Testing for Mold [was: Re: Air Purifiers]

[Guest guest]

Judi,

For additional details and discussion please check the archives. But

in short, by definitive answer is, " It depends. "

Usually, IF I EVEN SAMPLE, I will do as little as I need to answer

the question. So, what is the question? If the question is, " Is mold

making me sick? " I won't test because if there is mold it needs to be

removed whether or not it is making you sick. If there is mold it may

or may not be the cause of your sickness. About 1/3 of the mold cases

I consult on don't have mold problems. Of the ones that don't think

they have mold problems about 60% do. Regardless, sampling will not

answer that question.

Even if there were numerical exposure levels (which there aren't) for

" mold " or even specific types of mold - Mold is a whole Kingdom like

animal, vegetable, mineral, bacteria, mold - that level is set

(theoretically but most likely politically) to protect the largest

group of the general public. It is never and can never be set to

protect specific individuals.

So testing cannot answer the question of, " Is mold making me sick? "

Testing can sometimes answer specific questions, like someone posted

the other day of whether or not they cross-contaminated their

brother's house. Testing can HELP answer that question but won't be

definitive because we still haven't figured out if mold is a problem

to you.

Now, let me introduce another point that gets lost in e-mail

exchanges but is critical when consulting. Bob asked the question

last week of " How can you tell me what to do when you don't know

anything about me? "

He is exactly right. Because " all of this " is so indivdual the first

part of any consultation, in my opinion and practice, is to learn

what the person is experiencing. What are their complaints, what are

they reactive to that they know, that doctors have tested, that they

suspect? Perhaps there are others they haven't thought of or

realized. What is the impact? Mild, moderate, disabling, life

threatening?

Only then, again in my opinion and practice, should we begin the next

part of the assessment - what are the exposure sources? Whether

known, suspected or blind to. People with experience and previous

success that have a problem they can't figure out are usually blind

to something that is obvious to others. Their rationale will be

something like, " But that couldn't be it. " Or, " But I have to keep

it. "

Only after theabove plus lots of education and mini-tutorials to

clarify and expand their knowledge base do I even begin to offer

opinions SPECIFIC to that person.

The information I post here is general information that may or may

not relate to any specfic person. But from my personal and

professional experience over the last 20+ years, this is what I know

and what may apply to you.

Back to testing - Before any samples of any type with any analytical

method is started there should first be:

-Define the problem. Inversely, how will know when the problem is

solved?

-A hypothesis. What is causing the problem?

-A plan for how to test the hypothesis, preferably how to disprove

it. If you can, keep working. If you can't, you might be on to

something.

-Can the hypothesis be tested without lab samples? If so, don't test.

What part of the hypothesis must be tested with lab samples?

-Before I sample, what will the data mean? If I find certain types

and/or levels of mold does it mean contamination? A health threat?

Normal fungal ecology? For what type of location? If it is for a

place I don't live and where I never go, like a crawlspace, can the

crawlspace air get into my living space?

-Which authoritative (not regulatory, but authoritative) document

will guide the remediation? EPA? NYC? ACGIH? S520? S500? The

remediators personal preference? The latest Web site with the latest

" magic bullet? " Please, pick one and stick to it. Otherwise you have

a dog chasing a cat's tail. (A deliberately mixed metaphor!)

-If you don't anticipate the possibilities of the data and its

meaning ahead of time, then even the most rigorous and statistically

valid procedure is no longer objective. It becomes subjective,

ultimately influenced by what you want to see. For example, I've seen

the exact same data interpreted by the same person but in different

ways depending on whether or not it is in their best interest to find

mold or not find it. E.g. a remediator finds mold at first because it

means a job for him, but doesn't " find " it when he is done because he

wants to finish and get paid without further erosion of his profit.

Very common on insurance work.

-Define a successful outcome. Less mold in the samples? All mold gone

from the samples? Did the samples " look " in the right places? The

remediator says he is successful? He completed the technical terms of

his contract with you? He followed the procedures of the above

guidance and standards document? Your mold symptoms are gone? All

your symptoms and complaints are gone? Etc etc. Again, you should

define the success before anywork is done. (see the first point,

above). And if in doubt, have an independent professional verify the

work and the completion. Which should include at least an improvement

in your complaints (see above).

NOW, and only now - I can talk about sampling and what kind.

Sometimes I don't do air or surface, but dust or bulk or PCR. In a

recent case I did a combination from different locations because I

wanted to see if I could trace " marker " organisms from the source to

the immediate air to the HVAC to the rest of the air. I'm more apt to

test for bacteria than for mold.

So, your excellent question has a definitive answer of " It depends. "

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> Carl,

> Thanks for the great explanation of all the testing,

> etc. I think I mentioned before that I was never sure

> of what I was doing when I lived in the mold condo. I

> was just " winging it. "

> The industrial hygienist had a Ph.D., but it does make

> sense what you are saying about the " residential "

> training. Also, I don't think the terminology she

> used was " normal " levels of mold, it was just

> mentioned that it was not as excessive as it had been.

> So, do you recommend air testing or tape samples, or

> both? Judi

>

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

>

> > Judi,

> >

> > A lot of what you were told is true - but not

> > complete. Even the

> > following isn't complete, but hopefully

> > comprehensive.

> >

> > 1. HEPA is rated at 0.3 microns so mold spores and

> > fragments (and

> > other stuff) that are larger will be stopped. But

> > anything smaller

> > will go through. Also, not all the parts of the mold

> > organism (think

> > " tree " ) are the equivalent of seeds and leaves. The

> > ones that are

> > chemical - like pine odor - won't be stopped

> > (actually, there is an

> > exception to this but I don't want to make this more

> > confusing).

> > HEPAs are not useless but they are not the " cure

> > all " either.

