German ETF Innovation (Exchange Traded Faeces) – Frankfurt Prepares New Post-Brexit Products : Management of Change is reaching fever pitch in the EU financial markets following the Brexit vote. As well as trying to encourage London bankers to relocate the Germans are developing innovative environmentally friendly trading products to encourage Start-ups.
The Key to Successful Trading In Poo is Finding Ways To Manage the Smell
In these times of post Brexit and US Election hangovers I am keenly looking out for good examples of Management of Change opportunities. Here is one that is, in my view, very ‘green’. In addition to this article I have also prepared a briefing in relation to ‘Trump’ issues – if you are interested in that the link is here (‘How to Prevent Smelly Trumps – Scientific Breakthrough…‘)
I was interested to read in last week’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung about the German Güllebörsen which can be roughly translated as their ‘Shit Exchange‘. Buying and selling ‘exchanges‘, like those used to trade commodities, are a useful way of improving economic efficiency. They put those who ‘have‘ in touch with those who ‘want‘. Futures and Options exchanges are an extension of this idea providing people with an opportunity to make the trade at a future date or by merely giving them the ‘option’ of buying or selling a commodity.
State of the art facilities and innovative products to encourage London City Traders To move to Frankfurt
But what about when the commodity is poo? Or to be more precise animal poo? For my masters dissertation about 25 years ago I researched setting up a new ‘exchange’ for the chemicals industry. The idea was to help producers and consumers of nasty smelling chemicals buy and sell more efficiently.
Well our German friends have gone one further and on their ‘shit exchange’ you can buy and sell some very nasty smelling products. To investigate this business in more detail I decided to take a look at the Nordrhein-WestfalenRegion’sNährstoffbörse. The word ‘Nährstoffbörse’ translates as ‘Nutrient Exchange‘ which I think uses a bit of artistic licence because it deals with buying and selling excretia from farm animals. I suppose the more descriptive name ‘Animal Shit Trading Website‘ struggled to get through the marketing department’s vetting process.
Frankfurt’s Latest Exchange Traded Commodity
The necessity to be able to trade in animal poo is underscored in German Law by the ‘Düngeverordnung‘ (Transl: ‘Dung Regulations’) which stipulates that the number of, for example cows or pigs, that a farmer can keep is limited by the availability of land needed to dispose of their poo. The idea behind this law is to control the amount of environmentally unfriendly contaminants like nitrates that get into the soil and then can enter the water table.
This means that a farmer may find he has more poo from his animals than he can use on his own land. This is where he needs the Shit Exchange – a managed way of trading in unwanted animal faeces. There are also other farmers who do not have enough fertiliser for their crops and would really appreciate someone dropping by with a truck load of poo. This demand often peaks in the spring time – precisely the period when animal farmer’s poo tanks are almost overflowing because they can’t ‘spread muck‘ during the winter snow.
Distributing Exchange Traded Commodities
The Nordrhein-Westfalen Regional Shit Exchange website provides details of how to take animal poo samples and where to send them. The relevant regional agricultural authority can then arrange sample testing (for a fee) – you need to specify what kind of poo it is – beef or dairy cattle, pig, horse, veal, chicken etc. You take 10 samples from your ‘vat’, mix them in a bucket and then send 0.75L in a bottle by post (specific details here). The sample is then analysed for various chemicals (e.g. Nitrogen, Ammonia, Phosphates, Potassium, Magnesium, Calcium, Solids etc.).
The analysis of the poo is important because as we say up-North: ‘All shit is not the same‘. The chemical characteristics of the poo help to determine its value to a potential customer and whether there is a risk of over-contaminating the local ground water with the wrong substances.
Making Liquid Commodities For Germany’s Newest Exchange
Also ensuring customer and supplier are geographically close is an important job for the exchange. In addition to reducing transport costs this also helps to minimise the number of faeces tankers moving around the German road system. Despite every effort on the part of the suppliers these vehicles can sometimes be a bit smelly. Distance minimization is also important because the vehicles generally have to return empty (it is rather difficult to find other products that you could sensibly transport in a poo tanker – even if you wash it first).
Adequate Good Quality Storage Is Important In Commodity Trading
So there you have it – a German environmentally friendly innovation in the area of risk management. In time I am sure they will introduce shit futures and options to further help manage farmers risks. I know that following Brexit there is a big movement to encourage the financial industry to move from the City of London to Frankfurt. Watch out you Brits you may have already missed the boat on the Frankfurt Shit Exchange!
