home page

Linda and Bill Bonvie, a New Jersey-based brother/sister writing team specializing in health and environmental issues, in 1993 broke the story on airline disinsection that led to the requirement being dropped by many countries.
 

Flight attendants for United Airlines believe an alternative to in- flight pesticide spraying on airliners bound for Australia and New Zealand could be creating a new rash of adverse health effects.

The flight attendants, who regularly fly the routes between California and down under, claim the new procedure has caused a variety of ailments ranging from skin irritation to severe headaches and neurological problems.

Citing pending litigation, Joe Hopkins, UAL's media-relations representative, said he could not comment on the matter other than to note that "if it's an important issue to our employees, it's an important issue to United Airlines."

"Disinsection" -- the spraying of insecticides on airliners flying to various international destinations -- is a practice that up until a few years ago was mandated for incoming flights by a host of foreign governments. The countries were concerned about the possibility that foreign bugs might be on board.

The standard disinsection method involved having a flight attendant spray an aerosol product over the heads of passengers just prior to arrival.

Most countries have since dropped the requirement, under pressure from the United States, after a spate of negative publicity in the early '90s. Australia and New Zealand, however, have remained adamant about the need for such spraying. That's caused some airlines, including United, British Airways and the Australian carrier Qantas, to switch to a "residual" application procedure allowed by those countries.

The method calls for permeating a plane's interior surfaces with a long-lasting insecticide at eight-week intervals while neither passengers nor crew members are on board. "Residual spraying" is done by workers in protective gear when planes are unoccupied.

In one case, a Los Angeles-based United Air Lines flight attendant (who spoke on condition of anonymity) first began to develop an unusual, burnlike irritation on her legs in 1996, the year after she began routinely working on flights to and from Sydney, Australia.

At first, her doctor prescribed an allergy medication. But the condition worsened, taking the form of skin ulcers that became extremely painful when exposed to fabric.

She also began to develop other symptoms that included a dry, hacking cough and a sensitivity to the scent of gasoline, glue, vinyl, new carpets and other items that resulted in excruciating headaches.

None of the tests and treatments she tried over the next 4 1/2 years -- including visits to dermatologists and a doctor specializing in infectious diseases, biopsies, screenings for lupus, blood cancer and parasites, experimental drugs and acupuncture -- produced either an explanation or lasting relief.

Last fall, the attendant learned of a likely connection between her symptoms and her work. A colleague casually mentioned that she would no longer fly to Sydney because the insecticides used on the planes were causing fainting, seizures, tumors and skin ulcerations.

Such complaints of adverse reactions to residual spraying are among dozens logged by the Washington, D.C.-based Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) from members whose duties include service on UAL's Australia-New Zealand routes. The reports, many of which were provided as background for this article, cover a variety of ailments.

Ingredient not approved

The spray used by flight attendants, with D-phenothrin as its active ingredient, was originally registered for disinsection purposes by the Environmental Protection Agency. But it lost that status in the mid-'90s because of publicity given to label warnings that it was "hazardous to humans" and shouldn't be inhaled or come into contact with skin or eyes.

The residual product contains permethrin, considered a possible carcinogen. The EPA does not allow the product to be sprayed inside airliner cabins in United States. That's why, under rules of the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, the planes are treated in Sydney, with a 2-percent permethrin solution applied to cabin surfaces. A separate product containing 2 percent permethrin and 2 percent D-phenothrin is applied to cargo compartments.

While intended to quell concerns about disinsection, residual spraying, AFA officials claim, has become a health nightmare for its members who are regularly assigned to Australia- and New Zealand- bound flights by United (the only domestic airline servicing those routes).

Los Angeles-based flight attendant Mary Russell's litany of symptoms is typical -- "scratchy throat, swollen tongue, runny nose and sinus problems, and a vice-like headache," as well as chest congestion, digestive problems and "a metal taste in my mouth which makes me ill."

Attempts by the union to resolve these health issues with the airline, according to Judith Murawski, the union's industrial hygienist, have resulted in a new disinsection policy -- one intended to allow sufficient time for proper drying and ventilation of the cabin, even if it involves scheduling delays.

The airline, according to a November "disinsection update" issued to flight attendants, has also instituted a fogging procedure, allowing for quicker drying than manual sprayers, which release streams of liquid; testing of a more pleasant-smelling, less- irritating solution -- now reportedly in use -- that "should decrease some adverse reactions"; and closer supervision of the entire process.

