RE: I need to explain to people what's troubling me but no book is quite

[Guest guest]

Branislav,

I am a great believer in science.

If spores are a problem, even dead ones can readily be observed by taking

dust samples from furniture, clothing, etc. Other potential allergens or

irritants such as fibers, insect droppings, animal dander, etc. can all be seen

with dust sampling and microscopy.

From your description of the home and conditions, it is unlikely that

mycotoxins would be present on particles other than spores: in environments

where there is significant mold growth, mycotoxins can be present on

microparticles that cannot be distinguished by microscopy. On the other hand,

mycotoxins if present in adequate quantities can be detected chemically in dust

samples.

You can have dust samples sent to a lab for both visual and chemical

analysis for a variety of allergens and toxins. For example, take a look at the

tests available from www.aerotechlabs.com.

By selectively removing cushioned items or sealing them (with adhesive

polyethylene film or plastic and duct tape or foil, etc.), you can also take a

scientific approach to determining what may be problematic in your environment.

C. May, M.A.

May Indoor Air Investigations LLC

Cambridge, MA

www.myhouseiskillingme.com

www.mayindoorair.com

--

Reply to:

Jeff@...

>1. Mold must be visible in order to be considered a problem. We have

>no visible mold in our house, and thus your health is not

>compormised by mold, it must be something else.

>2. The furniture you say that is contaminated is always dry, and is

>exposed only to air humidity which is almost always the same. Even

>if there were some toxic mold spores they wouldn't have

>conditions to thrive here.

>3. Mold spores cannot live for that long! Are you referring to that

>incident that happened five or ten years ago? You mean that day when

>you returned feeling ill from your friend's house? How, on earth, do

>you think those spores could have survived until now? It has been 10

>years since then, nothing can live so long on clean surface!

>4. How is it possible that nobody in the whole world has any

>problems like you do? We don't feel anything and we live with you.

>There wasn't even one case in the newspapers! Nobody has ever talked

>about any problem that remotely resembles yours, so you must be

>imagining things! If mold was so dangerous as you describe, people

>would be sick all over, and it would be a known issue. And it is not.

[Guest guest]

Branislav,

Jeff May's final paragraph is perhaps the most reliable and simple

process for figuring out what is happening to you. Especially since

you are so far away.

> By selectively removing cushioned items or sealing them (with

> adhesive polyethylene film or plastic and duct tape or foil,

> etc.), you can also take a scientific approach to determining

> what may be problematic in your environment.

talks a lot about how avoiding exposure is the key. That was and

is true for me also. But I first had to figure out what to avoid and

then how to avoid it. That took me years, starting 22 years ago,

because I was so sick that almost everything was a problem. It took

ten years before I could work full time. Now I overwork!

Finally, mold isn't the only problem. It may be, as states, the

initial trigger and primary culprit, but you can ovten gain

significant relief during your healing by avoiding all the secondary

sources of exposure as well.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> Branislav,

>

> I am a great believer in science.

>

> If spores are a problem, even dead ones can readily be observed by

> taking dust samples from furniture, clothing, etc. Other potential

> allergens or irritants such as fibers, insect droppings, animal

> dander, etc. can all be seen with dust sampling and microscopy.

>

> From your description of the home and conditions, it is unlikely

> that mycotoxins would be present on particles other than spores:

> in environments where there is significant mold growth, mycotoxins

> can be present on microparticles that cannot be distinguished by

> microscopy. On the other hand, mycotoxins if present in adequate

> quantities can be detected chemically in dust samples.

>

> You can have dust samples sent to a lab for both visual and

> chemical analysis for a variety of allergens and toxins. For

> example, take a look at the tests available from

> www.aerotechlabs.com.

>

> By selectively removing cushioned items or sealing them (with

> adhesive polyethylene film or plastic and duct tape or foil,

> etc.), you can also take a scientific approach to determining what

> may be problematic in your environment.

>

> C. May, M.A.

