Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 No, it's the opinion of many based on what chemo and radiation due to the body, but I don't believe there is any proof. > Most die > from treatment rather than cancer. > > Barb, this is an accurate epidemiology stat from somewhere? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision- targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, President Air Intellect Tallahassee, Florida Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 Barb, I work often for insurers as well as other parties. In today’s need for disclosure, in my reports, I now provide a section on my biases in working for a particular party including limits of the investigation and when required, sampling and analysis. Meaning, stating what my assignment is and is not, and how I intend or achieved my conclusions, is part of the “foundation” of my report. This way, I do not get in the crossfire between one or more parties and other experts when two years from now, my reports become part of a future litigation case. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of barb1283 Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:43 AM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " That the insurance company is party that is trying to be pleased is true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an ideal time to throw that in.). > > Good point, . > Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance company > and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification > report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client? My > attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check. > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 Barb, It’s all about a known or unknown bias. Complaints that we hear in the health industry are the carriers drive the services. I can see their (the carriers) point when it comes to cost. I can see the insured’s side when it comes to care. I can see the provider’s end when it comes to payments. Each has their biases. Now when it comes to contractor where do his/her biases derive? It’s about who is writing the check. rs are never the payer. All proceeds are to be directed to the insured (per contracture language) unless an authorization has been signed by the insured for direct payments. One must suffer a loss to be reimbursed. Your health insurance is exactly that, insuring your health (present and future). If your health suffers a loss (you get sick) the carrier pays for the loss (doctor’s visit). Technically the payments are being reimbursed back to the insured for any cost paid out (or expected to be paid out). Because the industry knows most insured do not have the money to pay directly and seek reimbursement, they may feel they are able to offer more pressure to the end of securing better pricing. So any contractor that thinks he/she is really working for the carrier is misinformed (or is the public). Bob/Ma. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of barb1283 Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:43 AM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " That the insurance company is party that is trying to be pleased is true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an ideal time to throw that in.). > > Good point, . > Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance company > and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification > report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client? My > attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check. > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 Lila C. Albin, Ph.D Senior Industrial Hygienist Dept. REM Purdue University 550 Stadium Mall Dr. West Lafayette IN 47907-2051 phone: fax: From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of envconsultingSent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:39 AMTo: iequality Subject: Re: "Mold Free" I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, PresidentAir IntellectTallahassee, Florida Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 CMHC (the Canadian federal housing agency) also supports the use of the least toxic approach. There are so few things that we know for sure about many of the chemicals in use that to use few unless there are no alternatives makes a great deal of sense. Although it is not an easy site to negotiate, all in this group should know the CMHC site well (enter through www.cmhc.ca and spend some time there). I helped contribute to much of the earlier health and housing work and believe that it is still quite good. Work goes on without me. Jim H. White SSC Re: "Mold Free" I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, PresidentAir IntellectTallahassee, Florida Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 A pathologist from WI who works mostly with tricothecenes recommended to me ammonia for decontaminating surfaces. Since mycotoxins have described to be sticky substances, one wonders if the grease cutting properties of similar type cleaners would be good for decontaminating mycos. Just a reader here. No credentials. Cancer survivor (so far) who lived in moldy house unknowingly for 15 years. > > Lila C. Albin, Ph.D > Senior Industrial Hygienist > Dept. REM > Purdue University > 550 Stadium Mall Dr. > West Lafayette IN 47907-2051 > phone: > fax: > > ________________________________ > From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of envconsulting > > I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be > worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through > their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke > down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 There was a good study presented in 2006 on bleach denaturing several allergens (including mold) by aerosol spraying. Tony ....................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC 5250 E US 36, Suite 830 Avon, IN 46123 off fax cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM) This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Albin, Lila C Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:59 PM To: 'iequality ' Subject: RE: " Mold Free " Lila C. Albin, Ph.D Senior Industrial Hygienist Dept. REM Purdue University 550 Stadium Mall Dr. West Lafayette IN 47907-2051 phone: fax: From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of envconsulting Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:39 AM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision- targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, President Air Intellect Tallahassee, Florida Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 , Wise decision. Bob/Ma. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Moffett Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:49 PM To: iequality Subject: RE: " Mold Free " Barb, I work often for insurers as well as other parties. In today’s need for disclosure, in my reports, I now provide a section on my biases in working for a particular party including limits of the investigation and when required, sampling and analysis. Meaning, stating what my assignment is and is not, and how I intend or achieved my conclusions, is part of the “foundation” of my report. This way, I do not get in the crossfire between one or more parties and other experts when two years from now, my reports become part of a future litigation case. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of barb1283 Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:43 AM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " That the insurance company is party that is trying to be pleased is true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an ideal time to throw that in.). > > Good point, . > Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance company > and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification > report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client? My > attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check. > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 why " off-line " ? that's nonsense. post it (or them here) for all the world to see. we've asked before, again and again. what the h*%@ is " strong bleach " ? straight out of the bottle? 50% dilution? we'll believe it when we see it. > > Jim, > > I will contact you with the references off line. I have several. Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to dry after bleach-treating? As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins left to denature. You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks. Steve Temes , The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as "preventative treatments". Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 , The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as "preventative treatments". Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of gary rosenSent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:19 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: "Mold Free" Jim, I will contact you with the references off line. I have several. Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does. Re: " Mold Free"> > > > Thanks Amy,> > > > I get many clients that are chemically sensitive and mold > > sensitive... . perhaps 1/2 of my work. Most of my co-workers don't > > want to deal with them due to liability issues or they price work > too > > high. > > > > Many people on this chat board argue that all remediation work > should > > be done by groups of people with separate specialties: Assessment, > > Remediation, HVAC & Reconstruction. I have found that careful work > > with one reponsible party (and good prices because many such people > > have limited funds) is the key to servicing this group of sensitive > > people with their special requirements. Our firm does the > assessment, > > remediation, post-remedation testing, sealing and cleaning of > supply > > and return air plenums and reconstruction all ourselves. So we can > > be very competitive on the price (when we have to) and still do a > > good job.> > > > We focus on removal of problem materials and replacement with new. > We > > are very careful to investigate and find solutions forproblems with > > HVAC systems and ducting. And we only use household cleaners such > as > > Tilex and Lysol that do not leave any residues. We explain that > > sometimes the work and cleaning are an iterative process and we > > always follow up and return phone calls with advice and provide an > > unconditional 1 year warranty on the work. > > > > Of coursehaving a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and having written 5 books > > on mold does help with the group of clients! > > > > Rosen, Ph.D.> > www.Mold-Books. com> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----> > From: barb1283 <barb1283yahoo (DOT) com>> > To: iequality@yahoogrou ps.com> & g Release Date: > > 2/25/2007 3:16 PM> > > > > > > > > > > > Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.> > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. Never miss an email again!Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Curtis, One conclusion I have discovered by participating on this list is when science and supportive data conflicts with one’s profits it seems trying to get the science across really become the greater challenge. Bob/Ma. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Redington, Curtis Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 10:19 AM To: iequality Subject: RE: " Mold Free " , The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as " preventative treatments " . Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health Re: " Mold Free " Jim, I will contact you with the references off line. I have several. Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does. Re: " Mold Free " > > > > Thanks Amy, > > > > I get many clients that are chemically sensitive and mold > > sensitive... . perhaps 1/2 of my work. Most of my co-workers don't > > want to deal with them due to liability issues or they price work > too > > high. > > > > Many people on this chat board argue that all remediation work > should > > be done by groups of people with separate specialties: Assessment, > > Remediation, HVAC & Reconstruction. I have found that careful work > > with one reponsible party (and good prices because many such people > > have limited funds) is the key to servicing this group of sensitive > > people with their special requirements. Our firm does the > assessment, > > remediation, post-remedation testing, sealing and cleaning of > supply > > and return air plenums and reconstruction all ourselves. So we can > > be very competitive on the price (when we have to) and still do a > > good job. > > > > We focus on removal of problem materials and replacement with new. > We > > are very careful to investigate and find solutions forproblems with > > HVAC systems and ducting. And we only use household cleaners such > as > > Tilex and Lysol that do not leave any residues. We explain that > > sometimes the work and cleaning are an iterative process and we > > always follow up and return phone calls with advice and provide an > > unconditional 1 year warranty on the work. > > > > Of coursehaving a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and having written 5 books > > on mold does help with the group of clients! > > > > Rosen, Ph.D. > > www.Mold-Books. com > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: barb1283 <barb1283yahoo (DOT) com> > > To: iequality@yahoogrou ps.com > & g Release Date: > > 2/25/2007 3:16 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited. > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas that certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab. They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach. The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or 3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7. Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores (I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe, takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness if my memory serves. This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of our " borrowed " processes probably need a little more work before applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use one. It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like a " chemical bleachy " odor. So it is less offensive than a " straight up " bleach water mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 If bleach were not a powerful caustic it would not work as well. We always rinse with water that includes a quat disinfectant. Rinsing is not a problem. We then ecapsulate. Electrical boxes have thick galvanize and are not affected by bleach. High hat (that's the metal material you nail ceiling sheetrock to) is easily tarnished by bleach but half the time that is tarnished anyway and I have never had a problem with complaints about high hat tarnishing. Rosen, Ph.D. www.Mold-Books.com Re: "Mold Free" It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to dry after bleach-treating?As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins left to denature.You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks.Steve TemesIn a message dated 3/1/2007 10:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, credingtonwichita (DOT) gov writes: , The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as "preventative treatments". Curtis Redington, RSEnvironmental Quality SpecialistCity of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health It's here! Your new message!Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 Dana, The EPA link on using bleach to decontaminate anthrax is at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/chemicals/bleachfactsheet.htmThe article is called: "Bleach; Use of Bleach in Anthrax Decontamination" Rosen, Ph.D. www.Mold-Books.com Re: "Mold Free" Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas that certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab. They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach. The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or 3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7. Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores (I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe, takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness if my memory serves.This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of our "borrowed" processes probably need a little more work before applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use one.It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like a "chemical bleachy" odor. So it is less offensive than a "straight up" bleach water mix. Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debatein the Yahoo! Answers Food Drink Q&A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 This is sad. EPA should know better than to call it “Anthrax” decontamination. Anthrax is a disease, you don’t decontaminate it. Bacillus anthracis is the agent. Tony ....................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC 5250 E US 36, Suite 830 Avon, IN 46123 off fax cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM) This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of gary rosen Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 4:16 AM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " Dana, The EPA link on using bleach to decontaminate anthrax is at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/chemicals/bleachfactsheet.htm The article is called: " Bleach; Use of Bleach in Anthrax Decontamination " Rosen, Ph.D. www.Mold-Books.com Re: " Mold Free " Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas that certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab. They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach. The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or 3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7. Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores (I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe, takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness if my memory serves. This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of our " borrowed " processes probably need a little more work before applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use one. It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like a " chemical bleachy " odor. So it is less offensive than a " straight up " bleach water mix. Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q & A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 , Wrong. It works better if you lower the pH to get more free Cl. Common household bleach (sodium hypochlorite) has a pH of 12 to prolong its shelf life. To achieve effective sporicidal activity, bleach must be diluted with water to increase the free available chlorine and acetic acid to change the pH of the solution to 7. See: Inactivation of Bacillus anthracis Spores, Emerg Infect Diseases 9(6). 2003. Sagripanti J, Bonifacino A. Comparative sporicidal effects of liquid chemical agents. Appl Environ Microbiol 1996;62:545–51. Tony ....................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC 5250 E US 36, Suite 830 Avon, IN 46123 off fax cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM) This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of gary rosen Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 5:57 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: " Mold Free " If bleach were not a powerful caustic it would not work as well. We always rinse with water that includes a quat disinfectant. Rinsing is not a problem. We then ecapsulate. Electrical boxes have thick galvanize and are not affected by bleach. High hat (that's the metal material you nail ceiling sheetrock to) is easily tarnished by bleach but half the time that is tarnished anyway and I have never had a problem with complaints about high hat tarnishing. Rosen, Ph.D. www.Mold-Books.com Re: " Mold Free " It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to dry after bleach-treating? As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins left to denature. You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks. Steve Temes In a message dated 3/1/2007 10:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, credingtonwichita (DOT) gov writes: , The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as " preventative treatments " . Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 3, 2007 Report Share Posted March 3, 2007 ...and the best way, or one good way, is to do this is to add vinegar? > > , > > Wrong. It works better if you lower the pH to get more free Cl. > 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.