For years, people have complained that exposure to various hazardous substances makes them ill. While some do not believe these claims, the numbers of those who complain seems to increase. When the problem is ever present, it is called Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.

Canada has been in the lead on this issue. Recently the Supreme Court there upheld a municipal ban on lawn pesticide use. And Canada has had anti-public fragrance laws on the books for years now. Will the U.S. follow? I suspect so, at least in some measure . But, it will take a while.

Maybe the notion that hazardous substance exposure is possibly enhancing male infertility will attract the attention of our largely male law makers.

Researchers recently provided evidence that suggests that pesticides and solvents can contribute to an increase in male infertility. Specifically, the study suggests focused on pesticides and solvents.

That study consisted of 225 men who worked in farming regions in Argentina. According to the study results, exposure to insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides appears to have reduced the ability of the subjects to have children.

The study results were published in the recent addition of the journal "Human Production." One of the authors of the report was Dr. Luc Multigner of the French Research Institute "Inserm."

As it turns out, this information is relatively significant in light of the 1992 findings from Danish researchers indicating a worldwide increase in male infertility. Experts have suggested a link between this problem and environmental factors.

Under the Argentine study, men who attended an infertility clinic between 1995 and 1998 were questioned about many factors including lifestyle, medical history, occupation and exposure to pesticides. The study indicated that other factors might be contributing to infertility, but exposure to pesticides and solvents did appear to be a factor.

Also, in a study published this past March by the Assisted Reproductive Technology Center ("ARTC") located in Coinbatore, scientists concluded again that changes in lifestyle and the environment, as well as occupational hazards, may be related to an "alarming increase" in male infertility. That study was conducted over a three-year period and again concluded that male infertility was possibly related to occupational exposures to pesticides and herbicides. The author of the report, ARTC Director Dr. Mirud Hubashini, concluded that various toxins, including products from the plastic industry, fungicides, dioxins, and other hazardous substances, may be significant contributors to male infertility.

According to a report entitled Toxic Exposures and Male Infertility published by Dr. Steven Schrader of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the connection between environmental exposure and male infertility was first reached in the 1970s during studies of a chemical called DBCP on male workers. Since then, other human male reproductive toxins have been identified including lead, other pesticides and organic solvents.

In fact, several lists of male reproductive toxins have been created since the 1970s. One was called the Genetox List, which contains 52 chemicals with established impacts on male reproduction. A list of 1,191 chemicals that have male reproductive effects can also be generated using a computer search program called CCINFO. And California's Proposition 65, which requires the Governor of California to formulate a list of toxic agents, requires a list of reproductive toxins be established.

While a study of a few hundred South American farmers cannot be considered to be conclusive, several researchers have opined that exposure to hazardous substances may be a factor in evaluating our global male infertility problem. Which once again suggests that people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity really do have something significant and important to complain about. We all need to listen.

The information provided in this column is written by Stuart Lieberman,a practicing environmental attorney, and is for general information purposes only. It is not legal advice and should not be used in place of legal advice.

Stuart Lieberman, Esq., and IRED.Com, Inc., will not accept any responsibilty for any reliance on the information in this column or any damages whatsoever resulting from reading this column.