Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know the answer to this

[Guest guest]

I agree. Unfortunately, the MCS groups simply don't see it that way

and Grace Ziem, Dr Thrasher, and an amazing number of

other people simply could not see the mycotoxin connection.

/message/21286

As late as 2004, people in this very group were still blazing into

me for claiming that mycotoxins are chemicals and that mold

reactivity is a form of MCS, as you can see in msg. 20379, 20466 and

34386.

As I've said in so many ways, what can you do when you speak the

words and people refuse to listen? And even get ANGRY at you for

saying them?

All I did was tell it straight!

-

Murtaugh wrote:

> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>

> http://powershowz.medicalillustration.com/healthtopics.php?

& A=63136 & I=1102 & article=13512

>

> For sufferers of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) syndrome,

even fleeting contact with cleaning products, pesticides, car

exhaust and other inescapable substances in the modern world sets

off a series of symptoms that mystify most medical experts.

> " It's a controversial medical disease, " says victim

, executive director of the Chemical Injury Information

Network, an MCS support organization based in White Sulphur Springs,

Montana. She estimates more than 10 million chemically-sensitive

people live in the United States.

[Guest guest]

I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I am a

person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity or

reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think everyone that

has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways. And

then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to everyone.

> > The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

> >

> > http://powershowz.medicalillustration.com/healthtopics.php?

> & A=63136 & I=1102 & article=13512

> >

>

> > For sufferers of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) syndrome,

> even fleeting contact with cleaning products, pesticides, car

> exhaust and other inescapable substances in the modern world sets

> off a series of symptoms that mystify most medical experts.

> > " It's a controversial medical disease, " says victim

> , executive director of the Chemical Injury Information

> Network, an MCS support organization based in White Sulphur

Springs,

> Montana. She estimates more than 10 million chemically-sensitive

> people live in the United States.

>

[Guest guest]

I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold in my

home. I

had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

> > The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

> >

[Guest guest]

> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I am

a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity

or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think everyone

that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways.

And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

everyone.

>

Oh, I'm not generalizing.

I'm " specificalizing " .

If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

illness.

The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for mold

and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

molds are an " allergy " .

I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just like

chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

They were QUITE certain.

Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical that

did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

people aren't " buying it " .

But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then had a

cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

From that point on, even though you may be doing everything possible

to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you are

still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

force in your continued inflammatory response.

I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

attention to mold after so many years of implicating the pesticides

that seemed to have been the main problem.

I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without a

good reason.

It was the only thing that saved MY life.

-

[Guest guest]

Because sometimes the " gears " stay stripped, no matter the cause.

That's why. There are MCS people right here who control carefully for

mold, and they remain MCS. There are people here who control

carefully for mold, and they remain MSH difficient. That's why.

Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose an MCS

person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO you

know what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

rescucitation you might need to know?

Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

responsible medical testing available these days making it possible

to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

. " Specificalize " on your own time, man.

>

>

> > I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I am

> a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity

> or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think everyone

> that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways.

> And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

> everyone.

> >

>

>

> Oh, I'm not generalizing.

> I'm " specificalizing " .

> If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

> pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

> cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

> illness.

>

> The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for mold

> and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

> molds are an " allergy " .

> I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

> and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just like

> chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

>

> They were QUITE certain.

> Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

>

> Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

> seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical that

> did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

> levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

> The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

> people aren't " buying it " .

> But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

> an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then had a

> cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

> From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

possible

> to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you

are

> still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

> force in your continued inflammatory response.

> I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

> attention to mold after so many years of implicating the pesticides

> that seemed to have been the main problem.

> I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without a

> good reason.

> It was the only thing that saved MY life.

> -

>

[Guest guest]

" pushcrash " wrote:

> Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose an MCS

person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO you know

what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

rescucitation you might need to know?

Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

responsible medical testing available these days making it possible

to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

. " Specificalize " on your own time, man. <

Yes, I DID just happily skip over the " actual, responsible medical

testing " part.

And VERY happily so, because the " experts " are flat out wrong

regarding the circumstances and consequences of mycotoxin exposure.

Their approach is misguided and arises from a false premise which they

failed to re-check. (Yes, I used to subscribe to The Objectivist

Newsletter and read Ayn Rand and iel Branden too)

The entire thrust of your analytical process indicates that you share

their fundamental misunderstandings and limitations.

For example, when you stated the necessity and importance of medical

testing, my thought was to ask why someone would accept the validity

of such results over their own perceptions?

I tested my own response, treated it as valid - despite all

assertions to the contrary, and I believe that my situation is now

supprted by the science that Dr Shoemakers developed to measure the

experience of those who have duplicated my circumstances.

I find medical testing to be completely unnecessary to arrive at an

understanding of this reactivity. Especially when such testing can be

self conducted with such ease.

Like it or not, we are exposed to mycotoxins every day, and my level

of reactivity allows me to witness a simultaneity of response in

others.

I know what they are responding to although they do not generally

know or admit it themselves because " You ain't the doctor " and " Who do

you think you are " interferes with their objective assessment of the

results of our non clinical - real world test situation.

They have indeed become my unwitting " lab rats " .

Your misplaced faith in medicine and rejection of the concept of

individualized perception has not stood you in good stead and is an

obstacle to taking better control of your illness.

Yes, I do carry around my own portable detox chamber and this IS my

own time.