A Diverse Economy Requires Multiple Sourcing Options
Changing Business Ethics – To Reduce Cancer Risk In Cars Improve UV Protection From Side Windows. Not all car manufacturers appear to have driver and passenger safety as their top priority. Although most windscreens provide high levels of protection from dangerous UV radiation this is not the case for the side windows in cars. Research (see list below) indicates many manufacturers install side windows in their vehicles with reduced UV protection compared with the windscreen. Could this be the next emissions scandal in the making?
Skin Cancer – A Basal Cell Carcinoma on the side of a patient’s nose
During the last year I found myself becoming more interested in the causes of skin cancer. This was partly due to allergy problems I experienced with my own skin last summer (reported here and here). At about the same time my father needed to have an operation for a Basel Cell Carcinoma on his nose. As a result of these events I found myself paying much more attention to that part of the body that most of us take for granted – our skin.
As I approach 60 years of age I am also becoming aware of how my skin changes with age. These changes are especially apparent where the skin is directly exposed to the elements – mainly the sun – like the hands and face. It is interesting to note how those areas that are less exposed to the sun have aged very little (perhaps a skin transplant from my bottom to my face could rejuvenate my youthful looks?). To highlight the impact of sunlight on ageing I have included a photo below from a 2012 article in the New England Journal of Medicine. It is of a man who had been driving trucks for 28 years and illustrates the damage to the side of his face caused by the lower levels of UV protection from his vehicle side window.
Damage to the Side of a truck driver’s face from years of exposure to sunlight through his vehicle’s side window (photo Courtesy of the New England Journal of Medicine).
Actually if you cover up the damaged part of his face it is interesting to observe how young the rest of the skin of this 68 year old man appears. This no doubt reflects the very high levels of UV protection the rest of his face received from the laminated front windscreen of his vehicle. One of the characteristics of the laminated glass used for vehicle windscreens is that it acts as a very good screen against UV light. Sadly this does not appear to be the case for the side windows on the left side window of his truck – presumably a different kind of glass was used.
This differential exposure to the damage cause by sunlight does not just lead to accelerated skin ageing – it can also lead to an increased incidence of skin cancer and other illnesses like cataracts of the eyes. There have been a number of studies in which a higher incidence of skin cancer and cataracts have been identified on the left side of people driving in countries where drivers sit on the left hand side of their vehicles. Interestingly studies in Australia where drivers sit on the right hand side (as in the UK and South Africa) have documented an increased incidence of sun related skin damage on the opposite side of the face.
Picture of a cataract in a human eye
The issue of road vehicle side window UV protection was addressed in an article published last week in the on-line scientific journal JAMA Ophthalmology. In this article Brian S. Boxer Wachler, MD, published the results of his investigations into levels of UV protection provided by windows of 29 vehicles from 15 car manufacturers. He used a UV-A measuring device to measure the amount of blockage of UV-A radiation by windshields and side windows of the vehicles tested.
Generally the level of protection provided by the windshield at the front of these vehicles was high with an average blockage of 96% (the range measured was from 95-98%). However the average UV-A blockage from the side windows was much lower at 71% with some vehicles measuring as low as 44%. The table of results from the article for each vehicle is included below (click on the table to enable enlargement of the text).
Results of Vehicles UV Tested by Dr Boxer Wachter (Click on table to see larger version)
From the results of the research it is interesting to note that some of the most prestigious brands (2012 Porsche Turbo S, 2013 BMW 320i/328ia) had markedly lower protection from the side windows compared with the front windscreens (40 and 42% lower respectively). Other prestige makes gave much better protection from the side – like the Lexus models: Rx350 (2011), Rx450H (2013) and RX350 (2011) – which gave side window UV protection reductions of only 0 – 4%. Some manufacturers showed year to year variation for example a Mercedes 5550 from 2013 gave 95% UV protection from its side windows whereas a Mercedes E550 from 2009 only provided 44% protection. Both cars provided 96% protection through their front windscreen.
Age of vehicle was not a good indicator of protection with a Buick Riviera from 1990 giving better side protection (65%) than a 2014 Audi A6 or Q5 (63 and 64% respectively). Just based on UV side protection the old Buick would be a better buy than the 2013 Porsche Turbo S (56% side protection).
