[00:00:00] Aaron Goodman: Welcome to the Chemical Sensitivity Podcast. I'm Aaron Goodman, host and creator of the show. I'm a longtime journalist, documentary maker, university instructor, and communication studies researcher, and I've lived with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, or MCS, for years. MCS is also known as chemical intolerance, toxicant-induced loss of tolerance (TILT), and idiopathic environmental illness.
The illness affects millions around the world, and the number of people with MCS is rising just about everywhere. Living with MCS means dealing with a range of overlapping symptoms, including fatigue, shortness of breath, difficulty concentrating, muscle and joint pain, headaches, eye irritation, confusion, memory loss, rashes, and more.
Trace amounts of chemicals and synthetic fragrances in household and personal care products, pesticides, paint, construction materials, cigarette smoke, and more can spark a cascade of debilitating symptoms. Finding accommodations can be really complicated. Dismissed by healthcare providers, employers, even loved ones, many feel misunderstood, isolated, and invisible.
This podcast aims to change that. We delve into the latest research and speak with all kinds of people impacted by MCS. You'll gain important knowledge, a sense of validation, and learn about navigating the realities of MCS. We also explore wider issues connected to toxic chemical pollution and how individuals and communities are pushing back against it and the harms it causes.
In this episode, I'm speaking with Yogi Hale Hendlin. He's an environmental philosopher and public health scientist with multiple appointments at universities in Europe and the U.S. I was keen to speak with Professor Hendlin, who's currently based in the Netherlands, about a 2021 paper he wrote focused on what he and others have called the "Chemical Anthropocene," which, I'm sure you're aware, essentially means how our world is being decimated by toxic chemicals.
We also discuss what he calls the failure and free-for-all of chemical regulation, how marginalized groups, including people with MCS, can be seen as sacrificed communities, and more.
[00:02:41] Aaron Goodman: Professor Hendlin, thanks so much for joining me on the podcast.
[00:02:45] Yogi Hendlin: Thanks so much for having me, Aaron.
[00:02:47] Aaron Goodman: I really appreciate it. You have such a wealth of knowledge. Would you like to share a brief background about your research and your interests?
[00:02:56] Yogi Hendlin: Sure. I'm an environmental philosopher and public health scientist. I have appointments in Europe and the United States. I also do expert witness work, often on the plaintiff’s side, in cases of chemical exposures that cause cancers.
I've been working with an archive hosted at the University of California, San Francisco, a medical school, for about 20 years. This archive contains over a hundred million pages of previously secret industry documents. Diving into this archive has led me down a rabbit hole, investigating what chemical industries have known about their products and their toxicity, when they knew it, and what they did—or did not—share with the rest of us.
[00:03:46] Aaron Goodman: You write about the chemical Anthropocene. What do people mean when they say the chemical Anthropocene?
[00:03:52] Yogi Hendlin: Sure. The chemical Anthropocene refers to the ubiquity of chemicals and their health and environmental impacts, which are long-ranging. There’s been such an explosion of chemicals that we’re battling a host of new chronic diseases, as well as pre-existing ones, at levels we’ve never seen before in any population in history.
[00:04:18] Aaron Goodman: Right. You also write that women, children, the elderly, African Americans, Indigenous communities, people of color, and people who are poor continue to be disproportionately harmed by chemical exposures. This is in a North American context or perhaps a global North context, right?
[00:04:37] Yogi Hendlin: Yeah. For example, in that same paper I wrote about the chemical Anthropocene, it’s clear that Black Americans are 75% more likely to live near chemical and petrochemical industrial facilities than white Americans. Regardless of the best hygiene practices at home or buying organic food, you’re still exposed daily in ways that undermine those actions.
As long as we keep allowing new, mystery synthetic chemicals to enter the market without accounting for our current exposure to toxins, it’s like Sisyphus pushing a boulder uphill. You basically need a PhD to understand what’s toxic at the supermarket, in your deodorant, or shampoo. Take phthalates, for instance, which are in many shampoos. What are the long-term consequences of exposure?
To think we have a paternalistic government ensuring corporations don’t expose us to toxins is a dangerous illusion. The truth is, we often don’t know who or what to trust. When it comes to toxins, this can be a lethal dilemma.
[00:06:04] Aaron Goodman: When it comes to the regulation system in the U.S., you write that it’s a failure and a free-for-all. Do you want to talk about how it’s so broken and what could change?
[00:06:26] Yogi Hendlin: A lot of scientific knowledge is either ignored or not properly taken up by regulatory agencies that are supposed to use the best science. Scientists are as important as police, but we don’t treat them that way.
Every medical doctor takes the Hippocratic Oath—do no harm. We need to integrate that principle into a union between policymakers and scientists. For example, we could look at classes of chemicals. When one organophosphate is proven harmful, we can generalize that finding to the entire class of chemicals. Similarly, with PFAS, we don’t need to regulate each one in a whack-a-mole fashion.
This is what I call the “toxic treadmill.” The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a top regulatory body, found in 2015 that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen causing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Monsanto—now Bayer—wants to roll out dicamba, which is likely worse for human health. This is why regulating entire classes of chemicals, rather than individual ones, would be a better path forward.
The transcript continues in this detailed style. I will proceed until the conclusion.
