Re: Re: Cleaning up the mold

[Guest guest]

Carl, Thanks for the response. I am highly reactive do long exposure of molds

from work & remediation chemical exposure. I tried to professionally clean my

couch & now I can't sit on it because I have nerve reactions & head explosions.

Questions for anyone:

1. When you kill the mold, do the mycotoxins float in the air or do they fall

to the ground? How do get rid of mycotoxins after the kill???

2. What product would you use on wood furniture to kill mold?

3. Are the molds lurking on the paint?If so, what do you use to kill them on

paint??

4. It's starting to get cold so I will need to turn on the HVAC system. I am

dreading this. I have a pot shelve in the bedroom that has years of dust on it.

So as to not wisk the mold into the entire house what would be the protocol

here. Could I spray Lysol mold spray first to kill the mold & then vacuum it up.

Would that work?????

5. Do the room air purifiers take the mold out of the air? I have a Friedrich

which was consumers report pick last year & I can't tell if it is working. The

inside collection plate does not have any dust on it after 6 mos of use.

Thanks for the help, Loni

" Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

Loni,

It depends. Don't you just love a definitive answer like that?

We can take a clue from the IICRC S520 Standard and Reference Guide

for Professional Mold Remediation. If we look at the obvious at both

extremes we can say that a simple surface that is hard and smooth can

be cleaned with soap and water to remove any dirt, mold growth,

bacteria, etc. So try. But it may not be successful for the highly

reactive individuals.

At the other extreme we can say that complex structures with nooks

and crannies that are hard-to-nearly-impossible to clean have little

chance of success. Likewise, rough surfaces that are porous like

fabric that have mold growth would be nearly impossible. So don't

try. If the mold has merely settled onto the surface like dust, then

maybe.

So what about all the objects that aren't obvious, with mixed

characteristics? It depends. They may take 2, 3 or more cleaning

attempts and still not be successful. By that time is usually cheaper

to replace it anyway. Some will be cleaned sufficiently for a typical

person, a few might be for a sensitive person, and some never for a

highly reactive person.

Decide on the obvious and then make choices about all those in the

middle. Is their inherent or perceived value worth the risk of

spending money on a failure? Are you so sensitive that the chance of

success is zero? Someone recently posted about how to clean their

art. There are specialists for that but is so expensive the art has

to be extremely valuable. Most of these answers won't be known for

sure until you try it. What is the risk with your circumstances?

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> So are you saying throw away desks, wood furniture, sofas etc. Can

> they not be cleaned? Loni

>

> snk1955@... wrote:

> In a message dated 11/15/2005 12:22:17 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> grimes@... writes:

>

> KC and Sharon,

>

> At the risk of sounding like a traitor, don't throw the baby out with

> the bathwater. There is a lot of excellent information in this

> briefing, especially the warning against unnecessary testing and being

> careful about remediators. I also like the statement that if it is

> porous and moldy, throw it out instead of trying to clean it. Wonder

> what the insurance adjustors think of that?

>

> I also like that the EPA guy specifically mentions that they include

> data that would be applicable to those with greater sensitivity. At

> least it's a start.

>

> What I do disagree with, is they don't go far enough in explaining

> that public health is not the same as individual health. Therefore,

> what they deem as overall acceptable to the " general public " may not

> be for a specific individual. That would remove some of the support

> to the naysayers.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> > Is this i

> >

> > FEMA Announcements Last Updated: Sep 29th, 2005 - 07:29:19

> >

> >

> > http://communitydispatch.com/artman/publish/article_2249.shtml

>

>

> Hey Carl,

>

> You are one who could never, ever be considered a traitor in the fight

> to help mold victims! And in reality, why should there be traitors

> to this issue at all? Whether one is most concerned about the

> physical impact of this issue or if one is most concerned about the

> financial impact of this issue....this issue is uselessly wasting

> many lives and much money.

>

> It is beyond me, why this even is an issue. Seems like all would want

> to do everything possible to move the science forward.

