Guest guest Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Bon ami cleanser is something I can use off the shelf. No chlorine, no scent. If only all the products were like that. ap said--- ---there are very good off the shelf products that are not labelled green that are nearly identical to counterparts labelled as green. Read the labels, it'll spin your head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Carl: This is the problem when new people join. They have not read our previous post on this subject. I have also seen a lot of posting on essential oils. Essential oils do contain volatile and semi-volatile components. I have met many people in my years who cannot use or be around essential oils. I also have met people who can tolerate them. Therefore, I suggest that recommendations for using these oils must be qualified by the person posting the information. Re: [] Re: essential oils Group, This is an old and very tired subject settled long ago. Thieves Oil was thoroughly discussed and cussed this past year. The Grandson of the inventor participated. I exchanged e-mails with the inventor. I asked for and he sent me his scientific studies and evidence for the effectiveness of Thieves Oil. I sent it to Dr Thrasher also. None of " studies " were studies in any basic scientific sense. They were more a limited attempt to prove that Thieves Oil did as he claimed. When he was asked questions about how he tested for the removal of mold it was based solely on viable spores from air testing. Two critical problems: 1. Dead spores and spore fragments can cause health effects so he needed to check for those. He wasn't aware of this possibility so didn't test for them. 2. Seventy two hours of diffusing (evaporating) oils (or water) into the air will cause the spores and fragments to absorb them and become heavy enough to settle out of the air. He only tested the air, not the surfaces. The end result was they had good intentions and truly believed in their process but had little evidence, none of which could withstand even a minimal challenge of fundamentals which most of you are familiar with. If you get benefit and don't react to Thieves Oil or anything else, that that's great! But it's not a silver bullet which works for all, or even for most. And, as with most " treatments, " some react to it. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 thank you very much for the in depth response. i have used 3 forms of most testing - air samples, dust (ermi) and swab. none of these tests mentioned dead spores and spore fragments. is there another test for this? thank you. > > Group, > > This is an old and very tired subject settled long ago. > > Thieves Oil was thoroughly discussed and cussed this past year. > The Grandson of the inventor participated. I exchanged e-mails > with the inventor. I asked for and he sent me his scientific studies > and evidence for the effectiveness of Thieves Oil. I sent it to Dr > Thrasher also. > > None of " studies " were studies in any basic scientific sense. They > were more a limited attempt to prove that Thieves Oil did as he > claimed. When he was asked questions about how he tested for > the removal of mold it was based solely on viable spores from air > testing. > > Two critical problems: 1. Dead spores and spore fragments can > cause health effects so he needed to check for those. He wasn't > aware of this possibility so didn't test for them. 2. Seventy two > hours of diffusing (evaporating) oils (or water) into the air will > cause the spores and fragments to absorb them and become > heavy enough to settle out of the air. He only tested the air, not > the surfaces. > > The end result was they had good intentions and truly believed in > their process but had little evidence, none of which could > withstand even a minimal challenge of fundamentals which most > of you are familiar with. > > If you get benefit and don't react to Thieves Oil or anything else, > that that's great! But it's not a silver bullet which works for all, or > even for most. And, as with most " treatments, " some react to it. > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 I use Bon Ami too, don't have problem with it, and don't trust labels cause there is NO Truth in Labeling. Read maufacturing processes and others to be informed. God Bless !! dragonflymcs Mayleen ________________________________ From: anita paulsen <apami@...> Sent: Wed, February 2, 2011 5:42:05 PM Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils Bon ami cleanser is something I can use off the shelf. No chlorine, no scent. If only all the products were like that. ap said--- ---there are very good off the shelf products that are not labelled green that are nearly identical to counterparts labelled as green. Read the labels, it'll spin your head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 momoko, If you check the archives there are several threads discussing testing. You can also go to the lab Web sites at http://www.emlab.com/ and www.emsl.com or similar to read about the various tests. In summary, there are methods for air, surface, dust, and bulk. Surface can be collected by tape lift or swab or dust collection. Bulk is a piece of the material you want tested. Air has several different types of collection devices depending on whether you want cultured or microscopy. All methods can be analysed by culture