Re: Re: [moldtheseverereactor] Re: T-2 Toxins in Water-Damaged Buildings (Questions)

[Guest guest]

Carl, I appreciate your comments, but I'm confused. I understand there is a big

difference between testing for T-2 in buildings versus human fluids. My

questions are focused on testing for T-2 toxins in water-damaged buildings.

If tests aren't usually done to check for T-2 toxins, then we don't really know

how often it occurs in water-damaged buildings. Correct? As I mentioned in my

original message, I have reviewed reports from Aerotech Labs. Their report has

a list of molds/toxins that they test for and the T-2 toxins aren't listed. So,

are there any labs that test for it (when testing samples from water-damaged

buildings) and how would a homeowner know if the lab had tested for those types

of toxins?

And, I want everyone to keep in mind that the insurance company won't give you

the entire report. They will typically only give you a couple pages and will

withhold the information they don't want you to see.

________________________________

From: Carl E. Grimes <grimes@...>

Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:13:44 PM

Subject: [] Re: [moldtheseverereactor] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings (Questions)

,

I disagree that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are found in

water-damaged buildings (WDB). You and I may not know if T-2

toxins are in my WDB or in your WDB because we haven't tested

for them.

But the research citations posted here show that if I were to test

for mycotoxins in my WDB I should not expect to find T-2 toxins,

but would expect to find other mycotoxins in some of them some

of the time. Which means if I am going to pay the high cost of

mycotoxin testing I'm wasting my time and money specifying T-2.

The other distinction is with testing human fluids vs testing

environmental samples, The $40 T-2 toxin test under discussion

does not test environmental samples, but human fluid samples. If

T-2 or other mycotoxins are present it doesn't know where it

came from - from a WDB or from food, for example. We are back

again the the critical importance of a comprehensive history of

the building and the occupants plus other information to establish

the context for interpreting the data.

The sample testing and cost Branislav is talking about is testing

environmental samples, not human fluids. If present it doesn't

know if the person was exposed to it or not, or to a food source.

Again, we are back to the comprehensive inspection and history,

as above.

There is a huge difference in technique, cost, and accreditation

requirements (as Dr Thrasher has emphasized) between testing

environmental samples and human fluid/tissue samples.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

Branislav says that you have to specificially ask for the tests to include T-

2 toxins and those tests are very expensive. Based on Branislav's

comments, I would guess that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are

found in water-damaged buildings.

____________ _________ _________ __

From: Branislav <arealisgmail (DOT) com>

moldtheseverereacto rgroups (DOT) com

Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:06:57 PM

Subject: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in Water-Damaged

Buildings (Questions)

The tests for trichothecenes are not cheap. If you want it, you have to tell

them that you want the analysis to include testing specifically for each

and every trichothecene mycotoxin (Satratoxin G, Satratoxin H,

Verucarrin etc). I know of some labs that do that in USA, but again it's

pretty expensive (from $300 to several thousand dollars per toxin,

depending on the particular lab).

[Guest guest]

,

I guess I wasn't clear about when T-2 toxins are scientifically

possible as determined by research and when T-2 toxins are

actually in a specific house.

Research shows T-2 is rarely in WDB, but others are. So why

test for T-2 in any house? Even if it is there, it is more likely

others are also and in more easily detected quantities with more

meaning.

The further distinction has to do with the $40 T-2 test. I wanted to

make sure nobody was thinking this $40 test could be used for a

house. And that a $40 T-2 test for urine may have nothing to do

with what is or isn't in their house.

Aerotech was bought-out at least 3 years ago and is now EMLab

P & K. So the more relevant info would be from the EMLab site at:

www.emlab.com. You can see and download what they test for.

The lab report will state the type of test conducted. The Chain of

Custody will state the type of test requested. The invoice will state

the type of test they charged for. If none specify mycotoxin or

similar then it wasn't tested for mycotoxin of any type.

Only rarely do insurance companies conduct their own testing. If

they refer the property owner to their preferred provider then that

vendor will have them sign a Work Release Order. That is who

should get the report. If that person isn't you, then they don't have

to show the results to you. But the insurance company doesn't

get and then withhold the report.

One exception is if the insurance company actually hires and

pays the contractor or consultant. That may be a conflict of

interest and should be challanged on those grounds. It may be

illegal in some states. Even then, someone has to sign a work

release order and they should make sure they get the

information.

It's not the insurance companies, for all their other faults, who

usually keep lab reports secret unless they are the property

owner. It's landlords, property managers, HOAs, company

managers, etc.

If the couple of pages they release are the pages with the data,

that is all you need from them. A qualified professional armed

with the data in the context of history, moisture measurements,

etc can properly interpret the data. Neither the lab nor the

insurance company should be interpreting the data.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

>

> Carl, I appreciate your comments, but I'm confused. I understand there is a

big difference between testing for

> T-2 in buildings versus human fluids. My questions are focused on testing for

T-2 toxins in water-damaged

> buildings.

