ALLERGIES AND COPING WITH CHEMICAL EXPOSURE: NATURAL GAS
First on the list is natural gas. The case of Ellen Sanders is an extreme example of what natural gas can do to susceptible people. Many more people are less dramatically, but just as insidiously, affected by this product.
The use of the word “natural” in this context is misleading. Natural gas comes from the earth, but by and large it has lain there, trapped, for millennia. It is only in the past century that man has tapped this resource and brought himself into physical contact with it. Thus, natural gas is highly unnatural as far as the human body is concerned—a substance with which the body has no physiological method of coping. Synthetic chemicals are also added to this “natural” product, such as the one used to give it its characteristic “skunky” odor.
A leaking gas line is, of course, a life-threatening hazard: each year over a thousand people die of gas poisoning in the home. An equally serious threat, in my opinion, is posed by the day-in and day-out inhalation of minute quantities of this same poisonous substance by the chemically susceptible.
We have been convinced by skillful advertising and public relations that natural gas is not only natural, but “safe” and “clean.” Yet studies at the University of California and elsewhere have shown that the carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide levels in a vented kitchen become as high as in Los Angeles during a smog attack, when an oven has been heated to 350°F. for one hour. If the kitchen does not have an exhaust fan, these levels climb to three times the Los Angeles smog level in the same period. Few people would not be susceptible to such high levels of indoor air pollution.
There are individuals, however, who are kept in a perpetual state of illness by far lower levels of the same poisonous substances. The gas which emanates from normal pilot lights or escapes from a well-saturated stove is often the main source of a patient’s illness.
Given a choice, then, everyone should choose an electric range over a gas range. The first rule of prevention in this field is to minimize one’s exposure to utility gas.
Since changing the stove might very well entail some expense, it is advisable to test oneself for reactions to the gas range first. This can be done by temporarily removing the range from the house, if at all possible. (A shut-off stove is better than a connected one but still disseminates gas into the environment.) Electric appliances such as a hot plate can be substituted for the range while the test is under way.
After the gas stove has been removed for a week or so, it can then be returned. The reader should keep a symptom diary, in which changes (positive or negative) in his condition can be noted. Both the removal of the gas stove and its reintroduction may be accompanied by changes in health. In cases in which the stove is definitely incriminated as a cause of symptoms, it should be permanently removed.
Although there may be some expense involved in making this change, it is a worthwhile investment in health. Several thousand patients have been guided in removing their gas ranges on the basis of such positive tests and not one has complained about the cost or reported being dissatisfied with the change.
*104\110\2*
Categories: Allergies | Tags: Allergies | No Comments