> > However, if they work then they work. But they don't

> > always work. You

> > have to try it and see what happens.

> >

> > 2. HEPA will often reduce airborne levels of mold

> > (unless there are

> > other disturbances) but not what has settled to

> > surfaces like floors,

> > tables, furniture, furnace ducts, etc. So if your

> > industrial

> > hygienist took air samples she would most likely see

> > a reduction.

> > However, if she took surface samples, she most

> > likely would NOT. And

> > that's fine as long as people and pets don't disturb

> > what's on the

> > surface by doing silly things like walking or moving

> > about in other

> > ways, or the forced air starts up (after she

> > samples, of course).

> > This is a big debate among professionals with no

> > resolution between

> > air vs surface samples, when to take them, how many

> > to take, and what

> > does it all mean. Perhaps the answer is the same as

> > for The

> > Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy question of Life,

> > the Universe and

> > Everything: 39.

> >

> > 3. If you are going to get an air purifier, get a

> > HEPA. If you need

> > chemical/odor removal also, get a HEPA with charcoal

> > and/or potassium

> > permanganate and/or zeolite to remove the

> > chemcals/odors.

> >

> > 4. I don't know what the industrial hygienist (IH)

> > meant by " normal

> > levels " of mold. That is the gold standard that

> > nobody in the world

> > has established. Also, many on this group react to

> > " normal levels " at

> > least where they live. But if your situation was

> > fixed, fantastic!

> > You are done.

> >

> > 5. Industrial hygienists (IH) can be anybody. Even

> > YOU can call

> > yourself an IH. However, a Certified Industrial

> > Hygienist (CIH) is a

> > different matter.

> >

> > They are highly trained and must have a

> > specified amount and type of

> > training/experience before they are allowed to

> > even take the exam.

> > The exam is developed and administered

> > independantly of the

> > organization of CIHs.

> >

> > However, there is little to nothing in their

> > training or on the exam

> > about mold. And there is nothing about

> > RESIDENTIAL. Why? Because

> > they are INDUSTRIAL hygienists, not

> > residential hygienists. Without

> > additional training/experience from somewhere

> > else they are not

> > qualified to work in residential settings and

> > are not allowed to do

> > so as a CIH according to their code of ethics.

> > If they do the work

> > that should call themselves something else.

> >

> > Please notice that I didn't say they couldn't

> > do the work. I said

> > they couldn't do the work while representing

> > themselves as a CIH.

> > Same as a plumber performing heart surgery. The

> > plumber is highly

> > trained, certified and licensed - just not for

> > heart surgery. But if

> > he went to medical school, had training and was

> > state licensed then

> > he would ALSO be qualified to work on my heart.

> > (But I'd still have

> > to get to know him/her and trust before I'd

> > submit).

> >

> > As of Jan 1 (yesterday) there is the start of

> > an independent

> > certification program for the NON-INDUSTRIAL

> > environment. Those that

> > have taken the CIE exam by IAQA and the

> > equivalent by AmIAQ who also

> > meet other qualifications, can be granted the

> > independant

> > certification of CIEC - Certified Indoor

> > Environmental Consultant.

> > CIH will be able to take that training and exam

> > to be so qualified,

> > just like CIECs can do the CIH if they are

> > otherwise qualified. Give

> > them a few months to get the first applications

> > evaluated.

> >

> > 5. You are exactly right about stopping the water,

> > removing the food

> > source, and removing the mold as the primary action.

> > The HEPA can

> > then be very appropriate and often not needed. HEPA

> > filtration,

> > spraying chemicals whether " safe " or otherwise,

> > ozone, photocatalytic-

> > superoxygenation-expialidocious and other " magic

> > bullets " should

> > never be used IN PLACE of removal. Yes, they are

> > cheaper up front,

> > but that is like buying a guard kitten to keep the

> > mountain lions

> > away when you should be living in a habitat where

> > people thrive and

> > pestilence can't.

> >

> > Carl Grimes

> > Healthy Habitats LLC

> >

> > -----

> > > When I was living in the mold, I did a lot of

> > researc

> > > on air purifiers myself, and then finally bought

> > one.

> > > The industrial hygienist that I hired actually

> > told me

> > > that the homes that she tested with the air

> > purifiers

> > > had much lower mold spore counts than other homes

> > she

> > > tested. She had no reason to tell me that

> > > information, as she wasn't selling any products.

> > I

> > > think there are some worthless products out there,

> > but

> > > there are also some good quality air purifiers.

> > In my

> > > case, I feel it did help mitigate the damages

> > while I

> > > had to live there (along with the dehumidifiers).

> > My

> > > intention was to keep the mold more under control

> > and

> > > remove the moisure source. I also had normal

> > air

> > > tests after remediation and with the air purifiers

> > and

> > > I also got 3 of the air sterilizers which I moved

> > > around the house. So, how did I get the nornal

> > tests.

> > > Also, I always was told that hepa filters DO work

> > in

> > > trapping mold, and was told by the same industrial

> > > hygienist to get hepa filters. So the news that

> > they

> > > don't work against mold, is something I haven't

> > heard

> > > before. Obviously, one also has to get rid of the

> > > moisture and the source of mold, as well as

> > getting

> > > rid of contaminated materials. Judi

> > >

> > > --- SERENA EDWARDS <pushcrash@...> wrote:

> > >

> > > > It just moves more air faster. Maybe better if

> > > > you're trying to keep a clean space clean, but

> > if

> > > > you still can't stop moving all the bad stuff

> > > > around, what's the point of moving more of it

> > > > faster?

> > > >

> >

> === message truncated ===

>

>

>

>

>

> __________________________________

> for Good - Make a difference this year.

> http://brand./cybergivingweek2005/

>

>

>