Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 WOW, HOPE SO. HERES THE LINK TO;IS INDOOR MOLD CONTAMINATION A THREAT TO HEALTH? <http://www.mold-survivor.com/harrietammann.html> > > I had assistance in locating this information that pertains > to the IOM report. > 1. I believe Dr. Coifman is incorrect with his evaluation > of the findings of the Institute of Medicine, Damp Indoor > Spaces and Health Report. Dr. Harriet Amman was the > Toxicologist (Washington State Dept of Health) who the > Institute chose to author Chapter 4 of the Report which > pertains to illness from mycotoxins. She is also the > author of the following paper that finds there are serious > threats to human health from mold/mycotoxin exposure. The > paper is entitled, " Is Indoor Mold Contamination a Threat > to Health " . It may be found at > www.moldsurvivor.com/harrietammann.htm. > > 2. It is unfortunate, but much misinformation is relayed > regarding the findings of this study. At the Surgeon > General's Workshop on Indoor Air, Jan 2005, Dr. Noreen > , Chair of the IOM Damp Indoor Spaces and Health > Committee commented on this fact: > > " A journalist commented on press coverage of the Damp > Indoor Spaces and Health report and how it may have misled > many people by over- or under-emphasizing (depending on the > publication)committee conclusions regarding the seriousness > of the health concern. Dr. indicated that they made > every effort to help the media cover the report > effectively, but acknowledged that accurate media messages > may not have reached the public. A health activist > suggested that some responses to the report may have > resulted partly from things that were not evaluated, > contending that the report was primarily a respiratory > study and that non-infectious health effects such as > headaches and fatigue were not really examined. Mold > hypersensitivity and autoimmune-like symptoms have been > reported by some people, but have not been adequately > recognized by scientists or by physicians. One participant > suggested a need for an anecdotal reporting center > for such cases, indicating that there is too much emphasis > on determining causation and not enough on finding > effective treatment or training physicians to be sensitive > to the needs of these patients. In reply, Dr. > indicated that the report did not consider only respiratory > symptoms,but that these were the symptoms for which > associations were strongest. She noted that “absence of > evidence is not evidence of absence,†and said that the > report did not intend to dismiss the possibility of effects > for which the existing evidence of association was not > strong or for which evidence was not available. " > > This information may be found at the following link, > page 33. > http://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/topics/indoorenv/pdf/HIEWo > rkshopBinder.pdf > > 3. Within the IOM Damp Indoor Spaces and Health Report > there are no less than 135 places where it is specifically > called out as " more research is needed " . What this > indicates is that it is in no way conclusive these > illnesses are not occurring. When a document as respected > as the IOM Report indicates such dire need for more > research in so many area, it should set off alarms within > the medical community that our children's health is being > gravely impacted and this is an area in much need of our > attention. > > 4. Dr. Coifman also only addresses mycotoxins entering the > body via one route of exposure, inhalation. The molds > and mycotoxins that are more than abundantly present within > the sick environment enter the body via all routes of > exposure; ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact. They > are exposed to multiple fungi simultaneously. Within a > water damaged building, there is never only one mold/toxin > present. As such, the dose response theories promoted by > some and based on single exposure studies are of limited > value in understanding human illness from the matter. > > Dr. Johanning, who is often times recognized as the father > of Bioaerosol illness, chimed in: > Dear colleague(s) †" I would not put so much weight on the > IOM Damp in Indoor Spaces paper or the “scientific > position†announcements to the press and media †" I think it > reflects more a political public policy position of the > CDC & P and involved IOM editors. It is a rather secretive > and undemocratic process how these publication and > positions of “scientific conclusions†are made †" at least > from my perspective and experience †" I was invited to > present our clinical experience and research results from > the FUNGAL RESEARCH GROUP FOUDATION at the meeting, but was > not allowed to stay for a full discussion or listen to the > committee deliberations †" as well as the other specially > invited speakers at the meeting †" the discussions and > written papers by the committee members were kept secret > and exclusive to any other input or interested party †" even > the writer of the toxicology chapter †" a well respected > public health official - was reportedly not allowed to > respond to editorial changes by the final editors at the > Institute or outside reviewer comments regarding her > manuscript, as I was told. This committee member apparently > did not fully agree with the content and summary of the > press release and other