>

> There is some good information in this doc. But what is glaringly

> missing from the CDC is the acknowledgement that molds and mold toxins

> can produce severe, life threatening illnesses in prior healthly

> people. And there in, lays the heart of all the contention of the

> " Toxic Mold Issue " .

>

> Numerous times within the more comprehensive mold doc that was

> recently written the CDC makes statesment of " rare, little is known,

> in a small segment of the population, etc " .

>

> The illnesses we are all experiencing are not mere IgE mediated minor

> allergies, yet that is the only place where the CDC has focused any

> research for those who are immunocompetent. Still they continue to

> make statesment of the rarity of our illnesses.

>

> We have asked numerous times that they track these symptoms indicative

> of serious Type III hypersensitivity reactions and mycotoxicoses. To

> date, they have taken no action to do so.

>

> So, the statements of rarity of these illnesses in prior healthy

> people is not based on any scientific evidence....it is anecdotal

> information being presented by the CDC as sound science. It is

> making it difficult for those who are experiencing these illnesses to

> find proper medical care. And it is hurting us all, physically and

> financially.

>

> Those who are currently being exposed to excessive amounts of mold

> after Katrina, yet are not immunocompromised, are being left wide

> open by the CDC to acquire serious mold and mold toxin induced

> illneses. They are being told, runny noses, minor coughs, etc. All

> of us on this board know that is not true and accurate

> information...as does the CDC. Whether they want to call it rare or

> not rare based on some fictious study of numbers of those affected,

> they know it does happen and they are not properly warning people of

> the potentially serious illnesses of mold.

>

> I guess that would be my beef with what is being put out there by the

> CDC. I don't want to see one other person unnecessarily have to go

> through what most of us on this board have had to go through.

>

> Sharon

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Anyone know??????

1. When you kill the mold, do the mycotoxins float in the air or do they fall

to the ground? How do get rid of mycotoxins after the kill???

2. What product would you use on wood furniture to kill mold?

3. Are the molds lurking on the paint?If so, what do you use to kill them on

paint??

4. It's starting to get cold so I will need to turn on the HVAC system. I am

dreading this. I have a pot shelve in the bedroom that has years of dust on it.

So as to not wisk the mold into the entire house what would be the protocol

here. Could I spray Lysol mold spray first to kill the mold & then vacuum it up.

Would that work?????

5. Do the room air purifiers take the mold out of the air? I have a Friedrich

which was consumers report pick last year & I can't tell if it is working. The

inside collection plate does not have any dust on it after 6 mos of use.

Thanks for the help, Loni

" Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

Loni,

It depends. Don't you just love a definitive answer like that?

We can take a clue from the IICRC S520 Standard and Reference Guide

for Professional Mold Remediation. If we look at the obvious at both

extremes we can say that a simple surface that is hard and smooth can

be cleaned with soap and water to remove any dirt, mold growth,

bacteria, etc. So try. But it may not be successful for the highly

reactive individuals.

At the other extreme we can say that complex structures with nooks

and crannies that are hard-to-nearly-impossible to clean have little

chance of success. Likewise, rough surfaces that are porous like

fabric that have mold growth would be nearly impossible. So don't

try. If the mold has merely settled onto the surface like dust, then

maybe.

So what about all the objects that aren't obvious, with mixed

characteristics? It depends. They may take 2, 3 or more cleaning

attempts and still not be successful. By that time is usually cheaper

to replace it anyway. Some will be cleaned sufficiently for a typical

person, a few might be for a sensitive person, and some never for a

highly reactive person.

Decide on the obvious and then make choices about all those in the

middle. Is their inherent or perceived value worth the risk of

spending money on a failure? Are you so sensitive that the chance of

success is zero? Someone recently posted about how to clean their

art. There are specialists for that but is so expensive the art has

to be extremely valuable. Most of these answers won't be known for

sure until you try it. What is the risk with your circumstances?