to see what grows, or by microscopy to see what's there whether it can grow or not (dead spores). There are benefits and limitations of each. Another method analyses the DNA of the sample for a finely- tuned identification of species and varieties. But it doesn't give quantity - very well. ERMI which stands for Environmental Relative Moldiness Index was originally designed to reduce all the variables and accuracy issues to a single digit between 1 and 6 to determine health risk. But after several years of effort that has not succeeded. EPA funded the research and last June sent an official notice that it isn't appropriate for field diagnosis, only for research. Despite that, many " inspectors " rely on it without knowing the basis, limitations, or what it cannot mean. Many people who use ERMI are actually using the DNA analysis and ignoring the index number. If DNA is what you want then I suggest you request PCR, QPCR, or MSQPCR. The latter has the same 36 species as ERMI but the others have over 160 species they can identify. As you can see, there are many options. What is needed is determined by the situation and what question needs to be answered. Most of the time the questions can be answered and be answered better without testing. While each method has certain advantages none of them give the whole picture, only its individual piece of the puzzle. And none of them can be interpreted by numbers alone - including ERMI. The numbers must always be calibrated to something and the " somthing " doesn't exist in any reliable manner. You said you've used air, dust for ERMI, and swab. Was the air using settling plates or airflow equipment? What lab do you use? Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC ----- thank you very much for the in depth response. i have used 3 forms of most testing - air samples, dust (ermi) and swab. none of these tests mentioned dead spores and spore fragments. is there another test for this? thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 I haven't met an essential oil, any concentration, any product that I don't react negatively to. I didn't think about the process. I just figured it was because they, too, are a fragrance, only natural, but not in natural form. They are very concentrated, which is why people make them, because the concentration has an effect of the nervous system (calming, exciting, energizing). It works. They wig me right out. On Feb 1, 2011, at 2:45 PM, momoko_uno@... wrote: > from my understanding the solvents used in essential oils are mostly made of wax, resin and other essential oils. some times alcohol is also used, but it is removed during a distillation process. > are there other chemical solvents that are used in processing essential oils that could be potentially harmed for people who have chemical sensitivities? > what essential oil company makes the highest grade essential oils? > thank you. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Thanks. Air sampling " cassette " usually refers to " spore trap " which is analyzed by microscopy, not culturing. So it will (ideally) see all spores, whether dead or alive. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC ----- the environmental firm is called TERS. the lab they sent the air samples was to us micro-solutions. they used an air sampling cassette. thank you. > > momoko, > > If you check the archives there are several threads discussing > testing. You can also go to the lab Web sites at > http://www.emlab.com/ and www.emsl.com or similar to read > about the various tests. > > In summary, ---------- The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: DEFAULT.BMP Date: 15 Jun 2009, 23:10 Size: 358 bytes. Type: Unknown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 the environmental firm is called TERS. the lab they sent the air samples was to us micro-solutions. they used an air sampling cassette. thank you. > > momoko, > > If you check the archives there are several threads discussing > testing. You can also go to the lab Web sites at > http://www.emlab.com/ and www.emsl.com or similar to read > about the various tests. > > In summary, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Carl: again if the party has th funds they need both air sampling and PCR. For example, when we were testing the Bermuda buildings this is what we found: On one building we had airborne Stachy, but we missed it on PCR (differences of where and where samples were taken) and in the building, no Stachy in the air but was identified by bulk sampling of suspected growth. Also, we found many Gram positive and negative bacteria, some of which were potential human pathogens, e.g. Acinetobacter, Klebsiella and B. cereus. Also detected mycotoxins. Re: [] Re: essential oils Thanks. Air sampling " cassette " usually refers to " spore trap " which is analyzed by microscopy, not culturing. So it will (ideally) see all spores, whether dead or alive. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Carl, I don't think it was really resolved regarding " essential oils " , I don't think it's a " tired " subject either. I recall the promoter was trying to convince/sell the thieves used a fog or mist into the air. I do not think the promoter was from a national mfr, like Young Living (maybe I'm wrong), I think they were using a home-brew. We naturally took issue with the remediation process they promoted. The use of an oil to " disinfect " is of course nearly impossible to " professionally recommend " due to the EPA rules. However, we know that many plant-based oils have anti fungal and bacterial properties. I know that the topical use of oils can enhance or damage skin, depending on type, etc. I know that when the client had contents wiped down with the oil-treated wipes, they 1. came clean of dirt and debris, and 2. she could tolerate the result. Tea tree itself should be studied and understood, not just by us, but by the profession. See " Tea Tree Bible " , old book with interesting history story of tea tree. > > Group, > > This is an old and very tired subject settled long ago. > > Thieves Oil was thoroughly discussed and cussed this past year. > The Grandson of the inventor participated. I exchanged e-mails > with the inventor. I asked for and he sent me his scientific studies > and evidence for the effectiveness of Thieves Oil. I sent it to Dr > Thrasher also. > > None of " studies " were studies in any basic scientific sense. They > were more a limited attempt to prove that Thieves Oil did as he > claimed. When he was asked questions about how he tested for > the removal of mold it was based solely on viable spores from air > testing. > > Two critical problems: 1. Dead spores and spore fragments can > cause health effects so he needed to check for those. He wasn't > aware of this possibility so didn't test for them. 2. Seventy two > hours of diffusing (evaporating) oils (or water) into the air will > cause the spores and fragments to absorb them and become > heavy enough to settle out of the air. He only tested the air, not > the surfaces. > > The end result was they had good intentions and truly believed in > their process but had little evidence, none of which could > withstand even a minimal challenge of fundamentals which most > of you are familiar with. > > If you get benefit and don't react to Thieves Oil or anything else, > that that's great! But it's not a silver bullet which works for all, or > even for most. And, as with most " treatments, " some react to it. > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 When one is taking samples, you need to plan and ask what it is you are really looking for. If a sample is either a " trap " or a " lift " , then the particles will include not only spores, but also fragments of the mold growth. An air sample that collects particulates called a spore trap (casette) will have the particles impacted and " stuck " to the built-in slide. The analysis is via microscopy - they look at it with a light microscope. You must ask for additional analysis if you are sending it to a lab for typical " mold/fungi microscopy " . Most labs count and report spores, some include other things like background debris(all non-spore or unidentified stuff), skin cells, insect parts, pollen, fibers. A " lift " or 'tape lift' slide simple is a piece of clear tape or slide with sticky substance that is used to pick up whatever is onthe surface. It can easily pick up the mold growth relatively intact, so the microscopist can ID growth structures. HOWEVER, nearly no lab actually reports " growth structures " . They all report spores. You must ask them to report if they ID growth structures. The air sample structures are really " fragments " since they are broken off of the growth and floating in the air. The surface sample is literally the growth. You can also collect a bulk sample which is simply an actual piece of the material, collected or cut intact with the growth on it. The lab can use a microscope to ID it as growth or other debris. Hope this helps. PS, I can refer you to QLab USA for good analysis of growth. They will report for tape lifts: spores ID, growth, or settled debris. They will help you decide if it's debris left over after cleaning or if it's actual growth that needs to be cleaned. > > thank you very much for the in depth response. > i have used 3 forms of most testing - air samples, dust (ermi) and swab. none of these tests mentioned dead spores and spore fragments. is there another test for this? > thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 : I posted on this. Essential oils is an individual matter. If one reacts to the volatiles and semi-volatiles stay away from it. I have observed individuals who cannot use or be around them and others who can. [] Re: essential oils Carl, I don't think it was really resolved regarding " essential oils " , I don't think it's a " tired " subject either. I recall the promoter was trying to convince/sell the thieves used a fog or mist into the air. I do not think the promoter was from a national mfr, like Young Living (maybe I'm wrong), I think they were using a home-brew. We naturally took issue with the remediation process they promoted. The use of an oil to " disinfect " is of course nearly impossible to " professionally recommend " due to the EPA rules. However, we know that many plant-based oils have anti fungal and bacterial properties. I know that the topical use of oils can enhance or damage skin, depending on type, etc. I know that when the client had contents wiped down with the oil-treated wipes, they 1. came clean of dirt and debris, and 2. she could tolerate the result. Tea tree itself should be studied and understood, not just by us, but by the profession. See " Tea Tree Bible " , old book with