-

[Guest guest]

When I was first exposed to toxic mold in 1991, I thought it was a

chemical exposure that had caused my problems. and even ignored such

evidence as passing out when a vile smell of mold wafted under my

nose- not once but 3x- in my home- it was only years later that I

pieced together the info- why I became MCS and lung damaged- not one

of the DRs I went to had a clue

karen

>

>

> > I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I

am

> a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity

> or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think

everyone

> that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways.

> And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

> everyone.

> >

>

>

> Oh, I'm not generalizing.

> I'm " specificalizing " .

> If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

> pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

> cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

> illness.

>

> The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for

mold

> and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

> molds are an " allergy " .

> I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

> and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just

like

> chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

>

> They were QUITE certain.

> Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

>

> Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

> seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical

that

> did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

> levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

> The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

> people aren't " buying it " .

> But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

> an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then had

a

> cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

> From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

possible

> to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you

are

> still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

> force in your continued inflammatory response.

> I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

> attention to mold after so many years of implicating the

pesticides

> that seemed to have been the main problem.

> I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without

a

> good reason.

> It was the only thing that saved MY life.

> -

>

[Guest guest]

...

Since you are still feigning mold=chemical sensitiivty...why don't you

join the REAL activists in the war against chemical injury OUTSIDE of the

mold community and see if the real players agree with you.

You are invited to join CSDA@... who you are and

see if they grant you access. You will be with the BIG PLAYERS....then we

can cross post your theory with those in the trenches

ANGEL WITH CHEMICAL INJURY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH

MOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, kl_clayton wrote:

> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:20:37 -0000

> From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold in

my home. I

> had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

> I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

>

>

>

>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

So true!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, pushcrash wrote:

> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 17:15:06 -0000

> From: pushcrash <pushcrash@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> Because sometimes the " gears " stay stripped, no matter the cause.

> That's why. There are MCS people right here who control carefully for

> mold, and they remain MCS. There are people here who control

> carefully for mold, and they remain MSH difficient. That's why.

>

> Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose an MCS

> person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO you

> know what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

> Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

> rescucitation you might need to know?

>

> Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

> responsible medical testing available these days making it possible

> to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

>

> These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

> . " Specificalize " on your own time, man.

>

>

>

>>

>>

>>> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I am

>> a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity

>> or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think everyone

>> that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways.

>> And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

>> everyone.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Oh, I'm not generalizing.

>> I'm " specificalizing " .

>> If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

>> pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

>> cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

>> illness.

>>

>> The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for mold

>> and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

>> molds are an " allergy " .

>> I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

>> and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just like

>> chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

>>

>> They were QUITE certain.

>> Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

>>

>> Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

>> seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical that

>> did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

>> levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

>> The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

>> people aren't " buying it " .

>> But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

>> an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then had a

>> cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

>> From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

> possible

>> to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you

> are

>> still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

>> force in your continued inflammatory response.

>> I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

>> attention to mold after so many years of implicating the pesticides

>> that seemed to have been the main problem.

>> I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without a

>> good reason.

>> It was the only thing that saved MY life.

>> -

>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

As usual , if it does not follow your THEORY that you are hawking its

not a fact.

I guess all the research on ENZYME deficiencies being done and how the

body can not detox ALDEHYDES is just a moot point. SInce those with

aldehyde type expsoures are not mold related are not really injured.

DO a web search on University in Ohio and see the FUNDED research

on REAL chemical injury and you will NOTICE that there is not ONE MOLD

reference in their research.

Then please tell us how those people are getting sick from mold

predicated on your theory?!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, erikmoldwarrior wrote:

> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:52:26 -0000

> From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

>

>> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I am

> a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical sensitivity

> or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think everyone

> that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different ways.

> And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

> everyone.

>>

>

>

> Oh, I'm not generalizing.

> I'm " specificalizing " .

> If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

> pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

> cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

> illness.

>

> The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for mold

> and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

> molds are an " allergy " .

> I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

> and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just like

> chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

>

> They were QUITE certain.

> Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

>

> Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

> seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical that

> did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

> levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

> The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

> people aren't " buying it " .

> But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

> an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then had a

> cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

> From that point on, even though you may be doing everything possible

> to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you are

> still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

> force in your continued inflammatory response.

> I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

> attention to mold after so many years of implicating the pesticides

> that seemed to have been the main problem.

> I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without a

> good reason.

> It was the only thing that saved MY life.

> -

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Why not take an ONLINE course at Tulane for a MPH and then research your

THEORY?

Upto now it's your theory and no one in the chemical injury arena seems to

give you any credibility becasue it is not relevant!

The chemical injury choir is not listening...they are following the

RESEARCH that disproves your theory. You are going from the specific to

the general, when it should be the general to the specific.

I think you need to hold off on your campaign for everything is mold

related until the reseach that is going to be poublished THIS SPRING that

refutes everything you say.

I know this for a fact as I spoke with those doing the reserach.....stop

dispensing false medical advise when the lab tests are being finalized

that disprove your theory 100000%.

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, erikmoldwarrior wrote:

> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:07:54 -0000

> From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> " pushcrash " wrote:

>> Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose an MCS

> person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO you know

> what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

> Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

> rescucitation you might need to know?

> Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

> responsible medical testing available these days making it possible

> to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

>

> These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

> . " Specificalize " on your own time, man. <

>

>

> Yes, I DID just happily skip over the " actual, responsible medical

> testing " part.

