Re: Denaturing Mold Spores

[Guest guest]

,

I believe the scientific studies on

denaturing mold spores with heat is still speculative since the theory of

denaturing the antigen triggers is laboratory based, and further, the heat

process at 160 F appears to work on some mold spores and not all species of

mold spores.

As far as practical hands-on field studies

in moldy contaminated buildings, where stating the building has been denatured

of mold spore antigens, I do not know this has been scientifically proven to a

scientific degree that it is reproducible in the field.

Moffett

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

9:01 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Dust

Mites

:

Thanks for reminding me about sand fleas. Yes.....I now recall there were

similar arthropods that we got out of the Mojave desert, the Gobi

desert and the West African Desert that seemed to enjoy 140F. Sure glad

these biting, blood-sucking critters don’t live in the typical home here

in the U.S..

If I also recall, some were resistant to the typical pesticides at the

time too; except methyl bromide (which I tend to like). Regarding

references.....I’m not sure where it was all published. I was an

undergraduate working on a soil microbiology degree and the professors I slaved

for published the data somewhere, after I left. All I have to show for

the work is 10 to 12 large 3-ring binders of data in a storage locker. We

heated arthropods, nematodes, fungi, spores, and all sorts of soil-borne

organisms. I also conducted some heat studies, in later years, on methanogenic

bacteria due to its relevance to landfills and landfill fires, i.e., when the

landfill gets hot (from a subsurface fire) and the heat kills the methanogenic

bacteria, methane production in the affected area of the landfill drops off.

Very relevant if you are selling the methane and/or have a cogen facility

near the landfill. If you go the the ThermaPure web site (I think it is:

www.thermapure.com) they have a list of references, journals, and

compendiums with published studies related to heat and mortality, some of which

include professors I worked alongside; a long time ago. My general rule

of thumb is that 140F for 120-min kills most arthropods, and 150F kills most

fungi and bacterium, and 160F kills just about anything else hanging around

including denaturing most spores. Yes...the thermophillic and

mesothermophillic organisms can survive, maybe, and some of the heat resistant

spores (e.g., anthrax) can survive, but most of the problem bugs and pathogenic

organisms we are concerned with, don’t. When heating structures,

the higher the temp the more the problem there is with some engineered

architectural elements. Good old-fashioned dimensional timber, lath and

plaster, etc., do just fine.

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

On 11/8/06 4:56 PM, " Moffett " <pmoffettemeiaq>

wrote:

Mike,

I agree with your statement, because it sounds about right for the on-site

studies I done in the early 1980’s. If I remember, I found sand flees in

buildings harder to kill including the larva at that temperature. Please

provide me with references to your comments.

Thanks,

Moffett

From: iequality

[mailto:iequality ]

On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

2:45 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Dust Mites

Bob:

A great way to kill dust mites is to raise the temperature to 140F and hold it

there for 120 to 180 minutes. This will effectively kill all bugs in your

house and it will not harm most contents and architectural elements. Take

a look at the ThermaPure web site for additional info. This said, raising

the temp will kill them critters, but it does not necessarily remove the

bio-mass. A lot, maybe most >90%, of the bio-mass can be removed via

the aggressive conditions and cleaning methods employed by ThermaPure’s

technicians; which will be superior to just HEPA vacuuming. Albeit, there

will be some remains that are stubborn to remove. Whether or not what

remains can be aerosolized is a matter of debate. Killing the critters is

easy. Making the space “free” of dust mite remains is

altogether another chore. Same goes with powders or any other

“treatment.”

For what it is worth....

[Guest guest]

Raising the temperature to 140 degrees will definitely not do *anything* to neutralize mycotoxin buildups produced by molds over time. Trichothecene mycotoxins I have read, repeatedly, are exceedingly stable compounds, and even very high temperatures do not neutralize them. I don't know the relative longevity of aflatoxins/ochratoxins.. but I do think they tend to last much longer than most of us would wish..

The military has done research on decontaminating things contaminated with these toxins.. that would be the best place to find methods of neutralizing them, IMO.