information from the Institute re > the toxicology data and conclusions. Please also keep in > mind, that none of the members of the Institute or the > reviewers that are publicly listed had any specific > research experience or publication record regarding this > topic of fungal toxicity and human health †" indeed many of > the known experts in the field †" except for one committee > member †" a non-physician †" were not even aware of this IOM > paper or were not invited to actively participate in the > development and review of the final IOM document †" > Furthermore, one should keep in mind that this committee > was initially chaired by a previous Harvard Adjunct Senior > Lecturer on Environmental Microbiology †" who resigned > surprisingly and suddenly after the first meeting †" after > she already announced in the Boston Globe the her > conclusions before the committee even had met for the 2nd > time and debated their conclusions. In any case shortly > after the IOM meetings and publication †" there was a > meeting by environmental health specialists in Finland †" > practicing physicians, researchers and public health > specialists, who formulated the following consensus > conclusions and position paper regarding mold toxicity and > health †" I think that still can stand. " > > ICT X SATELLITE MEETING: > Indoor Mold †" A New Challenge for Toxicologists > 10th July, 2004 Kuopio > Symposium of “Indoor Mold -A New Challenge for > Toxicologists†was held in Kuopio, Finland, 10th July, > 2004. The event was a satellite symposium of the 10th > International Congress of Toxicology, Tampere, 11-15 July. > The exposure to biological contaminants in indoor air of > damp and moldy indoor environments is a challenge for > toxicological research and risk assessment. The intent of > this Satellite meeting was to present recent scientific > results on exposure and health effects of microbes and > their toxins in indoor air, and to discuss the > implementation of current knowledge. > The specific aims were: > • To bring forth the clinical aspects of exposure to indoor > mold both in home and in workplace > • To share the recent scientific advances in experimental > toxicology > The symposium had over 30 participants from different > countries and different areas of research. The symposium > ended up with a conclusion that dampness control of > buildings is essential for the prevention of health > effects. However, due to the many existing problems, the > need for the toxicological documentation of the harmful > agents and their effects was recognized. As the summary of > the Symposium, the following conclusions, challenges and > research needs for toxicology were presented. > Conclusions > • Dampness and mold in indoor environments are associated > with many diverse health effects, some of which are well > documented in epidemiological studies, and some of which > have been reported as clinical observations > • Based on current evidence, it can be concluded that there > is a biologically plausible connection between the growth > and occurrence of toxigenic molds in indoor environments > and health effects of the occupants. However, many aspects > of exposure and pathophysiological mechanisms are still to > be revealed > • No single exposing agent appears to be the causative > factor for the health effects > • Moist building materials may be favourable habitats for > many potentially toxin-producing fungi and bacteria > • Toxins occur both in the mycelium and in spores. The > release of spores and mycelial fragments can be a source of > inhalation and dermal exposure to toxins > • Other microbial products and components such as peptides, > enzymes, b-D-glucans and LPS may have significant > biological effects > • Health endpoints are probably results from exposure to > many exposing agents, which also have interactions > • More toxicological research is needed to reveal the > causal connections between exposure and health effects of > moldy indoor environments > Challenges and research needs for toxicology > • Challenges for toxicological risk assessment > -Wide variety of health end points and wide variety of > mechanisms > -Importance of building materials on microbe’s > toxicological behaviour > -Interactions of different species in microbial growth > and/or in exposure situations > -Solving the key question of â€causative agent†> • Open questions > -What model system would give the best measure for > neurotoxicity or for pulmonary toxicity? > -Which organs are typically affected? > -What explains gender, genetic, age and other host factor > differences? > • Research needs on microbes and their toxins > -Development of biomarkers > -Toxicity assessment of airborne material > -Assessment of neurocognitive outcome > -Case-control studies, intervention studies > -Establishment of NOAEL in acute animal models > -Long term, low-dose exposures in animal models > -In vivo studies on effects of fungal particles and toxins > especially in proximal respiratory tract > I remember that I was told in the beginning by people like > the ‘Havard Adjunct Senior Lecturer on Environmental > Microbiology’ that airborne Stachybotrys toxins cannot be > detected in indoor environments in any quantifiable > concentrations and pose no real inhalation risk, since it > does not easily become airborne (because these are “slimy > sporesâ€) †" but we