> And VERY happily so, because the " experts " are flat out wrong

> regarding the circumstances and consequences of mycotoxin exposure.

> Their approach is misguided and arises from a false premise which they

> failed to re-check. (Yes, I used to subscribe to The Objectivist

> Newsletter and read Ayn Rand and iel Branden too)

> The entire thrust of your analytical process indicates that you share

> their fundamental misunderstandings and limitations.

> For example, when you stated the necessity and importance of medical

> testing, my thought was to ask why someone would accept the validity

> of such results over their own perceptions?

> I tested my own response, treated it as valid - despite all

> assertions to the contrary, and I believe that my situation is now

> supprted by the science that Dr Shoemakers developed to measure the

> experience of those who have duplicated my circumstances.

> I find medical testing to be completely unnecessary to arrive at an

> understanding of this reactivity. Especially when such testing can be

> self conducted with such ease.

> Like it or not, we are exposed to mycotoxins every day, and my level

> of reactivity allows me to witness a simultaneity of response in

> others.

> I know what they are responding to although they do not generally

> know or admit it themselves because " You ain't the doctor " and " Who do

> you think you are " interferes with their objective assessment of the

> results of our non clinical - real world test situation.

> They have indeed become my unwitting " lab rats " .

> Your misplaced faith in medicine and rejection of the concept of

> individualized perception has not stood you in good stead and is an

> obstacle to taking better control of your illness.

> Yes, I do carry around my own portable detox chamber and this IS my

> own time.

> -

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Angel & and anyone else that I missed,

Your statement Angel, " Up to now it's your theory and no one in the

chemical injury arena seems to give you any credibility becasue it

is not relevant! " I happen to disagree with this strongly. Nothing

is 100%. Right or Wrong in anyones favor, including physicians and

scientists until proven otherwise. There are many individuals that

have had mold induced illnesses that are now experiencing MCS

symptoms, including my wife. At the same time there have been many

others that have been exposed to mold without symptoms of MCS at

this time. There are most likely several triggers and I don't think

we will ever know all of them. The way I understand it, it is a

toxic exposure OVERLOAD, whether it is VOC's from mold or manmade

chemicals. Mycotoxins are chemcials or any other fancy name you want

to give them. They are poisons bottomline and we have been poisoned.

From what I understand, you can wake up one morning and have MCS and

never know why. Obviously to me, something has affected the CNS with

a hypersensitivity reaction. Some of us know what triggered it, many

will never know. Not everyone fits in any one category, no matter

what the condition. does make a very good point, if he happened

to meet my wife and tried to convience her on what triggered her MCS

before we were aware of what mold could do, she may have told him he

was nuts. If he then took her into a moldy bldg. knowingly, and all

the symptoms showed their nasty face that corresponded with a mold

induced illnesses, then I would definately consider a piece of his

theory. But these are showing symptoms of mold, not MCS. Now did her

exposure possibly trigger the MCS, very possible. In fact, now we

know it did.

Her MCS reactions are totally different than her mold reactions.

Depending on the type of chemical " hit " will result in various

different degrees of reaction. Normally she starts off either way,

light or strong hit, with a dry hacking cough. This is also a

warning for me to be alert of how serious her response may become.

Then normally within seconds her voice goes from normal to something

like minnie mouse, then gone. This can last 3-4 hours or 3-4 days.

At the same time I have to watch her closely for oxygen intake.

Because this can become restricted very quickly. So far we have been

lucky and this is the only time she uses an inhaler that has up till

now kept her airways open. It has been brought to my attention

several times that I better take classes on how to put a trach tube

in.

So a mold hit is completely different, at least for her. Again, I am

not 100% sure why we are arguing on what has triggered an

individuals MCS, because there are many. Mold may be a factor that

alot of people do not look at, and I think that is what is

trying to say. We all must remain openminded to all possibilities.

Science is changing continuously... And so must we.........

KC

> >> Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose

an MCS

> > person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO

you know

> > what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

> > Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

> > rescucitation you might need to know?

> > Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

> > responsible medical testing available these days making it

possible

> > to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

> >

> > These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

> > . " Specificalize " on your own time, man. <

> >

> >

> > Yes, I DID just happily skip over the " actual, responsible

medical

> > testing " part.

> > And VERY happily so, because the " experts " are flat out wrong

> > regarding the circumstances and consequences of mycotoxin

exposure.

> > Their approach is misguided and arises from a false premise

which they

> > failed to re-check. (Yes, I used to subscribe to The Objectivist

> > Newsletter and read Ayn Rand and iel Branden too)

> > The entire thrust of your analytical process indicates that you

share

> > their fundamental misunderstandings and limitations.

> > For example, when you stated the necessity and importance of

medical

> > testing, my thought was to ask why someone would accept the

validity

> > of such results over their own perceptions?

> > I tested my own response, treated it as valid - despite all

> > assertions to the contrary, and I believe that my situation is

now

> > supprted by the science that Dr Shoemakers developed to measure

the

> > experience of those who have duplicated my circumstances.

> > I find medical testing to be completely unnecessary to arrive at

an

> > understanding of this reactivity. Especially when such testing

can be

> > self conducted with such ease.

> > Like it or not, we are exposed to mycotoxins every day, and my

level

> > of reactivity allows me to witness a simultaneity of response in

> > others.

> > I know what they are responding to although they do not

generally

> > know or admit it themselves because " You ain't the doctor "

and " Who do

> > you think you are " interferes with their objective assessment of

the

> > results of our non clinical - real world test situation.

