ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE ON TOXIC FUMES IN AIRCRAFT
UPDATE PETITION
By Guest Writer Trudie Dadd
“The flight surgeon, family doctor, hospital doctors and diagnostic centres - and nobody looked for harmful substances. Some claimed that I was just imagining things. Finally, a neurologist announced that I had multiple sclerosis and probably only had about two years to live. Fortunately, he was wrong. I had had my baby a few years earlier - my child was ill for the first five years, it had accumulated toxins from my body during pregnancy, as my doctor confirmed afterwards.” (Aida Infante, source ‘Süddeutsche’)
Artifical Intelligence is set to take off in a big way in the U.K. according to the U.K. Prime Minister’s speech on the subject recently. Many people are fearful of AI and quite rightly so, considering the potential dangers.
From a personal standpoint, I’ve enjoyed my interactions with ChatGPT in the way it currently operates, because it doesn’t have the capability to twist words or context or to hide the truth.
It has even explained how it learns, which in the wrong hands could most certainly be a danger.
At present it seems to be in good hands and long may that continue.
ChatGPT can make mistakes, and words to that effect are written on the website. As an example, it told me that all aircraft have filtration systems onboard which provide fresh, clean air; but I explained why that information was incorrect and it analysed the studies I provided with lightening speed and even summarised them within seconds, apologised, corrected itself and we carried on.
It provided me with information regarding HEPA filters at the same time and explained why they do not filter fumes. It also mentioned some of the concerns with claims made by the aviation industry regarding their effectiveness as well as concerns with maintenance.
However, in its current form AI doesn’t learn from being corrected - only during the current conversation.
It’s a very useful tool and a great resource for information, analysis, and clarification when researching specific subjects. While it can’t provide direct links to studies, it can guide you to reliable sources and suggest relevant study titles in key research areas. It doesn’t learn in real time or from interactions, nor does it retain memory of previous conversations, meaning it doesn’t advance its learning from those exchanges. Instead, it works with the information it was originally trained on, plus updates from 2023.
However, it’s always polite, friendly, and incredibly helpful, with a vast amount of information on Aerotoxic Syndrome, including the health issues, illnesses, and diseases resulting from acute (high-level) exposures during fume events, as well as from repeated chronic (low-level) exposures during normal operations. These exposures come from aircraft engine oil, hydraulic fluid, exhaust from other aircraft, and ground equipment, with various mechanisms and pathways within the human body that cause injury. In fact, on this topic, it is up to date and highly competent.
Which is more than can be said for the UK Government’s scientific experts, particularly The Committee on Toxicity (COT) and the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC), who continue to ignore recent scientific research as well as documents and findings sent to them. This information could help fill the knowledge gaps they’ve repeatedly mentioned and could contribute to the recognition of Aerotoxic Syndrome. Instead, these committees continue to work in ignorance and arrogance, dismissing the injuries and deaths caused, which has led to the denial of appropriate medical testing, care, and support for those who desperately need it.
Our governments are undoubtedly aware that exposure of this cover-up will have explosive consequences once it finally comes to light, due to the extent of their scientific experts' actions over decades. Not only have they concealed documents and ignored critical scientific evidence, they’ve also distorted the well-established science on the dangers of repeated chronic exposure to fumes or vapors containing organophosphates and the long-term illnesses and diseases that can occur.
As a result, current scientific experts within the UK Government cling to the pseudoscience perpetuated by their predecessors in the Committee on Toxicity (COT) and the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC) from the late 1990s through 2014. They refuse, under any circumstances, to reconsider their stance. The COT’s 2024 statement on Aircraft Cabin Air Quality only reinforces their determination to ignore the truth, highlighting both their ignorance of the subject and their unwavering arrogance in their refusal to acknowledge the once well-established science on chronic exposure and dismissing new, credible evidence of other pathways and mechanisms of injury.