have been able to show that is not the > case and reported about finding significant Stachybotrys > toxins concentrations (trichothecenes) on high-volume air > filter samples in tested homes of patients with non- > allergic symptomatology, see Indoor Air 2002, Monterey Ca, > paper †" similar findings of airborne mycotoxins in water > damaged homes using a different sampling and analytical > methodology was later reported by the T.L. Brasel & D. > Strauss group from Texas Tech: > AIRBORNE MYCOTOXIN SAMPLING AND SCREENING ANALYSIS > E Johanning1*, M Gareis2, K Nielsen3, R Dietrich4 and E > Märtlbauer4 > 1Fungal Research Group (FRG, Inc.), Occupational and > Environmental Life Science, Albany, N.Y. USA. > 2Institute for Microbiology und Toxicology, BAFF, Kulmbach, > FRG > 3Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark > 4Institute of Hygiene und Technology of Milk, L.M. > University of München, FRG > ABSTRACT > The indoor mycotoxins inhalation exposure of patients > (n=25) was studied using a high-volume air sampler (60 cfm > x 24 h) with a micropore-paper filter (8x11 inches). The > filters were evaluated for cytotoxicity caused by > mycotoxins using the MTT-cell culture bioassay and by > culture identification. A subset of samples was analyzed > with an enzyme-immuno assay for occurrence of macrocyclic > trichothecenes produced by Stachybotrys chartarum and HPLC- > DAD and GC-MS analyses for different mycotoxins. Highly > toxic air samples (IC50 ≤ 31 mg/ml) were found in seven > cases; moderate toxicities (IC50 > 31 to ≤ 125 mg/ml) in 14 > cases, and four cases were not toxic compared to controls. > The subset testing demonstrated that macrocyclic > trichothecenes and other mycotoxins could become airborne. > In conclusion, an inhalation risk could be confirmed (84% > of cases) with the 24-hour high volume air sampling test > method due to the detection of airborne cytotoxic fungal > particles and specific mycotoxins, including trichothecenes > produced by Stachybotrys fungi. > So †" it reminds me of the bumper sticker: “Question > authority††" I support working on getting ‘un-biased’ > research funded (see above) and for now I believe there is > enough knowledge and science on this topic published to > support the precautionary principle †" avoid unnecessary > indoor moisture and mold (including toxic mold) exposure. > I think that January 9, 2007, is going to be a very good > day for mold victims. The issue has been a pot ready to > boil over for quite some time now. > Sharon > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 I just wrote an email to Dr Coifman--hopefully, he'll help in this matter. [] Do you all follow the ACOEM chatboard? Wow!!! Mold Wow! I don't know if any of you follow the Occ-Env-Med Chatboard, which is funded in part by NIOSH and ASTAR, and is the chatboard for the physicians of the ACOEM, but It's Hot over the mold issue!!! Dr. Coifman, who is an allergist, wrote: 1/7/07: Re: Inhaled mycotoxins as causes of human disease: fact or fancy? To separate science from pseudoscience concerning questions of causality and issues of liability for symptoms claimed by persons with histories of mold exposures at levels encountered in damp indoor spaces, the Academy of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences commissioned a comprehensive review of relevant scientific knowledge, published as Damp indoor spaces and health, Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, National Academies Press, Washington DC 2004. The preparation of this report and its publication in this book were commissioned to, “conduct a comprehensive review of the scientific literature regarding the relationship between damp or moldy indoor environments and the manifestation of adverse health effects, particularly respiratory and allergic symptoms. The review will focus on the non-infectious health effects of fungi, including allergens, mycotoxins and other biologically active products. In addition, it will make recommendations or suggest guidelines for public health interventions and for future basic science, clinical, and public health research in these areas.†The Institute of Medicine report finds that molds that can produce mycotoxins under the appropriate environmental and competitive conditions can and do grow indoors. It finds that the doses of such toxins required to cause adverse health effects in humans have not been determined, and that there is no evidence supporting any association between mold exposure at levels likely to be encountered in damp indoor spaces and dyspnea (shortness of breath), skin symptoms, airflow obstruction (in otherwise-healthy persons), asthma development, mucous membrane irritation syndrome, gastrointestinal tract problems, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, fatigue, inhalation fevers (nonoccupational exposures), neuropsychiatric symptoms, lower respiratory illness in otherwise-healthy adults, cancer, rheumatologic and other immune diseases, reproductive effects or acute idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage in infants. The report concludes that there is an association between exposure to damp indoor spaces and asthma and upper respiratory symptoms in individuals who are already affected by these conditions, but it finds no evidence that such exposures cause any permanent increase in those symptoms or the activity