> > They have indeed become my unwitting " lab rats " .

> > Your misplaced faith in medicine and rejection of the concept of

> > individualized perception has not stood you in good stead and is

an

> > obstacle to taking better control of your illness.

> > Yes, I do carry around my own portable detox chamber and this

IS my

> > own time.

> > -

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > FAIR USE NOTICE:

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Angel,

I think you are wrong on this Angel and when I locate the document I

will post it. But I do remember reading some research to where

mycotoxins after entering the body make a form of ALDEHYDE. This is

why alot of mold patients who DO develope MCS become very

sensitivity to formaldehyde. This was one of our experiences,

because I worked in a woodshop, standing 30 feet out the door Sharon

got a hit and lost her voice and my boss couldn't believe it.

There are bloodwork that does show that the enzyme levels are off

after mold exposure. You are quoting from one group of doctors and

moldies are quoting from another group. So who is right, BOTH in

their own way...

KC

>

> > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:52:26 -0000

> > From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@...>

> > Reply-

> >

> > Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

Debate: We know

> > the answer to this

> >

> >

> >> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups. I

am

> > a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical

sensitivity

> > or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think

everyone

> > that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different

ways.

> > And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

> > everyone.

> >>

> >

> >

> > Oh, I'm not generalizing.

> > I'm " specificalizing " .

> > If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

> > pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive and

> > cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in their

> > illness.

> >

> > The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for

mold

> > and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

> > molds are an " allergy " .

> > I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them anymore

> > and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just

like

> > chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

> >

> > They were QUITE certain.

> > Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

> >

> > Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't it

> > seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical

that

> > did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

> > levels, - in fact they work with it every day without succumbing?

> > The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

> > people aren't " buying it " .

> > But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed to

> > an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then

had a

> > cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

> > From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

possible

> > to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if you

are

> > still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main driving

> > force in your continued inflammatory response.

> > I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

> > attention to mold after so many years of implicating the

pesticides

> > that seemed to have been the main problem.

> > I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that without

a

> > good reason.

> > It was the only thing that saved MY life.

> > -

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > FAIR USE NOTICE:

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

This not what I am looking for but its a start.When I find the doc.I

will post it.

http://www.mold-help.org/index.php?option=content & task=view & id=457

Volatile Fungal Metabolites

During exponential growth, many fungi release low molecular weight,

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as products of secondary

metabolism. These compounds comprise a great diversity of chemical

structure, including ketones, aldehydes and alcohols as well as

moderately to highly modified aromatics and aliphatics. Cultural

studies of some common household moulds suggests that the

composition of VOCs remains qualitatively stable over a range of

growth media and conditions (Sunesson et al. , 1995). Furthermore,

the presence of certain marker compounds common to multiple species,

such as 3-methylfuran, may be monitored as a proxy for the presence

of a fungal amplifier (Sunesson et al. , 1995). This method has been

suggested as a means of monitoring fungal contamination in grain

storage facilities (Börjesson et al. , 1989; 1990; 1992; 1993).

Limited evidence suggests that exposure to low concentrations of

VOCs may induce respiratory irritation independent of exposure to

allergenic particulate (Koren et al. , 1992). Volatile organic

compounds may also arise through indirect metabolic effects. A well-

known example of this is the fungal degradation of urea formaldehyde

foam insulation.

Fungal colonization of this material results in the cleavage of urea

from the polymer, presumably to serve as a carbon or nitrogen source

for primary metabolism. During this process formaldehyde is evolved

as a derivative, contributing to a decline in IAQ (Bissett, 1987).

> >

> > > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:52:26 -0000

> > > From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@>

> > > Reply-

> > >

> > > Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

> Debate: We know

> > > the answer to this

> > >

> > >

> > >> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups.

I

> am

> > > a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical

> sensitivity

> > > or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think

> everyone

> > > that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different

> ways.

> > > And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

> > > everyone.

> > >>

> > >

> > >

> > > Oh, I'm not generalizing.

> > > I'm " specificalizing " .

> > > If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

> > > pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive

and

> > > cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in

their

> > > illness.

> > >

> > > The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for

> mold

> > > and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

> > > molds are an " allergy " .

> > > I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them

anymore

> > > and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just

> like

> > > chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

> > >

> > > They were QUITE certain.

> > > Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

> > >

> > > Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't

it

> > > seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical

> that

> > > did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

> > > levels, - in fact they work with it every day without

succumbing?

> > > The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

> > > people aren't " buying it " .

> > > But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed

to

> > > an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then

> had a

> > > cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

> > > From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

> possible

> > > to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if

you

> are

> > > still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main

driving

> > > force in your continued inflammatory response.

> > > I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

> > > attention to mold after so many years of implicating the

> pesticides

> > > that seemed to have been the main problem.

> > > I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that

without

> a

> > > good reason.

> > > It was the only thing that saved MY life.

> > > -

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > FAIR USE NOTICE:

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

KC, I happen to disagree with you.

Mold has its own unique set of symtpoms/reactions as do chemicals.

This is the DEFINING reason, IMO that MCS and other chemically induced

illness can not be quantified by lab tests. Each chem has its own

signature, so to speak.

Those with mold have lab tests that can identify them, it is very

difficult to determine a chemcial injury if someone doesn't know their

trigger.

