymoronic since idiopathic means "no known cause")

Who No Longer Opposes MCS?

American Medical Association, which adopted a position paper critical of clinical ecology in 1992, said in 1994--in a joint statement with the American Lung Association, US EPA and US Consumer Product Safety Commission -- that the "current consensus" on MCS is that "complaints should not be dismissed as psychogenic, and a thorough workup is essential."
American College of Physicians, which adopted a position paper critical of clinical ecology in 1989, said in 1996 that it now has no position on MCS.
California Medical Association, which adopted a position paper critical of clinical ecology in 1986, reclassified it as a "historical document only" in 1993.

Last Modified: 10/23/06

25	Federal Government Agencies, Commissions, Institutes & Departments
28	State Government Agencies, Commissions, Legislatures & Departments
13	Local Government Agencies, Commissions, Councils & Departments
8	Federal Court Decisions
21	State Court Decisions
14	State Workers' Comp. Board Decisions
4	Canadian Federal Agencies
6	Canadian Provincial Agencies

Recognition of MCS as a Legitimate Disease and Disability

Who Opposes Recognition of MCS ?

Who No Longer Opposes MCS?