Inside v Outside mold [was: Dr. Shoemaker's Interview]

[Guest guest]

Group,

First, Dr Shoemaker will be on next week, same place and time,

to continue his discussion with Radio Joe (Instructions at the end

of this e-mail). Check out the previous programs for lots of other

interesting stuff. In the meantime, a couple of comments about

inside vs outside mold. I don't disagree with any of the comments

so far but want to add a little about HOW to determine if the mold

in the samples are from outside or from the inside.

1. Jeff May has excellent work, some of which is in his books and

posted here before, about how outside mold spores and

fragments tend to be in single fragments rather than clusters.

Inside spores tend to be in clusters and clumps. Also, outside

spores tend to be " clean " but inside ones, especially where there

is forced air, tend to have smaller particles clinging to them

making them appear " dirty. " None of this can be determined by

settling plates and most " mold testers " don't know how to have

this analyzed (or that it even occurs).

2. Comparing inside to outside is not as simple as seeing " higher

pen/asp " inside than outside, or visa versa. First, " pen/asp " is not

a mold. Pen/asp is a created word combining " Penicillium " and

" Aspergillus, " indicating that the lab can't tell the difference

between the two because it was analyzed under a microscope.

Usually (not always) the sample must be cultured to tell them

apart. Second, the " species " of mold must be compared, usually

only by culturing and analysis. Simply comparing Aspergillus may

lead to totally erroneous conclusions. If A. flavus is inside and A.

fumigatus is outside the inside did not come from outside. Also,

I'm not too worried. But if the A. fumigatus is inside I'm

concerned. If a sensitized or compromised persion is also inside,

I'm very worried whether or not it is coming from inside or

outside.

3. The time at which the outside sample is collected and when

the inside sample is collected is important. It takes time for the

outside mold, dust and air molecules to transfer through the

building envelope to the inside breathing zone.

If doors and windows are open the time is nearly zero. But you

wouldn't get a difference anyway. If the the building is shut tight,

the outside will still get inside but we don't know if it takes 1

minute, 10 minutes or an hour. To see what is outside that gets

inside the outside should be collected first. Then wait for the

transfer time before collecting the inside sample - analyzed by

species. Don't know the transfer time? Neither does anybody

else! So nobody really knows. The conclusions are a guess, an

assumption, a belief.

4. Most of the examples offered can be determined by ourselves,

without sampling, to establish a guess, assumption or belief and

most of the time we are close enough. But proving it to the

satisfaction of defense attorneys and a jury in a court of law

requires much more than sampling.

It requires evidence of the pathway the mold species on the

fence, for example, took to enter the house and that there was no

other source of the same species. Then you need objective

evidence (not an assumption or belief) that you were exposed to

the actual spores of the mold species that came from the fence

and not from somewhere else.

You also need objective evidence that it wasn't an entirely

different source that caused your illness or disease (not just a

reaction that makes you feel ill). If it isn't something a doctor can

diagnose as an acceptable illness or disease then it is usually

dismissed as temporary and not a harm. If we persist in our

complaints then it is assumed to be psychogenic (see, they resort

to guessing and beliefs just like us real people! Hence, the power

of the ACOEM mold statement. They want to believe it so they

do.)

5. All the above is assuming the sampling and the analysis are

accurate. Much is not, even by mold testing people, many of

whom know little more than you do. They are running a business

and have experience selling something that makes money. The

ethical ones believe in what they are doing, whether it is true or

not. The professionals have studied, read, taken classes,

attended conferences, discussed with mentors, etc so they know

the limitations of what they do, not just how to move your money

into their pocket.

Similar types of considerations must be included in any mold

sampling for any reason, not just for comparing inside to outside

sources. Which is why the professionals don't do as much mold

sampling as they used to and don't rely on just the numbers when

forming their conclusions and recommendations. This is also

partly why mold samples by themselves don't hold up in court.

They require interpretation by professionals, several of which are

in this group, which can withstand challanges.

Mold sampling, however, can answer some simple direct

questions such as " is this spot mold or not mold? " Or, " what type

of mold is in the sample. " But no mold sampling by itself identifies

exposure, location of the mold to which you are exposed, that you

were exposed to the mold, or that it was mold that caused your

illness or disease. Those questions take a combination of

different types of information.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC