Re: types of mold that have caused sickness

[Guest guest]

the types of mold found in my house were pretty common molds-----aspergillus and

alternaria.   as far as we know (not the horrible " black " mold that we all hear

about).   anyway, i guess if someone is a sensitive person----from what happened

to us----i believe that if you have a large spore count in your home of even

these common molds, i feel it can cause problems..  

From: TheBeth <thebethinator@...>

Subject: [] types of mold that have caused sickness

Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 5:01 AM

I was just wondering what types of mold have caused people in here to

get sick, if you were able to identify the exact cause.

[Guest guest]

The writeup by Vesper for the ERMI paper has a breakdown of mold

species that show up n QPCR vs. health problems.

Most of us who have had testing done have had many different molds show up,

each test is typically different..

I had stachybotrys and aspergillus/penicillium show up a lot, also many

others like Alternaria, ullocladium, cladasporidium, and a bunch of others..

On some of the tape lifts, stachybotrys and asp/pen was the max they show,

but on others, there wasn't any stachybotrys at all.. (what I thought was

stachy on one basement wall turned out to be ullocldium, in the room next to

it - slightly warmer, different time of year, a similar mat of mold was

stachy)

Lots of asp/pen in the air, that was the highest.. stachy too in some but

not all.. at that time tested..

Stachy shows up best on bulk tests, when you test the moldy sheetrock - for

example, or on tape lifts.. it is found much less in the air, unless its

dying.

[Guest guest]

Just to amplify what LiveSimply said, mere presence of typical

molds is not sufficient for there to be a problem.

The aspergillus/penicillium he mentioned is two genera of mold

which cannot be distinguished under a microscope. The penicillium

part is very common all the time. So in that case the question is

did it come from normal air or from a location indoor where it is

growing.

Stachybotrys, on the other had, is not common in the air although

occasional spores are present and will be collected. So detecting

Stachybotrys is usually an indication that there is a source

indoors.

Cladosporium is one of the most common molds indoors and outdoors.

Some consultants therefore say it is not a problem at any level. I

agree for " normal " levels but disagee if " above normal. " Which now

raises the question of what is " normal. " This is the tough one

with little agreement.

That said, if you are sensitized to one of those then you will

most likely be reacting at " normal " levels. If you are highly

sensitized you can react at below normal levels. I've had clients

who reacted after no more of the specific mold could be detected.

But further cleaning resulted improvement of complaints.

So the definitive answer is " It depends. " And this is why informed

interpretation is the key, not just numbers on a lab report.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

On Sat Dec 06 18:20:34 CST 2008, LiveSimply

<quackadillian@...> wrote:

> The writeup by Vesper for the ERMI paper has a breakdown

> of mold

> species that show up n QPCR vs. health problems.

>

> Most of us who have had testing done have had many different

> molds show up,

> each test is typically different..

>

> I had stachybotrys and aspergillus/penicillium show up a lot,

> also many

> others like Alternaria, ullocladium, cladasporidium, and a bunch

> of others..

> On some of the tape lifts, stachybotrys and asp/pen was the max

> they show,

> but on others, there wasn't any stachybotrys at all.. (what I

> thought was

> stachy on one basement wall turned out to be ullocldium, in the

> room next to

> it - slightly warmer, different time of year, a similar mat of

> mold was

> stachy)

>

> Lots of asp/pen in the air, that was the highest.. stachy too in

> some but

> not all.. at that time tested..

> Stachy shows up best on bulk tests, when you test the moldy

> sheetrock - for

> example, or on tape lifts.. it is found much less in the air,

> unless its

> dying.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Carl: Where on earth in the name of science did you and/or LiveSimply ever come

by this statement?

" Just to amplify what LiveSimply said, mere presence of typical molds is not

sufficient for there to be a problem. "

1) Aspergillus and Penicillium molds under the right environmental conditions

have the ability to give off mycotoxins, and the question is not specific to the

mold per se, but more specifically to the state of a person's particular current

health status and confounding factors such as: age, genetic strengths, previous

exposures to various molds and bacterias, old diseases and wounds,

immunocompetency, etc. Dr. Harriet Ammann (in whom my confidence and trust is

nearly equal to that of St. Theresa " states:

Molds can produce other secondary metabolites such as antibiotics and

mycotoxins. Antibiotics are isolated from mold (and some bacterial) cultures and

some of their bacteriotoxic or bacteriostatic properties are exploited

medicinally to combat infections.

Mycotoxins are also products of secondary metabolism of molds. They are not

essential to maintaining the life of the mold cell in a primary way (at least in

a friendly world), such as obtaining energy or synthesizing structural

components, informational molecules or enzymes. They are products whose function

seems to be to give molds a competitive advantage over other mold species and

bacteria. Mycotoxins are nearly all cytotoxic, disrupting various cellular

structures such as membranes, and interfering with vital cellular processes such

as protein, RNA and DNA synthesis. Of course they are also toxic to the cells of

higher plants and animals, including humans.

Mycotoxins vary in specificity and potency for their target cells, cell

structures or cell processes by species and strain of the mold that produces

them. Higher organisms are not specifically targeted by mycotoxins, but seem to

be caught in the crossfire of the biochemical warfare among mold species and

molds and bacteria vying for the same ecological niche.

Not all molds produce mycotoxins, but numerous species do (including some found

indoors in contaminated buildings). Toxigenic molds vary in their mycotoxin

production depending on the substrate on which they grow (Jarvis, 1990). The

spores, with which the toxins are primarily associated, are cast off in blooms

that vary with the mold's diurnal, seasonal and life cycle stage (Burge, 1990;

Yang, 1995). The presence of competitive organisms may play a role, as some

molds grown in monoculture in the laboratory lose their toxic potency (Jarvis,

1995). Until relatively recently, mold poisons were regarded with concern

primarily as contaminants in foods.

More recently concern has arisen over exposure to multiple mycotoxins from a

mixture of mold spores growing in wet indoor environments. Health effects from

exposures to such mixtures can differ from those related to single mycotoxins in

controlled laboratory exposures. Indoor exposures to toxigenic molds resemble

field exposures of animals more closely than they do controlled experimental

laboratory exposures. Animals in controlled laboratory exposures are healthy, of

the same age, raised under optimum conditions, and have only the challenge of

known doses of a single toxic agent via a single exposure route. In contrast,

animals in field exposures are of mixed ages, and states of health, may be

living in less than optimum environmental and nutritional conditions, and are

exposed to a mixture of toxic agents by multiple exposure routes. Exposures to

individual toxins may be much lower than those required to elicit an adverse

reaction in a small controlled exposure group of ten animals per dose group. The

effects from exposure may therefore not fit neatly into the description given

for any single toxin, or the effects from a particular species, of mold.

Field exposures of animals to molds (in contrast to controlled laboratory

exposures) show effects on the immune system as the lowest observed adverse

effect. Such immune effects are manifested in animals as increased

susceptibility to infectious diseases. It is important to note that almost all

mycotoxins have an immunosuppressive effect, although the exact target within

the immune system may differ. Many are also cytotoxic, so that they have route

of entry effects that may be damaging to the gut, the skin or the lung. Such

cytotoxicity may affect the physical defense mechanisms of the respiratory

tract, decreasing the ability of the airways to clear particulate contaminants

(including bacteria or viruses), or damage alveolar macrophages, thus preventing

clearance of contaminants from the deeper lung. The combined result of these

activities is to increase the susceptibility of the exposed person to infectious

disease, and to reduce his defense against other contaminants. They may also

increase susceptibility to cancer (Jakab et al., 1994). Because indoor samples

are usually comprised of a mixture of molds and their spores, it has been

suggested that a general test for cytotoxicity be applied to a total indoor

sample to assess the potential for hazard as a rough assessment (Gareis, 1995).

The following summary of toxins and their targets is adapted from and Moss

(1985), with a few additions from the more recent literature. While this

compilation of effects does not describe the effects from multiple exposures,

which could include synergistic effects, it does give a better idea of possible

results of mycotoxin exposure to multiple molds indoors.

Vascular system (increased vascular fragility, hemorrhage into body tissues, or

from lung, e.g., aflatoxin, satratoxin, roridins)

Digestive system (diarrhea, vomiting, intestinal hemorrhage, liver effects,

i.e., necrosis, fibrosis: aflatoxin; caustic effects on mucous membranes: T-2

toxin; anorexia: vomitoxin.

Respiratory system: respiratory distress, bleeding from lungs e.g.,

trichothecenes

Nervous system, tremors, incoordination, depression, headache, e.g., tremorgens,

trichothecenes.

Cutaneous system : rash, burning sensation sloughing of skin,

photosensitization, e.g., trichothecenes * Urinary system, nephrotoxicity, e.g.

ochratoxin, citrinin.

Reproductive system; infertility, changes in reproductive cycles, e.g. T-2

toxin, zearalenone.

Immune system: changes or suppression: many mycotoxins.

It should be noted that not all mold genera have been tested for toxins, nor

have all species within a genus necessarily been tested. Conditions for toxin

production varies with cell and diurnal and seasonal cycles and substrate on

which the mold grows, and those conditions created for laboratory culture may

differ from those the mold encounters in its environment.

Toxicity can arise from exposure to mycotoxins via inhalation of

mycotoxin-containing mold spores or through skin contact with the toxigenic

molds (Forgacs, 1972; Croft et al., 1986; Kemppainen et al., 1988 -1989). A

number of toxigenic molds have been found during indoor air quality

investigations in different parts of the world. Among the genera most frequently

found in numbers exceeding levels that they reach outdoors are Aspergillus,

Penicillium, Stachybotrys, and Cladosporium (Burge, 1986; et al., 1992;

Hirsh and Sosman, 1976; Verhoeff et al., 1992; et al., 1988; Gravesen et

al., 1999). Penicillium, Aspergillus and Stachybotrys toxicity, especially as it

relates to indoor exposures, will be discussed briefly in the paragraphs that

follow.

Penicillium Penicillium species have been shown to be fairly common indoors,

even in clean environments, but certainly begin to show up in problem buildings

in numbers greater than outdoors (Burge, 1986; et al., 1988; Flannigan

and , 1994). Spores have the highest concentrations of mycotoxins,

although the vegetative portion of the mold, the mycelium, can also contain the

poison. Viability of spores is not essential to toxicity, so that the spore as a

dead particle can still be a source of toxin. Important toxins produced by

penicillia include nephrotoxic citrinin, produced by P. citrinum, P. expansum

and P. viridicatum; nephrotoxic ochratoxin, from P. cyclopium and P.

viridicatum, and patulin, cytotoxic and carcinogenic in rats, from P. expansum

( and Moss, 1985).

Aspergillus Aspergillus species are also fairly prevalent in problem buildings.

This genus contains several toxigenic species, among which the most important

are, A. parasiticus, A. flavus, and A. fumigatus. Aflatoxins produced by the

first two species are among the most extensively studied mycotoxins. They are

among the most toxic substances known, being acutely toxic to the liver, brain,

kidneys and heart, and with chronic exposure, potent carcinogens of the liver.

They are also teratogenic ( and Moss, 1985; Burge, 1986). Symptoms of acute

aflatoxicosis are fever, vomiting, coma and convulsions ( and Moss, 1985).