of the underlying diseases that persists after exposure is reduced to pre-increase levels. In other words, exposure to moldy indoor spaces can aggravate respiratory symptoms during the period of increased mold exposure, without persisting adverse effects, and there is no evidence of any mechanism by which such exposures can cause any of the other conditions attributed to such exposures by Dr. Nagy. How should readers decide between the conflicting claims of the Institute of Medicine and those of Dr. Nagy and the authors she cites? Dr. Nagy and her co-believers have anchored the economic base of their careers on a model of disease causality and liability that has so-decimated the legitimate insurance industry that it is no longer possible to insure against even unequivocal and objective damage from mold. If one takes the time to critically read their literature one will find a mix of extrapolations from animal toxicity studies at doses hundreds of times those inhaled by humans in damp indoor spaces, studies confounded by various forms of selection bias, and reports of associations between various symptoms and exposures by individuals who stand to receive significant economic benefits if they can convince or persuade others that those symptoms were caused by those exposures. The purpose of the Institute of Medicine study was to subject those claims to critical review by experts with no vested economic interest in the outcome, and the outcome was that there is simply no evidence to support that model of disease causality. Sincerely, E. Coifman, M. D. If anyone wishes to correspond with me regarding this matter, we have had some incoming email loss at our aasj.com domain so please use the substitute email address, . E. Coifman, M. D. e-mail rcoifman@..., http://www.aasj.com Allergy & Asthma of South Jersey, P. A. & Clinical Research South Jersey Network 1122 N. High Street, Millville NJ 08332-2529 tel 856.825.4100, fax 856.825.1700 personal fax 206.202.2105 Dr. Nagy, who is affiliated with the American Academy of Environmental Medicine wrote: I had assistance in locating this information that pertains to the IOM report. 1. I believe Dr. Coifman is incorrect with his evaluation of the findings of the Institute of Medicine, Damp Indoor Spaces and Health Report. Dr. Harriet Amman was the Toxicologist (Washington State Dept of Health) who the Institute chose to author Chapter 4 of the Report which pertains to illness from mycotoxins. She is also the author of the following paper that finds there are serious threats to human health from mold/mycotoxin exposure. The paper is entitled, " Is Indoor Mold Contamination a Threat to Health " . It may be found at www.moldsurvivor.com/harrietammann.htm. 2. It is unfortunate, but much misinformation is relayed regarding the findings of this study. At the Surgeon General's Workshop on Indoor Air, Jan 2005, Dr. Noreen , Chair of the IOM Damp Indoor Spaces and Health Committee commented on this fact: " A journalist commented on press coverage of the Damp Indoor Spaces and Health report and how it may have misled many people by over- or under-emphasizing (depending on the publication)committee conclusions regarding the seriousness of the health concern. Dr. indicated that they made every effort to help the media cover the report effectively, but acknowledged that accurate media messages may not have reached the public. A health activist suggested that some responses to the report may have resulted partly from things that were not evaluated, contending that the report was primarily a respiratory study and that non-infectious health effects such as headaches and fatigue were not really examined. Mold hypersensitivity and autoimmune-like symptoms have been reported by some people, but have not been adequately recognized by scientists or by physicians. One participant suggested a need for an anecdotal reporting center for such cases, indicating that there is too much emphasis on determining causation and not enough on finding effective treatment or training physicians to be sensitive to the needs of these patients. In reply, Dr. indicated that the report did not consider only respiratory symptoms,but that these were the symptoms for which associations were strongest. She noted that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,†and said that the report did not intend to dismiss the possibility of effects for which the existing evidence of association was not strong or for which evidence was not available. " This information may be found at the following link, page 33. http://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/topics/indoorenv/pdf/HIEWo rkshopBinder.pdf 3. Within the IOM Damp Indoor Spaces and Health Report there are no less than 135 places where it is specifically called out as " more research is needed " . What this indicates is that it is in no way conclusive these illnesses are not occurring. When a document as respected as the IOM Report indicates such dire need for more research in so many area, it should set off alarms within the medical community that our children's health is being gravely impacted and this is an area in much need of our attention. 