Letter from Captain Susan Michaelis
My name is Susan Michaelis and I am a former
Australian airline pilot with over 5,000 hours flying experience
and had my medical certificate failed by the Australian CASA in
1999 after becoming unwell and no longer able to fly in 1997.
This occurred after CASA reviewed my medical reports showing that
I was no longer fit to fly. While flying from 1987 on various
aircraft with no health concerns whatsoever, I then spent almost
three years up until mid 1997 flying on the BAe 146 and experienced
repeated short term symptoms extremely regularly when in the air
conditioned air of the BAe 146. This pattern of smelling fumes
on the BAe 146 when the air supply was on, occurred on most flights
and I experienced adverse symptoms in flight on most occasions
which varied throughout the flight. It was clear that the symptoms
were related to oil contamination as they occurred soon after
turning the air supply on, which was my job or when in the aircraft
with the air on. Additionally the engineers would advise us and
all crew knew that it was "just oil" and they were aware
of it. 13 years since commencing flying on the BAe 146 and 10
years since having to stop flying, my health has not recovered.
The pattern of chronic health effects that I still experience
10 years later covers many areas and I think I most likely have
done more testing than most people in the world to determine what
the problems are. A number of the problems I am now left with
include but are not limited to:
— Respiratory: injury to small
airways in lungs causing abnormal respiratory symptomology;
— Neurological: abnormal—brain
scans, neuronal and glial autoantibodies and neurological assessment;
— Neuropsychological: abnormal
psychometric and neuropsychological findings;
— Autonomic nervous system abnormalities;
— Abnormal pathology testing including
Biolab (UK) blood tests showing beryllium adducted to my DNA (beryllium
is in oil seal bearings), low ATP, increased free cell DNA, reduced
superoxide dismutase;
— A strong history with an occupational
association.
These findings have been clearly linked by experts
to my repeated exposure on the BAe 146 aircraft and I have a very
extensive number of medical reports from senior doctors and scientists
from around the world. I am well aware of many other pilots and
flight attendants in Australia experiencing almost identical effects
and similarly no longer able to fly in most cases. I am also aware
of the same effects being experienced by many pilots and flight
attendants from the UK, USA and other countries. The pattern is
remarkable yet the airline and aviation industry denial is ongoing
and ridiculous.
Please note that I am only referring to aircraft
air contamination in this submission which in less than six pages
is not possible to summarise 10 years of research. The House of
Lords report in 2000 was factually flawed and the errors contained
are discussed in the reference manual I have recently published.[70]
Therefore I will not dwell on the past and advise some of the
new data to have emerged in the last seven years and some data
which you seemed unaware of or misinformed on in 2000.
Some of the main problem areas are, but not
limited to:
Air Quality Sampling
Studies to measure the air have never been undertaken
during contaminated air events as acknowledged in the Lords to
the Countess of Mar:
"The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's
Government: Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Davies of
Oldham on 19 October (WA 126), how many air quality monitoring
exercises were carried out during contaminated air events in commercial
jet aircraft; and on what occasions. [HL2312]
Lord Davies of Oldham: There is no requirement
for air quality monitoring exercises to be carried out during
contaminated air events in aircraft, and there is no record of
any such measurements in the public domain. Air quality measurements
are normally only made as part of the initial certification of
each aircraft type."
Despite this the airline industry continually
attempts to use air sampling in normal flights to claim the air
during a contaminated air event is safe.
Tricresyl Phosphate (TCP)
TCP which is used by most commercial jet engine
oils as an anti-wear additive has been identified in all swab
samples of UK registered aircraft walls in the last few years,
both in the passenger cabin, cockpit and in HEPA filters. TCP
is also being found on most tests carried out on Australian, Canadian
and US aircraft. TCP has been found in pilots' blood test, on
pilots' trousers and therefore we know with scientific certainty
exposure to TCP is occuring. TCP is a known neurotoxin and I am
certain that exposure to travelling passengers and pregnant mothers
will certainly not be good news. A blood test to confirm TCP exposure
and time of exposure is being funded by many interested parties
and will be available later this year.
The toxicity of the chemical mixture of contaminants
in the oils and hydraulic fluids is misrepresented. The effects
of chronic neurotoxic effects of TCP exposure is ignored and the
general toxicity of TCP is misused.
2007 UK BAe 146 Research and BAe alleged payments
Initial analysis of the survey data shows that
of 359 past and present UK based known BAe 146 qualified pilots,
242 were contacted and responded to the survey request in the
form of telephone or written responses to a two year survey looking
at exposure history to contaminated air and any effects experienced.
