Re: REALITY!

[Guest guest]

We have people of all degrees of reactivity talking about their

needs without regard to their Personal Impact Rating.

This leads to confusion and cross purposes of communication.

If someone has a PIR that allows them to stay alive in a specific

house, and they wish to do so - that is how they base their approach

and their responses - and it may well be the best option - for them.

For someone with a PIR that requires tenting it in the desert to

advise immediate abandonment of all possessions and adopting that

strategy is talking at cross purposes.

We all have to act in accordance with our own PIR, which can change

dramatically depending upon circumstances.

As someone who was forced to live in the woods in a tent, until the

tent was contaminated and I had to abandon that too and sleep in the

open, it sounds a bit strange to hear descriptions of concerns about

affordable housing being the limitation governing actions, but one

has to recognize that we are all at different levels.

At an extreme PIR, priorities are completely different and trying to

remain in a mold zone would simply be fatal.

When survival is at stake, affordability and comfort become

relatively irrelevant.

Mold illness can really drive you to this level of desperation and

leave you no other options for survival.

That's the reality.

-

[Guest guest]

,

You TRULY understand Personal Impact Rating, it uses and it's

implications. Not many do.

The concept of rating by impact occurred shortly after incongruous

reports by two clients in 1998. (, you'll particularly appreciate

the first one).

I asked a women how her reactivity had affected her life. She said,

" Oh, it's terrible! It's ruined my life. I used to climb 7 or 8

Fourteeners every year. " (Note: Fourteeners are 14 thousand ft

mountains. Colorado has 54 of them and climbing all of them, even in

a single year, is a goal of some people.) " And now I can only climb

one or two at a time. This illness is absolutely the worst! "

The next week when I asked another client how she was doing her

response was, " Great! I'm doing well, the best in years. "

I then asked, " Are you able to work, yet? "

She said, " On, no. I'm still on disability, have been for 15 years.

But I'm so much better now! I'm beginning to enjoy life again. "

Those two opposing sets of realities, perceptions and attitudes

helped me develop something a little more objective. It's valuable to

me in my consulting but is slow for others to comprehend. You are one

of the few.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> We have people of all degrees of reactivity talking about their

> needs without regard to their Personal Impact Rating.

> This leads to confusion and cross purposes of communication.

>

> If someone has a PIR that allows them to stay alive in a specific

> house, and they wish to do so - that is how they base their approach

> and their responses - and it may well be the best option - for them.

> For someone with a PIR that requires tenting it in the desert to

> advise immediate abandonment of all possessions and adopting that

> strategy is talking at cross purposes.

>

> We all have to act in accordance with our own PIR, which can change

> dramatically depending upon circumstances.

>

> As someone who was forced to live in the woods in a tent, until the

> tent was contaminated and I had to abandon that too and sleep in the

> open, it sounds a bit strange to hear descriptions of concerns about

> affordable housing being the limitation governing actions, but one has

> to recognize that we are all at different levels.

>

> At an extreme PIR, priorities are completely different and trying to

> remain in a mold zone would simply be fatal. When survival is at

> stake, affordability and comfort become relatively irrelevant. Mold

> illness can really drive you to this level of desperation and leave

> you no other options for survival. That's the reality. -

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Guys, I understand what you're saying. Yes, everyone is at different places with

this, and solutions are definitely not cookie-cutter. But...be careful with it.

There's that place where a person is so overcome they can't even tell what's

going on any more. You know exactly what that looks and sounds like, same as I

do.

There was some talk a ways back about when you have to cut and run so someone

else that wants it can be helped. I was mad at the time, because I felt that was

wrong, that those talking sounded willing to give up too easily. Not that we

can't reach those points - I just wasn't sure why or how to explain why it

seemed wrong to me, but now I think I can. Time has passed, and we've all seen

more since then. I think what I was reacting to at the time was the knowledge

that if no one had really paid attention and stayed with me on it, or if they

had given up on me, I wouldn't still be here. I was too intoxicated from the

mold to make my way out of it alone. I was helped by a lot of people, but KC

actually got on the phone and stayed on it. He didn't blow me off because I was

too time-consuming or too crazy or annoying (shut up, Sharon : ).

So, how do you use a scale to figure out needs when a person is so overcome

they can't make good use of the information? It might help, but when a person's

attention can't be focused long enough to get from a scale to a better outcome,

then what? Do you keep trying to be rational, do you walk away, do you just do

or say whatever you have to, or what? I think you just do whatever you can and

hope for something more rational later on, but there's no cookie cutter for

that, either.

