Is the Diagnosis of "Mass Hysteria" an Excuse for Incomplete Investigation of Low-Level Environmental Contamination?

Faust, Halley S.; Brilliant, Lawrence B.

doi:10.1097/00043764-198101000-00013

Cited by 55 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Outbreaks in schools may have been reported more frequently than those that occur elsewhere because of the importance attached to investigating outbreaks involving children. In addition, the existence of operational definitions (1,14,19,26,55,56,58,60,62,64,67,68,94,101,102) and lists of positive features suggesting epidemic hysteria (1, 18-20, 87, 96, 103) developed over recent years also may increase the likelihood that an outbreak is identified as epidemic hysteria. At the same time, these identifications of characteristics may lead researchers away from considering epidemic hysteria as the cause of an outbreak.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemic Hysteria: A Review of the Published Literature

Boss

1997

Epidemiologic Reviews

126

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemic Hysteria: A Review of the Published Literature

Boss

1997

Epidemiologic Reviews

126

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The initial hygiene investigation needs to be thorough and should lead to confidence that no underlying environmental exposure is the cause of the problem. It has been argued by Faust and Brilliant [1981] that a diagnosis of mass hysteria is simply an excuse for incomplete investigation of low-level environmental contamination, but in general, low-level environmental exposure cannot account for the dramatic illness behavior present in episodes of MPI [Struewing and Gray, 1990;Levine, 1981]. Therefore, once the hygiene investigation has been done, there is no need to carry out additional environmental investigations and such investigations might be harmful by prolonging the aura of mystery and uncertainty surrounding exposures in the workplace.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of factors affecting mass psychogenic illness in employees in a fish-packing plant

House

Holness

1997

Am. J. Ind. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study of the factors affecting the development of mass psychogenic illness (MPI) was carried out in a large fish‐packing plant in New Brunswick, Canada. A total of 269 out of 270 plant employees (99.6%) participated in the study and of these, 208 cases were affected with symptoms of MPI and 61 controls were unaffected over a period of 2½ months. A questionnaire was administered to participating employees to collect information about symptoms, demographic factors, work history, pre‐existing medical problems, potential workplace triggering exposure factors, and various psychosocial factors. Multiple logistic regression indicated that the main factors associated with MPI, in decreasing order of importance, were skill creation in the job, odor perception, and female sex. Management of this incident required reassurance of employees that there was no hazardous exposure in the plant as well as recognition of the need to reduce underlying sources of stress in the work environment. Am. J. Ind. Med. 32:90‐96, 1997. © 1997 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

“…Pour générer des hypothèses alternatives à l'étiologie psychologique, l'étude de l'occurrence collective de symptômes apparemment somatiques devrait inclure des indicateurs d'exposition, même aussi rudimentaires que la relation poids/symptômes (Faust et Brilliant, 1981) ou encore le schéma de circulation d'air dans une usine (Guidotti et al, 1987 ;Samet et al, 1988).…”

Section: Agresseurs Environnementauxunclassified