But the complaints from flight attendants haven't stopped, Murawski said.

"I just got a call from a flight attendant who came home Feb. 1," she said. "The cabin was sprayed at 11:30 that morning; the attendant boarded at 1:30. There was a strong smell (of pesticide), the surfaces were wet, as were the carpets and walls, and the closets had been sprayed, but not ventilated. The flight attendant told the purser, who talked to the UAL agent at the gate. The agent said, `We're going anyway.' In retrospect, they (the flight attendants) wished they hadn't."

Claims disputed

Murawski maintains United has yet to recognize most workers' compensation claims made for illnesses attributed to multiple exposures to the spray. In some cases, Murawski said, United told individual claimants they were merely allergic to dust mites or that their complaints were the only ones on file, and that "the sprays are perfectly safe" since "the World Health Organization (WHO) approves them."

Despite WHO's endorsement of permethrin, a report by an international group dedicated to addressing
chemical safety issues raises questions. The Peer Review Committee of the International Programme on
Chemical Safety (IPCS), a joint effort of the WHO, the International Labor Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, wrote that short-term exposure to permethrin "irritates the eyes, the skin and the respiratory tract."

"The substance may cause effects on the nervous system, resulting in facial sensation such as tingling, itching or burning," the IPCS wrote. Occupational exposure limits and the point at which concentrations become harmful have not been established, the IPCS said.

In UAL's update, however, one dealing with "the many myths and concerns about the disinsection process," the company's "Sydney Task Team" calls the chemical "safe for human exposure." The update cites the opinions of both WHO and an independent Canadian laboratory that "has approved it and considers the solution safe for aircraft use."

But a toxicologist at the University of British Columbia, who said he studied the constituents of the sprays involved at the behest of both the airline and the AFA late last year, denied making any such claim.

Passenger complaint

UAL's update, while assuring employees that "we hear your concerns and are being proactive on your behalf," also asks them -- in bold letters -- to "remain professional, and to demonstrate your leadership by keeping any personal concerns out of earshot of our customers."

But some of those customers have filed complaints of their own, according to correspondence that AFA President Patricia Friend sent to UAL Chairman James Goodwin last September.

One complaint she cited came from Dr. Richard Dorazio, chief of surgery of the Southern California Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, who reported that his wife and 13-year-old grandson felt ill an hour or two into an Aug. 13 flight from Sydney to Los Angeles. Dorazio noticed "a strong smell of pesticide throughout the flight."

Shortly after a flight attendant inquired about his wife's condition during the flight, he learned that the plane had been sprayed and that crews had been experiencing similar problems. He expressed concern that the symptoms "are the result of chemical toxicity."

Australian law requires that galley surfaces be sprayed, and failure to thoroughly dry the area, Murawski said, means that "food is prepared on those sticky surfaces and served to paying customers."

Passengers and flight attendants flying to and from Australia and New Zealand, however, aren't the only ones to occupy the pesticide- permeated cabins. Once the treated planes arrive back in California, they are scheduled to fly other routes, both domestic and foreign.

The residual pesticide will have dried by then, so the permethrin shouldn't reenter the air. But according to Murawski, the chemicals in which it is dissolved may still pose a problem. Xylene, for example, is an industrial solvent used in many of the sprays.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry says that lower levels (100-299 parts per million) of inhaled xylene can cause such symptoms as eye, nose, and throat irritation, delayed response to a visual stimulus and poor memory.

The National Institute for safety and health recommends that exposure not exceed 200 ppm for longer than 15 minutes. But Murawski said the levels of xylene left in the plane's interior after the spraying have yet to be determined.

Planes forced to fly to many different destinations can sometimes be overdue for a scheduled residual treatment. In those cases, Australian regulations require that airline personnel resort to the in-flight disinsection method.

The AFA has requested that United reduce the number of airliners treated with permethrin (all 747
400s) from 44 to 20 by having some planes fly dedicated routes. The airline has declined. The proposal, Murawski notes, would limit scheduling flexibility and reduce profitability "because an aircraft might have to sit on the ground for six hours instead of two."

Meanwhile, Murawski said, "My phone continues to ring. I get calls on this almost every day."