Table highlighting the difference in UV protection between the front windscreens and the side windows (Click on table to see larger version)
As all the manufacturers shown in the table above were able to provide consistently good UV protection through their front windscreens the lack of consistent protection from the side was clearly not a technology issue. Presumably other issues like cost were taken into account by those manufacturers of vehicles with low levels of side protection. The lamination process used in the manufacture of windscreens (to make them break more safely upon impact) also helps to improve the level of UV protection provided.
Skin cancer is one of the most common forms of cancer in the world – causing about 40% of cancer globally. At least 90% of skin cancer is due to exposure to UV radiation. Drivers and passengers often presume they do not need to wear sunblock inside their vehicles – an illusion that is made worse by the cool atmosphere provided by the use of air conditioning. Cataracts, which cause blindness, are found in about half the population of the USA by the age of 80. They can also be caused by exposure to UV light. Many parents provide their children with booster seats in their cars which raise the position of their face closer to the side windows. The above research indicates that for certain vehicles the closer your skin is to the side window the greater is the potential harm from UV radiation. Therefore appropriate protective measures should be taken (long sleeved clothing, hats and sun block when sitting inside a car).
Baby with cataracts in both eyes
Of the types of skin cancer the Basal Cell Carcinoma is the most common and can usually be treated successfully without becoming malignant. The next most common form of skin cancer is the squamous cell carcinoma, this is more likely to become malignant than the Basel Cell type. The least common form but the one most likely to become malignant and cause death is the Malignant Melanoma. The best way to reduce the risk from all these and all other forms of skin cancer is to minimise your exposure to UV radiation from the sun. When you buy your next car it is worth checking out the UV specification for all the windows – in particular look for a significant difference in the UV protection levels between the windscreen (generally high) and the side windows (currently very variable). They should both be similar and provide high UV blockage.
By the way don’t presume that if your car has tinted side windows you are protected from UV radiation. Generally the tints reduce the transparency of the window to light in the visible part of the spectrum – therefore the tint may have limited, if any, impact on the level of harmful UV radiation that can pass through the glass.
Basal cell carcinomaSquamous Cell CarcinomaSkin Cancer Melanoma
Safe motoring!
Chris Duggleby
Chris Duggleby started his scientific career studying Bacteriology and Virology at the Manchester University Medical School. From there he went on to spend over 35 in the chemicals and oil industries which included setting up a polymers research and development group in Geneva, Switzerland for a major international chemicals company. Following an MBA from Warwick University he went on to lead a number of international manufacturing and marketing operations in the Chemicals, Plastics and Oil industries. This included being the founding President of Formosa BP Chemicals Corporation in Asia. His work involved living and working in Europe, Asia, the USA, the Middle East, and Russia. More recently he was invited to take on a senior leadership position in the Audit Department of the BP International Oil Group. Here he used his global change and risk management experience to help the group reshape its management structures and processes following a major environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He has now retired to focus on writing about risk management and producing music in his studios near London, in the Alps and Cape Town. If you are interested in risk management check out his RiskTuition.com or BizChangers.com (management of change) sites. He has also recently launched the JointVentureRisk.com site.
If you found this article interesting please consider taking a look at some of his other recent reports on similar subjects.
Plastic Packaging Destroyed By Superbugs – New Threat To PET Products Found In Kyoto Waste: Have you ever wondered what would happen if the PET bottles used to store water and carbonated drinks could be degraded by bugs. Think of the mess in the fridge. Well it has started to happen in Japan. The “non-biodegradable” plastic PET bottle, can now be eaten by bacteria. We only created this inert plastic 70 years ago and the bacterium Ideonella sakaiensis can already eat it! Should we reinvent glass?
A Thing Of The Past?The PET bottle – already the target of naturally occurring superbugs
Those of us who have worked with microbes are well aware of their powerful potential to adapt to new environments. Nearly 40 years ago I carried out research on Enterococcus in the Bacteriology Department at Manchester University Medical school. My dissertation? Well these little organisms that live in the human gut were able to transmit little pieces of genetic information between one another during sex (or ‘conjugation’ as bacteria prefer to call it). This genetic information (small circular pieces of DNA called plasmids) contained the genes for multiple antibiotic resistance.