A. flavus is found indoors in tropical and subtropical regions, and occasionally

in specific environments such as flowerpots. A. fumigatus has been found in many

indoor samples. A more common aspergillus species found in wet buildings is A.

versicolor, where it has been found growing on wallpaper, wooden floors,

fibreboard and other building material. A. versicolor does not produce

aflatoxins, but does produce a less potent toxin, sterigmatocystin, an aflatoxin

precursor (Gravesen et al., 1994). While symptoms of aflatoxin exposure through

ingestion are well described, symptoms of exposure such as might occur in most

moderately contaminated buildings are not know, but are undoubtedly less severe

due to reduced exposure. However, the potent toxicity of these agents advise

that prudent prevention of exposures are warranted when levels of aspergilli

indoors exceed outdoor levels by any significant amount. A. fumigatus has been

found in many indoor samples. This mold is more often associated with the

infectious disease aspergillosis, but this species does produce poisons for

which only crude toxicity tests have been done (Betina, 1989). Recent work has

found a number of tremorgenic toxins in the conidia of this species (Land et

al., 1994). A. ochraceus produces ochratoxins (also produced by some penicillia

as mentioned above). Ochratoxins damage the kidney and are carcinogenic (

and Moss, 1985).

Stachybotrys chartarum (atra) Stachybotrys chartarum (atra) has been much

discussed in the popular press and has been the subject of a number of building

related illness investigations. It is a mold that is not readily measured from

air samples because its spores, when wet, are sticky and not easily aerosolized.

Because it does not compete well with other molds or bacteria, it is easily

overgrown in a sample, especially since it does not grow well on standard media

(Jarvis, 1990). Its inability to compete may also result in its being killed off

by other organisms in the sample mixture. Thus, even if it is physically

captured, it will not be viable and will not be identified in culture, even

though it is present in the environment and those who breathe it can have toxic

exposures. This organism has a high moisture requirement, so it grows vigorously

where moisture has accumulated from roof or wall leaks, or chronically wet areas

from plumbing leaks. It is often hidden within the building envelope. When S.

chartarum is found in an air sample, it should be searched out in walls or other

hidden spaces, where it is likely to be growing in abundance. This mold has a

very low nitrogen requirement, and can grow on wet hay and straw, paper,

wallpaper, ceiling tiles, carpets, insulation material (especially

cellulose-based insulation). It also grows well when wet filter paper is used as

a capturing medium.

S. chartarum has a well-known history in Russia and the Ukraine, where it has

killed thousands of horses, which seem to be especially susceptible to its

toxins. These toxins are macrocyclic trichothecenes. They cause lesions of the

skin and gastrointestinal tract, and interfere with blood cell formation.

(Sorenson, 1993). Persons handling material heavily contaminated with this mold

describe symptoms of cough, rhinitis, burning sensations of the mouth and nasal

passages and cutaneous irritation at the point of contact, especially in areas

of heavy perspiration, such as the armpits or the scrotum (Andrassy et al.,

1979).

One case study of toxicosis associated with macrocyclic trichothecenes produced

by S. chartarum in an indoor exposure, has been published (Croft et al., 1986),

and has proven seminal in further investigations for toxic effects from molds

found indoors. In this exposure of a family in a home with water damage from a

leaky roof, complaints included (variably among family members and a maid)

headaches, sore throats, hair loss, flu symptoms, diarrhea, fatigue, dermatitis,

general malaise, psychological depression. (Croft et al, 1986; Jarvis, 1995).

Johanning, (1996) in an epidemiological and immunological investigation, reports

on the health status of office workers after exposure to aerosols containing S.

chartarum. Intensity and duration of exposure was related to illness.

Statistically significant differences for more exposed groups were increased

lower respiratory symptoms, dermatological, eye and constitutional symptoms,

chronic fatigue, and allergy history. Duration of employment was associated with

upper respiratory, skin and central nervous system disorders. A trend for

frequent upper respiratory infections, fungal or yeast infections, and urinary

tract infections was also observed. Abnormal findings for components of the

immune system were quantified, and it was concluded that higher and longer

indoor exposure to S. chartarum results in immune modulation and even slight

immune suppression, a finding that supports the observation of more frequent

infections.

(Source: Ammann, " More about mold, mold allergies, and toxigenic types of mold " ,

http://www.allergyconsumerreview.com/mold-information.html)

2) Aspergillus niger and Aspergillus fumigatus are nasty and plentiful in the

air, while Penicillium notatum is used to cure/control certain diseases. It is

not that each cannot be detected under a powerful electron microscope or

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) genetic analysis, they can. It is normally too

expensive to determine their specific bio-chemical phenotype characteristics.

(Source: http://www.emsltesting.com/EMSLPCRDocument.pdf)

(Google type:

" determining Aspergillus species phenotype physical characteristics " and the

same for Penicillium).

If you should take a piece of sheetrock and place it in water, you will soon

discover that Stachybotrys chartarum (atra) are very common in indoor habitats

(Along with Aspergillus/Penicillium). However, as long as water or moisture are

not applied, these toxigenic live-celled microbes are contained and cannot

inflict biological damage in humans. In the air, in the absence of contained

moisture, as long as they (i.e., Aspergillus/Penicillium) have direct heat,

sunlight, and adequate oxygen, they live and die peacefully.

Headed for church.

God Bless and take care.

Doug Haney

Bio-Health Research Psychologist.

>>>

@...: grimes@...: Sat, 6 Dec 2008

20:50:31 -0600Subject: Re: [] types of mold that have caused

sickness

Just to amplify what LiveSimply said, mere presence of typical molds is not

sufficient for there to be a problem.The aspergillus/penicillium he mentioned is

two genera of mold which cannot be distinguished under a microscope.

[Guest guest]

It is quite possible to have a bulding where people get sick that doesn't

show amplified mold growth in spore testing.. I think there is a huge

problem in that health issues and spores are not the same thing, but there

are clearly groups that are trying to make the two synonomous despite the

disconnect.

We all know fungal fragments are much more respirable, but they can't be

recognized under a microscope..

Also some toxins seem to persist for many years, probably even decades.. a

very serious mold problem might end up being almost impossible to clean up,

but spore tests would show clean..

[Guest guest]

Stachy was in my air samples in every room in my home.

>

> The writeup by Vesper for the ERMI paper has a breakdown of mold

> species that show up n QPCR vs. health problems.

