home
pagehome
pageFLIGHT ATTENDANTS LINK HEALTH PROBLEMS TO
SPRAYING OF AIRLINER CABINS
by Margie Boule
The Oregonian, April 22, 2001
Grace and Helen loved their jobs for a long time. Who
wouldn't? For decades they've flown all over the world, been
well paid, and enjoyed generous time off.But even as they collected their paychecks from Pan Am
Airlines, and later from United Airlines after United bought
Pan Am's Pacific routes, Grace and Helen and all the other
flight attendants they worked with were paying a price they
were unaware of.
Several times a month they were locked in tin cans called
Boeing 747-400 airplanes and forced to breathe
insecticide. "They told us it was completely safe," says
Grace. "They told us that over and over."Now they know it wasn't completely safe. Now their health
has been damaged by decades of direct exposure to
chemical pesticides that are banned by the EPA for use in
airplanes in America. In spite of that ban, the cabins of
many 747-400s used on domestic flights in the U.S. are
saturation-sprayed with these banned chemicals every 56
days. Why? Because Australia and New Zealand won't
allow planes to land in their countries unless cabins and
baggage compartments are sprayed regularly. Never mind
that the World Health Organization does not list the U.S.
among the countries that pose a risk of disease-carrying
mosquitoes or crop-threatening fruit flies. Australia and
New Zealand say the spraying will be done, and it is done.And it's not pleasant.
Helen and Grace both have requested that we use only
their first names in this story. Helen lives in the Portland
area; Grace lives in Los Angeles. Both are afraid their
employer, United Airlines, might fire them for talking to the
press about pesticide use on United planes. But both want
the public to learn about a situation Grace calls
"monstrous and degrading to flight attendants. And don't
forget the passengers. Frequent flyers get exposed to it all
the time, even if they aren't going to Australia. They need
to be warned."Helen began flying to Sydney, Australia, with Pan Am in
1971, when she was 23. On her first flight and every
Australian flight thereafter, Helen endured an uncomfortable
ritual on board."We would land in Sydney and then before they would let
the people off the plane, (Australian) government
agriculture agents would come through the cabin with
these big aerosol cans, pointing the spray over people's
heads. You could see the mist, like a fog in the air, and
then it would drop down on the people."For the first few years, Helen just held her hand over her
face. "Then I realized I should get a tissue to cover it. But I
trusted the airline. They said it was safe. I was in my 20s; I
just believed them."Two times a month for 15 years, Helen would fly from Los
Angeles or San Francisco to Sydney, then spend seven
days flying back and forth from New Zealand to Australia,
finally returning to the U.S. Every time the plane sat down
in New Zealand or Australia, the cabin would be sprayed.
Once an agent sprayed Helen directly in the face. "I don't
think he intentionally did it; he just didn't aim high enough."Grace spent 20 years with Pan Am, and later with United,
flying to Sydney. "I felt like I was being gassed in a gas
chamber. The agents would close the doors and tell the
pilot to shut down the air system. You sit there with no air,
breathing this spray for ten minutes."In 1993, Grace, too, was sprayed in the face accidentally.
"My eyes started to burn, and I couldn't keep them open. I
had to flush them with water. . . . Somebody took me to a
doctor in a taxi. I couldn't move. It was the weirdest feeling,
like an elephant sat on my head and my body and I
couldn't move. I couldn't even lift up my arm." Grace
recovered from the symptoms. And in 1994, most of the
spraying stopped.At least, the public spraying stopped.
Journalist uncovers pesticide product
American journalist Linda Bonvie took a trip to New
Zealand with her mother in 1989 and witnessed the
onboard spraying. It concerned her, so when she returned
to her home in New Jersey, she and her co-writer and
brother, Bill Bonvie, began researching the practice. "My
first call was to United Airlines. I asked what the spray
was. They immediately got defensive, saying, 'Why do you
want to know? Why do we have to tell you?' And then,
'Nobody's ever been concerned. We have to do it. Please
don't get something started.' " Which, of course, only
intrigued Linda more.Linda uncovered the product that was being used and got a
copy of the label. "It was shocking. It said something like .
