Factors in genetic susceptibility in a chemical sensitive population using QEESI.

OBJECTIVES: Inherited impairment of xenobiotic metabolism is a postulated mechanism underlying environmentally associated pathogeneses such as multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). Using the Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (QEESI), we defined people who have a strong response to chemical substances as "chemical sensitive populations (CSP)." The aim of this study is to evaluate the condition of subjects sensitive to chemicals and to analyze their genotypes in order to identify susceptibility factors in CSPs in Japanese populations. METHODS: A total of 1,084 employees of Japanese companies were surveyed using the QEESI, history of MCS, and sick house syndrome. The common genotypes of the participants were analyzed for glutathione S-transferase (GST) M1, GSTT1, aldehyde dehydrogenase2 (ALDH2), and paraoxonase1 (PON1) in order to identify factors in the susceptibility to sensitivity to chemicals. RESULTS: Four subjects had history of diagnosis of MCS; no subjects had diagnosis of sick house syndrome. The subjects were divided into four levels according to scores of 0, 1-19, 20-39, and 40 or more on three of the QEESI subscales. In addition, we used the MCS criteria by Hojo to differentiate between cases (CSP) and controls. No significant differences in the allelic distribution of genetic polymorphisms in the GSTM1, GSTT1, ALDH2 or PON1 genes were found among the four levels of each subscale, or between cases and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the common genotypes of GSTM1, GSTT1, ALDH2, and PON1 are of little importance to CSP in a Japanese population.

Description of environmental determinants of quality of life in children with intellectual disability in Japan using the Delphi technique.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to define the framework of an environment conducive to the well-being of children with intellectually disability (CID). METHODS: A questionnaire composed of 31 items was developed through literature review. Then a 2-round Delphi survey was conducted with 3 different panels: health professionals (HPs), parents of CID, and teachers. The participants were asked to rate each item, select and rank the 10 most important items, and suggest additional ones. RESULTS: A total of 71 participants responded to the first round: 24 HPs, 22 parents, and 25 teachers. In the second round the overall response rate was 83%. At the end of the exercise, 12 items reached global consensus, i.e., in all groups. Only 5 items were ranked as most important by all groups: attitudes of family members at home; attitudes of HPs and teachers; support from family members at home; support at school (classmates and teachers); and government policies. Nevertheless, the panelists' views diverged on the remaining items. Several additional elements were suggested. CONCLUSIONS: The views of HPs, teachers, and parents are complementary for the improvement of quality of life (QOL) of CID. The present findings will be used as a basis for the development of an instrument to assess the living environment of CID.