Part of what I started to see here had to do with some surgery. I was knocked

out, but I kept partially waking up because the local wasn't working. The

surgeon kept explaining aftercare to me. He was saying the same stuff every time

he saw me start to come around, and I was wondering why he kept repeating

himself. When I really woke up later, I couldn't remember a darned thing he had

said - only that he kept repeating something very annoying. So I had to ask him

to tell me all over again. He just smiled and explained it again, because he

knew what had happened. He sees it all the time. I was intoxicated. I wanted to

hear and remember. I remember him asking me if I understood, and me saying yes.

But I really didn't get it, and couldn't remember it - until I got enough of the

junk out of my system. It felt a whole lot like being heavily exposed - almost

impossible to think and remember enough to do anything with it. That's where I

put two and two together and realized it's more like

what mold exposure does than different, because it' really is the same

condition. Intoxication, only caused by different substances.

For your consideration - if there's not a place for that condition on the

scale, then maybe there ought to be?

" Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

,

You TRULY understand Personal Impact Rating, it uses and it's

implications. Not many do.

The concept of rating by impact occurred shortly after incongruous

reports by two clients in 1998. (, you'll particularly appreciate

the first one).

I asked a women how her reactivity had affected her life. She said,

" Oh, it's terrible! It's ruined my life. I used to climb 7 or 8

Fourteeners every year. " (Note: Fourteeners are 14 thousand ft

mountains. Colorado has 54 of them and climbing all of them, even in

a single year, is a goal of some people.) " And now I can only climb

one or two at a time. This illness is absolutely the worst! "

The next week when I asked another client how she was doing her

response was, " Great! I'm doing well, the best in years. "

I then asked, " Are you able to work, yet? "

She said, " On, no. I'm still on disability, have been for 15 years.

But I'm so much better now! I'm beginning to enjoy life again. "

Those two opposing sets of realities, perceptions and attitudes

helped me develop something a little more objective. It's valuable to

me in my consulting but is slow for others to comprehend. You are one

of the few.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> We have people of all degrees of reactivity talking about their

> needs without regard to their Personal Impact Rating.

> This leads to confusion and cross purposes of communication.

>

> If someone has a PIR that allows them to stay alive in a specific

> house, and they wish to do so - that is how they base their approach

> and their responses - and it may well be the best option - for them.

> For someone with a PIR that requires tenting it in the desert to

> advise immediate abandonment of all possessions and adopting that

> strategy is talking at cross purposes.

>

> We all have to act in accordance with our own PIR, which can change

> dramatically depending upon circumstances.

>

> As someone who was forced to live in the woods in a tent, until the

> tent was contaminated and I had to abandon that too and sleep in the

> open, it sounds a bit strange to hear descriptions of concerns about

> affordable housing being the limitation governing actions, but one has

> to recognize that we are all at different levels.

>

> At an extreme PIR, priorities are completely different and trying to

> remain in a mold zone would simply be fatal. When survival is at

> stake, affordability and comfort become relatively irrelevant. Mold

> illness can really drive you to this level of desperation and leave

> you no other options for survival. That's the reality. -

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

" Carl E. Grimes " wrote:

> ,

> You TRULY understand Personal Impact Rating, it uses and it's

> implications.

Thanks for developing it. I'm finding your scale extremely useful.

We should adopt it as a standard so we can all communicate more

effectively.

I think it was back in '98 when I was trying to develope a scale of

intensity for places that slammed me and strategize what I wanted to

do about it.

One place that usually immobilized me within an hour of exposure had

inhabitants that were suffering from " vague " health problems but

seemed to be " hanging in there " . The owner had heart problems and his

wife was diagnosed with CFS.

One beautiful warm summer day, the owner was feeling particularly

energetic and decided to tackle some chores around the house.

He had detected a small water leak in the basement which was

aggravating some mold growth, and so he got out his plumbing tools and

crawled under the house.

Suddenly he felt so tired and weak that he couldn't even lift a pipe

wrench. He crawled out from under the house, collapsed into a chair

in the living room, and his heart just stopped.

Naturally, thanks to doctors who won't listen to clues, the cause of

death was attributed to overexertion and weak heart.

But his widow is convinced that the way he felt so good right up until

the instant of coming face to face with mold and then dropping is no

coincidence. Perhaps his heart condition would have killed him

eventually, but as far as we are concerned, it was mold.

So, just having a PIR that allows you to remain in a moldy house is

no protection against an overwhelming exposure.

-

[Guest guest]

Serena,

I want to respond to the following parts of your post:

> Guys, I understand what you're saying. Yes, everyone is at different

> places with this, and solutions are definitely not cookie-cutter.

> But...be careful with it. There's that place where a person is so

> overcome they can't even tell what's going on any more. You know

> exactly what that looks and sounds like, same as I do.

Most don't, like the two in my previous examples. But they can be

guided through it fairly quickly. Once they are, the relief can be

tremendous. Then they can more clearly comprehend, understand new

information and begin making better decisions.