138 (57%) pilots of the 242 respondents reported adverse effects
ranging from short through to long term effects (one deceased).
Of these 82 (34%) reported short term adverse effects only, while
61 (25%) advised medium to long term symptoms, most likely in
addition to short term effects. 207 (86%) pilots advised that
they had been exposed to contaminated air on the BAe 146 with
only 8% advising they had not been exposed to such air. 18 pilots
(7.4%) advised that they had had their medical certificates withdrawn
by the CAA or had taken early medical retirement with a range
of health effects and exposure background. Several other pilots
reported having to take between several months to a year off work
to recover from adverse effects. The data presented clearly identifies
serious trends that support previous studies and shows a full
scale epidemiological survey is urgently required of all crews
who flew the BAe 146 as pilots or cabin crew.
Lord Tyler asked the following question in the
House of Lords which received a brush off answer and which surely
should be investigated by a Royal Commission:
9 Oct 2006 : Column WA13 Aviation: Contaminated
Air
"Lord Tyler asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are aware of any payments made by British Aerospace
Regional Aircraft Limited to Ansett Transport Industries Operations
Limited and East West Airline Operations Limited, under an agreement
dated 3 September 1993, in connection with design flaws in the
BAe 146 aircraft allowing contamination of cabin air by oil and
other fumes; and, in light of that agreement, what steps they
took at that time to ensure that regulations pertaining to cabin
air quality were enforced.[HL7230]."
Medical effects and the BALPA Conference
The 2000 Lords report failed to highlight the
wealth of data confirming ill effects in crews and passengers
exposed which has existed for over 30 years.[71]
Crews around the world are showing a remarkable similarity in
symptoms experienced.
The health effects being reported and diagnosed
by medical doctors and other experts show a very strong pattern
and are supported by physical evidence. Medical effects being
seen in crews include but are not limited to: respiratory damage,
CNS and PNS problems, autonomic nervous system and neurological
damage, neuropsychological effects, immune system effects, reproductive
problems, genetic problems, fatigue and many more. Reports of
Parkinson's, MS, ME were also being reported by crews and their
doctors all with strong history of exposure to contaminated air.
These are all discussed in detail in the Aviation Contaminated
Air Reference Manual and other published papers referenced
therein. Since 2000 numerous published papers,[72]
,[73]
and a 2005 Contaminated Air Conference in London[74]
have confirmed that crews and passengers are suffering both short
and long term medical effects of exposure to contaminated air
in aircraft. Only the airline industry and those who attempt to
protect them remain in denial.
The 2005 contaminated air conference organised
by BALPA made the following conclusions:
— "There is a workplace problem
resulting in chronic and acute illness amongst flight crew (both
pilots and cabin crew);
— The workplace in which these
illnesses are being induced is the aircraft cabin environment;
— This is the resulting in significant
flight safety issues, in addition to unacceptable flight crew
personnel health implications;
— Further, we are concerned the
passengers may also be suffering from similar symptoms to those
exhibited by flight crew."
There is now a confirmed report of MND from
a pilot with a strong history of exposure. Increased MND levels
has previously been noted in aircrew.[75],[76]
Likewise there are papers linking Parkinson's to hydrocarbon exposure
and a misdiagnosis of MS to TCP exposure. These are all listed
in chapter 7 of the Aviation Contaminated Air Reference Manual.
The oil warning labels and MSDS sheets have at various times listed
nervous system effects as one of the outcomes of repeated inhalation
of the oils.
Workers compensation cases have been won in
Australia, USA and Canada since 2000 where medical effects of
exposure have been accepted as real and genuine
SWEDISH DATA
Following a serious event on a BAe 146 aircraft
in Sweden, both pilots were incapacitated for about five minutes
in flight, the chemical combination they were exposed to, has
recently become available. This data clearly shows that the synergistic
effects of exposure to pyrolised jet engine oils, is a serious
health and flight safety hazard. The airline industry continues
to misinform passengers and crews that air quality testing has
shown nothing as all levels found were low. In fact no testing
in flight during a contaminated air event has ever been published
and it is the cocktail of chemicals once heated that clearly had
the effect of incapacitation of both pilots in flight for a period
of five minutes during a descent at night. It was only oxygen
that enabled the pilots to land the plane. This data is available
for review. TCP was found amongst the mixture of contaminants
as was CO. Clearly looking at individual levels of chemicals is
a pointless and misinformation exercise. Additionally it is well
accepted by even many within the aviation industry that exposure
standards cannot be applied to an aviation setting. Therefore
to say all levels are low is pure misinformation.