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> So are you saying throw away desks, wood furniture, sofas etc. Can

> they not be cleaned? Loni

>

> snk1955@... wrote:

> In a message dated 11/15/2005 12:22:17 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> grimes@... writes:

>

> KC and Sharon,

>

> At the risk of sounding like a traitor, don't throw the baby out with

> the bathwater. There is a lot of excellent information in this

> briefing, especially the warning against unnecessary testing and being

> careful about remediators. I also like the statement that if it is

> porous and moldy, throw it out instead of trying to clean it. Wonder

> what the insurance adjustors think of that?

>

> I also like that the EPA guy specifically mentions that they include

> data that would be applicable to those with greater sensitivity. At

> least it's a start.

>

> What I do disagree with, is they don't go far enough in explaining

> that public health is not the same as individual health. Therefore,

> what they deem as overall acceptable to the " general public " may not

> be for a specific individual. That would remove some of the support

> to the naysayers.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> > Is this i

> >

> > FEMA Announcements Last Updated: Sep 29th, 2005 - 07:29:19

> >

> >

> > http://communitydispatch.com/artman/publish/article_2249.shtml

>

>

> Hey Carl,

>

> You are one who could never, ever be considered a traitor in the fight

> to help mold victims! And in reality, why should there be traitors

> to this issue at all? Whether one is most concerned about the

> physical impact of this issue or if one is most concerned about the

> financial impact of this issue....this issue is uselessly wasting

> many lives and much money.

>

> It is beyond me, why this even is an issue. Seems like all would want

> to do everything possible to move the science forward.

>

> There is some good information in this doc. But what is glaringly

> missing from the CDC is the acknowledgement that molds and mold toxins

> can produce severe, life threatening illnesses in prior healthly

> people. And there in, lays the heart of all the contention of the

> " Toxic Mold Issue " .

>

> Numerous times within the more comprehensive mold doc that was

> recently written the CDC makes statesment of " rare, little is known,

> in a small segment of the population, etc " .

>

> The illnesses we are all experiencing are not mere IgE mediated minor

> allergies, yet that is the only place where the CDC has focused any

> research for those who are immunocompetent. Still they continue to

> make statesment of the rarity of our illnesses.

>

> We have asked numerous times that they track these symptoms indicative

> of serious Type III hypersensitivity reactions and mycotoxicoses. To

> date, they have taken no action to do so.

>

> So, the statements of rarity of these illnesses in prior healthy

> people is not based on any scientific evidence....it is anecdotal

> information being presented by the CDC as sound science. It is

> making it difficult for those who are experiencing these illnesses to

> find proper medical care. And it is hurting us all, physically and

> financially.

>

> Those who are currently being exposed to excessive amounts of mold

> after Katrina, yet are not immunocompromised, are being left wide

> open by the CDC to acquire serious mold and mold toxin induced

> illneses. They are being told, runny noses, minor coughs, etc. All

> of us on this board know that is not true and accurate

> information...as does the CDC. Whether they want to call it rare or

> not rare based on some fictious study of numbers of those affected,

> they know it does happen and they are not properly warning people of

> the potentially serious illnesses of mold.

>

> I guess that would be my beef with what is being put out there by the

> CDC. I don't want to see one other person unnecessarily have to go

> through what most of us on this board have had to go through.

>

> Sharon

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't see any white powder. It looks like stuff gets caught in the filter

coming in. Loni

pwcwg325 <pwcwg325@...> wrote: ,

This model is not the best choice for those with severe allergies.

Since this model uses an electrostatic plate, the Friedrich produces

a small amount of ozone.

You just cant beat a HEPA filter. What goes in, does not come out

and there is no by products to add into you homes environment. Also,

electrostatic filters do not hold true to the 99.9% effeciency that

HEPA filters have. Some allergists said that they have long

recommended HEPA cleaners over ionizers because of fears about ozone

output.

You will also find a white,powdery dust around the home with

electrostatic filters. This is the mold,dust and other contaminents

that have been charged but dont stick the the collection plates. The

retailer does not tell you that to get these contaminents out of

your air, they instead fall into the carpets and on furniture.

