Food flavouring wrecked my lungs Hazards 101
January-March 2008
Within three years, exposure to an artificial butter flavouring used in thousands of products including frozen dinners, baked goods, home baking products, crisps, snacks, sweets, butter substitutes, sprays and oils and other processed foods, had cost the father of four his marriage, his health and his job. “When you do lung function tests it gives you a lung age. I come out about 80 years old,” Martin said. “If I run upstairs, I’m out of breath. I was fit as a butcher’s dog before, I’ve always been healthy. They reckon I’ve lost 25-30 per cent of my lung capacity. It doesn’t sound like a lot but when you try do anything you realise it is.” In December 2005, the firm, based in Thirsk, North Yorkshire, referred
him to a chest physician, who confirmed he had bronchiolitis obliterans,
a normally rare but sometimes life-threatening condition. The work link
was only spotted at all because he was by chance referred to one of the
few UK specialists familiar with the US cases. Diacetyl - the lung destroyer
The disease scars the bronchioles, small airways in the lung, causing irreversible damage. Severe symptoms can surface suddenly or emerge gradually, resulting in shortness of breath, dry cough, wheezing and fatigue. For the worst affected a lung transplant is the only hope – but the operation is risky, and the majority of transplant patients are dead within 10 years. The first cases were spotting in 2000 in workers on the production line in a popcorn factory in Jasper, Missouri, with the condition dubbed “popcorn workers’ lung”. Since then dozens of cases have emerged in workers in other parts of the food industry. Among them is flavouring factory worker Francisco Herrera, 34, who in 2003 – the year Martin started work with Firmenich – was diagnosed with bronchiolitis obliterans. He sleeps tethered to an oxygen tank. His job, like Martin’s, was mixing flavours, including diacetyl. “My job as a production operative was running the plant, mixing powders, packing it,” explained Martin. “It produces high intensity food flavourings to go into stock cubes and the like. This was a vegetable flavouring – goes into anything, gives it a high intensity flavouring.” Swiss multinational Firmenich, which describes itself as “the world’s largest company in the fragrance and favour industry” and which has a turnover in excess of £1bn, puts the flavour into brand name foods for major firms including Unilever, Knorr, Walkers Crisps, McDonald’s and Burger King. And the evidence suggests Firmenich was aware of the seriousness of the diacetyl risk. In December 2003, two years before Martin’s diagnosis and over a year before he became sick, the US government’s National Institute for Safety and Health (NIOSH) sent an alert to 4,000 businesses that might make or use butter flavouring or diacetyl. The alert called for stringent controls, including “substitution of less hazardous flavouring ingredients or formulations where feasible.”
Firmenich operates from nine locations in the US. NIOSH confirmed it sent this alert direct to the company’s New Jersey plant. Firmenich was, anyway, on the inside track when it came to accessing the latest information. The Flavoring and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA), an influential US-based trade group, commented on the NIOSH alert at draft stage; Firmenich is a prominent FEMA member, and the company’s Leslie L Blau is a long-standing member of the FEMA board, serving as president in 2007. Dr Richard Kanwal, of NIOSH’s Division of Respiratory Disease Studies commented: “Representatives of Firmenich attended a FEMA meeting in June 2002 at which I gave a presentation on flavouring-related occupational lung disease risk and described NIOSH's work in microwave popcorn plants as well as our knowledge of cases in flavouring plants. “Firmenich had also been doing spirometry [lung function] tests on its workers since at least the late 1990s.” Information about the risks in flavouring factories was also in the public domain. On 26 April 2002, an article by scientists from NIOSH and the Missouri Department of Health in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, published by the US government’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC), noted “recent reports to CDC document bronchiolitis obliterans cases in the settings of flavouring manufacture” and “preliminary animal studies at CDC suggest severe damage to airway epithelium after inhalation exposure to high air concentrations of a butter flavouring.” What is “food flavourers’ lung”? Martin’s experiences suggested in the UK at least Firmenich fell short of the NIOSH recommended safe procedures, including “use of closed production processes (ie. avoid handling of open containers of flavourings and ingredients)”. Martin was using a stainless steel pot “with a little wooden lid on top, just sat there. There was nothing in place. I knew it made your eyes sore and I wore goggles and dust masks, but we made chillies so I assumed it was the same sort of thing. Even the dust masks weren’t right.” After his diagnosis “there was a massive song and dance – overhead ventilation and air supplied face masks appeared. They got 3M in to look at it and they said the particulates used on site were too small to be stopped by the dust masks.” He added: “They actually got rid of the product in 2006 after it all came out as they found a safer alternative, completely harmless.” There is no compelling reason to suspect UK workers are significantly better protected than their US counterparts. The dearth of cases here could be explained not by their absence, but by UK doctors failing to recognise an unfamiliar condition with an unfamiliar cause. What they don’t know
