Re: Mold Testing - labs & methods

[Guest guest]

Almost any lab that does the full ERMI (31 species) test. All you need is the

species. Asked the lab to only report species, not the Moldiness Index (MI).

The MI is not useful.

[] Mold Testing - labs & methods

Hi all, new member here. I suppose that question has been asked before, but

which lab is the best for determining the species present and in which quantity?

Via culture or via EPA-licensed MSQPCR technology?

I've read that http://www.mycometrics.com is the lab Dr Shoemaker recommends,

but I want to consider all labs before choosing. Also, I cant find a pricelist

for the mycometrics services.

At home I can see molds in my bathroom and my kitchen, so i could easily get a

culture. In my office at school i dont see molds so I would have to do a close

inspection of the AC system (that hasnt worked in a long time, it's the only

office in the building where the air doesnt circulate) or get the dust tested.

thanks for inputs

[Guest guest]

Is purpose of knowing species for lawsuits and/or to prove house/apt is cause of

illness. I don't think species would help my doctor to treat me for example.

--- In , " Jack Thrasher, Ph.D. " <toxicologist1@...>

wrote:

>

> Almost any lab that does the full ERMI (31 species) test. All you need is the

species. Asked the lab to only report species, not the Moldiness Index (MI).

The MI is not useful.

>

> [] Mold Testing - labs & methods

>

>

>

> Hi all, new member here. I suppose that question has been asked before, but

which lab is the best for determining the species present and in which quantity?

Via culture or via EPA-licensed MSQPCR technology?

>

> I've read that http://www.mycometrics.com is the lab Dr Shoemaker

recommends, but I want to consider all labs before choosing. Also, I cant find a

pricelist for the mycometrics services.

>

> At home I can see molds in my bathroom and my kitchen, so i could easily get

a culture. In my office at school i dont see molds so I would have to do a close

inspection of the AC system (that hasnt worked in a long time, it's the only

office in the building where the air doesnt circulate) or get the dust tested.

>

> thanks for inputs

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It adds knowledge as to what species are present and probable mycotoxins. You

can use the information for law suits, illness and or your doctor.

Also, do not forget to culture for Gram negative and positive bacteria. A

person may have an infection that can be associated with the house. For

example, I have a case of Nocardiosis and another case of Mycobacterium

cellulare obtained from a WDB.

I also have a case of severe sarcoidosis caused by actinomycetes in an

automobile air conditioning system. Finally, some school teachers have been

diagnosed with sarcoidosis in Connecticut

[] Re: Mold Testing - labs & methods

Is purpose of knowing species for lawsuits and/or to prove house/apt is cause

of illness. I don't think species would help my doctor to treat me for example.

[Guest guest]

Sorry for my looonng answer but the issue has some subtleties, some if which go

beyond the type of testing.

The lab should be EMLAP and EMPAT accredited by the AIHA. That is a minimum but

no guarantee.

ERMI is limited to 30+ species which are both associated and not associated with

water damaged buildings. (to provide a comparison to calculate the index number

which as Jack said is not useful).

Most labs that do ERMI will also do a full PCR analysis of the 160+ species.

Which is what I recommend because no one really knows just what causes or

contributes to the illness, if any.

EPA has withdrawn its support for their licensed MSQPCR (ERMI) for all purposes

but research. Last June they announced it still wasn't ready and should not be

used as a field diagnostic.

PCR will not tell you how much. Quantitative PCR (QPCR) gives an estimate of

how much but is not part of the PCR analysis, rather a separate methodology.

Because PCR requires large quantities it is hard to count that high accurately.

If you can see the mold what will a sample tell you that don't already know? If

there is mold it should be removed. Period. The kind of mold doesn't change

that need, neither does it affect how it is remediated.

It is remediated by removing it by cleaning the surface on which it is growing

or if it can't be cleaned then that surface must be removed. Also, because mold

cannot grow without moisture the source must be identified and stopped.

Killing mold doesn't help and usually makes it worse because it fragments into

tinier pieces, increasing exposure (among other reasons).

An inspection, as you mention, by someone who understands building and material

science, fungal biology, moisture behavior, and air pathways can tell you more

with greater accurately than any testing of any kind.

Except, as Barb pointed out, if there is a legal case or medical necessity. In

which case the inspection is even more important for determining if sampling is

needed. If so, what kind, where, when, and what the possible range of results

will mean. BEFORE the samples are collected. To do so after the results opens

the interpretation to whomever chooses according to their bias. A losing

proposition.

The typical objection for an Inspection is it adds to the cost of remediation.

But the Inspection identifies the need, the location, the work practices, and

the information necessary for the post remediation verification.