There are no experts that can say with assurance that one equates to the

other.

NOw, can one provoke another, of course, as once the system has sustained

a *hit*, it is subject to others. But being so gun-ho that mold is the

starting point is ridiculous and shows a complete lack of foundation for a

theory of that nature.

I have yet to see any case won in a court that someone started out with

MCS then it was back tracked and found mold to be the cause and was won on

a mold exposure.

I deal with too many people who are the forerunners in this area and I

think heavy duty researchers with years of expertise in this area would

have made the connection, as some of them ARE SUFFERING and they have r/o

mold and are still looking for answers.

Post nasal drip can lead to an URI but an URI does not have to be founded

in a post nasal drip. SImiliar but not dynamic.

On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, tigerpaw2c wrote:

> Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 01:13:53 -0000

> From: tigerpaw2c <tigerpaw2c@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> Angel & and anyone else that I missed,

>

> Your statement Angel, " Up to now it's your theory and no one in the

> chemical injury arena seems to give you any credibility becasue it

> is not relevant! " I happen to disagree with this strongly. Nothing

> is 100%. Right or Wrong in anyones favor, including physicians and

> scientists until proven otherwise. There are many individuals that

> have had mold induced illnesses that are now experiencing MCS

> symptoms, including my wife. At the same time there have been many

> others that have been exposed to mold without symptoms of MCS at

> this time. There are most likely several triggers and I don't think

> we will ever know all of them. The way I understand it, it is a

> toxic exposure OVERLOAD, whether it is VOC's from mold or manmade

> chemicals. Mycotoxins are chemcials or any other fancy name you want

> to give them. They are poisons bottomline and we have been poisoned.

>

>> From what I understand, you can wake up one morning and have MCS and

> never know why. Obviously to me, something has affected the CNS with

> a hypersensitivity reaction. Some of us know what triggered it, many

> will never know. Not everyone fits in any one category, no matter

> what the condition. does make a very good point, if he happened

> to meet my wife and tried to convience her on what triggered her MCS

> before we were aware of what mold could do, she may have told him he

> was nuts. If he then took her into a moldy bldg. knowingly, and all

> the symptoms showed their nasty face that corresponded with a mold

> induced illnesses, then I would definately consider a piece of his

> theory. But these are showing symptoms of mold, not MCS. Now did her

> exposure possibly trigger the MCS, very possible. In fact, now we

> know it did.

>

> Her MCS reactions are totally different than her mold reactions.

> Depending on the type of chemical " hit " will result in various

> different degrees of reaction. Normally she starts off either way,

> light or strong hit, with a dry hacking cough. This is also a

> warning for me to be alert of how serious her response may become.

> Then normally within seconds her voice goes from normal to something

> like minnie mouse, then gone. This can last 3-4 hours or 3-4 days.

> At the same time I have to watch her closely for oxygen intake.

> Because this can become restricted very quickly. So far we have been

> lucky and this is the only time she uses an inhaler that has up till

> now kept her airways open. It has been brought to my attention

> several times that I better take classes on how to put a trach tube

> in.

>

> So a mold hit is completely different, at least for her. Again, I am

> not 100% sure why we are arguing on what has triggered an

> individuals MCS, because there are many. Mold may be a factor that

> alot of people do not look at, and I think that is what is

> trying to say. We all must remain openminded to all possibilities.

> Science is changing continuously... And so must we.........

>

> KC

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>>>> Who on earth would knowingly, willingly, and purposely expose

> an MCS

>>> person to mold when they knew what it could do to them? Or DO

> you know

>>> what it can do to them? Do you carry a portable detox chamber?

>>> Epipen? Are you fully training and certified in all the forms of

>>> rescucitation you might need to know?

>>> Did you just happily skip over the part where there is actual,

>>> responsible medical testing available these days making it

> possible

>>> to KNOW what their sensitivity to mycotoxins is?

>>>

>>> These people aren't your personal little lab rats,

>>> . " Specificalize " on your own time, man. <

>>>

>>>

>>> Yes, I DID just happily skip over the " actual, responsible

> medical

>>> testing " part.

>>> And VERY happily so, because the " experts " are flat out wrong

>>> regarding the circumstances and consequences of mycotoxin

> exposure.

>>> Their approach is misguided and arises from a false premise

> which they

>>> failed to re-check. (Yes, I used to subscribe to The Objectivist

>>> Newsletter and read Ayn Rand and iel Branden too)

>>> The entire thrust of your analytical process indicates that you

> share

>>> their fundamental misunderstandings and limitations.

>>> For example, when you stated the necessity and importance of

> medical

>>> testing, my thought was to ask why someone would accept the

> validity

>>> of such results over their own perceptions?

>>> I tested my own response, treated it as valid - despite all

>>> assertions to the contrary, and I believe that my situation is

> now

>>> supprted by the science that Dr Shoemakers developed to measure

> the

>>> experience of those who have duplicated my circumstances.

>>> I find medical testing to be completely unnecessary to arrive at

> an

>>> understanding of this reactivity. Especially when such testing

> can be

>>> self conducted with such ease.

>>> Like it or not, we are exposed to mycotoxins every day, and my

> level

>>> of reactivity allows me to witness a simultaneity of response in

>>> others.

>>> I know what they are responding to although they do not

> generally

>>> know or admit it themselves because " You ain't the doctor "

> and " Who do

>>> you think you are " interferes with their objective assessment of

> the

>>> results of our non clinical - real world test situation.

