press release Universal Detection Technology Adds Mold Detection Device to Bioha

[Guest guest]

How much???

From: KC <tigerpaw2c@...>

Subject: [] press release Universal Detection Technology Adds Mold

Detection Device to Bioha

Date: Monday, July 12, 2010, 6:35 PM

press release

July 12, 2010, 4:00 p.m. EDT · Recommend · Post:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/universal-detection-technology-adds-mold-detect\

ion-device-to-biohazard-detection-product-catalog-2010-07-12?reflink=MW_news_stm\

p

Universal Detection Technology Adds Mold Detection Device to Biohazard Detection

Product Catalog

[Guest guest]

KC: be careful about presenting this type of detection kit. There are too many

variables for this to be reliable. What about wall cavities, species,

mycotoxins, bacteria, fine particulates and other contamaninants?

Jack-Dwayne: Thrasher, Ph.D.

Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist

www.drthrasher.org

toxicologist1@...

Off: 916-745-4703

Cell: 575-937-1150

L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC

Trauma Specialist

sandracrawley@...

916-745-4703 - Off

775-309-3994 - Cell

This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered

privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message

(and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited

and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been

served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this

message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the

miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed.

Thank you in advance for your compliance.

[Guest guest]

I agree Dr. Thrasher. I just posted this info for you and others to see along

with any opinions and other comments. Thats it. If the product is faulty in any

way I'm sure some one will help inform the rest of us.

KC

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

wrote:

>

> KC: be careful about presenting this type of detection kit. There are too

many variables for this to be reliable. What about wall cavities, species,

mycotoxins, bacteria, fine particulates and other contamaninants?

>

> Jack-Dwayne: Thrasher, Ph.D.

> Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist

> www.drthrasher.org

> toxicologist1@...

> Off: 916-745-4703

> Cell: 575-937-1150

>

>

> L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC

> Trauma Specialist

> sandracrawley@...

> 916-745-4703 - Off

> 775-309-3994 - Cell

>

>

>

>

> This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered

privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message

(and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited

and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been

served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this

message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the

miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed.

Thank you in advance for your compliance.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

KC,

It's not so much that it's faulty, it just gives the impression it is a

definitive test.

Actually, it is definitive, but not to determine if the house is safe or

not. It is definitive for only a very few species of a couple of mold

genera, only when the spores are present, and only when actually

collected.

It doesn't detect any other species of mold which are equally of

concern, bacteria, or other growth. And, as Dr Thrasher states, it

can't find mold behind and inside structures.

The problem is that without knowing the subtleties the advertising

leads one to believe that if the test shows no results then there is

no mold and the house is safe. Nothing would be further from the

truth.

Again, it comes back to what question do you want answered.

The only question this test can answer is: Have I collected spores

of these specific species? If so, then I collected a minimum of

100,000 of them.

For those of you who like to use settling plates you get concerned

with a half dozen or so spores growing on one plate. Imagine

100,000! I think there would be other indicators present so

obvious that testing isn't necessary or useful: Like visible mold

and water damage.

On the other hand, this could be very valuable for a physician if a

patient has a fungal infection (not just an exposure but mold

growing inside the body) and the species of mold in the body has

been identified. Then the question becomes, Is that species in

the patient's home? That might be very useful. (might).

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

I agree Dr. Thrasher. I just posted this info for you and others to see along

with any opinions and other comments. Thats it. If the product is faulty in any

way I'm sure some one will help inform the rest of us.

KC

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

wrote:

>

> KC: be careful about presenting this type of detection kit. There are too many

variables for this to be reliable. What about wall cavities, species,

mycotoxins, bacteria, fine particulates and other contamaninants?

>

> Jack-Dwayne: Thrasher, Ph.D.

> Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist

> www.drthrasher.org

> toxicologist1@...

> Off: 916-745-4703

> Cell: 575-937-1150

>

>

> L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC

> Trauma Specialist

> sandracrawley@...