>

> Most of us who have had testing done have had many different molds show up,

> each test is typically different..

>

> I had stachybotrys and aspergillus/penicillium show up a lot, also many

> others like Alternaria, ullocladium, cladasporidium, and a bunch of others..

> On some of the tape lifts, stachybotrys and asp/pen was the max they show,

> but on others, there wasn't any stachybotrys at all.. (what I thought was

> stachy on one basement wall turned out to be ullocldium, in the room next to

> it - slightly warmer, different time of year, a similar mat of mold was

> stachy)

>

> Lots of asp/pen in the air, that was the highest.. stachy too in some but

> not all.. at that time tested..

> Stachy shows up best on bulk tests, when you test the moldy sheetrock - for

> example, or on tape lifts.. it is found much less in the air, unless its

> dying.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

That is interesting and scary. What time of the day was it and what kind of

weather was outside, was it sunny or windy?

I'm also assuming you mean in spore trap testing with a vacuum pump.

How many spores/m3 ? And were the tests done while you were occupying the

house..

living there...

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:27 AM, semco_semco_semco <

semco_semco_semco@...> wrote:

> Stachy was in my air samples in every room in my home.

>

>

>

> >

> > The writeup by Vesper for the ERMI paper has a breakdown of mold

> > species that show up n QPCR vs. health problems.

> >

> > Most of us who have had testing done have had many different molds show

> up,

> > each test is typically different..

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Group,

Doug Haney and I have had an interesting conversation off-line

about the comment by LiveSimply, which I supported, which said

" mere presence of typical molds is not sufficient for there to be a

problem. "

Doug strongly disputed that, citing the myriad of issues for people

exposed to mold. I disagreed with his disagreement. You all know

how these things go.

The end result is I now understand his objection and I wish to

correct my statement. Which, I now agree, is actually contrary to

my position on mold as I've stated ad nauseum here and

elsewhere.

There is no such thing as the " mere presence " of mold. Mold is

always one of many parts of the total ecology of the indoor

environment. Even miniscule presence in the right environment

exposing a particular individual can be a huge concern.

The " mere presence " or lack of " mold data " from a lab, however,

isn't necessarily a concern because of all the reasons many of us

have previously stated, also ad nauseum, about the errors of

testing.

While this appears to be " mere symantics " there is, again, no

such thing. Symantics is important and it depends on the context.

Just as with mold, VOCs, dust mites, pet dander, toxins,

asbestos, lead paint and others.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

[Guest guest]

Carl: You are truly a remarkable environmental professional and as always, have

my greatest respect for your character, intellect, and professional abilities.

The Molecular Sciences are extremely complex and revolutionary in the world

spectrum. After now, 22-years of combined and formal and dedicated self-study of

these " New Frontier " fields; the last 10 being indepth medical, forensic, and

environmental research into mycology related to human health (i.e., accumulative

serious diseases) infused with indoor exposures, it is easy to understand why my

reactions to various insights/writings are often considered somewhat confusing

and " way out there. " My friends are those who do not take offense to my rants,

but take the opportunity to have me explain why I am stating things as I do.

Just as the men and women I served with in the military are considered a " band

of brothers (and sisters), " I feel much the same about all of the advocates,

doctors, attorneys, environmental professionals such as you who are working hard

in waging a great peaceful and academic Civil War against dishonesty, greed, and

adversive political deviancy whereby mere economics overrules practical science

and logic regarding indoor fungal exposures/fungal exposures in general and

human health. Thank you, and thank all of them. Because of this, victims truly

have a voice.

Respectfully,

Doug Haney

[Guest guest]

Well Stated Carl. I of course agree with doug on that as well. I think you might

agree though in my house there was not much else to do but react...

 

Chris...

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

       

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

Subject: RE: [] types of mold that have caused sickness

Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 11:47 PM

Dear Group,

Doug Haney and I have had an interesting conversation off-line

about the comment by LiveSimply, which I supported, which said

" mere presence of typical molds is not sufficient for there to be a

problem. "

Doug strongly disputed that, citing the myriad of issues for people

exposed to mold. I disagreed with his disagreement. You all know

how these things go.

The end result is I now understand his objection and I wish to

correct my statement. Which, I now agree, is actually contrary to

my position on mold as I've stated ad nauseum here and

elsewhere.

There is no such thing as the " mere presence " of mold. Mold is

always one of many parts of the total ecology of the indoor

environment. Even miniscule presence in the right environment

exposing a particular individual can be a huge concern.

The " mere presence " or lack of " mold data " from a lab, however,

isn't necessarily a concern because of all the reasons many of us

have previously stated, also ad nauseum, about the errors of

testing.

While this appears to be " mere symantics " there is, again, no

such thing. Symantics is important and it depends on the context.

Just as with mold, VOCs, dust mites, pet dander, toxins,

asbestos, lead paint and others.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

[Guest guest]

I don't remember saying it exactly like that but if I did, I was probably

thinking about studies Ive seen which

show that the mycotoxicity of several of the most toxinogenic molds is not

predictable by any factor EXCEPT the amount of water and food- esp. the

humidity

at which they grew at, molds produce mycotoxins to kill each other under

conditions of extreme competition and stress. Thats their function.

Also, humidity determines what species out of the ones there will dominate.

(These are the French and English versions of the same paper, it looks like)

* *Bull Acad Natl

Med.<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'jour',%20'Bull%20Acad%20Natl%20Med.');>2005

Jan;189(1):43-51; discussion 52-4.