,

I believe the scientific studies on

denaturing mold spores with heat is still speculative since the theory of

denaturing the antigen triggers is laboratory based, and further, the heat

process at 160 F appears to work on some mold spores and not all species of

mold spores.

As far as practical hands-on field studies

in moldy contaminated buildings, where stating the building has been denatured

of mold spore antigens, I do not know this has been scientifically proven to a

scientific degree that it is reproducible in the field.

Moffett

From: iequality@yahoogrou

ps.com [mailto:iequality@yahoogrou

ps.com] On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

9:01 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Dust

Mites

:

Thanks for reminding me about sand fleas. Yes.....I now recall there were

similar arthropods that we got out of the Mojave desert, the Gobi

desert and the West African Desert that seemed to enjoy 140F. Sure glad

these biting, blood-sucking critters don't live in the typical home here

in the U.S..

If I also recall, some were resistant to the typical pesticides at the

time too; except methyl bromide (which I tend to like). Regarding

references.....I'm not sure where it was all published. I was an

undergraduate working on a soil microbiology degree and the professors I slaved

for published the data somewhere, after I left. All I have to show for

the work is 10 to 12 large 3-ring binders of data in a storage locker. We

heated arthropods, nematodes, fungi, spores, and all sorts of soil-borne

organisms. I also conducted some heat studies, in later years, on methanogenic

bacteria due to its relevance to landfills and landfill fires, i.e., when the

landfill gets hot (from a subsurface fire) and the heat kills the methanogenic

bacteria, methane production in the affected area of the landfill drops off.

Very relevant if you are selling the methane and/or have a cogen facility

near the landfill. If you go the the ThermaPure web site (I think it is:

www.thermapure.com) they have a list of references, journals, and

compendiums with published studies related to heat and mortality, some of which

include professors I worked alongside; a long time ago. My general rule

of thumb is that 140F for 120-min kills most arthropods, and 150F kills most

fungi and bacterium, and 160F kills just about anything else hanging around

including denaturing most spores. Yes...the thermophillic and

mesothermophillic organisms can survive, maybe, and some of the heat resistant

spores (e.g., anthrax) can survive, but most of the problem bugs and pathogenic

organisms we are concerned with, don't. When heating structures,

the higher the temp the more the problem there is with some engineered

architectural elements. Good old-fashioned dimensional timber, lath and

plaster, etc., do just fine.

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

On 11/8/06 4:56 PM, " Moffett "

wrote:

Mike,

I agree with your statement, because it sounds about right for the on-site

studies I done in the early 1980's. If I remember, I found sand flees in

buildings harder to kill including the larva at that temperature. Please

provide me with references to your comments.

Thanks,

Moffett

From: iequality@yahoogrou

ps.com

[mailto:iequality ]

On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

2:45 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Dust Mites

Bob:

A great way to kill dust mites is to raise the temperature to 140F and hold it

there for 120 to 180 minutes. This will effectively kill all bugs in your

house and it will not harm most contents and architectural elements. Take

a look at the ThermaPure web site for additional info. This said, raising

the temp will kill them critters, but it does not necessarily remove the

bio-mass. A lot, maybe most >90%, of the bio-mass can be removed via

the aggressive conditions and cleaning methods employed by ThermaPure's

technicians; which will be superior to just HEPA vacuuming. Albeit, there

will be some remains that are stubborn to remove. Whether or not what

remains can be aerosolized is a matter of debate. Killing the critters is

easy. Making the space "free" of dust mite remains is

altogether another chore. Same goes with powders or any other

"treatment."

For what it is worth....

