Re: Ticking Clock- Was: Re: How would you test this mcs safe ...

[Guest guest]

Joe,

You bring up an interesting point about posting on chatboards. I read

your posts. Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don't. People tend to

respond to posts with which they do not agree. But, that doesn't mean

anyone has a reverse fan club of naysayers. Sorry if you were made feel that

way.

And Carl, absolutely right. Many diverse exposures. Many diverse

reactions. Many diverse illnesses. The problem this causes is not that one must

burn down the house to get rid of the mold, etc. It is that because of the

unknown, when someone is extremely ill or vulnerable to become even sicker

(like my daughter with cystic fibrosis), sometimes it is just not worth the

risk to find out if a possession such as a house can be made safe for

occupancy again or not.

When people say " you can never go home again " , it needs to be made clear

that just because a house is not safe for one family anymore because of

special circumstances or acquired susceptibilities - it does not necessarily

mean it is not safe for another family.

I think it is important, particularly for new people on this board, to

understand the difference.

Sharon

In a message dated 10/16/2010 3:58:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

grimes@... writes:

Joe,

You probably consider me as one of your " fan club " who tells

others to ignore you. Actually, in this case, I agree strongly with

you about the " ticking clock. "

What you describe below is a common occurance which traps

those whose bodies can't easily and quickly recover. They need

to be aware of it and continue to take precautions.

When I disagree is when you post on the " ticking time bomb " of

inevitable death with any subsequent exposure.

For the record, I also disagree with others who equate the rare

fungal infection with the all too common allergic reaction or

asthma trigger; with the accompanying assumption we should

respond to all exposures as if we have the dreaded worst case.

Or who equate any reaction at any time to only mold. Or those

who equate any reaction at any time to only chemicals. Or only

dust mites.

There is a broad range of exposures and a broad range of

reactions. It is important to be as accurate as possible to insure

we are fixing the right problem.

There is a broad range of impact from any of the above. It is

important to be as accurate as possible to insure we are fixing

what needs to be fixed without over fixing the minor. Few of us

have the financial resources to err on the side of extreme

protection.

There is a broad range, unfortunately, of how contractors

remediate water damaged and mold infested buildings. It is

important to be as accurate as possible about what works under

which circumstances with what individuals to insure the right

problem is being addressed in a manner that the occupant can

re-enter without reaction. It is possible and is the most common

occurance - even when done with lousy work practices. Or,

determine if that is likely.

In other words, the presence of mold growth doesn't always

mean we should burn down the house before it will kill us.

Once the general responses don't work and we begin to consider

the variabilities, we are in the realm of specifically individual

considerations. With specifically individual fixes. And specifically

individual understanding. So we need to figure out the

commonalities and what aren't.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

When I read your words, below: " ...we are out of the house, except for

returning to clear it out, fix it up, etc. ... " I felt sick to my stomach.

IMHO, based on my own personal experience, you are not familiar with my theory

of " the clock is ticking " .