interesting history story of tea tree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 : Just one comment: I have found that carpet dust invariably misses Stachybotrys. Bulk is best for PCR to indentify it, or tape life. [] Re: essential oils When one is taking samples, you need to plan and ask what it is you are really looking for. If a sample is either a " trap " or a " lift " , then the particles will include not only spores, but also fragments of the mold growth. An air sample that collects particulates called a spore trap (casette) will have the particles impacted and " stuck " to the built-in slide. The analysis is via microscopy - they look at it with a light microscope. You must ask for additional analysis if you are sending it to a lab for typical " mold/fungi microscopy " . Most labs count and report spores, some include other things like background debris(all non-spore or unidentified stuff), skin cells, insect parts, pollen, fibers. A " lift " or 'tape lift' slide simple is a piece of clear tape or slide with sticky substance that is used to pick up whatever is onthe surface. It can easily pick up the mold growth relatively intact, so the microscopist can ID growth structures. HOWEVER, nearly no lab actually reports " growth structures " . They all report spores. You must ask them to report if they ID growth structures. The air sample structures are really " fragments " since they are broken off of the growth and floating in the air. The surface sample is literally the growth. You can also collect a bulk sample which is simply an actual piece of the material, collected or cut intact with the growth on it. The lab can use a microscope to ID it as growth or other debris. Hope this helps. PS, I can refer you to QLab USA for good analysis of growth. They will report for tape lifts: spores ID, growth, or settled debris. They will help you decide if it's debris left over after cleaning or if it's actual growth that needs to be cleaned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 I had airborne stachy in my home office. ________________________________ From: " Jack Thrasher, Ph.D. " <toxicologist1@...> Sent: Thu, February 3, 2011 12:35:24 PM Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils Carl: again if the party has th funds they need both air sampling and PCR. For example, when we were testing the Bermuda buildings this is what we found: On one building we had airborne Stachy, but we missed it on PCR (differences of where and where samples were taken) and in the building, no Stachy in the air but was identified by bulk sampling of suspected growth. Also, we found many Gram positive and negative bacteria, some of which were potential human pathogens, e.g. Acinetobacter, Klebsiella and B. cereus. Also detected mycotoxins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 momoko Re: Mold Testing As Carl mentioned, for those of us who have been in the industry for a while, the question regarding " the best " mold testing method has been beaten to death. As tiresome as it might seem, we have an obligation to provide accurate information as new people express interest in this subject. This group is very fortunate to have experts like Carl and Jack who have been generous with their time and knowledge. Most experienced mold consultants subscribe premise that no testing should be conducting without first answering the questions of " Why, What, Where, and How. " Answers to these questions should dictate if and how a sampling plan should be executed. First of all, an investigator should know why testing is being requested. Will the results be used for litigation? If so, a sampling plan will be more comprehensive than one designed to determine if a suspect stain is in fact mold. A sampling plan designed to assess exposure hazards also requires comprehensive testing that might include semi-aggressive or worst case scenario samples. However, a plan to assess the likelihood of indoor contaminant sources might include only a few samples. Knowing what to sample is critical, whether the plan is simple or complex. An investigator cannot say something is not present if appropriate testing is not conducted to test it. For example, as Dr. Thrasher emphasizes, bacteria and actinomycetes might be the causative agents of illnesses in a WDB. However, if an investigator only collects a few spore trap samples with the proposition that the " safeness " of a building is being evaluated, the data would be inconclusive. This is also the case when investigators claim that outdoor air is the source of airborne fungi in a building, based only on spore trap results that show similar concentrations of Penicillium/Aspergillus spores. Speciation is required to make conclusive comparisons. Where to sample is also critical to avoiding false negatives. Spore trap air samples collected in an empty building without activity often lead to false negatives. How to sample requires that investigators understand the principles of microbiology, selection of testing media and equipment, calibration, quality control, and others. No single method of testing can be considered the gold standard for mold testing. No testing is certainly better than a poorly designed sampling plan. Certainly no mold testing is required to determine that remediation is necessary when visible mold exists. Effective mold sampling should only be conducted