4. Dr. Coifman also only addresses mycotoxins entering the body via one route of exposure, inhalation. The molds and mycotoxins that are more than abundantly present within the sick environment enter the body via all routes of exposure; ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact. They are exposed to multiple fungi simultaneously. Within a water damaged building, there is never only one mold/toxin present. As such, the dose response theories promoted by some and based on single exposure studies are of limited value in understanding human illness from the matter. Dr. Johanning, who is often times recognized as the father of Bioaerosol illness, chimed in: Dear colleague(s) – I would not put so much weight on the IOM Damp in Indoor Spaces paper or the “scientific position†announcements to the press and media – I think it reflects more a political public policy position of the CDC & P and involved IOM editors. It is a rather secretive and undemocratic process how these publication and positions of “scientific conclusions†are made – at least from my perspective and experience – I was invited to present our clinical experience and research results from the FUNGAL RESEARCH GROUP FOUDATION at the meeting, but was not allowed to stay for a full discussion or listen to the committee deliberations – as well as the other specially invited speakers at the meeting – the discussions and written papers by the committee members were kept secret and exclusive to any other input or interested party – even the writer of the toxicology chapter – a well respected public health official - was reportedly not allowed to respond to editorial changes by the final editors at the Institute or outside reviewer comments regarding her manuscript, as I was told. This committee member apparently did not fully agree with the content and summary of the press release and other information from the Institute re the toxicology data and conclusions. Please also keep in mind, that none of the members of the Institute or the reviewers that are publicly listed had any specific research experience or publication record regarding this topic of fungal toxicity and human health – indeed many of the known experts in the field – except for one committee member – a non-physician – were not even aware of this IOM paper or were not invited to actively participate in the development and review of the final IOM document – Furthermore, one should keep in mind that this committee was initially chaired by a previous Harvard Adjunct Senior Lecturer on Environmental Microbiology – who resigned surprisingly and suddenly after the first meeting – after she already announced in the Boston Globe the her conclusions before the committee even had met for the 2nd time and debated their conclusions. In any case shortly after the IOM meetings and publication – there was a meeting by environmental health specialists in Finland – practicing physicians, researchers and public health specialists, who formulated the following consensus conclusions and position paper regarding mold toxicity and health – I think that still can stand. " ICT X SATELLITE MEETING: Indoor Mold –A New Challenge for Toxicologists 10th July, 2004 Kuopio Symposium of “Indoor Mold -A New Challenge for Toxicologists†was held in Kuopio, Finland, 10th July, 2004. The event was a satellite symposium of the 10th International Congress of Toxicology, Tampere, 11-15 July. The exposure to biological contaminants in indoor air of damp and moldy indoor environments is a challenge for toxicological research and risk assessment. The intent of this Satellite meeting was to present recent scientific results on exposure and health effects of microbes and their toxins in indoor air, and to discuss the implementation of current knowledge. The specific aims were: • To bring forth the clinical aspects of exposure to indoor mold both in home and in workplace • To share the recent scientific advances in experimental toxicology The symposium had over 30 participants from different countries and different areas of research. The symposium ended up with a conclusion that dampness control of buildings is essential for the prevention of health effects. However, due to the many existing problems, the need for the toxicological documentation of the harmful agents and their effects was recognized. As the summary of the Symposium, the following conclusions, challenges and research needs for toxicology were presented. Conclusions • Dampness and mold in indoor environments are associated with many diverse health effects, some of which are well documented in epidemiological studies, and some of which have been reported as clinical observations • Based on current evidence, it can be concluded that there is a biologically plausible connection between the growth and occurrence of toxigenic molds in indoor environments and health effects of the occupants. However, many aspects of exposure and pathophysiological mechanisms are still to be revealed • No single exposing agent appears to be the causative factor for the health effects • Moist building materials may be favourable habitats for many potentially toxin-producing fungi and bacteria • Toxins occur both in the mycelium and in spores. The release of spores and mycelial fragments can be a source of inhalation and dermal exposure to toxins • Other microbial products and components such as peptides, enzymes, b-D-glucans and LPS may have significant biological effects • Health endpoints are probably results from exposure to many exposing agents, which also have interactions • More