Finding out how many firms are using diacetyl in the UK is not easy. None of the major food, flavouring or snack trade organisations in the UK could or would provide a products list. Food and Drink Federation spokesperson Christine Welberry commented: “We are unable to provide you a list of products that contain diacetyl, as we do not hold this type of information at FDF.” She was, however - like all the other trade bodies questioned - in a position to say wherever it was being used, it was being used safely. “Where diacetyl is used in food and drink manufacturing, employers will be controlling the ingredient through the existing health and safety precautions set out under the COSHH (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health) regulations, which would protect employees from this and other substances.” The Margarine and Spreads Association shares the same building and, seemingly, the same viewpoint. “Where diacetyl is used in food and drink manufacturing, employers will be controlling the ingredient through the existing health and safety precautions set out under the COSHH regulations, which protect employees,” said spokesperson Juliet Bennett.“Spread manufacturers are constantly monitoring the safety of their employees and put the most stringent practices in place.” And Steve Chandler, director general of the Snacks, Nuts and Crisps Manufacturers Association (SNACMA), also at the same London address, said because of the known respiratory risk from the “purest form” of the chemical “it is necessary for flavouring manufacturers who deal with diacetyl in this form to have safety guidelines in place, which they have.” Nor is the unfolding scandal in the US causing Europe’s law makers to rush to action. In a statement, European Commission spokesperson Eva Kaluzynska said “for this specific substance, no EU Occupational Exposure Limit has been set nor has it been evaluated by the Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits. In addition, I can confirm that it is not on the priority list of substances for future scientific evaluation by this expert scientific committee.” Information from the UK’s official safety watchdog, the Health and Safety Executive, is equally sketchy. Spokesperson René McTaggart said HSE had confirmed diacetyl is not used in popcorn production in the UK, but could not provide any details on where it is used, how many workers are exposed, or on numbers suffering related health problems. He did confirm diacetyl is widely used in food products in the UK, but could not identify either the products or workplaces. McTaggart admitted “we were not able to find anyone willing to own up to using it as I suspect they feared bad publicity resulting in the public considering the substance a risk to food safety rather than a risk to workers.” Asked if HSE had identified any cases of bronchiolitis obliterans in diacetyl-exposed workers, he said: “They don’t have to notify us they are using diacetyl. You’re actively looking. We’re not.” Short of doorstepping employers – and the cutback agency does not have the resources to do that, with workplace visits in rapid decline in recent years – it has no way of compelling firms to provide the information. This leaves both consumers and workers in the dark. Food labels do not identify diacetyl, just “flavourings”. HM Revenue and Customs said they do not hold information on the volume of diacetyl imported into or exported from the UK. And European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) spokesperson Ewa Moncure confirmed: “We do not have data on diacetyl usage in the EU,” a message repeated by all the major European and international trade industry groupings. The Food Standards Agency said the EU has a register of about 2,800 flavouring substances, with spokesperson Shaun Whelan adding: “Diacetyl is on this register and no further evaluation is required.” Flavourings including diacetyl are rarely named on product labels, have not been assessed for occupational risks and do not have specific occupational exposure standards. Without this information, devising an effective safe system at work when a flavouring chemical enters a workplace will be, in most instances, a matter of guesswork. Belated US action
In September 2007, the House of Representatives passed draft legislation to require the preparation of interim workplace standards to limit worker exposure, a move pre-empted by the official safety watchdog OSHA, which announced it was taking the first tentative steps on the standard-setting process. The OSHA action came only after a public drubbing from the US press, unions and health and safety advocates for its refusal to clampdown on diacetyl use despite clear evidence from its sister organisation, NIOSH, that it had a major occupational health risk on its hands.