by an experienced investigator with knowledge in building science, microbiology, indoor contaminant sources, exposure pathways, ventilation, litigation, sampling/analytical methods, and exposure hazards. Many times, a team of professionals that might include engineers, building scientists, toxicologists, clinicians, hygienists, and indoor air quality consultants is required. Based on my experience in testing thousands of homes and buildings, a combination of spore trap air samples, culturable air samples, bulk source samples, settled dust samples, tape lifts, and wipe samples are required in most comprehensive investigations. Analysis of the samples depends on why sampling is requested and what contaminant is suspected. However, in addition to culture methods, I do include direct exams and MSQPCR. At times, sampling and analysis for thermotolerant fungi and bacteria are included in the plan. All sampling and analytical methods for mold are prone to false negatives. Culture results might produce false negatives if the wrong media is selected or mold is not viable. Spore trap samples can produce inconclusive results, as well as underestimate and miss fungal elements if high background debris exists. The same is true for surface tape samples. Unless I am mistaken, spore trap and direct exam samples do not identify sub-micron mold fragments, which are receiving much attention relative to health effects. Surface wipe samples do not differentiate between actual growth and settled spores, which can be an important piece of information when looking at proximal cause of contamination or health effects. ERMI results can produce false negative results if there are molds outside of the probe library. ERMI results can also underestimate the moldiness of a building if Cladosporium cladosporioides, Penicillium chrysogenum or any of the other Group 2 molds have colonized in the indoor environment. Additionally, I believe that the selection of Group 2 molds is not relative to many geographic regions. For example, I rarely find Penicillium chrysogenum in outdoor air samples, but frequently find it on water damaged drywall. I am also surprised that Acremonium and Ulocladium, which are tertiary colonizers, are in this group. An important point to remember is that only a few samples are required to establish that mold exists. However, many samples and sample types are generally required to declare that a mold problem does not exist. To borrow a recent movie title, " It is Complicated. " Connie Morbach, M.S., CHMM, CIE Sanit-Air, Inc. cleanlinest@... > > thank you very much for the in depth response. > i have used 3 forms of most testing - air samples, dust (ermi) and swab. none of these tests mentioned dead spores and spore fragments. is there another test for this? > thank you. > > > > --- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 If you know the types of fungi, there is info in books and research results on internet which oils helps against which fungi; i think thymol (in red thyme and in oregano) helps against certain types aspergillus, tea tree is good against many molds but not all, ess. oils help me to calm down symptoms or to protect, not to cure hypersensibility, in books you find if you can use them in the air, on the skin (mixed with basic oil), or inside. French aromatherapist often use ess. oils inside.I tried out also experiencing. Lemonngrass is strong anti inflammation, oregano too. It's important to read how to use because some oils are too strong, i cannot use my books yet, so therefore the oils help not enough, > > > > very strange! > > my experience: oregano in capsule: wonderful, caraway in nose , ears and mouth: very helpful, cinnamon cassia with olive oil drinking or one drop in nose: helpful, lemongrass or thymus (red type) on tissue near face : for protecting eyes en breath > > never had first a negative reaction, directly protecting > > essential oils used with washing clothes: not helpful > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 I just made a spray for a friend with skin infection out of herbs. I used tes tree, oregano, rosemary, arnica, and GSE. I mixed it in a spray with pure water and he has been using it and found some relief. I use oregano oil when I get real sick by putting it in tea, two or three drops per cup. I use arnica on painful joints and muscles. Otherwise I use vanilla beans, chamomille flowers, etc organic only, in lots of things. On the otherhand, I can't have store bought flowers near me. Some things are bad, some are good. I prefer herbs to modern medicine. Meredith > > If you know the types of fungi, there is info in books and research results on internet which oils helps against which fungi; > i think thymol (in red thyme and in oregano) helps against certain types aspergillus, tea tree is good against many molds but not all, ess. oils help me to calm down symptoms or to protect, not to cure hypersensibility, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 But why sample so much, even if one has the money. We/he/you/they do not change our cleanup procedures, do we? Cleaning is the same regardless of species or organism type. Right? > > I had airborne stachy in my home office. > > ________________________________ > From: " Jack Thrasher, Ph.D. " <toxicologist1@...