Re: Comment from Doug Rice PhD

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/22/2005 4:40:11 PM Pacific Standard Time,

blue74730@... writes:

Finally, the presence of toxins is not guaranteed. Just because Stachybotrys

is growing in an environment does not prove the presence of the toxins. In

order to produce a toxin, the mold colony must have the genetic ability to

produce toxins, all of the necessary chemical precursors to build the toxins,

and ideal environmental conditions of water and nutrient. Building materials

and furnishings are not ideal substrates for the toxigenic molds and the

dreaded toxins may not even be present.

Bob

Hi Bob,

On what are you basing the information that " Building materials and

furnishings are not ideal substrates for the toxigenic molds and the dreaded

toxins

may not even be present " ?

What are the ideal substrates for the toxigenic molds?

How can a layperson determine if stachy is producing toxins or not at any

given time?

Given the fact that stacy is capable of producing toxins, which is more

socially prudent when determining the potential ill health effects of toxigenic

molds- to assume it' is not producing toxins at any given time, or assume it

is?

Sharon

[Guest guest]

>Building materials and furnishings are not ideal substrates for the

toxigenic molds and the dreaded toxins may not even be present.<

Sheetrock?

Chipped compressed plywood?

Jute backing for carpet?

Kiln not-so-dried studs and joists?

The only things more ideal are Czapek cellulose media and cornmeal

agar.

-

[Guest guest]

snk1955@... wrote:

In

Hi Bob,

On what are you basing the information that " Building materials and

furnishings are not ideal substrates for the toxigenic molds and the dreaded

toxins

may not even be present " ?

I didn't say that. I posted what Doug Rice, PhD said. That is above my head at

this point.

Bob

---------------------------------

FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.