A 7 September 2007 letter to US Secretary of State of Labor, Elaine L Chao, said that OSHA “appears to be ‘missing in action’… it continues to ignore facilities where flavours are manufactured or mixed - the facilities where most new cases of bronchiolitis obliterans are appearing. It also makes no effort toward protecting diacetyl-exposed workers in other snack food factories. Most important, it fails to define the steps employers must take to protect employees, especially measures necessary to limit workers’ exposure to this hazardous chemical.”
To date, though, OSHA would seem to be the only regulatory agency anywhere to have taken any steps towards closer regulation of diacetyl in any occupations. And other nations may be standing by, averting their gaze as an occupational disease outbreak simmers on their doorstep.
“To prevent future outbreaks of disease in workers and consumers, it is recommended that the federal government regulate all potential hazards from food and substances added to food, including those currently considered to be GRAS or ‘generally regarded as safe’.” The GRAS system, concerned solely with the risk from consumption of minute quantities in food, has been a particular bugbear for unions worldwide. Foodworkers are handling diacetyl in industrial quantities and are inhaling the potent lung irritant, not ingesting it. But they are being told GRAS, a system that takes no account at all of occupational risks, proves diacetyl is safe for them to handle. Total inaction elsewhere
Regulated or not, there is a booming global trade in diacetyl. The Made-in-China website markets it online in 25kg drums. Closer to home, UK based flavouring supplier Treatt plc, a FEMA member with a £38 million turnover in 2007 and trading worldwide, includes diacetyl on its products list. Diacetyl is perfectly legal and EU-approved for use in food. It also has the potential to kill the workers handling it, something so far glossed over by Europe’s regulators. Global foodworkers’ union federation IUF said its enquiries in Europe had uncovered “an alarming pattern of complacency and denial of responsibility in the face of this dangerous threat to worker health. “Regulatory, safety and trade bodies approached by the IUF have acknowledged extensive use of diacetyl in food processing but would not provide details on where or how the chemical is used, the size of the exposed population or any details of health surveillance or research into diacetyl exposure as an issue in EU workplaces.” According to IUF: “No worker should be expected to work with a substance linked to a debilitating and potentially fatal occupational disease. In view of this threat to workers’ health and lives, the IUF is therefore calling on its member unions, on the wider labour movement, and on health care and medical organisations concerned with worker health and safety to immediately demand action by national and supranational health and safety regulatory agencies.”
He added that there was a hat trick of excuses for inaction – exposure levels are not dangerous, or diacetyl is ‘Generally Regarded As Safe’, a system that in fact refers only to consumer risk, or that commercial secrecy prevents firms telling workers whether or not they are working with diacetyl. It’s a combination that can leave workers at increased risk of developing the condition and, when they do, with little or no chance of making the link to their job. Oswald said national and international regulatory agencies “will have to move quickly” to head off potential lethal exposures from “products manufactured and commercially available around the world.” He concluded: “The Muir case is one more reason for unions to treat claims of product safety with the scepticism they deserve, and to press for decisive action.”