When humans have sex they sometimes share sexually transmitted diseases with one another. When bacteria have sex they can pass on things that are much more useful – like immunity to the powerful antibiotics we use to try and kill them. These are the same antibiotics we feed in abundance to our cows, sheep, pigs and chickens – and guess where the plasmids with antibiotic resistance probably originated? Considering their intelligent application of sex it is hardly surprising that there are a lot more bacteria in the world than people (in fact 90% of the cells in our ‘own’ bodies are microbes!).
My old friend Enterococcus faecalis (guess where it lives?) about to give birth to twins
Due to my familiarity with bacterial ingenuity I was not surprised when on March 11th 2016 researchers in Japan announced that they had isolated a strain of bacteria that eats PET plastic. They named this PET eater Ideonella sakaiensis. It was discovered by Shosuke Yoshida and co-workers atthe Kyoto Institute of Technology using samples taken from the soil and waste water around Japanese plastics recycling plants.
I remember from my own time living in Japan (30 years ago) that this nation was one of the first to seriously embrace plastics recycling so presumably the local bugs have had a bit longer to evolve the necessary enzymes. However, in evolutionary terms, this is an incredibly short period of time to develop new protein based enzyme systems. In this case the enzymes can break down a man made plastic that did not exist over 70 years ago.
The PET eating bacteria Ideonella sakaiensis came from waste near recycling plants in Kyoto
The newly discovered bacteria has evolved two enzymes which systematically break down the synthetic polymer that PET is made up of. You can think of this polymer as a microscopic chain of tough beads which are connected by an almost unbreakable thread. Well the bacteria is able to break down this thread separating the polymer into the individual beads (known as monomers). It then breaks down these monomers into two smaller chemical components (ethylene glycol and terephthalic acid) which it can digest using in normal biological processes to derive food and energy.
Tough molecular structure of the PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) used in Plastic bottles
This development opens up a couple of interesting possibilities. On the one hand the bug Ideonella sakaiensis could be used itself to break down PET based plastics. There is however one snag – at 30C it takes about 6 weeks to totally break down a piece of plastic the size of a finger nail. The second possibility involves genetic engineering techniques. The genes which contain the genetic information to produce the two new proteins could be isolated from this bacteria and then inserted into another faster growing bacteria like E.coli.
This idea of inserting a ‘foreign’ gene into a different bacteria is hardly new. It is not that dissimilar to the approach I used many years ago when transferring my plasmids for antibiotic resistance. However today it is possible to use special gene ‘cut and paste‘ enzymes to specifically place a new gene into a bacteria’s chromosome (typical enzymes used are called ‘restriction endonucleases‘). Rather than my primitive system requiring bacterial sex the modern approach uses different carrier (vector) systems to get the genes (DNA) into the microbes. For example they can use viruses (bacteriophages) that infect bacteria by injecting their DNA into them. Molecular geneticists add the foreign gene to the viruses own DNA so they are injected into the bacteria together.
Bacteriophage used by molecular biologists to inject genes into Bacteria. This virus lands on the bacteria and then ‘squirts’ its DNA into it.
The scientific community is quite excited by the prospects of harnessing microbial ingenuity to help us clear some of the rubbish that we ourselves have created through overuse of plastics. However I think one point has been overlooked by those trying to make use of this rapid evolutionary development. One of the reasons we started using plastics in place of materials like wood, cardboard and paper was their inertness. With plastic bottles and films people did not have to think about the shelf life of the packaging because usually the contents go off much quicker.
However in a world in which bugs can now break down our plastics products it may not be long before people start to discover their packaging is not as inert as they thought. Although Ideonella sakaiensis can take about 6 weeks to break down a small piece of plastic this is just the beginning. As a result of evolutionary ‘survival of the fittest‘ – more efficient plastic eating bacteria will quickly evolve. Soon those PET water bottles on the shelf could start leaking after just a few weeks. Through our thoughtless overuse of plastics (as with antibiotics) we have potentially destroyed the usefulness of what was an incredibly useful and hygienic packaging material. Watch this space!
Chris Duggleby
Look out for the bugs – PET is not just used for bottles (applications include films, engineering plastics and textiles – like the main sail on this boat)
The original paper about the discovery of this microbe “A bacterium that degrades and assimilates poly(ethylene terephthalate)” published in Science on March 11th 2016 by Shosuke Yoshida et al can be found using the link here.