> > > Sent: Thu, February 3, 2011 12:35:24 PM > Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils > > > Carl: again if the party has th funds they need both air sampling and PCR. For > example, when we were testing the Bermuda buildings this is what we found: On > one building we had airborne Stachy, but we missed it on PCR (differences of > where and where samples were taken) and in the building, no Stachy in the air > but was identified by bulk sampling of suspected growth. Also, we found many > Gram positive and negative bacteria, some of which were potential human > pathogens, e.g. Acinetobacter, Klebsiella and B. cereus. Also detected > mycotoxins. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Why sample depends on the situation to me anyways. I wish I could have something that told me a place is a bad place to live. A sign for us not to live somewhere, especially when I place looks completely clean , feel clean then months later you say something is off and I cannot put my finger on it. Others need to sample for legal reasons too. Question : People of Little Resources : How do you test a place for safety before moving there with little funds??? ________________________________ From: <scottarmour@...> Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 7:26:23 PM Subject: [] Re: essential oils But why sample so much, even if one has the money. We/he/you/they do not change our cleanup procedures, do we? Cleaning is the same regardless of species or organism type. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Mayleen, Simple tests are appealing exactly for the reasons you cite. And they are needed. Here's why they don't exist and probably won't. Assessing an unknown home is very different from one already occupied, which is even more different than one that is occupied and has water damage, fire, or some other known event that can be specifically assessed. The new, unknown home has no reliable history. We have no specific clues as guidance about what to look for or where to look or how to measure. If our client doesn't own the house we are severely limited in our techniques. We can't remove baseboards, for example, or drill a hole for a wall check-type sample. Moisture measurements don't help if a previous event is now dry. IR won't always help for the same reason or if the temperature differences don't exist at that time. For even more reasons mold sampling frequently doesn't yield accurate or representative information. Even if it did it must still be interpreted by comparing it to some sort of baseline. Mold spore levels keep changing so are not a reliable comparison baseline. Mold doesn't always produce spores or do so in a location they can be sampled. Bacteria or chemicals may be the problem or pet dander, mites, roaches. Poor or incorrect ventilation may be the cause of what spreads " it " through the air to the entire house. Adjacent houses or apartments can sometimes be the source - all depending on what you are or are not reactive to. All the above requires an inspection to try to re-create the history of the house as best an educated, informed person is able. History is the key. Even if lab tests appropriate for residences instead of workplace were available - which they aren't for most pollutants - it still depends on the individual wanting to move in. The best anyone can accurately do is profile a house for a range of people with a range of needs and susceptibilities. The client then gets to decide where they fit in and whether the inherent unknowns are worth the risk. Anyone who is presented with this framework and still insists on or demands precision hasn't been paying attention or needs to find somebody to blame. Of course, this framework is rarely presented or followed. In which case there are usually legitimate grounds for blame. That's what most of us have experienced. Simple tests are appealing exactly for the reasons you cite. And they are needed. But we would need a couple of dozen all at once proven to be relevant. Then each of us would still have to determine, each in our own way, if that house is habitable for us. While history is the key, uncertainty and doubt will remain and that is what we are all left with. Unfortunate but true. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC (fm my Blackberry) [] Re: essential oils But why sample so much, even if one has the money. We/he/you/they do not change our cleanup procedures, do we? Cleaning is the same regardless of species or organism type. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 It is just so sad to keep moving. me particularly would like a test for WD/Contamination and one for Sewer gas before moving again. Can I , no. I hear what you are saying. My body can determine chemical parts for the most part, but the others are a true concern I am so very tired of. I only wish there was a solution. But then I also want a crystal ball to tell me people are goring to foreclose too. Thank you Carl, God Bless !! dragonflymcs Mayleen ________________________________ From: Carl Grimes <grimes@...