Related

Articles<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & DbFrom=pubmed & Cmd=Li\

nk & LinkName=pubmed_pubmed & LinkReadableName=Related%20Articles & IdsFromResult=1611\

9879 & ordinalpos=1 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_\

RVAbstract>,

Links <javascript:PopUpMenu2_Set(Menu16119879);>

*[Wall relative humidity: a simple and reliable index for predicting

Stachybotrys chartarum infestation in dwellings]*

[Article in French]

*Charpin

D*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin\

%20D%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubme\

d_RVAbstract>,

*Boutin-Forzano

S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Boutin-\

Forzano%20S%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPane\

l.Pubmed_RVAbstract>,

*Chabbi

S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Chabbi%\

20S%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed\

_RVAbstract>,

*Dumon

H*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Dumon%2\

0H%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_\

RVAbstract>,

*Charpin-Kadouch

C*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin\

-Kadouch%20C%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPan\

el.Pubmed_RVAbstract>

..

Service de Pneumologie-allergologie, Hôpital Nord, Marseille.

As the indoor mold Stachybotrys chartarum (SC) has been linked to serious

health disorders, its identification in water-damaged dwellings is of utmost

importance. The aim of this work was to compare wall relative humidity (RH)

measurements with the results of mold identification studied on 458 samples

collected from 100 dwellings. Mold identification was based on direct

microscopic examination of wall samples collected by the gummed paper

technique. Mean (+/- SD) wall RH (%) was much higher (97.0 +/- 6.1) when SC

was identified (30 samples) than when other molds were identified (291

samples, 41.8 +/- 36.9) and when no molds were identified (137 samples, 38.9

+/- 34.8). There was a direct relationship between wall and room-air RH but

the scatter of results implies that the latter cannot be used as a surrogate

for the former. This study suggests that simple wall RH measurement can

serve as a reliable indicator of SC infestation of dwellings.

Publication Types:

- English

Abstract<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'English%20Abstract');>

- Research Support, Non-U.S.

Gov't<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'Research%20Support,%20Non-U.S.%20Gov\\

't');>

PMID: 16119879 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

------------------------------

*2: *Indoor Air.

<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'jour',%20'Indoor%20Air.');>2004

Jun;14(3):196-9.

Related

Articles<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & DbFrom=pubmed & Cmd=Li\

nk & LinkName=pubmed_pubmed & LinkReadableName=Related%20Articles & IdsFromResult=1510\

4787 & ordinalpos=2 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_\

RVAbstract>,

Links <javascript:PopUpMenu2_Set(Menu15104787);>

*Wall relative humidity: a simple and reliable index for predicting

Stachybotrys chartarum infestation in dwellings.*

*Boutin-Forzano

S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Boutin-\

Forzano%20S%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPane\

l.Pubmed_RVAbstract>,

*Charpin-Kadouch

C*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin\

-Kadouch%20C%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPan\

el.Pubmed_RVAbstract>,

*Chabbi

S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Chabbi%\

20S%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed\

_RVAbstract>,

*Bennedjai

N*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Bennedj\

ai%20N%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pub\

med_RVAbstract>,

*Dumon

H*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Dumon%2\

0H%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_\

RVAbstract>,

*Charpin

D*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin\

%20D%22%5BAuthor%5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubme\

d_RVAbstract>

..

Department of Chest Diseases and Allergy, Hôpital Nord, Marseille, France.

Because the indoor mold Stachybotrys chartarum has been considered as

potentially responsible for serious health effects, its identification in

dwellings with water damages is of utmost importance. As such dwellings are

many, it would be of great value to have a simple and reliable index for

predicting its presence. The aim of the study was to compare measurements of

wall relative humidity (RH) to mold identification in 458 samples from 100

dwellings. Mold identification was performed by direct microscopic

examination of a sample collected on the wall by the gummed paper technique.

Mean (+/- s.d.) wall RH (%) was much higher (97.0 +/- 6.1) on the 30 samples

where S. chartarum was identified compared with the 291 samples where other

molds were identified (41.8 +/- 36.9) and to the 137 samples where no molds

were identified (38.9 +/- 34.8). There was no straightforward relationship

between wall and room RH. In conclusion, this study clearly demonstrate that

the simple measurement of wall RH can be used as a reliable index for

discarding and suspecting S. chartarum infestation in dwellings. PRACTICAL

IMPLICATIONS: This paper suggests that very high relative humidity (RH)

within walls is a strong risk factor for their infestation with the 'toxic

mold' Stachybotrys chartarum. Besides, data from the literature demonstrate

that other molds are able to produce mycotoxins when RH is very high. Thus,

measurement of wall RH, which is easy to perform and very cheap, could be

used as a screening tool to select those dwellings where mold identification

should be performed and remediation should be promptly carried out.

Publication Types:

- Research Support, Non-U.S.

Gov't<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'Research%20Support,%20Non-U.S.%20Gov\\

't');>

PMID: 15104787 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[Guest guest]

Your house was a good example of how mold sampling

information is but one part of the picture. Although it was an

important part there were several other components of the " damp

indoor spaces " syndrome which mold sampling doesn't see. Your

reactivity and ultimate sensitization was a key part of this - which

is what Doug is emphasizing. The people who moved in

afterwards, although they " noticed " something, were not affected

as strongly as you were. At least not by the time I was there. I

don't know wht happened afterwards.

Some people are greatly affected by mold and don't realize

anything is wrong (misattributed to aging or just plain denial) and

others know something isn't right but misattribute it to the wrong

cause. Many of my clients who do this " solve " a musty odor by

buying plug-in deodorizers. This creates a new exposure and this

is when some of them begin to react. Because removing the

plug-in stops the reactions I have a hard time convincing them

they still should solve the " musty " odor (mold) problem.

That said, detecting mold in samples is not " sufficient " by itself for

mold to " necessarily " be a problem for everyone. Certainly not

like for anthrax or ricin or mustard gas. Individuality is important.

For those interested, Google information about infectious disease

and poisons. Read about LD50 and how a highly poisonous

substance, which only requires a few molecules to kill, can be

less likely to harm than a low poisonous substance which can kill

is several different ways (like water).

It can get pretty complex but that complexity must be understood

or we waste thousands of dollars on the wrong cure. Then we

can't afford the right one. But finding the right cure usually costs

money, which the more impacted of us don't have. Which is why

relying on the " free market " will never solve this problem. The

" market " only finds the segment of the highest profit, which

means the most people. We aren't it.