Martin Muir was in the bronchiolitis obliterans front line. He used pure diacetyl in a factory setting and it was a hot process, increasing the potential for hazardous fumes. There is a generally accepted assumption once the flavouring has been added to the flavour mix and shipped out in diluted form to food firms and consumers, that’s the end of the risk. It’s a very convenient assumption too, as the market in products containing butter-flavourings is highly lucrative. It could also be a wrong assumption. The findings of laboratory tests commissioned and published on 21 December 2007 by US newspaper the Seattle Post-Intelligencer found top selling butter substitutes, when heated, released significant levels of diacetyl vapour. This creates a whole new category of at risk worker: commercial kitchen staff. Among the products tested was Unilever’s ‘I can’t believe it’s not butter’. The best selling product was introduced in the US in 1986, and in the UK in 1991. When a dozen eggs were cooked in six tablespoons of the butter substitute, levels of diacetyl arising from the skillet were measured at 171.91 parts per million (ppm), joint second highest of the seven spreads tested - and higher than levels seen in some factories where bronchiolitis obliterans cases have occurred. The lab tests did not mimic real-life working conditions, but they were a genuine warning sign, said NIOSH’s Dr Richard Kanwal. “Without a comprehensive evaluation it’s impossible to assess the actual risk, but there is no doubt that this group of workers should be studied,” he said. “It is possible that the amount of diacetyl being released in commercial kitchens where these butter-flavoured products are being used could equal or perhaps exceed what was found in the popcorn plants.” Unlike many factory environments, restaurants and other food outlets typically have a rapid staff turnover. Sick workers with relatively little employment protection would quickly leave their jobs and perhaps the sector entirely, making the identification of a work link considerably more difficult. Questioned about possible health risks in the manufacture or use of its market-leading product, Caspar Nixon, a UK spokesperson for Unilever, said: “We’ve not really got anything to say.” Dairy Crest, another market leader, did not respond to several requests for a comment. Kerry Foods said none of its products contained diacetyl. NIOSH said at least one case of “terrible lung disease” has been linked to use of butter-flavoured cooking products by a US short-order cook – the sort that churns out hundreds of sunny-side-up and over-easy eggs every morning. Hidden dangers
On 5 December 2007, Wilkinson initiated compensation proceedings at Newcastle County Court. It was clear there was a problem in the work method – and the company has already admitted liability, he said. “When mixing in diacetyl oil it gave off a yellow haze. When the job was finished he then had the job of cleaning out the vat, with his head inside, using hot water.” Martin was a safe worker. “If I was offered PPE (personal protective equipment), I took it. I’ve always, always worn my PPE, done health and safety courses, always done them when they have come up. It’s necessary to protect yourself and get on.” But solicitor Neil Wilkinson says there are limits to what an individual worker can do. “He sometimes wore masks, but they didn’t fit securely. “He wasn’t familiar with the safety precautions to be taken, nothing specific to diacetyl.” He added that despite the serious health risk warning on the datasheet, no-one told Martin. Wilkinson believes it “is extremely likely” there are other cases in the UK. “My first thought was ‘I eat this stuff’. I eat potato crisps and popcorn on a fairly regular basis. “Diacetyl is pretty commonplace. And studies in the US suggest small concentrations can cause the condition.” Cases are being missed How many other workers are affected in the UK is at this time impossible to assess. Martin Muir is the first case of flavouring related bronchiolitis obliterans recognised in the UK – and it may be down to luck that it was spotted at all.
This personal contact proved crucial. “I think that is a fair point, because I and a colleague run the regional centre for occupational lung diseases, and he was aware of the problem when the case was referred to him, because I was involved,” Professor Hendrick said. “Had this been referred to other centres around the country it could have been missed. It would not probably have been picked up if referred to just the local chest consultant. There may be other cases that haven’t been recognised. Like all new diseases with occupational and environmental causes, it is only the cases with the highest exposure levels that are recognised first.” Recognition “would be particularly difficult if the patient is elderly and smokes and shows fixed airways obstruction, hence a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)” – a condition that is common in the general population and often linked to smoking. Cases could be missed for years, instead labelled as the more familiar conditions asthma, bronchitis, emphysema or pneumonia. Martin’s case was unusually straightforward, said Hendrick. “He was young, never smoked and all symptoms came on within three months and by chance the first chap who saw him knew about this condition.” Four severe cases of bronchiolitis obliterans at a Dutch factory – the only other cases so far identified in Europe – were neither recognised nor linked to the job but were labelled COPD, mirroring the experience in the US. The Dutch cases were only identified in a study after the factory had shut. The research team noted cases of bronchiolitis obliterans “were not previously detected or suspected by the occupational health service or otherwise.”
Ron Oswald of global foodworkers’ union IUF commented: “Since bronchiolitis obliterans is frequently misdiagnosed as asthma or COPD, we won’t know the full extent until governments begin overriding claims of commercial secrecy and start demanding full disclosure of the use of diacetyl by the food and flavour manufacturing industry and organise systematic surveillance of all current and former food workers who may have been put at risk.” It seems certain an unquantifiable but significant number of cases are being misdiagnosed, misattributed or just plain missed, and this has helped justify a regulatory paralysis on the issue. The human cost of this failure to act is high, even if the absolute numbers affected turn out to be low. In the worst affected workers, a lung transplant is the only option – but only half of lung transplant patients survive five years. Few are alive after 10 years. Some of those who don’t get a transplant die anyway, their damaged lungs unable to suck in sufficient air. Martin’s case is not so severe. “I’m fortunate. I’m not going to get any worse. But I know I find my body is working twice as hard to keep up. When you’ve got 80 year old lungs, that’s bad enough.” His mental well-being has also been a concern. “I was sent to a psychotherapist in the end. “It was affecting my marriage horrendously. We’ve broken up now and this didn’t help. I was a nightmare to live with. I didn’t know what was wrong with me.” According to Professor Hendrick: “Most of these guys simply don’t get any better and by the time the cases are recognised are suffering significantly.” He is dismayed that companies are refusing to admit to using diacetyl – and perhaps to brionchiolitis obliterans cases in their workforce. “It’s a very sad knee jerk reaction. By and large cooperating early is easier and better in the long-term. “Just putting diacetyl into Google turns up a considerable amount of high quality, sensible advice. Once an employer knows, there is no excuse to be ignorant.” In a forthcoming paper in the journal Thorax, he says the case illustrates how “popcorn lung” is a misnomer, with “food flavourers’ lung” a more appropriate diagnostic label. And he believes diacetyl might not be the only suspect. “The chances are there are other agents could cause it. When it comes to regulatory action, we are right at the start.” A real human tragedy Martin left the firm in March 2007, a move encouraged by the psychotherapist. “It was winding me up,” Martin admitted. “She really helped me. I realised I’m not going to get better so I can’t dwell on that.” The December 2005 day he received his diagnosis was a low point. “It was a long drive home. I was always hoping I could get help and I’d be right again. I started to cry in the car. It was an empty feeling, knowing life was going to change altogether.” His relationship with his kids – Jessica, 10, Curtis, 12, Gemma, 18 and Paul, 19 – has been affected. “I can’t go out for a bike ride, can’t have a game of football, a game of cricket in the summer. “I can’t go in the sea – that bit of cold is too much, it just takes my breath. I used to enjoy going to the beach, playing about with the kids. All that’s over.” There is no treatment. “They tried all sorts, a right string of stuff, and they did nothing – really strong steroids, inhalers. They tried the works and nothing worked.” Now nothing is easy. “I try to do something on my own and I get in a mess – lifting weights, moving stuff about. It’s very tiring and I get frustrated.” He’s friends with his ex now, but has been unable to start a new relationship. “It knocks your self confidence, because the physical stuff you can do – everything physical – is reduced.” A new job in sales took “ages” to find, and he is now working for less money, his income topped up with industrial injuries benefit. And he’s still waiting for a compensation payout – “I’m fed up waiting” - that his solicitor Neil Wilkinson believes could be worth as much as £100,000. “He’ll be disadvantaged on the open labour market and he has this condition for life and he’s never going to get any better,” he said. For Martin, more important than the money is some admission he’s been wronged. “I’d like someone to be held accountable. I’d like an apology, someone to say ‘yup, we’re sorry, we did screw up’. It’s not as though it’s not their fault. They’ve admitted liability.” The company only got a properly prepared work system after Martin had been affected. “I got to write the safe system of work when I was pulled off the production line,” he said. Diacetyl timeline