> > > > In a message dated 11/15/2005 12:22:17 AM Pacific Standard

> Time,

> > > > grimes@h... writes:

> > > >

> > > > KC and Sharon,

> > > >

> > > > At the risk of sounding like a traitor, don't throw the

baby

> > out with

> > > > the bathwater. There is a lot of excellent information in

this

> > > > briefing, especially the warning against unnecessary testing

> and

> > being

> > > > careful about remediators. I also like the statement that

if

> it

> > is

> > > > porous and moldy, throw it out instead of trying to clean

it.

> > Wonder

> > > > what the insurance adjustors think of that?

> > > >

> > > > I also like that the EPA guy specifically mentions that

they

> > include

> > > > data that would be applicable to those with greater

> > sensitivity. At

> > > > least it's a start.

> > > >

> > > > What I do disagree with, is they don't go far enough in

> > explaining

> > > > that public health is not the same as individual health.

> > Therefore,

> > > > what they deem as overall acceptable to the " general

public "

> > may not

> > > > be for a specific individual. That would remove some of the

> > support

> > > > to the naysayers.

> > > >

> > > > Carl Grimes

> > > > Healthy Habitats LLC

> > > >

> > > > -----

> > > > > Is this i

> > > > >

> > > > > FEMA Announcements Last Updated: Sep 29th, 2005 - 07:29:19

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> http://communitydispatch.com/artman/publish/article_2249.shtml

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Hey Carl,

> > > >

> > > > You are one who could never, ever be considered a traitor in

> the

> > fight

> > > > to help mold victims! And in reality, why should there be

> > traitors

> > > > to this issue at all? Whether one is most concerned about

the

> > > > physical impact of this issue or if one is most concerned

> about

> > the

> > > > financial impact of this issue....this issue is uselessly

> > wasting

> > > > many lives and much money.

> > > >

> > > > It is beyond me, why this even is an issue. Seems like all

> > would want

> > > > to do everything possible to move the science forward.

> > > >

> > > > There is some good information in this doc. But what is

> > glaringly

> > > > missing from the CDC is the acknowledgement that molds and

> mold

> > toxins

> > > > can produce severe, life threatening illnesses in prior

> healthly

> > > > people. And there in, lays the heart of all the contention

> of

> > the

> > > > " Toxic Mold Issue " .

> > > >

> > > > Numerous times within the more comprehensive mold doc that

was

> > > > recently written the CDC makes statesment of " rare, little

is

> > known,

> > > > in a small segment of the population, etc " .

> > > >

> > > > The illnesses we are all experiencing are not mere IgE

> mediated

> > minor

> > > > allergies, yet that is the only place where the CDC has

> focused

> > any

> > > > research for those who are immunocompetent. Still they

> > continue to

> > > > make statesment of the rarity of our illnesses.

> > > >

> > > > We have asked numerous times that they track these symptoms

> > indicative

> > > > of serious Type III hypersensitivity reactions and

> > mycotoxicoses. To

> > > > date, they have taken no action to do so.

> > > >

> > > > So, the statements of rarity of these illnesses in prior

> healthy

> > > > people is not based on any scientific evidence....it is

> > anecdotal

> > > > information being presented by the CDC as sound science.

It

> is

> > > > making it difficult for those who are experiencing these

> > illnesses to

> > > > find proper medical care. And it is hurting us all,

> physically

> > and

> > > > financially.

> > > >

> > > > Those who are currently being exposed to excessive amounts

of

> > mold

> > > > after Katrina, yet are not immunocompromised, are being

left

> > wide

> > > > open by the CDC to acquire serious mold and mold toxin

induced

> > > > illneses. They are being told, runny noses, minor coughs,

> > etc. All

> > > > of us on this board know that is not true and accurate

> > > > information...as does the CDC. Whether they want to call it

> > rare or

> > > > not rare based on some fictious study of numbers of those

> > affected,

> > > > they know it does happen and they are not properly warning

> > people of

> > > > the potentially serious illnesses of mold.

> > > >

> > > > I guess that would be my beef with what is being put out

there

> > by the

> > > > CDC. I don't want to see one other person unnecessarily

have

> to

> > go

> > > > through what most of us on this board have had to go through.