Chris Duggleby started his scientific career studying Bacteriology and Virology at the Manchester University Medical School. From there he went on to spend over 35 in the chemicals and oil industries which included setting up a polymers research and development group in Geneva, Switzerland for a major international chemicals company. Following an MBA from Warwick University he went on to lead a number of international manufacturing and marketing operations in the Chemicals, Plastics and Oil industries. This included being the founding President of Formosa BP Chemicals Corporation in Asia. His work involved living and working in Europe, Asia, the USA, the Middle East, and Russia. More recently he was invited to take on a senior leadership position in the Audit Department of the BP International Oil Group. Here he used his global change and risk management experience to help the group reshape its management structures and processes following a major environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He has now retired to focus on writing about risk management and producing music in his studios near London, in the Alps and Cape Town. If you are interested in risk management check out his RiskTuition.com or BizChangers.com (management of change) sites. He has also recently launched the JointVentureRisk.com site.
If you found this article interesting please consider taking a look at some of his other recent reports on similar subjects.
Can you Get Cancer from Leather Handbags and Shoes? Allergies from Jewellery? – The German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit or BVL) has identified Excessive Chromium 6 and Nickel Levels in items made from leather and some pieces jewellery.
While you read the following article why not listen to my e-baroque compositions – just click on the box below:
or if techno music is more your cup of tea here are my techno/ambient compositions:
I hope you find the article below interesting…you can find more information like this at chrisduggleby.com .
Young Lady carrying out a ‘hands-on’ investigation into a hand bag from a reputable supplier
The German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL) addresses the management of risks and coordinates monitoring for the Federal States (Bundesländer) of tobacco products, cosmetics and other goods which either come directly into contact with people or with food intended for human consumption. Under the heading of goods they include leather articles like handbags, shoes and gloves as well as jewellery and items used in body piercings.
Entrance to the Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit (BVL) in Berlin
Since 2014 the BVL has been investigating the levels of the carcinogenChromium 6 in leather products and the amounts of allergenNickel being taken up by the human body from jewellery and body piercing products. These are risk areas considered by the BVL to be of particular concern to human heath due to the linkage of chromium 6 with cancer and the potential for nickel to elicit serious contact allergies. I explained more about allergic contact dermatitis and its various causes in my recent article on this subject which described how I became an unwilling guinea pig to an allergy caused by laundry additives. Click on the title below if you would like to read this article and see some rather unpleasant photos (of my affected body parts):
Allergenic Nickel in Jewellery and Clothing Accessories
The BVL published its latest research results in a German report on the 23rd November 2015. The report presented the findings of its investigation into whether products were exceeding the permitted maximum levels of Nickel which can be absorbed into the human body. It highlighted that jewellery articles on sale in Germany continue to exceed the permitted levels of this serious allergen. Nickel causes contact allergies when the nickel ion enters the human body – the potential to enter the body increases when the item containing the nickel is frequently or constantly being worn like a ring, an ear ring or other piercing item.
Baby with Multiple Ear Piercings
Highlights from the BVL study of nickel uptake from jewellery/accessories:
556 Samples were tested
17.4 percent of the earrings and other piercings tested exceeded the permitted maximum limits (Nickel uptake of 0,35 µg/cm²/week)
4.9 percent of jewellery, fasteners, accessories exceeded the permitted limits (0,88 µg/cm²/week)
There had been no improvement in results since an earlier study in 2008
The results indicated that it is not simply the cheapest fashion items that lead to a serious risk of an allergic reaction. An item made from 18-carat white gold for example can contain 20% nickel as an alloy. Such items of jewellery or wrist watch casings can cause allergic skin contact reactions in about 1 in 8 people. The problem with nickel is made worse if the body’s immune system is sensitized to the metal through pronounced exposure. Once sensitized even a low level exposure can lead to a severe allergic reaction. Some samples tested by the BVG had levels of nickel which were 10 times the permitted maximum level.
Example of a white gold wedding ring and a diamond engagement ring
Cancer Causing and Allergenic Chromium 6 in Leather
The investigation by the DVG also uncovered continuing high levels of another nasty contaminant – chromium 6 (or hexavalent chromium) – in leather products. They summarised their results as follows:
386 Samples were tested
16 Percent had chromium 6 concentrations exceeding the maximum permitted limit (3 mg/kg)
Main culprits were leather gloves (33% exceeded) , bags (25%), work clothes(23%) and footwear (13%)
12 percent of samples of products produced in Germany exceeded the permitted level. For products produced in China this increased to 33%.