>>> They have indeed become my unwitting " lab rats " .

>>> Your misplaced faith in medicine and rejection of the concept of

>>> individualized perception has not stood you in good stead and is

> an

>>> obstacle to taking better control of your illness.

>>> Yes, I do carry around my own portable detox chamber and this

> IS my

>>> own time.

>>> -

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>>>

>>>

>>>

[Guest guest]

Kc...

And how does that equate mold to GWS? Were all the vets exposed to mold

who developed GWS?

Shedding light on Gulf War Ills

By Lamb Dayton Daily News

The goal was to explain a serious medical condition affecting thousands of

Gulf War veterans, whose symptoms have been dismissed and ridiculed for

lack of understanding them.When they finished, researchers at State

University's medical school also shed important new light on another

serious medical condition affecting millions of civilians whose symptoms

have also been dismissed and ridiculed.Gulf War syndrome and

multiple-chemical sensitivity both are a baffling and often debilitating

collection of diverse symptoms.Both can leave people with cloudy thinking,

unable to concentrate or remember.Both can cause weakness, pain or

numbness

in the muscles and joints.Both can lead to headaches, dizziness, rashes,

diarrhea or persistent fatigue.And victims of both have specific

biochemical peculiarities, it turns out. Those discoveries, by more than a

dozen Ph.D.-level researchers over four years, will help identify those

who

have either affliction explain why they have it and raise a realistic hope

of finding ways to treat it.Everybody has enzymes that help break down

small amounts of toxic chemicals and chase them harmlessly out of their

bodies. Chemically sensitive people, who have significantly lower levels

of

those enzymes, can become seriously ill from mere traces of some

commonplace chemicals. " We were able to clearly discriminate between normal

and sensitive groups, " said Gerald Alter, who did much of the enzyme

research. Just by analyzing blood samples, colleague Berberich

said,

he could tell a sensitive patient from someone else. " It doesn't

necessarily

take high levels of chemicals, " said Organisciak, who chairs the

department of biochemistry and molecular biology. " Not just the levels

that

we already knew might cause problems, but relatively low levels that might

be in the environment all the time. " That makes sense to Dr.

,

who treats chemical sensitivity in her Centerville practice. Chemicals

also

could be causing genetic abnormalities that lead to the enzyme deficiency,

she said.Follow-up research will try to tease out the roles of both

inherited genes and environmental contacts, Berberich said. He hopes it

will lead to a diagnostic test that could identify chemically sensitive

people before their symptoms overwhelm them. " From a patient's stadpoint,

it's wonderful to have this validation, " said Jackie Barton of

Centerville. " It's good that people understand this is a legitimate

problem,

and that when I ask people not to wear perfume, I'm not doing it just to

be

difficult or controlling. I have a very uncomfortable, sometimes long-term

reaction to things like fragrances, paint, new carpeting, even the

chemicals thrown off by fluorescent lights. " The Department of Defense gave

State $7.2 million toward the cost of the study and the

establishment of its Center for Genomics Research. With support from Rep.

Hobson, R-Springfield, and Springfield philanthropist

Petticrew,

Organisciak said, the researchers explored the similarities between Gulf

War veterans and the broader chemically sensitive population, which the

National Academy of Sciences has estimated at up to 15 percent of

Americans.Gulf War syndrome appears to be at least partly a heightened

sensitivity to low doses of sarin, a chemical weapon known to damage the

brain and nervous system in higher amounts. While it's impossible to trace

directly to the estimated 80,000 veterans with symptoms, evidence

indicates

microscopic sarin exposure could be at least one of the causes. " We can't

be

so cavalier in terms of low-dose exposure, " said na , who

chairs

the pharmacology and toxicology department. Although the damage from small

amounts isn't easily measured, " that doesn't mean you're not having an

effect. " Alter's group specifically tested organo-phosphates and

formaldehyde. They both " pervade modern homes and workplaces, " he said,

the

formr in insecticides and the latter in a vast array of synthetic products

that include Perma-Press clothing, construction pressboard and

carpeting. " We live in a toxic soup, let's face it, " said. " We've

been

eating pesticides and herbicides laced into our foods, albeit in very low

concentrations, since the late 1940s. It's a huge chemical experiment that

needs to be looked at, as to why we're seeing so much more chemical

sensitivity over the last 25 years. " Contact Lamb at 225-2129

Find this article at:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/localnews/content/localnews/daily/1005gulfwar

..html

[Guest guest]

This still does not prove that everyone with chemical injury has been

exposed to mold. It shows that the spores release the same VOC's as other

chemicals.

Its going from the specific to the general not the general to the

specific.

On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, tigerpaw2c wrote:

> Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 02:40:27 -0000

> From: tigerpaw2c <tigerpaw2c@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> This not what I am looking for but its a start.When I find the doc.I

> will post it.

>

> http://www.mold-help.org/index.php?option=content & task=view & id=457

>

> Volatile Fungal Metabolites

> During exponential growth, many fungi release low molecular weight,

> volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as products of secondary

> metabolism. These compounds comprise a great diversity of chemical

> structure, including ketones, aldehydes and alcohols as well as

> moderately to highly modified aromatics and aliphatics. Cultural

> studies of some common household moulds suggests that the

> composition of VOCs remains qualitatively stable over a range of

> growth media and conditions (Sunesson et al. , 1995). Furthermore,

> the presence of certain marker compounds common to multiple species,

> such as 3-methylfuran, may be monitored as a proxy for the presence

> of a fungal amplifier (Sunesson et al. , 1995). This method has been

> suggested as a means of monitoring fungal contamination in grain

> storage facilities (Börjesson et al. , 1989; 1990; 1992; 1993).