The discussion Doug and I had centers around the question of

when to act and when to ignore. Acting too quickly results in

unnecessary actions and cost. Acting too slowly results in

unnecessary illness and health cost. Some are obvious, some

aren't. Like Goldilocks and the Three Bears house, we need to

find that which is " just right. " Not for all, but just for us.

Doug, I hope I haven't misrepresented your position or our

conversation. If I did, I apologize and welcome your comments.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> Well Stated Carl. I of course agree with doug on that as well. I think you

might agree though in my house there was not much else to do but react...

>  

> Chris...

>

>

>     

>  

>  

>  

>  

>  

>  

>    

>        

>

>

>

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

> Subject: RE: [] types of mold that have caused sickness

>

> Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 11:47 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Dear Group,

>

> Doug Haney and I have had an interesting conversation off-line

> about the comment by LiveSimply, which I supported, which said

> " mere presence of typical molds is not sufficient for there to be a

> problem. "

>

> Doug strongly disputed that, citing the myriad of issues for people

> exposed to mold. I disagreed with his disagreement. You all know

> how these things go.

>

> The end result is I now understand his objection and I wish to

> correct my statement. Which, I now agree, is actually contrary to

> my position on mold as I've stated ad nauseum here and

> elsewhere.

>

> There is no such thing as the " mere presence " of mold. Mold is

> always one of many parts of the total ecology of the indoor

> environment. Even miniscule presence in the right environment

> exposing a particular individual can be a huge concern.

>

> The " mere presence " or lack of " mold data " from a lab, however,

> isn't necessarily a concern because of all the reasons many of us

> have previously stated, also ad nauseum, about the errors of

> testing.

>

> While this appears to be " mere symantics " there is, again, no

> such thing. Symantics is important and it depends on the context.

> Just as with mold, VOCs, dust mites, pet dander, toxins,

> asbestos, lead paint and others.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

>

[Guest guest]

I have read all of your comments. You are still missing some key elements:

Mold, bacterai and all of their by-products. The actinomycetes (Streptomyces,

Nocardia and Mycobacterium) are potentially dangerous. The fine particulates as

demonstrated by Brasel (Straus' lab) have been entirely overlooked. Also, do

not forget gucans, galatomannans, endotoxins and MVOCs as well as allergens.

Finally, the latest research out of Sweden (a Bloom in Larrsson's Lab)

clearly demonstrates the complexity of the indoor environment and its potential

health effects. Molds and mycotoxins are not the only thing in damp indoor

spaces.

Jack D. Thrasher, Ph.D.

Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist

www.drthrasher.org

toxicologist1@...

Off: 530--644-6035

Cell - 575-937-1150

L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC

Trauma Specialist

sandracrawley@...

530-644-6035 - 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]

what's in the wall space and what's in the liveing space can be to

different things as far as what you are exposed to. and i garentee

that if with a small spot of toxic nold growing from a leak in the

corner of your bedroom by your bed can make you sick when your

breathing it every night or like with crib death a tiny spot on your

mattress or pillow from a bottle leaking. a roof leak 2 floors above

you might not expose you to all those mvoc's or bateria's but you will

still be breathing the toxic dust filtering down and into your space.

in a hudge 3 story house I got the worst and first exposure because

one of those leaks was in my bedroom cealing. if you slept with your

head in the cabnit under a leaky sink,direct contact, well make you

much sicker than if you dont sleep there. if you buy a house that has

been broken down and leaking much,that the salers dried out and

gutted out what mold could be seen and it's had mold infestation

growing for 30 years and everything turns damp after you move into it.

there's not a safe place in the house and your in big trouble.

ps. I've never heard that mycptpxins are produced just for the sole

purpose of attacking each other, I dont agree to that statement ar all

mycotoxins are not alive, mycotoxins are released for many reasons

but I dont think it's to fight other mycotoxins.

--- In , LiveSimply <quackadillian@...>

wrote:

>

> I don't remember saying it exactly like that but if I did, I was

probably

> thinking about studies Ive seen which

> show that the mycotoxicity of several of the most toxinogenic molds

is not

> predictable by any factor EXCEPT the amount of water and food- esp.

the

> humidity

> at which they grew at, molds produce mycotoxins to kill each other

under

> conditions of extreme competition and stress. Thats their function.

>

> Also, humidity determines what species out of the ones there will

dominate.

>

> (These are the French and English versions of the same paper, it

looks like)

> * *Bull Acad Natl

> Med.<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'jour',%20'Bull%20Acad%20Natl%

20Med.');>2005

> Jan;189(1):43-51; discussion 52-4.

> Related Articles<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & DbFrom=pubmed & Cmd=Link & LinkName=pubmed_pubmed & LinkReadableNa

me=Related%

20Articles & IdsFromResult=16119879 & ordinalpos=1 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEn

trez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstract>,

> Links <javascript:PopUpMenu2_Set(Menu16119879);>

>

> *[Wall relative humidity: a simple and reliable index for predicting

> Stachybotrys chartarum infestation in dwellings]*

>

> [Article in French]

>

> *Charpin D*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin%20D%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Boutin-Forzano

> S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Boutin-Forzano%20S%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Chabbi S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Chabbi%20S%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Dumon H*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Dumon%20H%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Charpin-Kadouch

> C*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin-Kadouch%20C%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>

> .

>

> Service de Pneumologie-allergologie, Hôpital Nord, Marseille.

>

> As the indoor mold Stachybotrys chartarum (SC) has been linked to

serious

> health disorders, its identification in water-damaged dwellings is

of utmost

> importance. The aim of this work was to compare wall relative

humidity (RH)

> measurements with the results of mold identification studied on 458

samples

> collected from 100 dwellings. Mold identification was based on

direct

> microscopic examination of wall samples collected by the gummed

paper

> technique. Mean (+/- SD) wall RH (%) was much higher (97.0 +/- 6.1)

when SC

> was identified (30 samples) than when other molds were identified

(291

> samples, 41.8 +/- 36.9) and when no molds were identified (137

samples, 38.9

> +/- 34.8). There was a direct relationship between wall and room-

air RH but

> the scatter of results implies that the latter cannot be used as a

surrogate

> for the former. This study suggests that simple wall RH measurement

can

> serve as a reliable indicator of SC infestation of dwellings.