This scope of work is what you can then have multiple remediation contractors

bid on. Without it the contractor determines all those questions and the cost

among them will be in a wide range with many contradictions often impossible to

sort out without an independent inspection. Which should prevent this

unnecessary event in the first place.

Again, sorry for so much information but your simple question has no simple

answer.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

(fm my Blackberry)

[] Mold Testing - labs & methods

Hi all, new member here. I suppose that question has been asked before, but

which lab is the best for determining the species present and in which quantity?

Via culture or via EPA-licensed MSQPCR technology?

I've read that http://www.mycometrics.com is the lab Dr Shoemaker recommends,

but I want to consider all labs before choosing. Also, I cant find a pricelist

for the mycometrics services.

At home I can see molds in my bathroom and my kitchen, so i could easily get a

culture. In my office at school i dont see molds so I would have to do a close

inspection of the AC system (that hasnt worked in a long time, it's the only

office in the building where the air doesnt circulate) or get the dust tested.

thanks for inputs

[Guest guest]

There seem to be knowledgeable and rational people in this group (as opposed to

most lyme groups!) so I'll try to formulate better what I'm looking for. I'm

moving into another apartment on Jan 1st and I have a new, healtheir office

since more than a year. However I'd like to test my current appartment and old

office in order to 1) perhaps understand why I became sick (mostly cognitive

dysfunction " brain fog " , recurring infections, etc. Borrelia Burgdorferi and

chlamydia pneumonia launched their attack) and 2) lawsuits are not out of

questions, depending on test results of course. However, I'm not concerned at

all with remediation.

Samples for Molds: So if I understand, you're suggesting that I forget about

doing a Swab/Wipe/Lift Tape with the visible molds, and instead only get the #

of spores/mg of dust for each of the 31-160 species via the MSQPCR " ERMI test " ?

Or should I do both since swabs are cheap? And what do you guys think of DIY air

sampling like

http://www.homemoldtestkit.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info & cPath=1 & pr\

oducts_id=5 ?

Methods for molds: I understand there is mainly culture, microscopic examination

and QPCR. Are saying QPCR is the most reliable/cost-effective?

Labs for molds: mycometrics.com is EMLAP and appears to have had 100% on their

EMPAT tests. However their ERMI panel is only for 36 of the 48 species that they

test, and 48 species at the customized panel price would be 770$. And 48 is

still far from the 160+ Carl mentionned. Any specific recommendations for a lab

that is highly reliable, cost-effective, EMLAP/EMPAT accredited, etc.

Bacterias: mycometrics.com has a bacterial culture (BC201 - bottom of 1st page

in http://www.mycometrics.com/Mycometrics_Services_List.pdf) however that

doesnt seem to be their specialty. Do you have a specific lab in mind for these

cultures? Would you recommend via an air sample or via a dust sample?

I had never heard of a transplant of the intestinal flora!! nice

[Guest guest]

Also, can we test for Fusarium species and Scedosporium apiospermum, as well as

zygomycetes?

[Guest guest]

> I had never heard of a transplant of the intestinal flora!! nice

>

pretty amaseing isn't it, with the stomach problems I had through this ordeal I

would of considered this very seriously.

I was reading about how allergies can very possably be transfered by blood

transfusions, also amaseing.

as far as testing I cant realy give you any advice on that, I would still do the

swabs and air testing too, if you can afford but thats just my opinion, the more

the better and a inspector of some sort to document the cause of mold growth.

take lots of pictures too.

good luck.

[Guest guest]

You have identified fungi more often associated with infection, the

least likely affect from mold exposure in water damaged buildings

(WDB). But not from organ transplants, surgery, organ

transplants, chemo, etc.

Nothing wrong with that, just wanting to point out that not all mold

is the same and not all effects are the same and not all

supportive environments are the same. Context is critical when

dealing with over a million species of mold.

That said, Fusarium species is included in the PCR database of

160+ species, so any accredited lab offering most versions of

PCR could accommodate your need. But it is not included as one

of the 36 species identified by the ERMI analysis.

Scedosporium apiospermum is another matter entirely. This is a

relatively new fungi of interest and I could not find it in any of the

libraries I'm familiar with. It is highly infectious, associated mostly

with penetration wounds and organ transplants. Because it

mimicks Aspergilous species it is often confused with it and thus

frequently misidentified.

Zygomycetes is also another matter. It is not a genus (like

Aspergillous) or a species (like A. fumagatis), but rather a phylum

consisting of nearly 1100 species.