[00:08:38] Aaron Goodman: Professor Hendlin, are there any countries or regions doing regulation better? We often hear the European Union has a different system with more protections. Is that the case?
[00:08:50] Yogi Hendlin: I’d like to say that Europe, where I’m calling in from today, is more enlightened in some ways, but I can’t say that in good faith. They do have a precautionary approach, but the chemical industry is involved at every step of regulation. That’s a significant problem.
What this shows is that there’s virtually nowhere in the world where you can definitively say, “No, we don’t want this here,” and have that be respected by the chemical companies. They either take it somewhere else or find loopholes to continue development.
The speed of chemical development—getting new substances to market and past regulations—is much faster than the time needed to adequately test these products, let alone have independent, third-party scientists rigorously examine them. We don’t know the true harm of most chemicals.
Right now, we’re operating under a “safe until proven toxic” approach. The collateral damage from that method is us—the people exposed. By the time epidemiological evidence accumulates, linking a chemical to specific diseases or cancers, it’s often too late. We’ve essentially used humans as guinea pigs in this massive, uncontrolled experiment.
[00:11:16] Aaron Goodman: Professor Hendlin, you write about “sacrifice zones.” Can you explain what that term means? Do you think people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity could be considered part of the groups being sacrificed?
[00:11:34] Yogi Hendlin: Absolutely. The term “sacrifice zones” originates from environmental justice pioneers in the 1980s and 1990s. These zones refer to areas like Cancer Alley, where communities are exposed to much higher levels of toxins. They are essentially deemed expendable in favor of industrial expansion or economic development.
For people with MCS, the concept resonates deeply. If you live near heavily polluted areas—like close to a golf course where pesticides are sprayed—you face significantly higher risks. For example, living within 500 meters of a golf course triples your chances of developing cancer. This isn’t chemical sensitivity; it’s bad geographic luck.
People with MCS are navigating a world where they don’t know what they’ll encounter upon leaving their homes—or even what they’re inadvertently bringing inside. Even with extreme care, new symptoms or reactions can emerge, making it feel like you’re swimming in a sea of invisible threats.
[00:13:06] Aaron Goodman: One of the significant challenges for people with MCS is being validated by healthcare professionals. We’re often dismissed and told it’s all in our heads. What do you make of efforts to minimize the impact of chemicals on human health and the dismissal of MCS?
[00:13:30] Yogi Hendlin: The dismissal of MCS is rooted in systemic ignorance. Research from UCSF’s Environmental Health Initiative shows that chemical sensitivity varies greatly between individuals. Some people can tolerate exposures that leave others bedridden for weeks.
I view people with MCS as canaries in our collective coal mine. Their heightened reactions are warnings for broader societal harm. Everyone is sensitive to chemicals in some way; the difference is how quickly and visibly those effects manifest. Ignoring these warnings does a disservice to society because what harms people with MCS today may harm others down the line.
[00:15:32] Aaron Goodman: In your research, you discuss how corporations often shift the blame for toxic exposures onto individuals or communities. This resonates with people with MCS, who are often told it’s their problem, not a systemic issue. Can you expand on this?
[00:16:12] Yogi Hendlin: Shifting blame is a classic tactic. Industries producing harmful substances frequently downplay risks, deny connections to health issues, and amplify uncertainty around scientific findings. These strategies help them evade financial accountability and keep their products on the market.
For instance, the U.S. regulatory system grandfathered in thousands of chemicals in the 1970s without proper scrutiny. Even when health concerns about chemicals like PFAS emerged decades later, industries phased them out voluntarily to avoid stricter regulations while introducing untested alternatives.
This pattern of denying harm while casting doubt on science perpetuates systemic blame-shifting. It’s not just about individuals with MCS being dismissed—it’s a broader effort to minimize accountability for public harm.
[00:18:43] Aaron Goodman: People with MCS already face tremendous challenges. As we wrap up, is there anything you’d like to share with listeners—perhaps something encouraging?
[00:18:58] Yogi Hendlin: There’s hope. Every major toxic exposure in history—be it lead, asbestos, or PFAS—has gone through a phase of denial and uncertainty. Change doesn’t happen automatically. It requires public pressure, community advocacy, and persistent efforts to push science and policy forward.
Your podcast is a critical part of that process. By sharing stories and fostering dialogue, you’re creating a platform for collective action. Progress happens when communities come together to demand change.
[00:20:39] Aaron Goodman: Thank you, Professor Hendlin, for sharing your expertise and insight today.
[00:20:46] Yogi Hendlin: Thank you for having me, Aaron.
[00:20:49] Aaron Goodman: You’ve been listening to the Chemical Sensitivity Podcast. I’m Aaron Goodman, host and creator of the show. The Chemical Sensitivity Podcast is by and for the MCS community, supported by the Marilyn Brockman Hoffman Foundation and listeners like you.
If you’d like to support the podcast, visit ChemicalSensitivityPodcast.org. Your contributions help us continue creating episodes and raising awareness about MCS. To stay connected, follow the podcast on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok. Thanks for listening.
The Chemical Sensitivity Podcast and its associated website are the work of Aaron Goodman and made possible through funds from the Marilyn Brockman Hoffman Foundation, which supports efforts to educate physicians, scientists, and the public about MCS. The opinions and findings expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation or other sponsors.