>

> If tests aren't usually done to check for T-2 toxins, then we don't really

know how often it occurs in water-

> damaged buildings. Correct? As I mentioned in my original message, I have

reviewed reports from Aerotech

> Labs. Their report has a list of molds/toxins that they test for and the T-2

toxins aren't listed. So, are there

> any labs that test for it (when testing samples from water-damaged buildings)

and how would a homeowner

> know if the lab had tested for those types of toxins?

>

> And, I want everyone to keep in mind that the insurance company won't give you

the entire report. They will

> typically only give you a couple pages and will withhold the information they

don't want you to see.

>

> ________________________________

> From: Carl E. Grimes <grimes@...>

> groups (DOT) com

> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:13:44 PM

> Subject: [] Re: [moldtheseverereactor] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings (Questions)

>

> ,

>

> I disagree that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are found in

> water-damaged buildings (WDB). You and I may not know if T-2

> toxins are in my WDB or in your WDB because we haven't tested

> for them.

>

> But the research citations posted here show that if I were to test

> for mycotoxins in my WDB I should not expect to find T-2 toxins,

> but would expect to find other mycotoxins in some of them some

> of the time. Which means if I am going to pay the high cost of

> mycotoxin testing I'm wasting my time and money specifying T-2.

>

> The other distinction is with testing human fluids vs testing

> environmental samples, The $40 T-2 toxin test under discussion

> does not test environmental samples, but human fluid samples. If

> T-2 or other mycotoxins are present it doesn't know where it

> came from - from a WDB or from food, for example. We are back

> again the the critical importance of a comprehensive history of

> the building and the occupants plus other information to establish

> the context for interpreting the data.

>

> The sample testing and cost Branislav is talking about is testing

> environmental samples, not human fluids. If present it doesn't

> know if the person was exposed to it or not, or to a food source.

> Again, we are back to the comprehensive inspection and history,

> as above.

>

> There is a huge difference in technique, cost, and accreditation

> requirements (as Dr Thrasher has emphasized) between testing

> environmental samples and human fluid/tissue samples.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> Branislav says that you have to specificially ask for the tests to include T-

> 2 toxins and those tests are very expensive. Based on Branislav's

> comments, I would guess that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are

> found in water-damaged buildings.

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Branislav <arealisgmail (DOT) com>

> moldtheseverereacto rgroups (DOT) com

> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:06:57 PM

> Subject: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in Water-Damaged

> Buildings (Questions)

>

> The tests for trichothecenes are not cheap. If you want it, you have to tell

> them that you want the analysis to include testing specifically for each

> and every trichothecene mycotoxin (Satratoxin G, Satratoxin H,

> Verucarrin etc). I know of some labs that do that in USA, but again it's

> pretty expensive (from $300 to several thousand dollars per toxin,

> depending on the particular lab).

>

>

[Guest guest]

Carl, thanks for the additional information. I have to say it again--insurance

companies withhold information. They will do anything to win---including

altering or destroying evidence, bribing judges, committing perjury or other

crimes, etc.

________________________________

From: Carl E. Grimes <grimes@...>

Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 12:56:23 PM

Subject: Re: [] Re: [moldtheseverereactor] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings (Questions)

,

I guess I wasn't clear about when T-2 toxins are scientifically

possible as determined by research and when T-2 toxins are

actually in a specific house.

Research shows T-2 is rarely in WDB, but others are. So why

test for T-2 in any house? Even if it is there, it is more likely

others are also and in more easily detected quantities with more

meaning.

The further distinction has to do with the $40 T-2 test. I wanted to

make sure nobody was thinking this $40 test could be used for a

house. And that a $40 T-2 test for urine may have nothing to do

with what is or isn't in their house.

Aerotech was bought-out at least 3 years ago and is now EMLab

P & K. So the more relevant info would be from the EMLab site at:

www.emlab.com. You can see and download what they test for.

The lab report will state the type of test conducted. The Chain of

Custody will state the type of test requested. The invoice will state

the type of test they charged for. If none specify mycotoxin or

similar then it wasn't tested for mycotoxin of any type.

Only rarely do insurance companies conduct their own testing. If

they refer the property owner to their preferred provider then that

vendor will have them sign a Work Release Order. That is who

should get the report. If that person isn't you, then they don't have

to show the results to you. But the insurance company doesn't

get and then withhold the report.

One exception is if the insurance company actually hires and

pays the contractor or consultant. That may be a conflict of

interest and should be challanged on those grounds. It may be

illegal in some states. Even then, someone has to sign a work

release order and they should make sure they get the

information.