>

> Limited evidence suggests that exposure to low concentrations of

> VOCs may induce respiratory irritation independent of exposure to

> allergenic particulate (Koren et al. , 1992). Volatile organic

> compounds may also arise through indirect metabolic effects. A well-

> known example of this is the fungal degradation of urea formaldehyde

> foam insulation.

>

> Fungal colonization of this material results in the cleavage of urea

> from the polymer, presumably to serve as a carbon or nitrogen source

> for primary metabolism. During this process formaldehyde is evolved

> as a derivative, contributing to a decline in IAQ (Bissett, 1987).

>

>

>

>

>

>>>

>>>> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:52:26 -0000

>>>> From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@>

>>>> Reply-

>>>>

>>>> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

>> Debate: We know

>>>> the answer to this

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>> I don't think you can generalize MCS groups or moldy groups.

> I

>> am

>>>> a person that is ill from mold and now have a chemical

>> sensitivity

>>>> or reactive airways and chronic yeast, etc. I don't think

>> everyone

>>>> that has MCS is ill from mold. We were damaged in different

>> ways.

>>>> And then we have to try to explain mold and the chemicals to

>>>> everyone.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Oh, I'm not generalizing.

>>>> I'm " specificalizing " .

>>>> If I take an MCSer to a mold exposure and they respond, that's

>>>> pretty much an indication that they are specifically reactive

> and

>>>> cannot afford to overlook mycotoxins as a driving force in

> their

>>>> illness.

>>>>

>>>> The fact is that a number of MCSers are failing to control for

>> mold

>>>> and mycotoxin exposure because doctors have them convinced that

>>>> molds are an " allergy " .

>>>> I did the same thing too, until I couldn't listen to them

> anymore

>>>> and pointed at specific molds saying " This is slamming me just

>> like

>>>> chemicals. Are you CERTAIN that they are not? "

>>>>

>>>> They were QUITE certain.

>>>> Fortunately for me, I didn't believe them.

>>>>

>>>> Duehrings exposure was caused by pesticide, but doesn't

> it

>>>> seem a bit odd that, as in so many cases of MCS - the chemical

>> that

>>>> did such damage was applied by people who work with far higher

>>>> levels, - in fact they work with it every day without

> succumbing?

>>>> The " pesticide caused MCS " model is suspicious, and that's why

>>>> people aren't " buying it " .

>>>> But if you were a mold responder, and were chronically exposed

> to

>>>> an evironmental irritant of which you were unaware - and then

>> had a

>>>> cytokine storm, this just might 'strip the MSH/ACTH gears " .

>>>> From that point on, even though you may be doing everything

>> possible

>>>> to control for man made chemicals, it may be insufficient if

> you

>> are

>>>> still exposed to neurotoxic molds which are now the main

> driving

>>>> force in your continued inflammatory response.

>>>> I find it extremely compelling that Duehring turned her

>>>> attention to mold after so many years of implicating the

>> pesticides

>>>> that seemed to have been the main problem.

>>>> I don't think she would have shifted her focus like that

> without

>> a

>>>> good reason.

>>>> It was the only thing that saved MY life.

>>>> -

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

[Guest guest]

Dr Schaller's web site that I just read today said that he never met a MCS that

didn't have mold illness. Loni

Angel!! <jap2bemc@...> wrote:

...

Since you are still feigning mold=chemical sensitiivty...why don't you

join the REAL activists in the war against chemical injury OUTSIDE of the

mold community and see if the real players agree with you.

You are invited to join CSDA@... who you are and

see if they grant you access. You will be with the BIG PLAYERS....then we

can cross post your theory with those in the trenches

ANGEL WITH CHEMICAL INJURY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH

MOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, kl_clayton wrote:

> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:20:37 -0000

> From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold in

my home. I

> had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

> I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

>

>

>

>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

" tigerpaw2c " wrote:

> So a mold hit is completely different, at least for her. Again, I

am not 100% sure why we are arguing on what has triggered an

individuals MCS, because there are many. Mold may be a factor that

alot of people do not look at, and I think that is what is

trying to say. We all must remain openminded to all possibilities.

Science is changing continuously... And so must we.........

>

> KC

As I said in Mold Warriors, Dr diagnosed me as

a " Universal Reactor " who was " At a point where most people with CFS

commit suicide " .

But I said that at this level, my reactivities became specific

enough that I could point at a single irritant that stood out as

being different and " specific " .

And when I identified it, it was a common denominator at the site of

many other CFS onsets.

And that by avoiding this primary irritant, it seemed to have more

effect at reducing my symptoms than all the avoidance of chemical

irritants that I had previously attempted.

I'm not the only one. We've seen that trichothecenes are far more

prevalent than anyone suspected.

Why this opposition to mold when there is so much supporting

evidence? Especially in a MOLD GROUP?

-

[Guest guest]

Then I have a list for him.......

Angel

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Loni Rosser wrote:

> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 20:12:09 -0800 (PST)

> From: Loni Rosser <loni326@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: Re: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We

> know the answer to this

>

> Dr Schaller's web site that I just read today said that he never met a MCS

that didn't have mold illness. Loni

>

> Angel!! <jap2bemc@...> wrote:

>

> ...