> Sick Buildings < > Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 1:30:54 AM Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils Mayleen, Simple tests are appealing exactly for the reasons you cite. And they are needed. Here's why they don't exist and probably won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Mayleen, It is discouraging but not hopeless. More people need to be trained away from the historical industrial hygiene framework of one hazard at a time for regulatory compliance. And if those workplace requirements - which are consistently being invalidated - don't find a violation then the conclusion is there is " nothing to detect " so we are therefore imagining it. They often begin by assuming we have no legitimate complaint so their job is to " prove " it. As if everything that is to be known is already known and testable. Our contribution for the change is to only hire those who can truly understand and help us. There are a few out there. But if we give in and the hire the others for the sake of " pretend " information then they stay in business and the status quo prevails. It's the victims, who have the least energy and resources, who are left to do the hard work of change. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC ----- It is just so sad to keep moving. me particularly would like a test for WD/Contamination and one for Sewer gas before moving again. Can I , no. I hear what you are saying. My body can determine chemical parts for the most part, but the others are a true concern I am so very tired of. I only wish there was a solution. But then I also want a crystal ball to tell me people are goring to foreclose too. Thank you Carl, God Bless !! dragonflymcs Mayleen ________________________________ From: Carl Grimes <grimes@...> Sick Buildings < > Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 1:30:54 AM Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils Mayleen, Simple tests are appealing exactly for the reasons you cite. And they are needed. Here's why they don't exist and probably won't. ---------- The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any other MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: DEFAULT.BMP Date: 15 Jun 2009, 23:10 Size: 358 bytes. Type: Unknown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I fought with workmens comp after a company came in and tested for mols and such. The test came back Can cause respiratory illness. I fought workmens comp for a year with a result from this test and letters from doctors but could get no where. One jerk told me over the phone Oh the mold could have showed up just last week! I told him I worked down there for 12 years and it has always been there. NOTHING NADA! This was Fedreal wc. Dont know if outside the government is any different. Sorry that came out of nowhwere Janet In a message dated 2/6/2011 3:14:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, gr imes@... writes: Mayleen, It is discouraging but not hopeless. More people need to be trained away from the historical industrial hygiene framework of one hazard at a time for regulatory compliance. And if those workplace requirements - which are consistently being invalidated - don't find a violation then the conclusion is there is " nothing to detect " so we are therefore imagining it. They often begin by assuming we have no legitimate complaint so their job is to " prove " it. As if everything that is to be known is already known and testable. Our contribution for the change is to only hire those who can truly understand and help us. There are a few out there. But if we give in and the hire the others for the sake of " pretend " information then they stay in business and the status quo prevails. It's the victims, who have the least energy and resources, who are left to do the hard work of change. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Carl, As always, well stated response. Connie Morbach > > Mayleen, > > It is discouraging but not hopeless. More people need to be > trained away from the historical industrial hygiene framework of > one hazard at a time for regulatory compliance. And if those > workplace requirements - which are consistently being invalidated > - don't find a violation then the conclusion is there is " nothing to > detect " so we are therefore imagining it. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Thanks Carl, I do try not to be hopeless, I am just a little exhausted especially here where it all includes discrimination on top of everything else. I am all for change !!!! Absolutely God Bless !! dragonflymcs Mayleen ________________________________ From: Carl E. Grimes <grimes@...> Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 2:14:52 AM Subject: Re: [] Re: essential oils Mayleen, It is discouraging but not hopeless. More people need to be trained away from the historical industrial hygiene framework of one hazard at a time for regulatory compliance. And if those workplace requirements - which are consistently being invalidated - don't find a violation then the conclusion is there is " nothing to detect " so we are therefore imagining it. They often begin by assuming we have no legitimate complaint so their job is to " prove " it. As if everything that is to be known is already known and testable. Our contribution for the change is to only hire those who can truly understand and help us. There are a few out there. But if we give in and the hire the others for the sake of " pretend " information then they stay in business and the status quo prevails. It's the victims, who have the least energy and resources, who are left to do the hard work of change. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC 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.