[Guest guest]

:

No disagreement. Studies are currently being done, some preliminary results are being published, and I expect that within two years there will be some significant, peer-reviewed studies in print regarding dry heat treatment in structures. One interesting issue that keeps cropping-up as some of these studies are performed, is what you elude to, i.e., heat inactivates some mold spores but not ALL species of mold spores, and heat works at denaturing some antigens but not all antigens. In fact, I have had some good scientists discredit heat because it does not kill ALL molds and/or it does not denature ALL antigens. I find this king of logic ironic. They ignore the benefits of inactivating/denaturing 90/70 percent of the target biomass, and instead focus on what was not accomplished. I know of no treatment or method that is 100 percent effective at everything. Yet that is what some people expect and want. Moreover, if heat, or any other treatment method, was 100 percent effective at inactivating all mold spores, and 100 percent effective at denaturing all antigens, could we not conclude that the treatment area was sterile post-treatment?!? I find this position a bit impractical and short sighted, i.e., sterility is not practical. We need to be satisfied with a practical level of control for a practical price, and accept that some biomass will be left behind. Dry heat treatment is not a panacea for all things. However, it does a lot of good at some things (e.g., drying things out), it can reach into inaccessible spaces, it does so without a lot of destruction, delay, and loss of use, and it does so at a very attractive price. For many applications, it fits my clients needs AND budget. I look forward to the peer-review studies coming out. There are some very significant folks currently studying heat’s affects inside the built environment for molds, arthropods, antigens, and asthma triggers. So far the data looks VERY exciting.

For what it is worth...

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

,

I believe the scientific studies on denaturing mold spores with heat is still speculative since the theory of denaturing the antigen triggers is laboratory based, and further, the heat process at 160 F appears to work on some mold spores and not all species of mold spores.

As far as practical hands-on field studies in moldy contaminated buildings, where stating the building has been denatured of mold spore antigens, I do not know this has been scientifically proven to a scientific degree that it is reproducible in the field.

Moffett

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:01 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Dust Mites

:

Thanks for reminding me about sand fleas. Yes.....I now recall there were similar arthropods that we got out of the Mojave desert, the Gobi desert and the West African Desert that seemed to enjoy 140F. Sure glad these biting, blood-sucking critters don’t live in the typical home here in the U.S.. If I also recall, some were resistant to the typical pesticides at the time too; except methyl bromide (which I tend to like). Regarding references.....I’m not sure where it was all published. I was an undergraduate working on a soil microbiology degree and the professors I slaved for published the data somewhere, after I left. All I have to show for the work is 10 to 12 large 3-ring binders of data in a storage locker. We heated arthropods, nematodes, fungi, spores, and all sorts of soil-borne organisms. I also conducted some heat studies, in later years, on methanogenic bacteria due to its relevance to landfills and landfill fires, i.e., when the landfill gets hot (from a subsurface fire) and the heat kills the methanogenic bacteria, methane production in the affected area of the landfill drops off. Very relevant if you are selling the methane and/or have a cogen facility near the landfill. If you go the the ThermaPure web site (I think it is: www.thermapure.com) they have a list of references, journals, and compendiums with published studies related to heat and mortality, some of which include professors I worked alongside; a long time ago. My general rule of thumb is that 140F for 120-min kills most arthropods, and 150F kills most fungi and bacterium, and 160F kills just about anything else hanging around including denaturing most spores. Yes...the thermophillic and mesothermophillic organisms can survive, maybe, and some of the heat resistant spores (e.g., anthrax) can survive, but most of the problem bugs and pathogenic organisms we are concerned with, don’t. When heating structures, the higher the temp the more the problem there is with some engineered architectural elements. Good old-fashioned dimensional timber, lath and plaster, etc., do just fine.

For what it is worth....

[Guest guest]

Quack:

First you say that heat “will not do anything to neutralize mycotoxin buildups..”, then you support this claim (opinion) with a foundation stating it is based on trichothecene stability. Are you inferring that trichoethecene is the ONLY mycotoxin produced by molds?

I believe you need to broaden your perspective of mycotoxins.

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

Raising the temperature to 140 degrees will definitely not do *anything* to neutralize mycotoxin buildups produced by molds over time.

Trichothecene mycotoxins I have read, repeatedly, are exceedingly stable compounds, and even very high temperatures do not neutralize them. I don't know the relative longevity of aflatoxins/ochratoxins.. but I do think they tend to last much longer than most of us would wish..

