I didn’t realize when I started my study on 2-butoxyethanol over 3 years ago … that that’s what I’d find, but I do believe I have made a major medical discovery … and I’m neither a medical person nor a researcher.
I believe 2-butoxyethanol is the primary cause of Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome, and that doctors don’t find the fatigue because the red blood cell counts appear to be in normal range for many years; and they don’t know that blood in urine is significant for etheylene glycol monobutyl ether’s harm … to prove this chemical’s harm you have to prove THE FATIGUE that doctors say they don’t know what it is.
So, red blood cells that are small-sized and blood in urine are 2 red flags for this chemical’s effects. AND the other clues, such as the odd assortment of CFS symptoms. It has a very strong 2nd hand exposure. I believe that if you were around someone who was strongly exposed … that you could get exposed by getting their ‘breath’ in your eyes. Vapors in eyes is not realized to be an exposure. Gulf war vets have said, “Why is it that our spouses … & children born before we were deployed to the gulf in 90-91 … also come down with ‘the syndrome’ upon our return?” I believe it is 2nd hand solvent exposure. The chemical’s I’m talking about are on the list of solvents and pesticides the gulf war troops were exposed to. It is both.
But apparently it is not acceptable to have a passion on something even on a first post. (Started in general topics - moderator moved to Cecil’s thread) & someone objects to my 'this ‘n that’ content (which is what it was)
I can tell you this, what I have done in researching this chemical on my own, I have done for free. I believe I have stumbled onto a major medical discovery of the century … yet, because my viewpoint is different than the mainstream, you are not interested?
Well, if you are not interested in this topic, then please don’t reply to this thread. The webpages that I wrote were to further express my views. Do you object to that, too?
I would have never looked into it in the first place, had someone in my family not worked on the Exxon Valdez oil spill cleanup & was harmed by it. The only chemical of harm listed on the new product was 2-butoxyethanol. So, unlike many who are harmed by this chemical, we knew what harmed him
OK, your first post was moved because it appeared to the Moderator that you were commenting on Cecil’s Column. (This may have something to do with the fact that you opened that thread with a direct reference to the column.)
On your next post, you continued the theme of warning of the dangers of 2-butoxyethanol and a different Moderator saw your post as one that was hyping a particular web site and closed it.
You have now re-posted almost your exact first post, here. I understand that you are looking to spread the news about your discovery, but I am not sure that the Straight Dope is the best place to do that.
Do you have an actual topic for debate? (Please note that when Moderator Samclem suggested posting in Great Debates, he specifically mentioned defining a topic with a narrower scope.)
I do not want to appear unwelcoming, but this site is not really the place for general medical warnings. If you can suggest a particular topic for debate, fine, otherwise I will close this thread, as well.
What exactly was your study? Your research methods?
Around here, you’re going to have to back that up with some evidence. The fact that this chemical is used in a variety of places, two of which people have gotten sick while working around, is not proof.
In order to get this research taken seriously, you are going to need to at least find out how much exposure causes the symptoms on the MSDS.
If you are really interested in discussing this at the Straight Dope, be prepared to answer questions. Read some of the threads in each forum- get a feel for where your topic should be placed. Narrow it down to smaller questions/topics- perhaps select one point from your original post and offer it up for discussion, along with your evidence for that point.
That’s really not the issue here, I assure you. Rework your ideas into a more narrowly focused, coherent post, and you will get a better response. Again, you’re going to need facts to back up your claims. Things that you posted on your own website are not sufficient. That’s the equivalent of ‘Why?’, ‘Because I said so.’
“I Recognize the pattern” of a chemical’s harm. It is the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome pattern. I’m not an expert in any normal fashion … but I do recognize the pattern of 2-butoxyethanol harm.
I saw another example of this kind of thing on History Channel last night. “Failure is not an Option” covering the Space program. When Apollo 5 lost its electrical source … something like that, the mission appeared to be doomed, even the loss of the astronauts was looming as a possibility
When John Aaron remembered seeing the same data pattern at NASA controls a year before. He calls out, "OCX to OX’ Flip the switch. Turns out the astronaut knew where the switch was, over his right shoulder, he flipped it, and data reappeared, the problem had been fixed.
I feel sort of like a John Aaron in another field.
I recognize the pattern of harm of 2-butoxyethanol
OK, I appreciate you comments, but it is very difficult to break down, because it causes such an odd assortment of symptoms.
Surely you noticed the link on pesticides and solvents gulf war troops were exposed to … another source … and 2-butoxyethanol AND diethylene glycol monobutyl ether are both on the list.
There is a saying that if you spend an hour a day for five years you can be an expert in anything you want to. I think that, conservatively speaking, I’ve talked to MANY people with known and suspected exposure … and read up on the research of this chemical for 4-5 hours a day EVERY day for since May 27, 2002
True, but I will guarantee that they have also been exposed to (and even consumed) dihydrogen monoxide–every one of them.
That is why such investigations need more than simply accumulated anecdotes and apparent coincidences. I am not saying that you are in error, but you need better tests (with controls) to persuade other people that you have found anything useful.
Mother-Margaret, I have merged your two separate threads (the other is now post #5, here) into a single thread. They are basically discussions of the same topic and it is not generally considered polite to start mutiple threads on a single topic simultaneously.
There is a saying that the best way to cope with debt is not to open bills. :eek:
I think you need to distinguish between being fascinated with a subject and actually achieving something. I regularly listen to rock music (at least an hour a day for over 35 years) and I still can’t play any instrument, nor compose a song.