>

> Publication Types:

>

> - English Abstract<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'English%

20Abstract');>

> - Research Support, Non-U.S.

> Gov't<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'Research%20Support,%

20Non-U.S.%20Gov\'t');>

>

>

> PMID: 16119879 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

> ------------------------------

> *2: *Indoor Air.

> <javascript:AL_get(this,%20'jour',%20'Indoor%20Air.');>2004

> Jun;14(3):196-9.

> Related Articles<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & DbFrom=pubmed & Cmd=Link & LinkName=pubmed_pubmed & LinkReadableNa

me=Related%

20Articles & IdsFromResult=15104787 & ordinalpos=2 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEn

trez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstract>,

> Links <javascript:PopUpMenu2_Set(Menu15104787);>

>

> *Wall relative humidity: a simple and reliable index for predicting

> Stachybotrys chartarum infestation in dwellings.*

>

> *Boutin-Forzano

> S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Boutin-Forzano%20S%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Charpin-Kadouch

> C*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin-Kadouch%20C%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Chabbi S*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Chabbi%20S%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Bennedjai N*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Bennedjai%20N%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Dumon H*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Dumon%20H%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>,

> *Charpin D*<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

Db=pubmed & Cmd=Search & Term=%22Charpin%20D%22%5BAuthor%

5D & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbs

tract>

> .

>

> Department of Chest Diseases and Allergy, Hôpital Nord, Marseille,

France.

>

> Because the indoor mold Stachybotrys chartarum has been considered

as

> potentially responsible for serious health effects, its

identification in

> dwellings with water damages is of utmost importance. As such

dwellings are

> many, it would be of great value to have a simple and reliable

index for

> predicting its presence. The aim of the study was to compare

measurements of

> wall relative humidity (RH) to mold identification in 458 samples

from 100

> dwellings. Mold identification was performed by direct microscopic

> examination of a sample collected on the wall by the gummed paper

technique.

> Mean (+/- s.d.) wall RH (%) was much higher (97.0 +/- 6.1) on the

30 samples

> where S. chartarum was identified compared with the 291 samples

where other

> molds were identified (41.8 +/- 36.9) and to the 137 samples where

no molds

> were identified (38.9 +/- 34.8). There was no straightforward

relationship

> between wall and room RH. In conclusion, this study clearly

demonstrate that

> the simple measurement of wall RH can be used as a reliable index

for

> discarding and suspecting S. chartarum infestation in dwellings.

PRACTICAL

> IMPLICATIONS: This paper suggests that very high relative humidity

(RH)

> within walls is a strong risk factor for their infestation with

the 'toxic

> mold' Stachybotrys chartarum. Besides, data from the literature

demonstrate

> that other molds are able to produce mycotoxins when RH is very

high. Thus,

> measurement of wall RH, which is easy to perform and very cheap,

could be

> used as a screening tool to select those dwellings where mold

identification

> should be performed and remediation should be promptly carried out.

>

> Publication Types:

>

> - Research Support, Non-U.S.

> Gov't<javascript:AL_get(this,%20'ptyp',%20'Research%20Support,%

20Non-U.S.%20Gov\'t');>

>

>

> PMID: 15104787 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Carl: Stated excellently.

God Bless and take care.

Respectfully,

Doug

@...: grimes@...: Tue, 9 Dec 2008

11:44:39 -0600Subject: RE: [] types of mold that have caused

sickness

Your house was a good example of how mold sampling information is but one

part of the picture. Although it was an important part there were several other

components of the " damp indoor spaces " syndrome which mold sampling doesn't see.

Your reactivity and ultimate sensitization was a key part of this - which is

what Doug is emphasizing.

[Guest guest]

>

> I have read all of your comments. You are still missing some key

>elements: Mold, bacterai and all of their by-products. The

>actinomycetes (Streptomyces, Nocardia and Mycobacterium) are

>potentially dangerous. The fine particulates as demonstrated by

>Brasel (Straus' lab) have been entirely overlooked. Also, do not

>forget gucans, galatomannans, endotoxins and MVOCs as well as

>allergens.

Dr Trasher,

Do you know which of the microbial classes of chemicals you just

mentioned are clearly volatile (apart from MVOCs)? As far as I know

all mycotoxins are supposed to be non-volatile.

-Branislav

[Guest guest]

Very well put, both carl and Doug, and I agree with both of you and don't

see you as disagreeing.

The more time I think about this issue and the more realpolitik that I see

happening the more I think the " just get rid of it " approach makes sense,

for most homeowners and building managers, and others, unless there are

legal issues involved or there is a desire to follow the science and

understand it, somehow.

certainly, a moldy building is a moldy building (!) usually obviously so,

and every day that it remains so is a day that people get sicker.

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Haney

<_Haney52@...>wrote:

[Guest guest]

Branslav, what would be the impact or importance of volatile versus non-

volatile in your opinion?

>

>Dr Trasher,

>

> Do you know which of the microbial classes of chemicals you just

> mentioned are clearly volatile (apart from MVOCs)? As far as I know

> all mycotoxins are supposed to be non-volatile.

>

>

> -Branislav

>

[Guest guest]

a Bloom

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17483261?ordinalpos=1 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEn\

trez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17285157?ordinalpos=2 & itool=EntrezSystem2.PEn\

trez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Jack D. Thrasher, Ph.D.

Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologist

www.drthrasher.org

toxicologist1@...

Off: 530--644-6035

Cell - 575-937-1150

L. Crawley, M.ED., LADC

Trauma Specialist

sandracrawley@...