The Zuckerman Document 1951:
See VI. DANGERS TO MAN — MODE OF ACTION
http://www.oprus2001.co.uk/zuck1951.htm
Poisoning by the following chemicals were previously recognised as Industrial Diseases in the U.K. from 1958 to 1992, when they were then consolidated under one heading which became known as Disease C3.
These documents have never been digitalised and are only available as photos, which I can’t attach here. They were found in a file (along with many others) held by the National Archives. That file had been officially closed until 2079. Fortunately access was gained:
Nature of Occupation: The use or handling of, or exposure to the fumes of, or vapour containing:
Poisoning by:
Disease Number 3 - Phosphorus - (Pesticides)
Disease Number 11 - Tri-cresyl Phosphate
Disease 12 - Tri-phenyl Phosphate’
Our Government were well aware of the dangers all that time ago - they also knew that repeated chronic exposure was, to quote the Zuckerman document above -
‘…but chronic toxicity is the main problem. Repeated absorption of parathion*may result in cumulative poisoning.’ (* Parathion being representative of the organophosphate group.)
These documents also confirm what was known by the U.K. Government and their scientific experts:
U.K. HSE MS17 -1980 http://www.oprus2001.co.uk/ms171980.pdf
U.K. HSE MS17 -1987: http://www.oprus2001.co.uk/ms171987.pdf
It’s important to remember that organophosphates are generally not used on their own, they are used commercially as part of chemical mixtures (formulations) in pesticides, aircraft engine oil etc.
The health effects of these mixtures which includes solvents/VOC’s has never been investigated or evaluated, nor have the cumulative and synergistic effects.
Fortunately, outside of our governments, science is evolving and advancing as it should, and is now providing us with the answers.
An article on Chronic Organophosphate Toxicity (2023) https://www.emdocs.net/toxcard-chronic-organophosphate-toxicity/
The COT, who advise the U.K. Government’s Department for Transport on Aviation, has not yet compiled a list of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDC’s) which are known to cause injury at repeated low levels via hormonal pathways. (There are many EDC’s in aircraft engine oil and hydraulic fluid.)
The EU released their list of EDC’s in December 2022.
This cover up hasn’t only involved pilots, cabin crew and passengers exposed to contaminated air onboard aircraft, it includes farmers and their family members, rural residents and gulf war veterans; all of whom have been exposed to fumes or vapour from chemical formulations containing organophosphates and in many cases there has been the addition of a pyrethroid called permethrin, used as an insecticide in the first Gulf War as well as onboard aircraft.
One of the methods employed in this cover up is the claim of psychological mechanisms being a plausible alternative for the physical symptoms, illnesses and diseases caused by exposure, rather than toxic mechanisms.
‘The "NOCEBO EFFECT" Fraud.
The term ‘Nocebo Effect’ was coined in 1961 by Walter Kennedy in connection with patients’ reactions to inert (un harmful) substances, usually in medical trials for pharmaceutical drugs.
Science has proven the Placebo Effect in that substances with no medical properties can be used to beneficial effect in patients who believe that the treatment can cure.
The Nocebo Effect is claimed to work in the opposite way in that a patient believes that a substance can harm them and suffers symptoms as a result.
The Nocebo effect is therefore similar to the effects of Voodoo in that there is a belief of harm which can become a reality.
However. The Nocebo Effect is being used fraudulently to prevent those exposed to known harmful chemicals getting the correct medical diagnosis, treatments, benefits and financial compensation.
It is criminal.
The clue is in the official definition of the Nocebo Effect which suggests "illness from environmental exposures that are perceived as hazardous".
Most people had no idea that they were being exposed to toxic chemicals.
Most would perhaps be distressed by the smell of a chemical or fumes from it but would not be able to mentally induce the symptoms linked to the chemicals they could smell because they would not know what those symptoms were.
Those working in agriculture, for example, are always told that the chemicals they use were tested and proven safe before they were allowed to be sold.
In fact in early years there was no protection offered at all.
Chemicals were even mixed using bare hands. Some turned the skin yellow.