In addition to causing allergic reactions chromium has also been identified as a carcinogen. The form of chromium investigated by the BVG is the highly dangerous 6 or hexavalent form of the chemical. Some forms of chromium used in processing leather are relatively harmless but even these can be converted to the 6 form if appropriate precautions are not taken during the tanning process. In addition to causing severe skin contact allergies chromium 6 in high concentrations is a very toxic chemical and known genotoxic carcinogen. In leather chromium 6 compounds are sometimes used to produce a red or pink colouration.
How confident are you that the shoes you are buying do not contain excessive levels of chromium 6?
These days we purchase many of our fashion items on-line and sometimes the origins of such goods are unclear. In addition, imported goods may not follow the strict product content requirements demanded by our local legislation. One way we can try to use our consumer power to reduce these risks is to require suppliers to confirm in writing that their goods fully conform with local laws and regulations concerning levels of chromium 6 (for leather) and nickel (jewellery, clasps, piercings, buttons, wrist watch cases). Good luck!
Chris Duggleby
To see the original report from the BVL (written in German) please use the link below:
A lady creatively using clothing to enhance the visibility of her leather shoes (from a reputable supplier)
Chris Duggleby started his scientific career studying Bacteriology, Virology and Immunology at the Manchester University Medical School. From there he went on to spend over 35 in the chemicals and oil industries which included setting up a polymers research and development group in Geneva, Switzerland for a major international chemicals company. Following an MBA from Warwick University he went on to lead a number of international manufacturing and marketing operations in the Chemicals, Plastics and Oil industries. His work involved living and working in Europe, Asia, the USA, the Middle East, and Russia. More recently he was invited to take on a senior leadership position in the Audit Department of the BP International Oil Group. Here he used his global change and risk management experience to help the group reshape its management structures and processes following a major environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He has now retired to focus on writing about risk management and producing music in his studios near London, in the Alps and Cape Town. If you are interested in risk management check out his RiskTuition.com or BizChangers.com (management of change) sites.
If you found this article interesting please consider taking a look at some of my other recent reports on similar subjects.
This article was originally published on the ChrisDuggleby.com website. The site has several articles on risk management – some with a distinct consumer focus. This particular subject was a little different because the victim was me.
While you read the following article why not listen to my e-baroque compositions – just click on the box below:
or if techno music is more your cup of tea here are my techno/ambient compositions:
I hope you find the article below interesting…please visit chrisduggleby.com again.
I have never suffered before from allergic skin reactions but a couple of months ago I was ‘poisoned‘ by something I had used in my washing machine. The effects were so bad they prevented me working for about 6 weeks and affected my whole body except for my face, the palms of my hands and my feet. At an early stage in the illness I decided to keep a photographic record to share with others who might have similar problems and hopefully provide some encouragement that the problem can be eliminated if you can identify the exact cause.
The problem I an referring to is Allergic Contact Dermatitis. This is a reaction to some chemical – or biochemical – in your environment that you have come into contact with and developed an allergic reaction to. Let me first share with you some photographs of myself shortly after I realised I have a problem (these were taken approximately two weeks after I first came into contact with the product that caused the reaction). If you want to inspect more detail in any of my photographs simply click on them and you will see a high resolution version.
As you can see from these photographs I developed a rash and spots over large parts of my body. In addition to my chest and arms shown in the photos my legs and genital area were also affected. Because my face and the palms of my hands were not affected I suspected the problem may have been related to my clothing and tried to identify what changes I had made recently. I identified a number of suspects: new clothing (chemicals like formaldehyde are used to process these), recent changes to washing detergents (‘Persil colour capsules‘ from Unilever), softeners (Procter and Gamble‘s ‘Lenor‘) and my first use of a clothing whitener (‘White’n’Bright‘ from Dylon).
As I had recently only worn new clothes that had been thoroughly washed I eliminated these as a possible cause of my problem. However if you would like to find out more about formaldehyde related contact allergies and where this chemical is found try the link here. I was able to find examples on the internet of other people developing allergic reactions to Lenor and Persil Colour Capsules and the packaging for White’n’Bright by Dylon stated that it could cause an allergic reaction. To help you identify precisely which products I had been using here are some photographs of the packaging.
