Why opinions can be very misleading

[Guest guest]

KC,

Thank you for the referral on another post. I am posting this

material so everyone can see the problems with opinions and

interpretations that can greatly impact human health with regards

to " toxic mold " and inhaltion as a route of entry.

My first response is to reach Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker if you want to

understand mycotoxin producing mold and human health in environmental

settings:

http://www.chronicneurotoxins.com

There has been very little to really understand mold via the

inhalation route and subsequent toxicity from the mycotoxins. The

best research for mold and health effects comes from food science and

veterinary science.

I would disregard the statement made by the " American College of

Occupational and Environmental Medicine " . It is nothing more than

the same regurgitation given by various government agencies. They

all say " Don't worry; we don't know what the heck is going-on. We

admit to allergic responses because this is not worth any money in

court by those scurrilous tort lawyers who expect us to give our best

efforts to heal patients " .

The people in the government who are in a position of knowledge for

pubic health are not in a position to divulge the knowledge of public

health since management is often " politically appointed " by those who

seek campaign financing from various groups who stand to lose profits

created by " standard of care " changes for public health.

Both political parties are responsible. The Republicans coddle " big

business " (never small business) and the Democrats coddle leftwing

nuts that are so removed from reality they bring everything to a

grinding halt (including small business). I saw it happen with food

safety first and indoor air quality (IAQ) is following the same

pattern. Public Health takes a backseat to corporate profit,

political favoritism and career building by supporting ideology that

is marketable with subsequent job changes (suppression bias).

We could all drop dead tomorrow and some group of politicians in the

hot seat would use the occasion to " look busy " while creating a

regulatory fiasco. Look at the State of Texas and their proposed " 30

fungal structures " (this includes hyphal fragments) limit for surface

testing as a means of post testing after remediation. I can get the

higher results in any lumberyard in America.

THE MISSING FACTS:

We are told mold inside structures can be found outside structures

and therefore, we would be sick all the time if mold is toxic.

This the typical statements made by people with hidden agendas or

have a very poor understanding for the physiology of mold in the

environment. If you check with the true " taxonomists " who research

mold, they will tell you there is a minimum water activity (Aw) for

each particular species of mold to grow and a higher water activity

for " some " mold species to produce mycotoxins. If you have

Stachybotrys (0.94 Aw) growing (even a small area) in an indoor

setting, you could have the strong potential for mycotoxin production

from various species of Penicillium and Aspergillus which are " active

spore releasers " (constantly spewing).

Mold in the outdoor air is diluted by the wind and may not get the

necessary water activity to produce mycotoxins. The best chance for

mycotoxin production is contact with the soil where there is

competition with bacteria (which usually wins the battle). This mold

is stuck in this wet environment (high water activity) in most

cases. Aspergillus fumigatus is an excellent example. Unless a

compost pile is vigorously stirred, I just can't see the argument for

claiming the mold indoor can't be toxic unless the mold outdoor air

is toxic.

Most of the studies for the aerobiology of mold and health

implications rely on spore trap testing or cultured air samples. The

biggest problem with applying this data to health effects is the

physiology of mold. When there is heavy growth from high water

activity, the biomass of mold is only 3 to 5 percent spores. With

exception of PCR (genetic) testing, the other forms of testing rely

on spores to identify or culture for future species identification.

I have seen a few good consultants and many bad consultants who are

just glorified (and overpaid) bean counters. Scientific literature

often times has huge gaps of missing knowledge that a consultant must

research further if they are to be of any use. The cookie cutter

operations don't have time for this investigation. Subsequently,

they are the ones who miss important clues and get their tales in a

legal crack while leading to economic loss for property owners and

needless suffering by occupants.

I can't stress enough how important it is to have someone like Dr.

Lipsey look for mold and put it in context with toxicology

and legal work. He has an amazing knack for finding the best places

to get surfaces samples. He is used in the courtroom for a very

good reason; he gets results.

http:www.richardlipsey.com

Regards,

Greg Weatherman

Aerobiological Solutions Inc.

Arlington VA 22202

gw@...