But they were all declared to be "safe".
Actually, apparently so "safe" that ministers even ate DDT from a spoon before cameras. (Video in the link).
When the truth about the danger of the chemical eventually showed to an extent when it could no longer be hidden, the authorities did not say that wildlife suffered from a Nocebo effect. They banned the chemical.
Hundreds of previously declared "safe" pesticides have been banned once the truth about their dangerous effects was known.
With chemical poisonings the symptoms come first and identifying the cause comes later, if at all.
In this way, despite the poisoning diagnosis, patients are left abandoned to their fate with improper medical treatments and little or no financial support.
Should they fall into the hands of dishonest psychiatrists they may well be drugged into silence or sectioned with all their assets taken from them.
The classic murder scene in movies has the person who is being slowly poisoned being told by the would-be murderer that the symptoms are being imagined by the unwitting victim, who must be going insane.
It is a ploy used by poisoners to ensure that the victim dies but over time the truth is often realised and the criminal is caught and punished.
Those responsible for regulating these dangerous chemicals should never resort to such tactics.
In cases where there is no formal recognition of environmental exposure as a cause of illness, governments or corporations may use the nocebo argument to avoid responsibility. This is seen in industries like aviation, where the long-term health effects of environmental factors—like exposure to aircraft fumes—are often minimized or ignored.”
Nocebo/Psychogenic Effects were employed in Germany in the early/mid 1990’s by Lufthansa German Airlines’ insurance underwriters, - “BG”-Berufsgenossenschaft who added the nocebo/psychological terminology when cases were brought against the airline by crew for injury from contaminated air in aircraft.
In a German news report from 2010, former Lufthansa Chief Stewardess Aida Infante was interviewed regarding her experience and the following was revealed:
Süddeutsche.de:
“What did the doctors say when your health continued to deteriorate?”
Infante: “For two years I went to the flight surgeon, family doctor, hospital doctors and diagnostic centres - and nobody looked for harmful substances. Some claimed that I was just imagining things. Finally, a neurologist announced that I had multiple sclerosis and probably only had about two years to live. Fortunately, he was wrong. I had had my baby a few years earlier - my child was ill for the first five years, it had accumulated toxins from my body during pregnancy, as my doctor confirmed afterwards.”
‘Sueddeutsche.de: Now you finally had your diagnoses - how did your employer react?
Infante: “I went to the flight surgeon with my sick note, which read "reduced perfusion in the brain, presumably due to pesticides". They didn't let my lawyer come along to the interview, even though it was about whether I would keep my job. However, the flight surgeon noted "rheumatoid clinical picture of unclear origin". I asked if he was serious. And he showed me about 3,000 files and said: "Oh girl, all colleagues who have a similar condition to you. But remember who my employer is." ‘
Source Article in ‘Süddeutsche’ “Gift in der Luft Ex-Stewardess fliegt nur noch mit Sauerstoffzelt”: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/reise/flugverkehr-gift-in-der-luft-ex-stewardess-fliegen-nur-noch-mit-sauerstoffzelt-1.988179
Long-term low-dose exposure has been shown to induce liver and kidney damage in animal studies, indicating potential organ toxicity. Permethrin is also an Endocrine Disrupting Chemical (EDC).
The pesticide in Aida’s case was confirmed to be permethrin which is the active ingredient used in the insecticide sprays sprayed by cabin crew members in the aircraft cabin before arrival in certain countries (lists of countries who require the spraying are available online).
Aida Infante was also repeatedly exposed to “low levels”engine oil fumes, (known to contain many EDC’s) as all airline crew are. In her case as well as many others’ permanent damage to the nervous system and various organs remained and resulted in the loss of her job and forced her to make huge changes in her life style in order to survive
Continue reading Trudie Dadd’s article in full here .
Part 2 - The interests
For further information on Aerotoxic Syndrome visit Unfiltered:
Petition update · Artificial Intelligence Knows