It's not the insurance companies, for all their other faults, who

usually keep lab reports secret unless they are the property

owner. It's landlords, property managers, HOAs, company

managers, etc.

If the couple of pages they release are the pages with the data,

that is all you need from them. A qualified professional armed

with the data in the context of history, moisture measurements,

etc can properly interpret the data. Neither the lab nor the

insurance company should be interpreting the data.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

>

> Carl, I appreciate your comments, but I'm confused. I understand there is a

big difference between testing for

> T-2 in buildings versus human fluids. My questions are focused on testing for

T-2 toxins in water-damaged

> buildings.

>

> If tests aren't usually done to check for T-2 toxins, then we don't really

know how often it occurs in water-

> damaged buildings. Correct? As I mentioned in my original message, I have

reviewed reports from Aerotech

> Labs. Their report has a list of molds/toxins that they test for and the T-2

toxins aren't listed. So, are there

> any labs that test for it (when testing samples from water-damaged buildings)

and how would a homeowner

> know if the lab had tested for those types of toxins?

>

> And, I want everyone to keep in mind that the insurance company won't give you

the entire report. They will

> typically only give you a couple pages and will withhold the information they

don't want you to see.

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Carl E. Grimes <grimeshabitats (DOT) com>

>

> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:13:44 PM

> Subject: [] Re: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings (Questions)

>

> ,

>

> I disagree that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are found in

> water-damaged buildings (WDB). You and I may not know if T-2

> toxins are in my WDB or in your WDB because we haven't tested

> for them.

>

> But the research citations posted here show that if I were to test

> for mycotoxins in my WDB I should not expect to find T-2 toxins,

> but would expect to find other mycotoxins in some of them some

> of the time. Which means if I am going to pay the high cost of

> mycotoxin testing I'm wasting my time and money specifying T-2.

>

> The other distinction is with testing human fluids vs testing

> environmental samples, The $40 T-2 toxin test under discussion

> does not test environmental samples, but human fluid samples. If

> T-2 or other mycotoxins are present it doesn't know where it

> came from - from a WDB or from food, for example. We are back

> again the the critical importance of a comprehensive history of

> the building and the occupants plus other information to establish

> the context for interpreting the data.

>

> The sample testing and cost Branislav is talking about is testing

> environmental samples, not human fluids. If present it doesn't

> know if the person was exposed to it or not, or to a food source.

> Again, we are back to the comprehensive inspection and history,

> as above.

>

> There is a huge difference in technique, cost, and accreditation

> requirements (as Dr Thrasher has emphasized) between testing

> environmental samples and human fluid/tissue samples.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> Branislav says that you have to specificially ask for the tests to include T-

> 2 toxins and those tests are very expensive. Based on Branislav's

> comments, I would guess that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are

> found in water-damaged buildings.

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Branislav <arealisgmail (DOT) com>

> moldtheseverereacto rgroups (DOT) com

> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:06:57 PM

> Subject: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in Water-Damaged

> Buildings (Questions)

>

> The tests for trichothecenes are not cheap. If you want it, you have to tell

> them that you want the analysis to include testing specifically for each

> and every trichothecene mycotoxin (Satratoxin G, Satratoxin H,

> Verucarrin etc). I know of some labs that do that in USA, but again it's

> pretty expensive (from $300 to several thousand dollars per toxin,

> depending on the particular lab).

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

I think we are still talking about different situations. I don't want to

belabor the point but it sounds like you are talking about a court

case where the insurance company has a report from whomever

and they refuse to release it, or all of it. If the report was

generated by someone other than the insurance company itself

(or their representative) then it should be available from that

source. Which is more than just the insurance company not

releasing it. This situation is not to be confused with the more

routine activity of insurance companies.

If I'm still missing the boat tell me the situation(s) you're familiar

with.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

------

>

>

> Carl, thanks for the additional information. I have to say it again--insurance

companies withhold

> information. They will do anything to win---including altering or destroying

evidence, bribing judges,

> committing perjury or other crimes, etc.

>

> ________________________________

> From: Carl E. Grimes <grimes@...>

> groups (DOT) com

> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 12:56:23 PM

> Subject: Re: [] Re: [moldtheseverereactor] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings

> (Questions)

>

> ,

>

> I guess I wasn't clear about when T-2 toxins are scientifically

> possible as determined by research and when T-2 toxins are

> actually in a specific house.

>

> Research shows T-2 is rarely in WDB, but others are. So why

> test for T-2 in any house? Even if it is there, it is more likely

> others are also and in more easily detected quantities with more

> meaning.

>

> The further distinction has to do with the $40 T-2 test. I wanted to

> make sure nobody was thinking this $40 test could be used for a

> house. And that a $40 T-2 test for urine may have nothing to do

> with what is or isn't in their house.