Key references Preventing lung disease in workers who use or make flavorings, NIOSH Alert, December 2003. Kathleen Kreiss. Flavoring-related bronchiolitis obliterans, Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology, volume 7, pages 162–167, 2007 [abstract]. Frits GBGJ van Rooy, Jos M Rooyackers, Mathias Prokop, Remko Houba, Lidwien AM Smit and Dick JJ Heederik. Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome in Chemical Workers Producing Diacetyl for Food Flavorings, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, volume 176, pages 498-504, 2007 [abstract]. Kathleen Kreiss. Occupational Bronchiolitis Obliterans Masquerading as COPD, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, volume 176, pages 427-429, 2007 [abstract]. David Egilman, Caroline Maillous and Claire Valentin. Popcorn-worker Lung Caused by Corporate and Regulatory Negligence: An avoidable tragedy, International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, volume 13, number 1, pages 85-98, 2007 [abstract]. New Study Highlights Potential Diacetyl Risk to Restaurant Workers, IUF, 3 January 2008. Unions, members of Congress urge action on diacetyl, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 22 December 2007. Flavoring additive puts professional cooks at risk, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 21 December 2007 Additive found in more than 6,000 products, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 21 December 2007. UNITE HERE response to new evidence of chemical hazard from cooking products, UNITE HERE, 20 December 2007. IUF Calls for Urgent Global Action on Toxic Food Flavouring Ingredient Diacetyl, IUF, 6 November 2007. Teamsters Applaud Passage of Legislation to Protect Workers From Diacetyl Exposure, IBT, 26 September 2007. Federal Agencies
Knew of Diacetyl Dangers and Kept Silent, OMB Watch, 11 September
2007. Unions & Scientists Renew Call for OSHA Action on Diacetyl, letter to US Secretary of Labor Elaine L Chao, 7 September 2007 [pdf]. Food and commercial workers applaud Congressional effort to force OSHA to do its job, UFCW, 13 June 2007. Teamsters Support House Bill to Protect Workers From Diacetyl Exposure, IBT, 12 June 2007. Emergency petition seeks immediate action on lethal popcorn flavorings. Unions, Supported by Scientific Community, Petition California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board for Emergency Temporary Standard for the Chemical, UFCW, 28 August 2006. Emergency Petition Assails OSHA'S Refusal to Take Action on Lethal Popcorn Flavoring, IBT, 26 July 2006. Petition for an OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard for Diacetyl, IBT/UFCW, 26 July 2006 [pdf] Obtaining bulk quantities of diacetyl online via Made-in-China.com
Resources
Diacetyl factsheet, DefendingScience.org Flavorings-Related Lung Disease, NIOSH webpage, USA. Flavorings-Related Lung Disease: Diacetyl, OSHA webpage, USA. Hazard communication guidance for diacetyl and food flavorings containing diacety, OSHA, USA, September 2007 Factsheet: Diacetyl and popcorn lung, UFCW. Diacetyl (butter flavour chemical) use in flavouring manufacturing companies. Health Hazard Alert, Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service (HESIS), California Department of Health Services/California Department of Industrial Relations, August 2006 [pdf] David Egilman’s archive of legal and scientific documents on diacetyl butter flavouring and health Washington State diacetyl warning to cooks [pdf] Andrew Schneider’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer blog
Hazards Diacetyl news USA: Popcorn peril spreads to sweets USA: Movement at last on popcorn lung USA: Toxic firm wants to be left alone USA:
Second consumer popcorn lung case USA: Does
popcorn poison cause Parkinson’s? USA: Watchdogs probe
diacetyl threat to cooks Britain: Government
busy doing nothing on diacetyl Britain: HSE issues
low key diacetyl warning Britain:
Lung destroying disease reaches the UK
|
|
| Deadly
Business. A Hazards special investigation |
The
decimation of Britain's industrial base was supposed to have one obvious
upside - an end to dirty and deadly jobs. |
In
this 'Deadly business' series, Hazards reveals how a hands
off approach to safety regulation means workers continue to die in preventable
'accidents' at work. |
Meanwhile,
an absence of oversight means old industrial diseases are still affecting
millions, and modern jobs are creating a bloodless epidemic of workplace diseases - from 'popcorn lung' to work related suicide. |
|
|