The military has done research on decontaminating things contaminated with these toxins.. that would be the best place to find methods of neutralizing them, IMO.

,

I believe the scientific studies on denaturing mold spores with heat is still speculative since the theory of denaturing the antigen triggers is laboratory based, and further, the heat process at 160 F appears to work on some mold spores and not all species of mold spores.

As far as practical hands-on field studies in moldy contaminated buildings, where stating the building has been denatured of mold spore antigens, I do not know this has been scientifically proven to a scientific degree that it is reproducible in the field.

Moffett

From: iequality@yahoogrou ps.com <http://ps.com> [mailto:iequality@yahoogrou ps.com <http://ps.com> ] On Behalf Of Geyer

Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:01 PM

To: iequality <http://ps.com>

Subject: Re: Dust Mites

:

Thanks for reminding me about sand fleas. Yes.....I now recall there were similar arthropods that we got out of the Mojave desert, the Gobi desert and the West African Desert that seemed to enjoy 140F. Sure glad these biting, blood-sucking critters don't live in the typical home here in the U.S.. If I also recall, some were resistant to the typical pesticides at the time too; except methyl bromide (which I tend to like). Regarding references.....I'm not sure where it was all published. I was an undergraduate working on a soil microbiology degree and the professors I slaved for published the data somewhere, after I left. All I have to show for the work is 10 to 12 large 3-ring binders of data in a storage locker. We heated arthropods, nematodes, fungi, spores, and all sorts of soil-borne organisms. I also conducted some heat studies, in later years, on methanogenic bacteria due to its relevance to landfills and landfill fires, i.e., when the landfill gets hot (from a subsurface fire) and the heat kills the methanogenic bacteria, methane production in the affected area of the landfill drops off. Very relevant if you are selling the methane and/or have a cogen facility near the landfill. If you go the the ThermaPure web site (I think it is: www.thermapure.com <http://www.thermapure.com> ) they have a list of references, journals, and compendiums with published studies related to heat and mortality, some of which include professors I worked alongside; a long time ago. My general rule of thumb is that 140F for 120-min kills most arthropods, and 150F kills most fungi and bacterium, and 160F kills just about anything else hanging around including denaturing most spores. Yes...the thermophillic and mesothermophillic organisms can survive, maybe, and some of the heat resistant spores (e.g., anthrax) can survive, but most of the problem bugs and pathogenic organisms we are concerned with, don't. When heating structures, the higher the temp the more the problem there is with some engineered architectural elements. Good old-fashioned dimensional timber, lath and plaster, etc., do just fine.

For what it is worth....

[Guest guest]

Hi , I think you were misunderstanding what I was getting at. I was responding because I often see various 'mold killing' solutions advertised (heat, biocides, etc.) that clearly, do not do anything to neutralize the mycotoxins that were produced already in the situation, and from what I have read, the living situations that are plagued by the worst mycotoxin situations are the ones where there was a long history of repeated moisture infiltrations followed by periods in which the mold dust, with mycotoxins in it, dried out and became airborne.. penetrating the entire structure and coating its contents.

From what I have read, indeed, 140 degree Fahrenheit heat does NOT do anything to neutralize the mycotoxins that I have read papers analyzing various methods of inactivating them. After all, 140 degrees Fahrenheit, although hot to the touch, and certainly too hot for humans (or most bugs, even, although as you said, not sand fleas!) is not so hot that it would cause many chemical compounds to break down.. This just seems like common sense to me. Sure, it may kill most mold spores in a situation, but some will survive.. I am sure.. And this heat will not do practically anything to resolve mycotoxin contamination.. Also, I am certainly familiar with the fact that there are many, many known mycotoxins.. hundreds if not thousands..(every scientist I have talked with about this has inserted the respectful - respectful of their DANGER- statement -'we are finding new ones all the time', BTW) and I might also posit that any biologically active substance has the potential to cause damage to humans under *some* set of circumstances.. although some, like trichothecene mycotoxins, for example, are so exceedingy toxic that they are 'prized' by the military forces and terrorists of the world because they are so 'good' at it.