In my internet search for others with allergic reactions to Procter and Gamble’s Lenor I checked the Allergy UK site (the link is here). The Netmums forum also had some correspondence about Lenor (link here).
When researching whether others had similar allergy problems with Persil from Unilever I found the forum at Allergy UK again to be quite useful (the link is here) and also the forum at mumsnet (link is here). It should be noted that Persil is manufactured by Henkel (not Unilever)when purchasedin Germany and therefore this should be considered to be a different product when determining what may be causing an allergy. Research papers have also been written about the incidence rates of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from detergents – for example a paper examining allergy rates from patch tests using Procter & Gamble’s liquid and powder detergents can be found here. In their tests 0.7% of the population (5 out of 738 people who volunteered) were found to be allergic to the detergents tested.
As a result of my research and the localisation of my allergic reaction I was pretty certain it was probably caused by one of these three suspect products. Until I could identify which one it was I decided to stop using all three immediately. However this was sadly not enough. The thing causing the allergic reaction (the allergen) was already in my clothes and even though I tried not to use any of the clothes which had recently been washed my condition worsened considerably around day 20. Just prior to this I had been itching so severely that I decided to try and ease the irritation using a small hand towel soaked in cold water (a serious mistake). Take a look at the results….
This was a mistake because the towel had been washed in the whitener‘White’n’Bright’ sold by Dylon. Until this time my suspicions had been focused on my softener or detergent as the most likely cause – however I don’t use softener when washing towels. Before using the soaked towel I had been scratching the irritated area and I suspect the damaged skin made it easier for the allergen to enter into my body – possibly helped by the water. The two photographs above showed the swelling in my arms a few days after using the cool wet towel.
At about the same time I had a much needed siesta and slept for about an hour wearing a white t-shirt that had been washed thoroughly at least once following an earlier wash with the whitener. This lead to a burning sensation on my skin and swelling around my chest which was similar to that shown on my arms (above). My weight increased by over 3 kilos and my sister suggested that my expanded body made me look like the ‘Michelin Man‘.
More worrying to me (and fortunately not seen by my sister!) my scrotal sack increased to the size of a grapefruit – yes I had washed my undies in the whitener. Let me put your mind to rest – I do not intend to publish any photos of this part of my anatomy. Needless to say my genitals felt like they were on fire (sadly for the wrong reasons).
At this point I decided more radical action was necessary. I could try and wash all the clothes in which I had used the whitener but I was not sure how many times I would need to wash them. I did not want to take the risk of the reaction occurring again so I simply disposed of any white clothes which may have been ‘contaminated’ with the whitener made by Dylon. I had used the product (supplied in sachets) in 3 full washing machines and because I had not segregated the most recently washed clothes I could not be sure which items in my white wardrobe were contaminated and which were ‘OK’. So anything with the slightest risk of containing the allergen went in the garbage (over 8 dustbin bags full – including towels and bed linen).
A few days later things started to improve – the swelling gradually reduced. I continued to have spots, scars and the red skin rash which all lasted for another 2-3 weeks until the skin started to fall off. The scars on my wrists were particularly painful and prevented me using a keyboard (both the computer sort and my assorted musical instruments). The skin shedding may sound dramatic but it is similar to what happens a couple of weeks after you return from a holiday in which you have managed to acquire a nice brown sun tan. My home looked as if it had a constant sprinkling of snow as skin fell off for a couple of weeks (my vacuum cleaner went through a very active period – often being used twice per day). I actually felt better that the skin was falling off because I believed it was taking the allergen with it – my body appeared to be trying to cleanse itself of the ‘bad’ skin.
In the blog I prepared when this allergic reaction first appeared (link is here) I included a list of the kind of things that might cause allergic contact dermatitis. In case you have a similar reaction and are trying to identify the cause here is the list:
The most common items containing allergic stimulants (allergens) tend to be:
certain kinds of plants (like poison ivy, poison sumac and poison oak),
dyes and
items containing precious metals like nickel and gold.
Sometimes an everyday item may contain an unexpected allergen, for example nickel may be in bra stays, hairpins, eyelash curlers, frames of glasses, necklace clasps,zips, thimbles, watch straps, jewellery and insecticides. These are just some common causes – for a more comprehensive list you should consult your allergy specialist.