. . 'To be used in the cabin with passengers present and
the ventilation system turned off . . .' and 'Warning: do not
inhale, or allow to get on the skin or in the eyes. If inhaled,
move the victim to fresh air immediately and get medical
attention.' " Linda learned U.S. flights to many other
countries also ended in required pesticide sprays. She
wondered how the EPA would register a product to be
used in aircraft cabins that was not supposed to be
inhaled. "Their answer at the EPA was, 'That's a very good
question.' "Working with a passenger who was angered after she was
accidentally sprayed in the face on a flight to the
Caribbean, Linda discovered the aerosol spray used by
airlines also had an alternate name: It was sold
over-the-counter as Black Knight Roach Killer.After the Bonvies published the results of their research,
the story was picked up by USA Today and The New York
Times. As a result, in 1994 the EPA withdrew approval for
the use of the in-flight pesticide in "occupied aircraft." In
addition, the U.S. Department of Transportation wrote
countries all over the world, asking that the practice be
stopped. Most countries, including Mexico, did stop. But a
few, including Australia and New Zealand, refused.So on flights to those countries, the spraying continued.
All along, flight attendants who'd been exposed to the
spraying had been reporting health problems. "Many were
getting sick, and we didn't know why," says Grace. "Every
time I came back from a trip I was sick. I thought it was jet
lag. Not even doctors seem to be aware." Flight attendants
such as Grace and Helen went to various specialists
complaining of chronic headaches, body aches, bronchial
problems, a metallic taste in their mouths, rashes, itching,
memory problems and sleep disorders. "I went to a sleep
disorders clinic and was diagnosed with chronic jet lag,"
says Helen. In 1990, after nearly 20 years of flights down
under, Helen began to see doctors for chronic nausea,
equilibrium problems and muscular problems. "I just never
connected it to the spraying." Neither did her doctors.In 1994, in response to complaints from passengers and
crew members, United and other airlines stopped most
in-flight spraying. Instead, they began saturation spraying
of cabins when passengers and crews were not present. It
appears the new technique has not lessened the health
hazard to flight attendants and passengers, according to
Judith Murawski, industrial hygienist for the Association of
Flight Attendants, a union representing flight attendants.
"At least they leave enough time for the spray to settle in
the air, says Judith. "But the real problem is, Permethrin is
the active ingredient in this residual spray. It's fat-soluble,
and that means it can be absorbed through the skin. After
these sprays, the cabin is often wet. We have this from
reports from flight attendants." In fact, both Helen and
Grace have experienced wet seats, galley counters, and
other interior surfaces. "If you sit on a wet seat, the
chemical is getting into your system," says Judith. "If you
touch your mouth after you've touched a surface that's
been sprayed" -- or if you eat food that has touched a wet
galley countertop -- "you can ingest it. There are all kinds
of ways for this stuff to get into your system."But since the spraying is no longer done in the presence of
passengers or staff, and since the airline does not inform
passengers that the cabin may be wet with pesticide,
people can have bad reactions to the chemicals and not
understand why.Which may be why it's taken so long for flight attendants
to recognize that their symptoms could be related to
exposure. "There are so many flight attendants who are
really ill, it's alarming," says Helen. Although her own
symptoms have worsened, and she now is experiencing
breathing and heart problems, she continues to work on
flights to Japan in planes that also go to Australia, and so
contain the pesticide. "I have to work. I'm a single mother,
and I don't have a choice."Two years ago, Grace's health problems became so
serious she was forced to take a medical leave. She now
uses oxygen and has been diagnosed with a long list of
conditions related to exposure to toxic chemicals. United
refused to acknowledge her illness is related to exposure
to pesticides, but the Social Security Administration
accepted her claim. She receives disability and is being
treated by a toxicologist in Los Angeles.Judith Murawski, with the Association of Flight Attendants,
cites studies that indicate several chemical components
used in the sprays have been identified as carcinogens.
She also says that while a large number of flight
attendants have health problems related to the practice of
spraying, no class-action lawsuits have been filed. "There's
a problem with the statute of limitations expiring," she
says. "It's taken quite a while for flight attendants to make
the connection between exposure and illness, and you
have a limited time period -- I think just a year -- in Illinois,
where United Airlines is based, to file a claim." There also
is a dearth of medical research about the effects of these
chemicals on flight attendants. Most research has involved
agricultural workers. Attorneys are wary of pursuing claims
without epidemiological studies to support their cases.United Airlines' manager of media relations, Matt Triaco,
said last Thursday, "I can't comment because of ongoing
litigation with the flight attendants. I can tell you that we do
this (spraying) because we are required to do so (by the
Australian government)."However, in a bulletin distributed last November to United
employees working in Sydney, which was passed along by
several flight attendants, the United "Sydney Task Team"
stated the use of Permethrin, the active ingredient in the
spray, is safe. The memo ended, "We are asking you to
remain professional and to demonstrate your leadership by
keeping any personal concerns out of earshot of our
customers."Grace and Helen think they can best demonstrate
leadership by telling the world what they're breathing when
they fly down under.
Reach Margie Boule at 503-221-8450, 1320 S.W.
Broadway, Portland, OR 97201, or marboule@aol.com.