FAILURE OF
THE REGULATORY
PROCESS
The aviation industry and governments globally
are systematically downplaying the significance of the data available
showing the extent of the problem of cabin air contamination.
The UK Government, the CAA, the AHWG are particularly at fault
here. The reason most likely is that the CAA is fully funded by
the industry that it regulates and therefore clearly protective
of the aviation industry, particularly British Aerospace. Especially
as aviation is about a third of all UK exports.
The CAA, EASA and other regulators are ignoring
the aviation regulations that exist that if adhered to would partly
protect the public and crew from air contamination.
Contaminated air is of course a flight safety
concern in all cases as shown in the regulations. Impaired crew
performance (very common) to any degree is a flight safety risk
and cannot be dismissed as it has been by the CAA and many others.
The data shown in the Aviation Contaminated Air Reference Manual
reviewing the 1050 contaminated air events shows that 32% of events
involved some degree of crew impairment. It must be remembered
that the evidence shows that most events are never reported in
the first place and the reporting system does not advise crews
to report health effects or adverse symptoms.
OPICN
The 2000 Lords report mentions the medical effect
of exposure to Tricresyl Phosphate known as OPIDN but failed
to look at other conditions such as OPICN (chronic neurotoxicity)
now being seen as a serious concern. Additionally blood testing
of crews, by way of autoantibody tests at Duke University in the
USA, is showing serious and concerning problems.
COT Investigation
The UK Committee on Toxicology (COT) is not
looking at the data provided appropriately at all and its industry
bias is extremely apparent to those who understand this issue.
To suggest it is independent is nonsense. The COT investigation
into air quality appears to be like in previous investigations
they have carried out failing the public for corporate profit.
The Committee has refused to listen to crew and most of the concerns
from medical experts who have seen the crews and investigated
this issue. In fact it is almost a foregone conclusion that the
COT will either dismiss the whole issue or more likely as advised
in the last meeting, find that there is no correlation between
exposure events and crew illness (more research needed) as measuring
has not taken place. This is pure misinformation as the data in
the Swedish section above clearly shows in a known oil leakage
event what the outcome of exposure to a mixture of substances
in the oil can be, and there is a vast amount of evidence showing
crew effects are more likely than not strongly related to the
contaminated air. However, the COT is virtually ignoring all of
this or misusing the significance of the data provided to it.
Most crew data will have never even been reviewed by the COT as
they have shown such strong industry bias towards this issue.
Under Reporting
The frequency of oil leaks and contaminated
air is not rare at all and the data available shows that such
events are not uncommon, are mostly never reported and are seen
as "normal" or a mere "nuisance" and therefore
not worthy of reporting. The CAA deliberately does nothing to
correct this situation and in fact denies it is occuring despite
clear and published evidence that this is the case. Admissions
that the reporting system is not working comes from within the
aviation industry itself. Under reporting of contaminated air
events continues with less than 4% actually reported.[77],[78]
This results in the industry failing to address the matter. All
contaminated air events should be reported as per legislation
worldwide. Regrettably regulators, especially the UK CAA, fail
to enforce their own regulations. To do so would be too costly
to the airline industry.
I am aware that a number of British airlines
are privately advising their pilots that contaminated air events,
unless they are major events, are not required to be reported
to the CAA. No matter what the airlines advise the COT or CAA,
there is evidence to show that crews are being told that contaminated
air events which the airline does not consider significant are
to be reported internally only or not at all. Even the CAA and
UK Government via answers in Parliament support this view in various
statements made.
Filters
Filtration technology to filter the bleed air
exists today, in fact some units remain on shelves collecting
dust as the airline industry has yet to take steps to protect
the travelling public. Filters could prevent exposures on aircraft
in current aircraft. In the future all aircraft should be bleed-free
as the Boeing 787 is. If the Committee feels that having bleed
free aircraft would minimise the risk of contaminated air as it
does it should consider making this important point so that other
aircraft manufacturers follow the route chosen by Boeing.
Passengers
Passengers are owed a duty of care to be informed
of the potential problem of contaminated air, when they are exposed
and offered medical help by Independent medical bodies after exposures.
None of these human rights are currently being actioned by the
airline industry. The Government should stop protecting the industry
and look after the people's needs and rights.