> 916-745-4703 - Off

> 775-309-3994 - Cell

>

>

>

>

> This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered

privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message

(and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited

and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been

served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this

message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the

miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed.

Thank you in advance for your compliance.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Its still hard for me to articulate everything I have read over the last 3

yrs.so bare with me.

When the fungi they mentioned is found it is always is combined with an array of

other toxins,endotoxins,bacteria, etc.etc.etc.

To me if someone used that and was properly educated and found any type of

stachy they would tell me to get the hell out and leave everything.

thoughts?

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

Subject: Re: [] Re: press release Universal Detection Technology

Adds Mold Detection Device to Bioha

Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 8:18 PM

It's not so much that it's faulty, it just gives the impression it is a

definitive test.

Actually, it is definitive, but not to determine if the house is safe or not. It

is definitive for only a very few species of a couple of mold genera, only when

the spores are present, and only when actually

collected.

[Guest guest]

I hear ya Carl about the count. I wouldn't like hearing something indicating

hundreds of spores, let alone thousands, although I know outside there can be

thousands in a square meter.

On other comment, it could be useful 'vice versa', if there is a high count of

something in home, it could be useful for doctor to know what to test patient

for. One thing I learned is one of the problems doctor has in figuring out what

is ailing someone is to have some idea to test for, since there are different

tests for different pathogens, so the doc has to have a good idea of what

pathogen may be present in order to run the right test, (and they almost never

consider mold because they are told not to), so could be useful that way. I

hear insurance companies can get upset with doctors running a lot of tests that

come out negative.

>

> For those of you who like to use settling plates you get concerned

> with a half dozen or so spores growing on one plate. Imagine

> 100,000! I think there would be other indicators present so

> obvious that testing isn't necessary or useful: Like visible mold

> and water damage.

>

> On the other hand, this could be very valuable for a physician if a

> patient has a fungal infection (not just an exposure but mold

> growing inside the body) and the species of mold in the body has

> been identified. Then the question becomes, Is that species in

> the patient's home? That might be very useful. (might).

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

> -----

[Guest guest]

a,

Yes you are correct but no there are some subtle errors. You are

generally correct and are understanding the critical point that

there is more to dampness than just mold growth. But your first

statement is relying on something too specific and the second

one is a generalization which frequently isn't true.

I found it difficult to respond clearly and this is my third attempt at

trying to write in a way that doesn't get all garbled in overly

technical distinctions. So I'll try it this way.

You said: " When the fungi they mentioned is found it is always is

combined with an array of other toxins,endotoxins,bacteria,

etc.etc.etc. "

That is an important point and I'm glad you understand it is more

than just mold.

But I'd re-write it this way, " When fungal growth of any kind is

found and especially if it has been there a long time, it can be

assumed it is combined with an array of other toxins... etc...

Therefore, I would not limited my verificaton of presence or of a

successful removal to testing for just mold. "

The problem with " the fungi they mentioned " is their test should

never be used in the first place unless you need to look only and

specifically for the handful of species they can detect. If you are

going to test for any other reason, use anything but this test.

You said: " ...and found any type of stachy they would tell me to

get the hell out and leave everything. "

No I wouldn't. Not always. Just as it is misleading to be too

specific with mold vs the rest of the " filth, " it is misleading to focus

so intently on Stachybotrys chartarum.

Stachy, if growing, is usually more troublesome than many other

molds, but not always. And just because Stachy isn't found

(hundreds of reason why) doesn't mean there is no problem.

On the other hand, just because it is found doesn't mean there is

a huge resevoir of growth lurking somewhere in the house. Yes, I

know it isn't easily airborne and often a few spores does indicate

more, much like if you see one cockroach you can assume there

are others. But stray spores of Stachybotrys are frequently picked

up in samples, especially spore traps. Sometimes they are mis-

identified as Stachy when it is somethingelse. So just because

one is detected, doesn't always mean there is growth. More

information is needed to determine whether it is a stray or if it is

the tip of the iceberg.

