Guest guest Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Sharon: Since you pressed the matter and decided to throw the grapes that I was going to make wine with, I'll add a bit of fermentation (oddly enough, the presence of certain fungi on grapes adds to their flavor). As you see oh I too, can get some yardage out of this. You said: A. " You are forming a conclusion of " This would tend to support a non-indoor environment source/causation. " based on information that was not even part of the equation. " Response: 1. I couched the statement appropriately. 2. The information on prevalence by location is broadly known and not a big surprise. B. " Yet, your erroneous assumption fuels the controversy of location of proximate cause. " Response: What erroneous assumption? (presuming you know what I was assuming) C. " You don't even know who were the subjects of this information or where they were exposed. Alternaria is noted as first. Aspergillus is the second one noted. How do you know that those who experience CFS and culture for Alternaria are not primarily campers. Maybe camper get CFS. Or that the second group, who cultured primarily for aspergillus, are not primarily teachers. Or maybe all the subjects were camping teachers. " Response: Correct, I don't. But the pattern of fungi present would suggest (not surprisingly) that given that the outdoor air has higher mold concentrations, that people acquire them from outside at a higher rate because of that, and that the results here support that, I would say I'm justified at first blush. D. " As much as you may like to indicate this info could be used as evidence against indoor mold exposure causing CFS, the information provided does not support your hypothesis or determine anything one way or the other about location of causation. You don't have enough facts to make the assumption you just did. " 1. Not to w(h)ine, but that was the point [this info could be used as evidence against indoor mold exposure causing CFS]. 2. As for - You don't have enough facts to make the assumption you just did. - I just did above. I have the ability and the right to make such an assumption (even consumption). You can contest it with your own data, labeling it as you might, or bottle it as you may, but it's still a valid assumption. Question: Why do we not see Chaetomium, Stachybotrys, Penicillium, or other molds listed here?? Did the author assume they were not relevant? Did the author not find them?? Ahhh. Back to some mead, supplied by a friend. Tony Braun, Eosinophilic Fungal Rhinosinusitis, A Common Disorder in Europe, Laryngoscope, 113, 264-269, 2003 ....................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC 5250 E US 36, Suite 830 Avon, IN 46123 www.ph2llc.com off fax cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM) This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.