Burden of Proof: The Debate Surrounding Aerotoxic Syndrome

Stephen E Mawdsley*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalSpecial issue (Academic Journal)peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
288 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Since the 1980s, some commercial airline pilots and flight crews in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia began to report an illness they believed was caused by exposure to contaminated cabin air. Despite a body of scientific research and health activism calling for this condition, termed Aerotoxic Syndrome (AS), to be classified an occupational illness, it has not been accepted as a clinical entity because its causation remains contested. This article contends that debates over the recognition of AS have been shaped by the politics of science and what can be considered evidence of a causal link; the burden of proof lay with survivors and their allies rather than with airlines and manufacturers. The history of AS shows the challenges of reacting to health risks in a global industry that provides an important form of transportation, and enjoys considerable political and economic influence. It also reveals that at the heart of commercial jet air travel remains an unresolved public health issue, and those who claim to be suffering from AS expected prompt recognition, reform, and assistance in light of scientific research and personal testimony, as well as a range of chemical, medical, legal, and air safety reports.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)959-974
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Contemporary History
Volume57
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 28 Jan 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust 200350/A/15/Z. For the purpose of Open Access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.

Funding Information:
I appreciate the generous support of the Wellcome Trust, which helped to make this research possible. Thanks also to Axel Jansen and Claudia Roesch for inviting me to present this research at GHI Washington and for reviewing and offering comments on early drafts. I also thank Hilary Carey, Josie McLellan and other colleagues in the Modern History Cluster at the University of Bristol for their thoughts and suggestions on this piece. A final special thanks to HCM Mawdsley for her patience and advice. This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust 200350/A/15/Z. For the purpose of Open Access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2022.

Keywords

  • Aerotoxic
  • Aircrew
  • Biomedicine
  • Occupational health
  • Labor Activism

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Burden of Proof: The Debate Surrounding Aerotoxic Syndrome'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this