HOWEVER, because you have been damaged by mold

exposure and are now extremely sensitive I'd probably tell YOU

to leave in just the way you worded it.

But that's not true for everyone. If it were most of the world would

be dead from Stachy exposure and we wouldn't have an

overpopulation problem. Especially in undeveloped countries.

I don't mean to dismiss Stachy, but I've seen hundreds of houses

and other buildings with growing Stachy and nobody is ill because

not all people react. Just like not all people who smoke always

die of lung cancer.

It is as much a mistake to focus intently on Stachy as it is to focus

on mold instead of the other components. The focus should be of

water damage and dampness. If it is stopped in a few days and

dried nothing will grow. What most of us on this group have

experienced is long term water damage and growth (sometimes

years!) and extensive medical harm from the " filth. "

I would be doing my clients and all of you in this group a gross

disservice if I were to always recommend you vacate your home

and leave everything behind if it were not necessary. Finding " any

type of Stachy " is not sufficient reason to destroy a persons life

and home. But when it is *otherwise* determined (more than just

a lab sample) that such extreme actions are necessary, then by

all means get out! It takes more than a sample to determine this.

Going back to the beginning, it depends on the building, the

materials, time, temperature, moisture AND the occupants.

So in general I agree with your conclusions, but there are

specifics which are too important to ignore.

If I've only confused you, let me know and I'll again. Maybe

eventually I can figure out how to say it more clearly.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

Its still hard for me to articulate everything I have read over the last 3

yrs.so bare with me.

When the fungi they mentioned is found it is always is combined with an

array of other toxins,endotoxins,bacteria, etc.etc.etc.

To me if someone used that and was properly educated and found any

type of stachy they would tell me to get the hell out and leave everything.

thoughts?

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

Subject: Re: [] Re: press release Universal Detection

Technology Adds Mold Detection Device to Bioha

Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 8:18 PM

It's not so much that it's faulty, it just gives the impression it is a

definitive test.

Actually, it is definitive, but not to determine if the house is safe or not. It

is definitive for only a very few species of a couple of mold genera, only

when the spores are present, and only when actually

collected.

----------

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: 16 Jun 2009, 0:10

Size: 358 bytes.

Type: Unknown

[Guest guest]

Barb,

I generally agree but the mold tests would need to be for species

and there are hundreds of species for just Penicillium and

Aspergillus. It would take several samples with different agar

(food in the culture plate) at different temperature and humidity

conditions to hopefully grow most of what might be present. If it is

an infection problem then I'd focus on the Aspergillus species.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

I hear ya Carl about the count. I wouldn't like hearing something indicating

hundreds of spores, let alone thousands, although I know outside there can be

thousands in a square meter.

On other comment, it could be useful 'vice versa', if there is a high count of

something in home, it could be useful for doctor to know what to test patient

for. One thing I learned is one of the problems doctor has in figuring out what

is ailing someone is to have some idea to test for, since there are different

tests for different pathogens, so the doc has to have a good idea of what

pathogen may be present in order to run the right test, (and they almost never

consider mold because they are told not to), so could be useful that way. I hear

insurance companies can get upset with doctors running a lot of tests that come

out negative.

>

> For those of you who like to use settling plates you get concerned

> with a half dozen or so spores growing on one plate. Imagine

> 100,000! I think there would be other indicators present so

> obvious that testing isn't necessary or useful: Like visible mold

> and water damage.

>

> On the other hand, this could be very valuable for a physician if a

> patient has a fungal infection (not just an exposure but mold

> growing inside the body) and the species of mold in the body has

> been identified. Then the question becomes, Is that species in

> the patient's home? That might be very useful. (might).

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

> -----

----------

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: 16 Jun 2009, 0:10

Size: 358 bytes.

Type: Unknown