>

> Aerotech was bought-out at least 3 years ago and is now EMLab

> P & K. So the more relevant info would be from the EMLab site at:

> www.emlab.com. You can see and download what they test for.

>

> The lab report will state the type of test conducted. The Chain of

> Custody will state the type of test requested. The invoice will state

> the type of test they charged for. If none specify mycotoxin or

> similar then it wasn't tested for mycotoxin of any type.

>

> Only rarely do insurance companies conduct their own testing. If

> they refer the property owner to their preferred provider then that

> vendor will have them sign a Work Release Order. That is who

> should get the report. If that person isn't you, then they don't have

> to show the results to you. But the insurance company doesn't

> get and then withhold the report.

>

> One exception is if the insurance company actually hires and

> pays the contractor or consultant. That may be a conflict of

> interest and should be challanged on those grounds. It may be

> illegal in some states. Even then, someone has to sign a work

> release order and they should make sure they get the

> information.

>

> It's not the insurance companies, for all their other faults, who

> usually keep lab reports secret unless they are the property

> owner. It's landlords, property managers, HOAs, company

> managers, etc.

>

> If the couple of pages they release are the pages with the data,

> that is all you need from them. A qualified professional armed

> with the data in the context of history, moisture measurements,

> etc can properly interpret the data. Neither the lab nor the

> insurance company should be interpreting the data.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> >

> >

> > Carl, I appreciate your comments, but I'm confused. I understand there is a

big difference between testing

> for

> > T-2 in buildings versus human fluids. My questions are focused on testing

for T-2 toxins in water-damaged

> > buildings.

> >

> > If tests aren't usually done to check for T-2 toxins, then we don't really

know how often it occurs in water-

> > damaged buildings. Correct? As I mentioned in my original message, I have

reviewed reports from

> Aerotech

> > Labs. Their report has a list of molds/toxins that they test for and the T-2

toxins aren't listed. So, are there

> > any labs that test for it (when testing samples from water-damaged

buildings) and how would a

> homeowner

> > know if the lab had tested for those types of toxins?

> >

> > And, I want everyone to keep in mind that the insurance company won't give

you the entire report. They

> will

> > typically only give you a couple pages and will withhold the information

they don't want you to see.

> >

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > From: Carl E. Grimes <grimeshabitats (DOT) com>

> >

> > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:13:44 PM

> > Subject: [] Re: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in

Water-Damaged Buildings

> (Questions)

> >

> > ,

> >

> > I disagree that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are found in

> > water-damaged buildings (WDB). You and I may not know if T-2

> > toxins are in my WDB or in your WDB because we haven't tested

> > for them.

> >

> > But the research citations posted here show that if I were to test

> > for mycotoxins in my WDB I should not expect to find T-2 toxins,

> > but would expect to find other mycotoxins in some of them some

> > of the time. Which means if I am going to pay the high cost of

> > mycotoxin testing I'm wasting my time and money specifying T-2.

> >

> > The other distinction is with testing human fluids vs testing

> > environmental samples, The $40 T-2 toxin test under discussion

> > does not test environmental samples, but human fluid samples. If

> > T-2 or other mycotoxins are present it doesn't know where it

> > came from - from a WDB or from food, for example. We are back

> > again the the critical importance of a comprehensive history of

> > the building and the occupants plus other information to establish

> > the context for interpreting the data.

> >

> > The sample testing and cost Branislav is talking about is testing

> > environmental samples, not human fluids. If present it doesn't

> > know if the person was exposed to it or not, or to a food source.

> > Again, we are back to the comprehensive inspection and history,

> > as above.

> >

> > There is a huge difference in technique, cost, and accreditation

> > requirements (as Dr Thrasher has emphasized) between testing

> > environmental samples and human fluid/tissue samples.

> >

> > Carl Grimes

> > Healthy Habitats LLC

> >

> > -----

> > Branislav says that you have to specificially ask for the tests to include

T-

> > 2 toxins and those tests are very expensive. Based on Branislav's

> > comments, I would guess that we really don't know if T-2 toxins are

> > found in water-damaged buildings.

> >

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > From: Branislav <arealisgmail (DOT) com>

> > moldtheseverereacto rgroups (DOT) com

> > Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:06:57 PM

> > Subject: [moldtheseverereact or] Re: T-2 Toxins in Water-Damaged

> > Buildings (Questions)

> >

> > The tests for trichothecenes are not cheap. If you want it, you have to tell

> > them that you want the analysis to include testing specifically for each

> > and every trichothecene mycotoxin (Satratoxin G, Satratoxin H,

> > Verucarrin etc). I know of some labs that do that in USA, but again it's

> > pretty expensive (from $300 to several thousand dollars per toxin,

> > depending on the particular lab).

> >

> >