To the understand the difference between phylum, genus, and

species it helps to know the ordering of living matter, known as

taxonomy. Following is the listing from the largest grouping to the

smallest:

KINGDOM (e.g. plants, animals, bacteria, fungi, etc)

PHYLUM (in the animal phyum is Chordata, all animals with

backbones)

CLASS (Chordata classes include birds, reptiles, mammals)

ORDER (mammals include mice, primates, felines)

FAMILY (felines include Panthera: cheeta, lion, tigers, house

cats)

GENUS (Panthera includes lion, tiger)

SPECIES

For the Kingdom of fungi one of many Phylum is Zygomycetes.

Further down the tree is the genus (e.g. Penicillium,

Cladosporium, Aspergillus, etc)

Species (e.g. A. fumagatis, P. chrysogenum)

Variety (e.g. Stachybotrys chartarum has 3 varieties, not all of

which produce mycotoxins)

Because Zygomycetes is a phylum consisting of nearly 1100

species you'll need to be more specific about identifying which

genus and/or species you are interested in. Also, we must be

aware that the species and variety of mold which can growth in

WDB may be different than what can grow in the very different

environment inside the human body.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

Also, can we test for Fusarium species and Scedosporium apiospermum,

as well as zygomycetes?

----------

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

[Guest guest]

I knew that zygomycetes is a phylum of thousands of fungi - I looked it up on

wikipedia a few days ago But I thought that all of its species would likely

share some DNA - hence a phylum PCR test is conceivable to me.

Anyway did you see this post

/message/83440 ? I'm trying to

choose a sampling method (air, dust or swab/wipe/lift tape), an anaysis method

(culture, microscopic examination or QPCR) and a lab that tests all of 160+

species.

In a courtroom, am I right to think that dust via QPCR is what would most likely

be recognized as state of the art?

How likely is a swab/lift tape culture to turn up species that would not have

turned up on the dust QPCR (assuming the culture is taken from the shower and

the carpet analyzed is adjacent to the bathroom)?

[Guest guest]

You have done some very good research on your own and have

a reasonable understanding of many of the issues. With that in

mind, here are my responses:

A phylum is so huge that there would be no useable

differentiation. It would basically answer the question of " Is this

mold or something else? "

On second thought, that could be a strength! Twenty years ago I

had a local lab helping me and that's all I got: How much mold

and how much bacteria. No differentiation. Once the IAQ labs

began commercializing air sampling for mold I got all these finely

tuned numbers which is often distracting to the fundamental

questions. Once those have been answered and if there is a

medical or legal need for the details then lots and lots of data

might be helpful.

Tape lifts are analyzed only by microscopy and therefore cannot

identify species. In fact, most credible labs no longer quantify

tape lifts at all. There are a couple who claim to culture tape lifts

but I still haven't figured out what information that generates.

As for the " best " and most legally credible samples, that is

actually the wrong question. Each sampling and analytical

method has its own strengths and limitations. Each can supply

one piece of the total picture. You wouldn't look for bacteria with a

telescope, or analyze the moon with a microscope.

What gives sampling credibility is the generation of a sampling

plan based on the specific situation to answer specific questions.

The sampling type then must be appropriate for the questions.

For example, if you want to know what species are on a surface

of water damaged drywall you would not use a tape lift. It can't

speciate. A swab or bulk sample cultured will provide species.

PCR will be a more accurate indentification of species and

sometimes the variety but it cannot quantify. You need a different

method to answer the question of " how much. " PCR is also

limited to the reference library being used. If it isn't in the library

then it cannot identify it. Open ended culturing is limited only by

the experience and diligence of the microscopist.

ERMI is specifically 36 predetermined species. They are a mix of

those associated with dampness and those which are not.

Because EPA has withdrawn their support except for research I

cannot understand why ERMI would be used instead of one of

the other PCR varieties.

If you want to know what is on a surface you wouldn't take an air

sample. If you take an air sample it can tell what is in the air but

says nothing about the location of where those spores came

from.

Except for PCR none of the sampling methods identifies anything

but spores. There can be massive growth without spores, or

without the spores exiting the inside of walls, and the samples will

show " no mold " therefore " no problem. " The recent story about

the SSA building that KC posted is a classic cluster___ of that

situation!

None of the samples identify, confirm, or measure exposure.

They only measure presence. Exposure is presence during a

period of time, a significantly long time, not the 3-10 minutes of

typical air samples.

To repeat, the credibility of sampling is first the recognition and

documentation of visible mold and conditions associated with

mold growth. Then the appropriate questions must be asked

followed by a determination of the type of samples, the type of

agar if cultured, and the type of analysis which can answer those

questions. All the above determine what will be collected and

identified. Change any of the above and the results will be

different.