> > > >

> > > > Sharon

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

Questions:

1. When you kill the mold, do the mycotoxins float in the air or do they fall

to the ground? How do get rid of mycotoxins after the kill???

2. What product would you use on wood furniture to kill mold?

3. Are the molds lurking on the paint?If so, what do you use to kill them on

paint??

Loni

Thanks for the help, Loni

" Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

Loni,

It depends. Don't you just love a definitive answer like that?

We can take a clue from the IICRC S520 Standard and Reference Guide

for Professional Mold Remediation. If we look at the obvious at both

extremes we can say that a simple surface that is hard and smooth can

be cleaned with soap and water to remove any dirt, mold growth,

bacteria, etc. So try. But it may not be successful for the highly

reactive individuals.

At the other extreme we can say that complex structures with nooks

and crannies that are hard-to-nearly-impossible to clean have little

chance of success. Likewise, rough surfaces that are porous like

fabric that have mold growth would be nearly impossible. So don't

try. If the mold has merely settled onto the surface like dust, then

maybe.

So what about all the objects that aren't obvious, with mixed

characteristics? It depends. They may take 2, 3 or more cleaning

attempts and still not be successful. By that time is usually cheaper

to replace it anyway. Some will be cleaned sufficiently for a typical

person, a few might be for a sensitive person, and some never for a

highly reactive person.

Decide on the obvious and then make choices about all those in the

middle. Is their inherent or perceived value worth the risk of

spending money on a failure? Are you so sensitive that the chance of

success is zero? Someone recently posted about how to clean their

art. There are specialists for that but is so expensive the art has

to be extremely valuable. Most of these answers won't be known for

sure until you try it. What is the risk with your circumstances?

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> So are you saying throw away desks, wood furniture, sofas etc. Can

> they not be cleaned? Loni

>

> snk1955@... wrote:

> In a message dated 11/15/2005 12:22:17 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> grimes@... writes:

>

> KC and Sharon,

>

> At the risk of sounding like a traitor, don't throw the baby out with

> the bathwater. There is a lot of excellent information in this

> briefing, especially the warning against unnecessary testing and being

> careful about remediators. I also like the statement that if it is

> porous and moldy, throw it out instead of trying to clean it. Wonder

> what the insurance adjustors think of that?

>

> I also like that the EPA guy specifically mentions that they include

> data that would be applicable to those with greater sensitivity. At

> least it's a start.

>

> What I do disagree with, is they don't go far enough in explaining

> that public health is not the same as individual health. Therefore,

> what they deem as overall acceptable to the " general public " may not

> be for a specific individual. That would remove some of the support

> to the naysayers.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> > Is this i

> >

> > FEMA Announcements Last Updated: Sep 29th, 2005 - 07:29:19

> >

> >

> > http://communitydispatch.com/artman/publish/article_2249.shtml

>

>

> Hey Carl,

>

> You are one who could never, ever be considered a traitor in the fight

> to help mold victims! And in reality, why should there be traitors

> to this issue at all? Whether one is most concerned about the

> physical impact of this issue or if one is most concerned about the

> financial impact of this issue....this issue is uselessly wasting

> many lives and much money.

>

> It is beyond me, why this even is an issue. Seems like all would want

> to do everything possible to move the science forward.

>

> There is some good information in this doc. But what is glaringly

> missing from the CDC is the acknowledgement that molds and mold toxins

> can produce severe, life threatening illnesses in prior healthly

> people. And there in, lays the heart of all the contention of the

> " Toxic Mold Issue " .

>

> Numerous times within the more comprehensive mold doc that was

> recently written the CDC makes statesment of " rare, little is known,

> in a small segment of the population, etc " .

>

> The illnesses we are all experiencing are not mere IgE mediated minor

> allergies, yet that is the only place where the CDC has focused any

> research for those who are immunocompetent. Still they continue to

> make statesment of the rarity of our illnesses.

