As you should well know, there is an awful lot simply not adequately known yet about the development of Parkinson's; and therefore the mere definition of it as a specific disease might very well evolve into a number of symptomatically-related but distinct by causality definitions of it down the line, just like is happening with the definition of schizophrenia, for example. Terminology changes with better knowledge. And I certainly hope that by stating "symptomatic" in relation to classification, you didn't think I was implying possibly "psychosomatic", versus "real disease", which Parkinson's surely is.
My dabbling into the peripheral relationship of pyro to gelatin tanning was more in relation to hypothetically finding an analogous but better alternative to carbon printing based on modern scientific findings rather than just accumulated accidental experience, but even that still contains a lot of unknowns. What has come to the forefront, nonetheless, is the industrial risk factors involved, whether someone is talking about hypothetically reviving the classic Technicolor movie process dependent on pyro cross-linking, or the commercial development of gelatin replacement tissues and prosthetic components. The chemistry per se, as I indicated, is a very specialized field, and I don't pretend to have a handle on that.
But at a PRACTICAL LEVEL appropriate to a forum like this, the manner in which enforcement and disposal agencies like the EPA look at it, or worker health insurance carriers, or MSDS sheets, or facilities engineers, gives a pretty good clue as to the potential risks of mishandling. And on that basis, formal studies so far concur with common sense darkroom protocols. Pyro is a health risk, and quite possibly a Parkinson's factor specifically. So wear those gloves, and have an effective darkroom ventilation system in place. No need go write or even read a phD thesis on it to grasp those basics.