As others have suggested, why not test your knowledge by sending material to a medical journal? Give details of your research and your experiments.
Very few things can be tested over an Internet message board!
You’re arguing that the hemolysis caused by 2-butoxyethanol is the proximal cause of CFID? Can you provide a cite for hemolysis occurring in CFID patients? PubMed kicks back nothing in any of my searches. I see a lot of anecdotal stuff on your website but honestly, that’s not sufficient. Show me some peer-reviewed research.
Look dude, you admit that you’re not a medical professional and you’re not a professional researcher. I don’t mean to discourage you from learning things or making hypotheses, but you come in here spitting theories about Gulf War Syndrome without citing anything other than this website that I have an extremely hard time reading. Lay out your case in a fashion I can understand. FWIW, Wikipedia says that acute exposure causes the destruction of blood cells, but that it doesn’t accumulate in any plant or animal species. Here’s a PubMed abstract that suggests that you should perhaps be more worried about 2-butoxyethanol causing cancer than anything else.
Is it possible that 2-butoxyethanol exposure generates the pathology of CFID? Sure. But as tomndebb notes, Gulf War soldiers were exposed to all kinds of things including psychological stressors. I’d need to see a LOT more evidence before I’d even begin to consider 2-butoxyethanol as the pathogenic factor.
Personally, I’m interested in people not pulling a bunch of potentially related factoids and passing it off as the medical discovery of the century.
Apollo 5 was unmanned, you’re thinking of Apollo 12.
The capsule was struck by lightning during launch, which screwed up the telemetry (the electrical source was not LOST, that would have been a much larger problem).
He called out “Flight, try SCE to Aux.,” not “OCX to OX.”
Minor nitpick, but I think your second link is unrelated to immunological gene expression and more involved with examining abnormal expression of neuorologically-relevant proteins (such as ion channels and enzymes in synthesis pathways). The first link is very interesting though.
No kidding. It’s a joke to point out that correlation is not causation–even if you could establish correlation, which you can’t. 100% of criminals breathe air! Therefore, air causes crime. Right? Where is the flaw in my logic? Can you find it?
SECTION 11. - - - - - - - - - TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION - - - - - - - -
ACUTE EFFECTS
HUMAN EXPOSURE ABOVE 200 PPM CAN BE EXPECTED TO CAUSE NARCOSIS, DAMAGE
TO THE KIDNEY AND LIVER AND PRESENT AN ABNORMAL BLOOD PICTURE SHOWING
ERYTHROPENIA, RETICULOCYTOSIS, GRANULOCYTOSIS, LEUKOCYTOSIS AND WOULD
BE LIKELY TO CAUSE FRAGILITY OF ERYTHROCYTES AND HEMATURIA.
this is a good resource: Product #579556; 2-butoxyethanol
I took a copy of the 2003 MSDS
EPA was successfully lobbied by EPA to ‘delist’ it from regulation about 2 years ago
MORE, this MSDS:
CHRONIC EFFECTS
TARGET ORGAN(S):
BLOOD
KIDNEYS
LIVER
CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM
TESTES
OVEREXPOSURE MAY CAUSE REPRODUCTIVE DISORDER(S) BASED ON TESTS WITH LABORATORY ANIMALS.
TARGET ORGAN DATA
SENSE ORGANS AND SPECIAL SENSES (OTHER OLFACTION EFFECTS)
SENSE ORGANS AND SPECIAL SENSES (OTHER EYE EFFECTS)
BEHAVIORAL (GENERAL ANESTHETIC)
BEHAVIORAL (ALTERED SLEEP TIME)
BEHAVIORAL (SOMNOLENCE)
BEHAVIORAL (EXCITEMENT)
BEHAVIORAL (ATAXIA)
BEHAVIORAL (COMA)
BEHAVIORAL (ANALGESIA)
LUNGS, THORAX OR RESPIRATION (DYSPNAE)
LUNGS, THORAX OR RESPIRATION (OTHER CHANGES)
GASTROINTESTINAL (NAUSEA OR VOMITING)
GASTROINTESTINAL (OTHER CHANGES)
LIVER (TUMORS)
KIDNEY, URETER, BLADDER (HEMATURIA)
KIDNEY, URETER, BLADDER (OTHER CHANGES)
ENDOCRINE (TUMORS)
SKIN AND APPENDAGES (HAIR)
MATERNAL EFFECTS (UTERUS, CERVIX, VAGINA)
MATERNAL EFFECTS (OTHER EFFECTS ON FEMALE)
EFFECTS ON FERTILITY (PRE-IMPLANTATION MORTALITY)
EFFECTS ON FERTILITY (POST-IMPLANTATION MORTALITY)
EFFECTS ON FERTILITY (LITTER SIZE)
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENTAL ABNORMALITIES (MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM)
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENTAL ABNORMALITIES (CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM)
NUTRITIONAL AND GROSS METABOLIC (WEIGHT LOSS OR DECREASED WEIGHT GAIN)
NUTRITIONAL AND GROSS METABOLIC (CHANGES IN: METABOLIC ACIDOSIS)
TUMORIGENIC (CARCINOGENIC BY RTECS CRITERIA)
TUMORIGENIC (EQUIVOCAL TUMORIGENIC AGENT BY RTECS CRITERIA)
there is plenty of research out there
CFIDS proof? Check for blood in urine and hemolytic anemia first evidenced by small red blood cells and overactive immune system (autoimmune)