I am entitled to make strong statements with
regard to aircraft air contamination issues as I have researched
this issue for 10 years now, and am in contact with hundreds of
crews and crew groups from around the world. I have published
numerous papers on the issue and have been involved in much of
the research. I have very recently published much of the known
information in what is a collated source that is being seen as
the authoritative guide on this issue and the only combined source
comprehensively covering the issue. 67 It is a collaborative and
extremely comprehensive review of the subject matter.
It was at the 2005 BALPA Contaminated Air Conference
that the General Secretary of BALPA advised that he was not only
concerned about the effects being seen in crews and those possible
for passengers or the unborn, but was also concerned that real
action was required. He was concerned that the issue should not
be passsed to a government department or transport committee which
would bring the issue to a halt. This is precisely effectively
what has happened by the transparent actions of the UK DfT, CAA,
AHWG and the COT.
There certainly are solutions available both
in terms of the contamination issue as well as the medical research
that ought to take place. However, such positive actions can only
be taken by those who are willing to recognise what has gone on
and enact change. One such step on the medical front includes
a major research program that could be undertaken Professor Robert
Haley who has been awarded funding by the US Congress to undertake
furhter brain imaging techniques in conjunction with a full scale
epidemiological survey and other investigations. We have been
advised this should and could be undertaken in relation to the
aircraft contaminated air issue, yet to date there has not been
the will to make this happen.
May I close by hoping that this new investigation
does not result in similar comments to those expressed by the
Chairman of the very comprehensive Australian Senate Inquiry,
who was not at all impressed with the House of Lords inquiry.[79],[80]
"I met with the woman who was the Chair
of the House of Lords Inquiry, Baroness Wilcox and she admitted
to me over lunch that she felt she was being "snowed"
by the bureaucrats on her Committee but felt there was nothing
she could do about it. I urged her to examine the evidence independently
and write her own report. But quite clearly the House of Lords
Inquiry again, the report was pretty much a "cover up"
of the evidence which that inquiry was given;
She felt she was being "conned" by
the bureaucrats and, having read the House of Lord's Report, I
believe she was!"
17 June 2006
70 Michaelis S, (2007) Aviation Contaminated Air
Reference Manual. ISBN 978-0-9555437-0-8. Back
71
Montgomery, M R, Wier, G T, Zieve, F J, Anders, M W Human Intoxication
Following Inhalation Exposure to Synthetic Jet Lubricating Oil.
Clinical Toxicology 1977; 11: 423-426. Back
72
Winder, C, Michaelis, S, (2005). Aircraft Air Quality Malfunction
Incidents: Crew Effects from Toxic Exposures on Aircraft. Air
Quality In Airplane Cabins And Similar Enclosed Spaces-The
Handbook of Environmental Chemistry-Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Gmbh. August 2005. Back
73
Winder, C, Fonteyn, P, Balouet, J ¸C. (2002) Aerotoxic Syndrome:
A Descriptive Epidemiological Survey Of Aircrew Exposed To In-Cabin
Airborne Contaminants. Journal Of Occupational Health and Safety-Australia
And New Zealand 18: 321-338, 2002. Back
74
Contaminated Air Protection: Proceedings of the Air. Editor: Chris
Winder. Publisher: School of Safety Science, University of New
South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia, August 2005. ISBN: 0-7334-2282-9. Back
75
Nicholas, J S, Lackland, D T et al "Mortality among US commercial
pilots and navigators" Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Medicine, Volume 40(11) November 1998 p 980-985. Back
76
Nicholas J S, Butler G C, Lackland D T et al (2001) Health
among commercial airline pilots. Aviat Space Environ Med:
72:821-6. Back
77
Michaelis, S, (2003), A survey of health symptoms in BALPA Boeing
757 pilots, Journal of Occupational Health and Safety,
Australia and New Zealand 19: 253-261, 2003. Back
78
Dr Bhupi Singh (2004) Australia Aviation Safety Spotlight 0304:
In flight smoke and fumes. Senior Research Officer, AVMED, RAAF
Edinburgh, SA, 2004. Back
79
AOPIS DVD: "Contaminated Air: An ongoing Health and Safety
issue" Comment by Reverend J Woodley. Back
80
Woodley Reverend J, The Politics Of Aircraft Health And Safety
Senate Inquiry, Australian Parliament October 2000. BALPA, UNSW.
Proceedings of the BALPA Contaminated Air Protection Air Safety
and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference,
held at Imperial College, London, 20-21 April 2005: ISBN 0-7334-2282-9. Back
| 