>

> We have asked numerous times that they track these symptoms indicative

> of serious Type III hypersensitivity reactions and mycotoxicoses. To

> date, they have taken no action to do so.

>

> So, the statements of rarity of these illnesses in prior healthy

> people is not based on any scientific evidence....it is anecdotal

> information being presented by the CDC as sound science. It is

> making it difficult for those who are experiencing these illnesses to

> find proper medical care. And it is hurting us all, physically and

> financially.

>

> Those who are currently being exposed to excessive amounts of mold

> after Katrina, yet are not immunocompromised, are being left wide

> open by the CDC to acquire serious mold and mold toxin induced

> illneses. They are being told, runny noses, minor coughs, etc. All

> of us on this board know that is not true and accurate

> information...as does the CDC. Whether they want to call it rare or

> not rare based on some fictious study of numbers of those affected,

> they know it does happen and they are not properly warning people of

> the potentially serious illnesses of mold.

>

> I guess that would be my beef with what is being put out there by the

> CDC. I don't want to see one other person unnecessarily have to go

> through what most of us on this board have had to go through.

>

> Sharon

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Loni,

According to my understanding of a conversation with Dr Eugene Cole

last year, mold mycotoxins tend to stay in the particle component

(cell) of the mold organism. (Endotoxins in bacteria don't). So

killing mold is more likely to rupture the cell wall and release the

mycotoxins. Especially since some products claim they are effective

because they kill by rupturing.

This, plus the fact that dead mold still contains all the components

of live mold, supports the position that killing mold is almost

always irrelevent. It's a waste of time and money. Remove the mold

per S520 as in my previous e-mail. If it can't be removed then remove

the contaminated material. That is the best way to get rid of

mycotoxins. Keep it inside the mold and remove the mold.

We've got to get two ideas out of our head. 1. Testing for mold is

definitive and compelling. 2. Killing mold is the ultimate goal; it

isn't even a minor goal. It is a waste and is often counter-

productive.

Any particle, whether mycotoxin, dander, mold or hair will act like

dust. " Big dust " falls and can accumulate like dust bunnies under the

bed while " tiny dust " stays up creating the mote Ken loves to talk

about. If the wind blows or the air is otherwise disturbed -

including by air purifiers - then the dust that fell will now rise

again. Dust removal, just like mold, is the most effective.

Your question about paint is interesting because it doesn't come off.

So for it to be affected a chemical reaction would have to take

place, which I think can happen with mycotoxins. Although the paint

stays on the surface the odor (molecular) might not. Otherwise

contact with the paint is necessary. I don't know for sure what

happens here so maybe some of the others can comment.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> Questions:

>

>

> 1. When you kill the mold, do the mycotoxins float in the air or do

> they fall to the ground? How do get rid of mycotoxins after the

> kill???

>

> 2. What product would you use on wood furniture to kill mold?

>

> 3. Are the molds lurking on the paint?If so, what do you use to

> kill them on paint??

>

>

> Loni

>

>

> Thanks for the help, Loni

>

> " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

> Loni,

>

> It depends. Don't you just love a definitive answer like that?

>

> We can take a clue from the IICRC S520 Standard and Reference Guide

> for Professional Mold Remediation. If we look at the obvious at both

> extremes we can say that a simple surface that is hard and smooth can

> be cleaned with soap and water to remove any dirt, mold growth,

> bacteria, etc. So try. But it may not be successful for the highly

> reactive individuals.

>

> At the other extreme we can say that complex structures with nooks and

> crannies that are hard-to-nearly-impossible to clean have little

> chance of success. Likewise, rough surfaces that are porous like

> fabric that have mold growth would be nearly impossible. So don't try.

> If the mold has merely settled onto the surface like dust, then maybe.

>

> So what about all the objects that aren't obvious, with mixed

> characteristics? It depends. They may take 2, 3 or more cleaning

> attempts and still not be successful. By that time is usually cheaper

> to replace it anyway. Some will be cleaned sufficiently for a typical

> person, a few might be for a sensitive person, and some never for a

> highly reactive person.

>

> Decide on the obvious and then make choices about all those in the

> middle. Is their inherent or perceived value worth the risk of

> spending money on a failure? Are you so sensitive that the chance of

> success is zero? Someone recently posted about how to clean their art.

> There are specialists for that but is so expensive the art has to be

> extremely valuable. Most of these answers won't be known for sure

> until you try it. What is the risk with your circumstances?

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> > So are you saying throw away desks, wood furniture, sofas etc. Can

> > they not be cleaned? Loni

> >

> > snk1955@... wrote:

> > In a message dated 11/15/2005 12:22:17 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> > grimes@... writes:

> >

> > KC and Sharon,

> >

> > At the risk of sounding like a traitor, don't throw the baby out

> > with the bathwater. There is a lot of excellent information in this

> > briefing, especially the warning against unnecessary testing and

> > being

> > careful about remediators. I also like the statement that if it is

> > porous and moldy, throw it out instead of trying to clean it.

> > Wonder what the insurance adjustors think of that?

> >

> > I also like that the EPA guy specifically mentions that they

> > include data that would be applicable to those with greater

> > sensitivity. At least it's a start.

> >

> > What I do disagree with, is they don't go far enough in explaining

> > that public health is not the same as individual health. Therefore,

> > what they deem as overall acceptable to the " general public " may

> > not be for a specific individual. That would remove some of the

> > support to the naysayers.

> >

> > Carl Grimes

> > Healthy Habitats LLC

> >

> > -----

> > > Is this i

> > >

> > > FEMA Announcements Last Updated: Sep 29th, 2005 - 07:29:19

> > >

> > >

> > > http://communitydispatch.com/artman/publish/article_2249.shtml

> >

> >

> > Hey Carl,

> >

> > You are one who could never, ever be considered a traitor in the

> > fight to help mold victims! And in reality, why should there be

> > traitors to this issue at all? Whether one is most concerned about

> > the physical impact of this issue or if one is most concerned about

> > the financial impact of this issue....this issue is uselessly

> > wasting many lives and much money.

> >

> > It is beyond me, why this even is an issue. Seems like all would

> > want

> > to do everything possible to move the science forward.

> >

> > There is some good information in this doc. But what is glaringly

> > missing from the CDC is the acknowledgement that molds and mold

> > toxins can produce severe, life threatening illnesses in prior

> > healthly people. And there in, lays the heart of all the

> > contention of the " Toxic Mold Issue " .

> >

> > Numerous times within the more comprehensive mold doc that was

> > recently written the CDC makes statesment of " rare, little is

> > known, in a small segment of the population, etc " .

> >

> > The illnesses we are all experiencing are not mere IgE mediated

> > minor allergies, yet that is the only place where the CDC has

> > focused any research for those who are immunocompetent. Still they

> > continue to make statesment of the rarity of our illnesses.

> >

> > We have asked numerous times that they track these symptoms

> > indicative of serious Type III hypersensitivity reactions and

> > mycotoxicoses. To date, they have taken no action to do so.

> >

> > So, the statements of rarity of these illnesses in prior healthy

> > people is not based on any scientific evidence....it is anecdotal

> > information being presented by the CDC as sound science. It is

> > making it difficult for those who are experiencing these illnesses

> > to find proper medical care. And it is hurting us all, physically

> > and financially.

> >

> > Those who are currently being exposed to excessive amounts of mold

> > after Katrina, yet are not immunocompromised, are being left wide

> > open by the CDC to acquire serious mold and mold toxin induced

> > illneses. They are being told, runny noses, minor coughs, etc.

> > All of us on this board know that is not true and accurate

> > information...as does the CDC. Whether they want to call it rare or

> > not rare based on some fictious study of numbers of those affected,

> > they know it does happen and they are not properly warning people

> > of the potentially serious illnesses of mold.

> >

> > I guess that would be my beef with what is being put out there by

> > the CDC. I don't want to see one other person unnecessarily have to

> > go through what most of us on this board have had to go through.

> >

> > Sharon

> >

> >

> >

> >