BEING AMONG THE MOST TOXIC SUBSTANCES KNOWN TO MAN...Those substances need to be treated with extreme respect because it is absolutely insane to say that a situation that produces them is not harmful because " in America people are innocent until proven guilty " . (Is that the businessmans' logic, one based on his potential liability?)

That is in a sense, what people who insist that indoor mold toxins are harmless in the IAQ situation are doing, IMO. That is an approach that CAN'T CONTINUE BEING USED AS THE WAY WE DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM 'RATIONALLY'.

Why? Because many, many data points from hundreds of different places.. (NO, NOT HUMAN STUDEIES, WHY NOT, see below) a scientists logic tells us that these substances kill.. They are so toxic they do not exist in an environment without doing damage.. cumulative damage, to the people who encounter them biologically (through touch, inhalation, etc.) there..

One important point.. Animal (remember, they -how conveniently- CAN'T DO THESE STUDIES ON HUMANS BECAUSE IT WOULD KILL THEM) studies have shown that the inhalation route for mycotoxins is in general more toxic than the ingestion route.. (and absorbtion through the skin roughly comparable) so how can we ignore this? because big money wants us to ignore it, thats why.. Nomatter what the human cost of doing this is.. it is outweighed by the " golden rule " .. " those with the gold, rule " ..

But I'm getting emotional and off the subject..Let me get back on track.. I guess my main point was that responsible people who know the health hazards posed by indoor molds should not recommend heat-based 'solutions' for mold except only as one part of a multi-pronged plan that also includes complete removal of the products of mycotoxin production by the mold.. or PERMANENT and to all extent impervious encapsulation.. I suppose.. nomatter how expensive it is..it has to get done.. And in a porous (wood) building, that means from all wall cavities.. If that is what you do when you are cleaning up toxinogenic molds.. THANK YOU. If that is not what you do, you should strongly consider the implications of not doing it .. That is my point.. I think that often building owners who are desperate for a cheap, quick fix will fixate on them (the cheap fixes, the most pathetic being a quick splash of bleach on the wall..) as 'the solution' and that the indoor air quality field has a moral obligation to inform clients who might be tempted to use those solutions without removing the mycotoxins that they don't provide a complete solution.. especially if the root cause of the mold (

i.e. water/humidity, etc) is not addressed..I'm sorry if I'm not articulating myself too clearly but I am hypersensitive to mold now, and having just had to do some hunting through my (wrapped in plastic, boxed up) mycotoxin contaminated belongings from my old apartment I now have a raging headache and am having a 'bad mold day'.

How is that for a broad perspective on mycotoxins, Mr. Geyer? After two moves, and untold months of work in trying to clean up the smell and address in some way the knockout punch they represented to my health, I am still living with them. And not by my choice, either.

And if I seem to be writing a disconnected mess of words, let me confess, I wasn't always this way.. I am now because living with trichothecene mycotoxins has done things to my ability to express myself clearly.. And I AM going through MAINSTREAM medical channels trying to figure what happened out and find out of there is any way to address it... BTW.Its not something that has been hashed out yet but it definitely does happen...

Quack:

First you say that heat "will not do anything to neutralize mycotoxin buildups..", then you support this claim (opinion) with a foundation stating it is based on trichothecene stability. Are you inferring that trichoethecene is the ONLY mycotoxin produced by molds?

I believe you need to broaden your perspective of mycotoxins.

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

On 11/9/06 5:35 PM, " LiveSimply " <quackadilliangmail> wrote:

Raising the temperature to 140 degrees will definitely not do *anything* to neutralize mycotoxin buildups produced by molds over time.

Trichothecene mycotoxins I have read, repeatedly, are exceedingly stable compounds, and even very high temperatures do not neutralize them. I don't know the relative longevity of aflatoxins/ochratoxins.. but I do think they tend to last much longer than most of us would wish..

The military has done research on decontaminating things contaminated with these toxins.. that would be the best place to find methods of neutralizing them, IMO.