> So, how do you use a scale to figure out needs when a person is so

> overcome they can't make good use of the information? It might help,

> but when a person's attention can't be focused long enough to get

> from a scale to a better outcome, then what? Do you keep trying to

> be rational, do you walk away, do you just do or say whatever you

> have to, or what?

The PIR is but one of several tools in figuring out and understanding

what is happening and what to do about it. It is not a one number

item and there have to be qualifiers with it. It is another window of

visibility into the new world when the old world has changed. (see

the rest of the thread on REALITY).

Most of the time, with an appropriate " tutorial " about PIR the person

can figure out precisely where they are, even when emotionally

distraught and very fogging but probably not under the effects of an

anesthetic! I have them make a number of comparisons such as the best

they've ever been with the worst they've ever been with right now

with before the exposure and with after, etc. It helps clarify in a

more objective way where their world has gone and what world they are

now in.

If the person is as overcome as in your example, that is a critical

piece of the puzzle that has to be included. So it begs the question

of how often does this happen? Is the experience representative of

their life or is this an occasional or singular event?

Your example of surgery would apply to surgery. But, does this sort

of experience happen other times, maybe not a bad but in a similar

way, with other exposures? Maybe never, maybe with a particular

perfume, for example, or also when exposed to mold.

The whole analysis uses the profile of all complaints, the profile of

all known susceptibilities plus known exposure sources - this is

where 's example comes in. Out of that complexity of multiple

complaints, reactions and exposures, then is the totality of

experience sufficient to even act on it? If so, that is 3 on the PIR

scale. Then each specific item alone and in combination can be ranked

by impact. Why? Because we want to address the most

critical/threatening events first and with the appropriate level of

diligence.

For example, I had the most incredible weekend with two different

clients, neither of which had an accurate picture of their new

reality. They were both fightened and emotionally distraught, out of

the house and afraid for their children and husband. They felt very

guilty because they were putting their family through something

because of their failing to be a good mother. I won't go into all the

details but in general here's what happened:

Client 1 needed help because of mold from water leaks in the attic.

She had a severe reaction and went to the emergency room. She and the

two kids moved out but her husband wasn't affected and stayed in the

house. He reported mold in the attic and he had used fans to dry it

out, only to find out from a remediation company that he had just

blown the mold all over the house. Familiar? This is something I warn

about happening, for example.

The facts were, the mold was limited to a few square feet in the

attic over the garage. The fans were in the attic blowing air to the

outside. The mold didn't occur until one fan fell over and blew

against the roof, melting the frost and drying the plywood

sufficiently for mold to grow. He sprayed bleach which removed the

color but not the mold.

However, by using the PIR with her numerous complaints and when each

started, we determined she was reacting not just to the mold but also

to a gas fireplace and to the attic insulation that had been sprayed

with a pesticide. How was she exposed? The other end of the house had

another attic access in her daughter's room, which is where the

trigger event occurred. And that happened only after her husband made

4 trips through the attic access, each time dropping clumps of

insulation on the floor which SHE picked up, smelled and threw away.

There was no mold at this end of the attic.

Was she reactive to mold? Yes. But moderately. Does the mold issue

have to be resolved? Yes, because the PIR for it was a 3 and they

have a severe moisture problem in part of the attic. Was she reactive

to chemicals? Yes. Severely with a PIR of 4+. How did I know? By

walking her through the procedure above and ranking them all by PIR.

We determined it together and she understands what it means. So even

if she was reacting to the mold, the exposure of greater concern and

impact was the chemicals from the insulation.

Her husband completed the cleaning as instructed that evening and she

is back in the house with only slight reactions which she ranks as a

PIR of 2. Yes, they are there and should be addressed but they can

wait for awhile.

Client 2 can't be in her house because of smoke from a fire in the

duplex next door. She is now a PIR of 4+ and can't tolerate any

possessions including clothing that has been washed multiple times.

Is this the worst she's ever been? No, 18 months ago she was a 5+

but recovered to a PIR of 3 by moving out of the modular home and

into the current house. She remained a 3 until the fire. Was she ever

a PIR of 1? No, she's been chemically sensitive since childhood, born

with a heart problem, and had numerous medical problems since then.

Inspection of the house showed there was still a moderate smoke odor

despite the claim by the fire restoration company that they were done

cleaning and werevready to rebuild and repaint, etc. Inspection

showed numerous areas that still had soot that could be seen and

smelled. Inspection of the neighboring unit that was declared ready

for occupancy found sloppy work, decreasing my confidence they could

perfom the excellent cleaning job for my client.

She does not want to go back to a 5+ and is extremely frightened

(justified!). She has recovered once and can do so again. She knows

from the previous experience that trying to live in the smoke damaged

house won't stop her exposures which will prevent her return to a 3.