> May Indoor Air Investigations LLC

> Cambridge, MA

> www.myhouseiskillingme.com

> www.mayindoorair.com

>

> --

> Reply to:

> Jeff@...

>

>

> >1. Mold must be visible in order to be considered a problem. We have

> >no visible mold in our house, and thus your health is not compormised

> >by mold, it must be something else.

>

> >2. The furniture you say that is contaminated is always dry, and is

> >exposed only to air humidity which is almost always the same. Even if

> >there were some toxic mold spores they wouldn't have conditions to

> >thrive here.

>

> >3. Mold spores cannot live for that long! Are you referring to that

> >incident that happened five or ten years ago? You mean that day when

> >you returned feeling ill from your friend's house? How, on earth, do

> >you think those spores could have survived until now? It has been 10

> >years since then, nothing can live so long on clean surface!

>

> >4. How is it possible that nobody in the whole world has any

> >problems like you do? We don't feel anything and we live with you.

> >There wasn't even one case in the newspapers! Nobody has ever talked

> >about any problem that remotely resembles yours, so you must be

> >imagining things! If mold was so dangerous as you describe, people

> >would be sick all over, and it would be a known issue. And it is not.

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Branislav,

>

> I am a great believer in science.

I am too!

With my original post I had no intention to say that my experiences

are outside the realm of science. The question is - what is good and

exact science? Is it sticking dogmaticaly to the current model of

accepted facts about a certain thing (in this case about toxic molds),

or is it constant experimentation and observation of phenomena in

nature and bringing current scientific theories/facts in sync with the

observed facts?

If someone's description of a phenomenon doesn't fit in the current

scientific explanation or model about that matter, it doesn't

necesseraly follow that that person is incorrect. On the contrary, and

especially in the fields such as this one (mold problems), science

should be more observant to what people's reactions to molds are, and

make an effort to bring its theories in accordance with observable

facts.

That's the way physics, chemistry, biology and all natural sciences

work. All natural sciences are subject to this rule: If observations

do not fit in some current theory or model, the model must be either

modified or totally discarded.

> By selectively removing cushioned items or sealing them (with

adhesive polyethylene film or plastic and duct tape or foil, etc.),

you can also take a scientific approach to determining what may be

problematic in your environment.

I think you did not quite understand my problem.

I know *precisely* which object is contaminated even if there is no

visible mold on it. Even if that object was only touched by other

contaminated object or person years ago. Even if that object has never

been exposed to excessive moisture.

Let's imagine this experiment: Put 50 identical chairs in a room, and

put this mold contamination with which I'm having problems only on one

chair. I can assure you I'll be able to tell you what chair is

mold-contaminated. Even if several years have passed after the

contamination.

Please understand I am not bragging about my " ability " . It's a curse

not something one should be happy about.

Not all mold contaminations are the same, some are much easirer to get

rid of, but this one is particularly nasty.

When I touch an object contaminated with this type of mold (or even if

I just pass near it), in a matter of a few seconds I first feel some

kind of skin itching. The side of the body that has been 'hit' by mold

starts to feel 'heavier'. Then this itching becomes burning, spreads

to whole body, and it is usually most severe in the groin area. If I

don't decontaminate myself quickly (usually by taking a shower and

changing clothes) these symptoms would follow: severe nausea, the urge

to vomit, diarrhoea, coughing, and if I'm not decontaminated for

several days, it's likely I'll collapse or be so tired as to be hardly

able to move myself.

Now those symptoms are not something I would ever ascribe to

psychological explanations. This IS physical. And it is caused by

mold. I am aware it might be hard to explain by current scientific

theories about mold, but I'm certain the time will soon come when

we'll have a scientific explanation of this type of sensitivity.

Branislav

[Guest guest]

> Now those symptoms are not something I would ever ascribe to

> psychological explanations. This IS physical. And it is caused by

> mold. I am aware it might be hard to explain by current scientific

> theories about mold, but I'm certain the time will soon come when

> we'll have a scientific explanation of this type of sensitivity.

