Open Letter to the Open Medicine Foundation

In light of the gigantic volume of anecdotal evidence regarding some kind of toxin associated with fire retardant usage, I think it’s worth thinking about the broader social and ecological and financial reasons for our policies of fire suppression and war on fire. We may not be able to prevent climate change or most ecological toxins, but what Lisa Petrison calls “fire retardant associated toxin,” (introduced here: https://paradigmchange.me/wp/outdoor-toxins/) is a tragically preventable toxin, produced by misguided short term fire suppression policies that dont even work to stop fires. And the worst thing is that it affects wilderness areas, so one can’t even escape it just by avoiding civilization.

Mike Davis may not know about mold avoidance and FRAT’s health effects, but his understanding of the economic context of development in California–which incentivizes such blatantly stupid policies as “total fire suppression”–helps us to learn what is sustaining these policies that are poisoning people exposed to these toxins. I chose to read this aloud and record it partially to expose an audience that is typically laser focused on mold avoidance related content, to class and sociological criticism that may be atypical for them, and also because, like the Edward Abbey excerpt I recently recorded, it’s very relevant to a deep understanding of ecology and its effects on human health.

So here is the recording https://youtu.be/JgHOzn4xiS4

And here is the text version of the original article: https://longreads.com/2018/12/04/the-case-for-letting-malibu-burn/

https://www.wired.com/story/scientists-finally-identify-a-deadly-toxin-thats-been-killing-birds

Erik Johnson and Lisa Petrison have been sounding the alarm for awhile about the possibility of bio toxins (mostly mold or cyanobacteria and their toxins) combining with chemicals in such a way that would make them far more virulent.

They have not gotten nearly enough credit for or attention to these theories, but recent research, including the above, has vindicated them.

The cyanobacteria in the aforementioned article didn’t make the neurotoxin until bromide was present. The source of the bromide wasn’t identified, but could have been pesticides, fracking fluid, or fire retardant.

In the Lake Tahoe outbreak that led to the coining of term and diagnostic category “chronic fatigue syndrome” by the CDC, a cyanobacteria bloom was pointed to by several people, but most prominently by Erik Johnson, as a possible factor in the illness. (https://cfsuntied.net/2014/12/04/and-now-for-something-completely-different/). He noted some additional things that could have combined with this biotoxin, like cloud seeding with silver nanoparticles, and a trichloroethylene spill in the sewer system. None of this was investigated at the time.

Those theories of cyanobacteria or molds combining with chemicals from the environment are similar to what happened in the original study:

“After finding the toxin, the research team picked up speed. They isolated the compound containing bromide and confirmed it was present in the dead birds that showed lesions. They looked at the hydrilla plant itself and discovered it’s able to enrich bromide from the environment, making it even more available to the cyanobacteria. “The concentration of bromide in the plant is much higher than in the water or in the sediment where the plant grows,” says Niedermeyer. “This is kind of intriguing, but we don’t know why the plant does it.”

But in this murder mystery, identifying the culprit isn’t quite the same as ending the story. The team still has a lot of questions. Did the cyanobacteria invade with the hydrilla or was it already in the water? Is the bromide naturally occurring, or could it be coming from man-made sources like coal-fired power plants and flame retardants? Hydrilla is such a persistent pest that people have tried using herbicides like diquat dibromide to kill it off; could that herbicide be the source of the ingredient that creates this toxin? Wilde and Niedermeyer think it’s possible.”

I believe that many scientists strongly underestimate environmental factors in human disease due to a cognitive bias in which we consider ourselves apart from “nature”. This happens to even the smartest scientist. Robert Naviaux (who may be an exception to the trend of scientists ignoring environmental causes of chronic illness) noted that environmental toxins are likely to be a factor in CFS as well as most diseases. (http://naviauxlab.ucsd.edu/the-28th-amendment-project/).

However, no scientist has investigated Erik Johnsons theories, or Lisa Petrisons. I criticize Ron Davis not because I don’t think he’s intelligent. I consider him more intelligent than most scientists and more intelligent than me. But intelligent people can easily miss simple patterns that a less academic person could pick up with somewhat common sense heuristics. The Open Medicine Foundation and Ron davis have the best minds and skillsets and funding to investigate environmental toxins, out of all of the ME/CFS researchers, but they are doing a poor job on it.

I’m currently in a bad flair, so this is a very incomplete post, but I will update it with more scientific theories related to Fire Retardant Associated Toxins, cyanobacteria, and this recent study; as well as my ideas on deep ecology and cognitive bias. In the meantime, here is a video that is an attempt at me understanding the mechanisms behind this bias by scientist such as Ron Davis of Stanford, and the whole Open Medicine Foundation

Here’s a relevant forum thread about various studies related to cyanobacteria and mold and nanoparticles:

https://forums.phoenixrising.me/threads/mold-colonies-aggregate-and-use-environmental-nanoparticles-becoming-more-pathogenic.77128/

Relevant quote: “

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/27/7087

I really can’t overstate how huge this article is. There have been previous articles showing that molds can use nanoparticles in interesting ways in the lab, and separately that nanoparticles themselves can act differently re the immune system than diffsize particles. But this article puts that all together and studies the interaction Btwn molds and various kinds of nanoparticles both in the lab and in samples from the “wild” showing that mold colonies aggregate nanoparticles in a way that alters the molds pathogenicity! The authors suggest that it’s probable or possible that most mold in the wild is doing this, and so models based on standard mycotoxin toxicity from labs, don’t accounts for this behavior. And it’s published in a good journal.”

Hopefully Ron Davis from the OMF/Open Medicine Foundation will investigate this, or perhaps Robert Naviaux. I have contacted them about similar, previous studies but they were uninterested, which find strange, given that Naviaux has emphasized the importance of a plethora of environmental stressors in chronic disease.

Some closing thoughts and quotes from Erik Johnson about the Lake Tahoe epidemic:

https://mobile.twitter.com/erikmoldwarrior/status/1330212416899133448

“I think it’s pretty obvious. Lake Tahoe had a massive cyanobacteria bloom. Everyone downwind had a suppressed immune system. Doctors blamed all the various viruses and bacterial infections they found, but not the cyano bloom. Creating mass “CFS” confusion…

https://mobile.twitter.com/erikmoldwarrior/status/1330652150754467841

And I believe that when one puts all the clues together, it adds up to an atmospheric influx of particulates which was highly concentrated in the “bowl” of Lake Tahoe due to the shape of the Sierra Nevada’s. ‘Mountain Effect” Launching the cyanobacteria bloom”

Thanks for this letter, Andrew. This really demonstrates the necessity of studying outdoor toxins as well as indoor mold, and the extent to which they encroach on even locations that we think of as pristine wilderness, like the Rockies. I’m hoping that the Open Medicine Foundation will look into this as a result of this video series.

Thank you Kaylin for helping me with this project. Every one of these stories illuminates how much we need the research community to hear us. I hope that with enough stories like yours we can break through the floodgates and make the research establishment, and in particular the Open Medicine Foundation, listen.