Little confidence the restoration company can succeed and even less

confidence the insurance companies (product defect insurance, home

owner assoc insurance and their contents insurance fighting amongst

themselves) will pay for anything other than the ordinary (which has

already failed).

Decision? They will allow the insurance and restorers to perform

their standard operating procedure, with documentation, so they can

sell the house, providing full disclosure.

My point of all this is to show how in one situation a scared person

with a high risk decides they can comforatably and safely re-enter

their home to check it out and it proves okay for several reasons.

But another scared person with high risk decides to not even try it

because the risk is too high for several reasons.. All based on a

combination of information, interpreted from different points of

view, inclusing the various PIRs.

The danger of short case studies is what is left out of the telling

and the risk of the reader assuming stupidity or incompetence on the

part of the writer. I'm not perfect and many " ifs " " ands " and

" therefores " are left out. So if any are of concern to anyone, please

respond and I'll detail them.

I hope this has helped, Serena, rather than confused. Let me know.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

[Guest guest]

Oh, no Carl. It's a very good explanation. I see where you're going, and it

makes excellent sense to me. I'm not at all critical of the scale itself. That's

a great way to isolate problem areas and make good decisions.

I had just been reading a piece about inadequate safety masks using a study

showing just how quickly droplets from sneezing and coughing get aerosolized and

then immediately dessicated into almost permanently airborn particles because

they are so tiny that they will float nearly indefinitely. It wasn't talking

about mycotoxins, but the general concept and mechanics were fascinating. I was

thinking again about how that applies to fans and filters, and your example

illustrates it really well.

The part of this I'm paying particular attention to right now is strictly that

intoxicant effect. Yes, of course surgery is surgery and not some other type of

exposure. I was just trying explain a small piece of that experience because it

reminded me so much the condition I was in myself from the mold at one time.

Until just recently, I wasn't quite thinking about mycotoxins as intoxicants. No

one was using that exact language to describe the effects. I had EXPERIENCED

them. But I somehow didn't quite make the connection and comparison to other

well-known and common intoxicants.

Not wanting to personalize it too much, but had there been a scale available

to me at the worst of it, I seriously doubt I could have made sense of it or

been able to tell one thing from another, even if you had been right here. I

seriously wouldn't have remembered what you told me, anyway. Doug Haney tried to

explain things to me at some length. All really I got was that fungus eats

everything, eventually. A core concept, but I couldn't really utilize it right

then. Couldn't remember the words he used. Felt like he was talking way too

fast, though I'm sure he wasn't, really. Still, he got in my face with it, and I

got a single idea across that stuck and later led to others - thankfully, before

I kicked the bucket. I simply could not respond at that time - due to the

intoxication. And that, like all the others, is a place on the scale, whether

it's been written into it yet or not.

The key feature of that intoxication is loss of normal ability to respond to

the situation. It's not my intention to be all la-la and psychological about it

- quite the opposite. Inability to respond is an easily observable phenomenon.

We see it again and again. Some people endure it quietly, others get really

boisterous, but the effect is the same - inability to respond reasonably to the

situation. You can describe it all in psychological terms, but that's a very

easy way to miss (or dismiss) its very organic origins. We've all been subjected

to wayyyy to much of that sort of dismissal already. Words like " stress " or

" shock " invariably get used right off. Valid or not, it's still nothing more

than a convenient smokescreen for the organic effects and leaves a whole lot to

be desired when you're in the trenches.

You can use a scale. can use a scale. I could use a scale now. On paper

or in your head, if you're actively avoiding mold, you have to have one of some

sort. So it's a great idea to standardize that into a common vocabulary. I think

where I was headed, though, is just trying to figure out what all the heck you

have to do to move from that intoxication stage to a point where the scale can

be used effectively. An irony, but there almost needs to be a question on the

scale that asks, " Are you too screwed up to use this scale? "

" Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> wrote:

Serena,

I want to respond to the following parts of your post:

> Guys, I understand what you're saying. Yes, everyone is at different

Serena

There is no such thing as an anomaly. Recheck your original premise.

...Ayn Rand,

paraphrased

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

Photos

Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP.

[Guest guest]

Serena,

> ... An irony, but there almost needs to be a question on

> the scale that asks, " Are you too screwed up to use this scale? "

Very true. And you also need outside assistance for more than

figuring out some kind of scale. You need protection and safety!

Another " exception " is for an acute reaction such as a life

threatening asthma attack, for example. that doesn't fit the scale

but is a critical exception to it that must be noted and responded

to.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

[Guest guest]

Toxicologists use the term 'intoxicate' (or intoxication, etc.) to

indicate any effect of a toxic substance. It doesn't imply drunk or

whatever, they are just implying that someone or some other living

thing, like a cell, has been poisoned - to any degree - by a poison..