>

> Branislav

Exactly and I'm the same Branislav. My body will warn me even though I

cannot see or smell the environmental toxin. I do not react to all mold. I

love gardening and there is mold in my dirt; I don't fear that mold nor will

I react to it. I've been in some homes that have the moldy odor but my body

does not react to it. I don't fear the world or all smells and chemicals.

I have become more sensitive and reactive to other chemicals which I was not

prior to my mold exposure. I've walked into stores; recently a grocery

store and my face would begin to burn as if on fire. Certainly didn't see

or smell mold. However found out later as I got close to the source they

had pesticided the produce area (yes I could then smell the pesticides).

made a good point and I hope I understood. That is we cannot become

Hyper -fearful (that's my description) of the world around us. I've seen

discussion groups where one person might say she had a reaction to vanilla

and then cause a chain of fear among all members that vanilla is toxic or

someone else posted the scent of flowers in the garden made her ill and I

saw the chain reaction that all of our plants and flowers had to be pulled

up and thrown away. This fear has been carried to extremes. I've seen

groups posting that any odor is toxic and will cause a reaction; well I'm

sorry everything has some odor to it. I've seen posts where a lemon is

classified a neurotoxin and most be avoided at all costs by everyone. I'm

sorry, we cannot afford to allow ourselves to become so fearful; yes we need

to educate ourselves and if too ill and sensitive we need someone to hold

our hands until our congnitive functions have stabilized, get qualified

medical assistance if at all possible, read the books, get a copy of Carl's

book, etc.

Just my thoughts on this matter,

Rosie

[Guest guest]

--- If observations do not fit in some current theory or model, the

model must be either modified or totally discarded.

>

Almost word for word what Dr Shoemaker says in Mold Warriors.

The use of science is intended to develope explanations for

observations, instead of denying the existence of the observation.

People often project their mental model upon a situation and shape

their responses accordingly - even if it doesn't match reality.

Example. Ask someone how to turn a bicycle.

Almost everyone will say that the method is to turn the handlebars in

the desired direction.

Put them on a bike and ask them to watch the handlebars as they

initiate a turn and watch their face as they realize that in reality,

the first thing they do is turn the handlebars in the OPPOSITE

direction to shift their balance toward the desired direction - and

only then do the handlebars actually turn to the new heading.

To turn to the left, the method is to turn the handlebars to the

right.

Untold numbers of Moldies have asked doctors and scientists to explain

their observations of extreme reactivity, and the response has been

shaped according to the conceptual model instead of scientifically

responding to the actual query.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

-

[Guest guest]

--- In , " erikmoldwarrior " <erikmoldwarrior@e...>

wrote:

> --- If observations do not fit in some current theory or model, the

> model must be either modified or totally discarded.

> >

>

> Almost word for word what Dr Shoemaker says in Mold Warriors.

> The use of science is intended to develope explanations for

> observations, instead of denying the existence of the observation.

>

> People often project their mental model upon a situation and shape

> their responses accordingly - even if it doesn't match reality.

>

> Example. Ask someone how to turn a bicycle.

> Almost everyone will say that the method is to turn the handlebars in

> the desired direction.

> Put them on a bike and ask them to watch the handlebars as they

> initiate a turn and watch their face as they realize that in reality,

> the first thing they do is turn the handlebars in the OPPOSITE

> direction to shift their balance toward the desired direction - and

> only then do the handlebars actually turn to the new heading.

> To turn to the left, the method is to turn the handlebars to the

> right.

>

> Untold numbers of Moldies have asked doctors and scientists to explain

> their observations of extreme reactivity, and the response has been

> shaped according to the conceptual model instead of scientifically

> responding to the actual query.

> Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

> -

Medical doctors have blinders on, no periperal vision. Tragic for patients and

for out

healthcare industry. Shoemaker is an outstanding example of what a physican

should be.

Realmoldygal