toxicological research is needed to reveal the causal connections between exposure and health effects of moldy indoor environments Challenges and research needs for toxicology • Challenges for toxicological risk assessment -Wide variety of health end points and wide variety of mechanisms -Importance of building materials on microbe’s toxicological behaviour -Interactions of different species in microbial growth and/or in exposure situations -Solving the key question of â€causative agent†• Open questions -What model system would give the best measure for neurotoxicity or for pulmonary toxicity? -Which organs are typically affected? -What explains gender, genetic, age and other host factor differences? • Research needs on microbes and their toxins -Development of biomarkers -Toxicity assessment of airborne material -Assessment of neurocognitive outcome -Case-control studies, intervention studies -Establishment of NOAEL in acute animal models -Long term, low-dose exposures in animal models -In vivo studies on effects of fungal particles and toxins especially in proximal respiratory tract I remember that I was told in the beginning by people like the ‘Havard Adjunct Senior Lecturer on Environmental Microbiology’ that airborne Stachybotrys toxins cannot be detected in indoor environments in any quantifiable concentrations and pose no real inhalation risk, since it does not easily become airborne (because these are “slimy sporesâ€) – but we have been able to show that is not the case and reported about finding significant Stachybotrys toxins concentrations (trichothecenes) on high-volume air filter samples in tested homes of patients with non- allergic symptomatology, see Indoor Air 2002, Monterey Ca, paper – similar findings of airborne mycotoxins in water damaged homes using a different sampling and analytical methodology was later reported by the T.L. Brasel & D. Strauss group from Texas Tech: AIRBORNE MYCOTOXIN SAMPLING AND SCREENING ANALYSIS E Johanning1*, M Gareis2, K Nielsen3, R Dietrich4 and E Märtlbauer4 1Fungal Research Group (FRG, Inc.), Occupational and Environmental Life Science, Albany, N.Y. USA. 2Institute for Microbiology und Toxicology, BAFF, Kulmbach, FRG 3Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark 4Institute of Hygiene und Technology of Milk, L.M. University of München, FRG ABSTRACT The indoor mycotoxins inhalation exposure of patients (n=25) was studied using a high-volume air sampler (60 cfm x 24 h) with a micropore-paper filter (8x11 inches). The filters were evaluated for cytotoxicity caused by mycotoxins using the MTT-cell culture bioassay and by culture identification. A subset of samples was analyzed with an enzyme-immuno assay for occurrence of macrocyclic trichothecenes produced by Stachybotrys chartarum and HPLC- DAD and GC-MS analyses for different mycotoxins. Highly toxic air samples (IC50 ≤ 31 mg/ml) were found in seven cases; moderate toxicities (IC50 > 31 to ≤ 125 mg/ml) in 14 cases, and four cases were not toxic compared to controls. The subset testing demonstrated that macrocyclic trichothecenes and other mycotoxins could become airborne. In conclusion, an inhalation risk could be confirmed (84% of cases) with the 24-hour high volume air sampling test method due to the detection of airborne cytotoxic fungal particles and specific mycotoxins, including trichothecenes produced by Stachybotrys fungi. So – it reminds me of the bumper sticker: “Question authority†– I support working on getting ‘un-biased’ research funded (see above) and for now I believe there is enough knowledge and science on this topic published to support the precautionary principle – avoid unnecessary indoor moisture and mold (including toxic mold) exposure. I think that January 9, 2007, is going to be a very good day for mold victims. The issue has been a pot ready to boil over for quite some time now. Sharon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Interesting to see the backstage mechanics of this debate. Thank God for people like Dr. Johanning, that's all I can say. On 1/8/07, snk1955@... <snk1955@...> wrote: > > > Wow! I don't know if any of you follow the Occ-Env-Med > Chatboard, which is funded in part by NIOSH and ASTAR, and > is the chatboard for the physicians of the ACOEM, but It's > Hot over the mold issue!!! > Dr. Coifman, who is an allergist, wrote: > 1/7/07: Re: Inhaled mycotoxins as causes of human disease: > fact or fancy? > To separate science from pseudoscience concerning questions > of causality and issues of liability for symptoms claimed > ... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 HOW DO I GET TO THAT CHATBOARD, I FORGET? V. Re: [] Do you all follow the ACOEM chatboard? Wow!!! Mold Interesting to see the backstage mechanics of this debate. Thank God for people like Dr. Johanning, that's all I can say. On 1/8/07, snk1955@... <snk1955@...> wrote: > > > Wow! I don't know if any of you follow the Occ-Env-Med > Chatboard, which is funded in part by NIOSH and ASTAR, and > is the chatboard for the physicians of the ACOEM, but It's > Hot over the mold issue!!! > Dr. Coifman, who is an allergist, wrote: > 1/7/07: Re: Inhaled mycotoxins as causes of human disease: > fact or fancy? > To separate science from pseudoscience concerning questions > of causality and issues of liability for symptoms claimed > ... > 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.