All of which is documented by an ethical, experienced

professional who knows how to interpret the data. (The lab

should NEVER provide the interpretaton). The Chain of Custody

is important, as is calibration of sampling equipment for collection

of air or dust samples.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

I knew that zygomycetes is a phylum of thousands of fungi - I looked it

up on wikipedia a few days ago But I thought that all of its species

would likely share some DNA - hence a phylum PCR test is conceivable

to me.

Anyway did you see this post

/message/83440 ?

I'm trying to choose a sampling method (air, dust or swab/wipe/lift

tape), an anaysis method (culture, microscopic examination or QPCR)

and a lab that tests all of 160+ species.

In a courtroom, am I right to think that dust via QPCR is what would

most likely be recognized as state of the art?

How likely is a swab/lift tape culture to turn up species that would not

have turned up on the dust QPCR (assuming the culture is taken from

the shower and the carpet analyzed is adjacent to the bathroom)?

----------

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

[Guest guest]

So thousands of spore equiv/mg of dust for Aureobasidium pullulans, Cladosporium

and fusarium do not concern you guys too much in terms of mycotoxins production?

But 21 000 for A. flavus/oryzae sounds pretty deadly? Likely via the

carcinogenic aflatoxin B1/B2?

When we talk about Stachybotrys chartarum and Chaetomium globosum contamination

are we generally talking an order of magnitude of 50-100 or more like 10 000-100

000 spore equiv/mg?

Or is the thinking that anything above 15-20 likely represent growth from water

damage, and at that point the amount of toxins they produce have a very poor

correlation to the amount of spores recovered in dust (when the molds are not

visible)?

Dr Thrasher, first thanks for the straightforward answer. Also, when you have a

chance can you please answer

/message/83935 (if you know

the answer)

[Guest guest]

It is not necessarily the spore count that is important. I have said many times

on this forum, it is the particulate count that is most important. The species

tells what molds are present and you can fairly well surmise what mycotoxins may

be present by the species of mold.. However, the mycotoxins are in the

particulates which include the following size ranges: >2.5 microns; 1.05 to 2.45

microns and at or less than 1 microns. The at or less than 1 micron fraction

has been estimated to be up to 500 times greater than spore counts Thus if you

have 75,000 spore count, multiply this by 500. This figure is for mold

by-products and is based upon 1-3-beta-glucan that is present in the cell wall

of molds.

Now the next issue is the bacteria. Gram negative and Gram positive bacteria

are also present. I have seen counts of Gram negative bacteria as high as 2.5

million per gram. I have also seen situations where the endotoxins

(lipopolysaccnharides) released by Gram negative bacteria as high as one million

EU/gram. The potentially dangerous Gram positive bacteria that I am most

concerned about are the Actinomyctes: Streptomyces, Mycobacterium, Nocardia to

mention only three genera. Like the Gram negative bacteria, this group are

potential human pathogens. Several mycobacterium species can cause a condition

referred to Mycobacterium Avium Complex. This is an infectious process that

involves the lungs and can be systemic the formation of mycetoma (small 1-3 mm)

granulomas are often seen in the lungs.

It is time you awaken to the fact that water damage in a building leads to 1)

Several different genera and species of molds; 2) Several different types of

mycotoxins; 3) 1-3-beta-D-glucans (respiratory inflammation); 4) Galactomanans

(another group of irritative polysaccharides in the cell wall of molds) 5) Gram

negative bacteria and; 6) their endotoxins (synergistic with some mycotoxins,

causes fever and malaise and chronic inflammation); 7) a variety of different

types of proteins (digestive enzymes, hemolysins, siderophores to mention a

few); 8) Gram positive bacteria (mentioned above); 9) bacterial toxins; 10)

Volatile organic compounds (microbial and household furnishings).

I must ask, why are you only concerned about mold species and mycotoxins when

all of the others I mentioned above are also present and impinging upon

occupants.

[] Re: Mold Testing - labs & methods

So thousands of spore equiv/mg of dust for Aureobasidium pullulans,

Cladosporium and fusarium do not concern you guys too much in terms of

mycotoxins production?

But 21 000 for A. flavus/oryzae sounds pretty deadly? Likely via the

carcinogenic aflatoxin B1/B2?

When we talk about Stachybotrys chartarum and Chaetomium globosum

contamination are we generally talking an order of magnitude of 50-100 or more

like 10 000-100 000 spore equiv/mg?

Or is the thinking that anything above 15-20 likely represent growth from

water damage, and at that point the amount of toxins they produce have a very

poor correlation to the amount of spores recovered in dust (when the molds are

not visible)?