530-644-6035 - 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]

Barb,

Volatile compounds can evaporate on their own from contaminated objects at room

temperature, while non-volatile compounds

cannot do that - they need to be mechanically disturbed and they have

to be in the form of fine particles in order to become airborne.

Furthermore, the chemistry of mycotoxins and MVOCs is entirely

different. Knowing what you are dealing with exactly could be

exploited for decontamination purposes.

I am now pretty convinced that in most cases we do not deal with

non-volatile mycotoxins but with volatile MVOCs.

-Branislav

>

> Branslav, what would be the impact or importance of volatile versus non-

> volatile in your opinion?

>

>

[Guest guest]

There are also semi-volatile compounds which evaporate more

slowly than the hours or days of the VOCs but faster than the

npn-volatiles. In other words, the rate of evaporation is a range

between immediate and never. Some are quicker (VOCs) than

others (semi-VOCs).

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

> Barb,

>

> Volatile compounds can evaporate on their own from contaminated objects at

room temperature, while non-

> volatile compounds

> cannot do that - they need to be mechanically disturbed and they have

> to be in the form of fine particles in order to become airborne.

>

> Furthermore, the chemistry of mycotoxins and MVOCs is entirely

> different. Knowing what you are dealing with exactly could be

> exploited for decontamination purposes.

>

> I am now pretty convinced that in most cases we do not deal with

> non-volatile mycotoxins but with volatile MVOCs.

>

> -Branislav

>

>

> >

> > Branslav, what would be the impact or importance of volatile versus non-

> > volatile in your opinion?

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

" These fungi are commonly found in soil, food, cellulose, grains,

paint, carpet, wallpaper, interior fiberglass duct insulation, and

decaying vegetation. Penicillium may cause hypersensitivity

pneumonitis, asthma, and allergic alveolitis in susceptible individuals. "

http://www.toxic-black-mold-info.com/moldtypes.htm#Penicillium

As we would start to drive into the grain fields of Ohio, I would feel

a heaviness in my chest, heart palpitations, headache and wheezing.

For 2.5 years while I lived there I was short of breath. llaci

[Guest guest]

Branislav,

There are better experts on this than me. Perhaps Jeff May could

respond also.

My understanding is that most, if not all, mycotoxins, are

considered semi-volatile because they are a component of the

physical cells of the mold biomass rather than a gas or a liquid.

Exposure is most likely from direct contact, inhalation or ingestion

of the spore or hyphal fragment. Mycotoxins are not like

formaldehyde or ammonia, for example, which evaporate as a

gas or vapor and is distributed within the air.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

> Carl,

>

> I agree, there are definitely semi-VOCs. In fact I think the most

> problematic microbial volatile compounds are semi-volatile, which is

> why they are so hard to get rid of. If they were totally volatile they

> would evaporate in several hours or days.

>

> Do you happen to know which micribial compounds can be classified as

> semi-volatile? Is there some list of these microbial semi-volatiles?

>

> -Branislav

>

>

> >

> > There are also semi-volatile compounds which evaporate more

> > slowly than the hours or days of the VOCs but faster than the

> > npn-volatiles. In other words, the rate of evaporation is a range

> > between immediate and never. Some are quicker (VOCs) than

> > others (semi-VOCs).

> >

> > Carl Grimes

> > Healthy Habitats LLC

>

>

[Guest guest]

Carl,

I agree, there are definitely semi-VOCs. In fact I think the most

problematic microbial volatile compounds are semi-volatile, which is

why they are so hard to get rid of. If they were totally volatile they

would evaporate in several hours or days.

Do you happen to know which micribial compounds can be classified as

semi-volatile? Is there some list of these microbial semi-volatiles?

-Branislav

>

> There are also semi-volatile compounds which evaporate more

> slowly than the hours or days of the VOCs but faster than the

> npn-volatiles. In other words, the rate of evaporation is a range

> between immediate and never. Some are quicker (VOCs) than

> others (semi-VOCs).

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

[Guest guest]

I agree. I think that in my first house the mvoc's remained-stuck

mostly in the walls and on the 3rd floor and I was exposed mostly to

mycotoxin and fungal fragment dust. in the second house the mvoc's

were heavy and along with sticking to everything I owned it also

stuck to my body and everywhere in my body. regardless of everything

else I fell this heavy exposure to mvoc's in this house played the

biggest role in the damage I suffered there. consider how breating a

sticky liguid airborne substance into your whole body, how after it

damages your protective lineings and you pass them and it than coats

all of your tissues,vessells,organs,cells and is pumped into your

brain lineing everything along the way and whatever else your

breathing is sticking to that. even your pee get's a green cast to it.

how long would it take to rid this from your body? no way are you

going to get through this without serious damage. this is basicly

what I fell happened to me. everyone talks about how hard it is to

get mvoc's out of belongings, how hard is it to get it out of your

body?

--- In , " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...>

wrote:

>

> There are also semi-volatile compounds which evaporate more

> slowly than the hours or days of the VOCs but faster than the

> npn-volatiles. In other words, the rate of evaporation is a range

> between immediate and never. Some are quicker (VOCs) than

> others (semi-VOCs).

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> >

> > Barb,

> >

> > Volatile compounds can evaporate on their own from contaminated

objects at room temperature, while non-

> > volatile compounds

> > cannot do that - they need to be mechanically disturbed and they

have

> > to be in the form of fine particles in order to become airborne.

> >

> > Furthermore, the chemistry of mycotoxins and MVOCs is entirely

> > different. Knowing what you are dealing with exactly could be

> > exploited for decontamination purposes.

> >

> > I am now pretty convinced that in most cases we do not deal with

> > non-volatile mycotoxins but with volatile MVOCs.

> >

> > -Branislav

> >

> > --- In groups (DOT) com, " barb1283 " <barb1283@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Branslav, what would be the impact or importance of volatile

versus non-

> > > volatile in your opinion?

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>