By day 36 things had improved considerably although I still itched in all the areas that had been in contact with the allergen – the itching appeared to be my body’s way of encouraging me to get rid of the unwanted skin layers:
When you are trying to identify what it is that is causing an outbreak of allergic contact dermatitis it can be helpful to consider the exact location of the skin response. Here is a list which might help you with your investigations:
a reaction around the ear-lobes may indicate nickel in an ear ring as the cause.
a reaction near the eyes may be due to cosmetics, finger nail products or something that is airborne (pollen, sprays, plant products).
Allergens in toothpaste, lip-balm or mouthwash may cause reactions in or around the mouth.
If your feet are involved perhaps something in or associated with your shoes is the cause (leather tanning agents, socks, glues, inserts,buckles) or a foot powder.
The neck region could indicate an allergen contained in cosmetics, aftershave,cologne or perfume. These can often be made worse by sunlight.
Antiperspirants and deodorants usually affect the underarm area as do certain textiles, in particular wool.
Detergents may be the cause of problems around the hands.
Also consider whether the area affected has been in contact with tars, fibreglass,rubbers (e.g. latex gloves), clothing dyes, chemicals or items treated with chemicals,adhesives (like tapes), soaps, detergents, bleaches, cleaning agents, vinegar,antiseptic or salts of metals.
Between days 30 and 40 I was unable to sleep very much at night – often managing only a couple of hours because of the constant irritation. As a result it was necessary to grab one or two sleeping sessions during the day. This lack of sleep, in addition to the general pain caused by the many scars and the constant itching, made it impossible to continue with my normal daily routine. In total I lost about 6 weeks of work during this allergic response period. After day 40 I was able to return to normal work activities (mainly writing and music production – both of which had been impossible due to the painful scars on my wrists). In fact by day 43 I was able to publish a new music video to celebrate being almost ‘normal’. Here it is:
Actually this is a modern interpretation of a piece written by Vivaldi 300 years ago to describe the suffering of Mary as she watched Jesus being crucified on the cross. Clearly this put my period of allergic suffering into the correct perspective – “however much you may suffer there will always be somebody, somewhere, who is worse off!” I will be adding this piece of music to my next album of baroque interpretations which will be out later in 2015. If you can’t wait and would like to sample all the tracks and their videos now here is the play-list on YouTube:
By day 44 I had made an almost fairly full recovery (OK there were still a few small spots and my skin continued to itch a bit but hopefully this will clear with time). To give hope to any fellow sufferers who are trying to erradicate themselves of their contact allergens here are some pictures taken on day 44. I continue to marvel at the body’s ability to recover from the poisons we inadvertently throw at it. It would be good if manufacturers of products which are known allergens actually provide some more detailed (and graphic) information on the packaging about just what can actually happen when you get an allergic response. In addition to photos they should advise people how long the illness can take to clear up (e.g. a month) and approximately what the rate of sensitivity in the population is (e.g. are 1 in 200 people affected or is it 1 in a 100,000?).
….and to conclude I have included below some before (day 15) and after (day 44) eradication of the allergen photos:
During the whole of this incident I did not blame my body once for it’s response. If this were a killer virus or a carcinogen I would be very grateful that my body mobilised its best storm-troopers to kill the invader (storm-troopers here are killer white blood cells or T-lymphocytes)
If you are a fellow sufferer – good luck with your efforts.
Comments gratefully received via the comments box below. If you know anyone who may benefit from the information here please do not hesitate to share this article.
Chris Duggleby
PS Allergy Sufferers may also find the following article of interest:
Chris Duggleby started his scientific career studying Bacteriology, Virology and Immunology at the Manchester University Medical School. From there he went on to spend over 35 in the chemicals and oil industries which included setting up a polymers research and development group in Geneva, Switzerland for a major international chemicals company. Following an MBA from Warwick University he went on to lead a number of international manufacturing and marketing operations in the Chemicals, Plastics and Oil industries. His work involved living and working in Europe, Asia, the USA, the Middle East, and Russia. More recently he was invited to take on a senior leadership position in the Audit Department of the Oil Group BP. Here he used his global change and risk management experience to help the group reshape its management structures and processes following a major environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He has now retired to focus on writing about risk management and producing music in his studios near London, in the Alps and Cape Town.
If you found this article interesting please consider taking a look at some of my other recent reports on similar subjects.
BIZCHANGERS 