Dr Thrasher, first thanks for the straightforward answer. Also, when you have

a chance can you please answer

/message/83935 (if you know

the answer)

[Guest guest]

So in plain language what you are telling me is that the answer to my question

> When we talk about Stachybotrys chartarum and Chaetomium globosum

contamination are we generally talking an order of magnitude of 50-100 or more

like 10 000-100 000 spore equiv/mg?

>

> Or is the thinking that anything above 15-20 likely represent growth from

water damage, and at that point the amount of toxins they produce have a very

poor correlation to the amount of spores recovered in dust (when the molds are

not visible)?

is the last option? And the only way to know for sure if Stachybotrys

chartarum/Chaetomium globosum are producing lots of mycotoxins in my former

office is to test for macrocyclic tricothecene/chaetoglobosins? If so, I think

it is more accurate to test them via urine than from an air sample (as in Brasel

et al).

As for why I'm supposedly not concerned about Actinomyctes and exotoxins, my

main reasons are

1) No one appears to know how to get rid of the toxins they might produce

2) Even less is known about environmental endotoxins than environmental

mycotoxins - which is already not much

3) Environmental testing for these bacterias/toxins is extremely primitive -

human testing is not that much better

4) some human testing regarding cytokines response to LPS/LOS is starting to be

reliable enough to help - I'm actually doing the test

https://www.neurorelief.com/index.php?option=com_content & task=view & id=550 this

coming Tuesday

5) with the nuclear load of 2/3rd generations antibiotics/antifungals I'm taking

for lyme disease and coinfections, and starting IV in a month, my antibiotic

treatment would not change even if I found out I had Mycobacterium tuberculosis

or whatever other mycobacterium/nocardia/Streptomyces/etc.

If you have PRACTICAL suggestions, I'm listening.

[Guest guest]

Btw it would only make sense to go through full-blown testing for VOCs,

exotoxins, etc if I was gonna hope to sue my university for giving me a sick

office - which is possible. How much would you charge to have everything you

mentionned tested at a reliability level that would hold in court? I also fear

it could be from electromagnetic pollution - as the office is right beside huge

servers.

[Guest guest]

I have spoken with you by telephone. I believe we came to an understanding of

what you need to do, including seeing Dr. Janette Hope in Santa Barbara.

It is best that we keep litigation details off of this board. Direct telecoms

are the best way to handle individual cases.

[] Re: Mold Testing - labs & methods

So in plain language what you are telling me is that the answer to my question

> When we talk about Stachybotrys chartarum and Chaetomium globosum

contamination are we generally talking an order of magnitude of 50-100 or more

like 10 000-100 000 spore equiv/mg?

>

> Or is the thinking that anything above 15-20 likely represent growth from

water damage, and at that point the amount of toxins they produce have a very

poor correlation to the amount of spores recovered in dust (when the molds are

not visible)?

is the last option? And the only way to know for sure if Stachybotrys

chartarum/Chaetomium globosum are producing lots of mycotoxins in my former

office is to test for macrocyclic tricothecene/chaetoglobosins? If so, I think

it is more accurate to test them via urine than from an air sample (as in Brasel

et al).

As for why I'm supposedly not concerned about Actinomyctes and exotoxins, my

main reasons are

1) No one appears to know how to get rid of the toxins they might produce

2) Even less is known about environmental endotoxins than environmental

mycotoxins - which is already not much

3) Environmental testing for these bacterias/toxins is extremely primitive -

human testing is not that much better

4) some human testing regarding cytokines response to LPS/LOS is starting to

be reliable enough to help - I'm actually doing the test

https://www.neurorelief.com/index.php?option=com_content & task=view & id=550 this

coming Tuesday

5) with the nuclear load of 2/3rd generations antibiotics/antifungals I'm

taking for lyme disease and coinfections, and starting IV in a month, my

antibiotic treatment would not change even if I found out I had Mycobacterium

tuberculosis or whatever other mycobacterium/nocardia/Streptomyces/etc.

If you have PRACTICAL suggestions, I'm listening.

[Guest guest]

Yes that was useful. I understand better now what you were writing and why. Such

boards are not perfect communication tools, on top of being in the public

domain. I'll go see Dr Hope and keep you posted about the other things. Thanks.

--- In , " Jack Thrasher, Ph.D. " <toxicologist1@...>

wrote:

>

> I have spoken with you by telephone. I believe we came to an understanding of

what you need to do, including seeing Dr. Janette Hope in Santa Barbara.

>

> It is best that we keep litigation details off of this board. Direct telecoms

are the best way to handle individual cases.

>