During the last decade there has been a growing interest in the sick building syndrome. Typically, employees in an office building complain of upper respiratory irritation, eye irritation, dizziness, and fatigue. Litigations are increasing and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, state health departments, and the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) have put out guidelines for how to achieve healthy indoor air in buildings and prevent the development of sick building syndrome.
Large groups of clinicians and researchers remain skeptical as to the specificity of the sick building syndrome. Nevertheless, a growing number of workers complain about poor indoor air quality. The World Health Organization expert group defined the sick building syndrome as consisting of a combination of general, mucosal, and skin symptoms. Common symptoms are eye, nose, and throat irritation, sensation of dry mucous membranes and skin, erythema, mental fatigue, headache, high frequency of airway infections, cough, hoarseness, wheezing, itching, nonspecific respiratory hypersensitivity, nausea, and dizziness. It is apparent that a number of the symptoms are nonspecific and overlap with other syndromes, such as MCS and hypersensitivity to electric and magnetic fields (Arnetz, Berg, & Arnetz, 1997).
The study by Menzies et al. ( 1993) tested the hypothesis that increasing the supply of air from 20 ft 3 (0.57 m 3 ) to 50 ft 3 (1.4 m 3 ) per minute per person would reduce symptoms. The study was a randomized, double-blind crossover trial. Supply of outside air was manipulated over time in four buildings: In each building, at a given time, one area received a higher outdoor air supply (1.4 m 3 per minute per person), while the other received the lower amount (0.57 m 3 ). More than 1,500 workers responded to detailed questionnaires covering a range of issues, including personal, smoking, medical, and work histories...........