>

> Since you are still feigning mold=chemical sensitiivty...why don't you

> join the REAL activists in the war against chemical injury OUTSIDE of the

> mold community and see if the real players agree with you.

>

> You are invited to join CSDA@... who you are and

> see if they grant you access. You will be with the BIG PLAYERS....then we

> can cross post your theory with those in the trenches

>

> ANGEL WITH CHEMICAL INJURY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH

> MOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

>

> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, kl_clayton wrote:

>

>> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:20:37 -0000

>> From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...>

>> Reply-

>>

>> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

>> the answer to this

>>

>> I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold in

my home. I

>> had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

>> I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

>>

>>

>>

>>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

>>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

>>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

>>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>>>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>>

>>

>>

[Guest guest]

Then again....those with Toxic Encephalopathy do not have mold exposures

associated with them and they have some of the same symptoms of MCS but

its not the same ailment.

I know for a fact that ANYONE with a science background would not make

such a hard core fact regarding generalities.

Am I the only one who understands the concept:

You can't go from the specific to the general?

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Loni Rosser wrote:

> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 20:12:09 -0800 (PST)

> From: Loni Rosser <loni326@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: Re: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We

> know the answer to this

>

> Dr Schaller's web site that I just read today said that he never met a MCS

that didn't have mold illness. Loni

>

> Angel!! <jap2bemc@...> wrote:

>

> ...

>

> Since you are still feigning mold=chemical sensitiivty...why don't you

> join the REAL activists in the war against chemical injury OUTSIDE of the

> mold community and see if the real players agree with you.

>

> You are invited to join CSDA@... who you are and

> see if they grant you access. You will be with the BIG PLAYERS....then we

> can cross post your theory with those in the trenches

>

> ANGEL WITH CHEMICAL INJURY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH

> MOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

>

> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, kl_clayton wrote:

>

>> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:20:37 -0000

>> From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...>

>> Reply-

>>

>> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

>> the answer to this

>>

>> I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold in

my home. I

>> had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

>> I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

>>

>>

>>

>>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

>>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

>>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

>>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>>>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>>

>>

>>

[Guest guest]

Please provide the link to this statement.

Thank you.

On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Angel!! wrote:

> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 07:13:34 +0000 (UTC)

> From: Angel!! <jap2bemc@...>

> Reply-

> Loni Rosser <loni326@...>

> Cc:

> Subject: Re: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We

> know the answer to this

>

>

>

> Then again....those with Toxic Encephalopathy do not have mold exposures

> associated with them and they have some of the same symptoms of MCS but

> its not the same ailment.

>

> I know for a fact that ANYONE with a science background would not make

> such a hard core fact regarding generalities.

>

> Am I the only one who understands the concept:

> You can't go from the specific to the general?

>

>

>

> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Loni Rosser wrote:

>

>> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 20:12:09 -0800 (PST)

>> From: Loni Rosser <loni326@...>

>> Reply-

>>

>> Subject: Re: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We

>> know the answer to this

>>

>> Dr Schaller's web site that I just read today said that he never met a MCS

that didn't have mold illness. Loni

>>

>> Angel!! <jap2bemc@...> wrote:

>>

>> ...

>>

>> Since you are still feigning mold=chemical sensitiivty...why don't you

>> join the REAL activists in the war against chemical injury OUTSIDE of the

>> mold community and see if the real players agree with you.

>>

>> You are invited to join CSDA@... who you are and

>> see if they grant you access. You will be with the BIG PLAYERS....then we

>> can cross post your theory with those in the trenches

>>

>> ANGEL WITH CHEMICAL INJURY NOT ASSOCIATED WITH

>> MOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>

>>

>> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, kl_clayton wrote:

>>

>>> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:20:37 -0000

>>> From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...>

>>> Reply-

>>>

>>> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

>>> the answer to this

>>>

>>> I became chemically sensitive over time directly from exposure to the mold

in my home. I

>>> had no chemical sensitivities previously, and also believed in an organic

lifestlye, so I know

>>> I had no exposure to chemicals to cause this.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it states

>>>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

>>>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin Pathway

>>>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

>>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>>>

>>>

>>>

[Guest guest]

For me I think it was a combination of things that did me in: I first

had an allergic reaction all over my body twice in a week. I looked

like I was 100. The first thing was several months of prendizone and

zyrtec and a few other meds. THen the landlord let her kids remove

wallpaper that had stachybotrus mold and others and then painted.

Then I was ready for sinus surgery. We had to get out a few weeks

after surgery. No recovery or anything. I called everyone but had

no rights. Then we moved into another moldy place. I never stood a

chance. Then the nightmare with the next landlord. They have a

liscence to kill apparently. So the courts, landlords did me in.

> >>>> The article below is what we all know to be true. When it

states

> >>> that the body is overwhelmed and not able to rid itself of

> >>> chemicals.......sounds eerily like Dr. Shoemaker's Biotoxin

Pathway

> >>> where the body can't get rid of the toxins.

> >>>>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> FAIR USE NOTICE:

> >>

> >>

> >>

[Guest guest]

Angel!! wrote:

> DO a web search on University in Ohio and see the FUNDED

research on REAL chemical injury and you will NOTICE that there is not

ONE MOLD reference in their research.

>

Nor is there much interest in mold from the mainstream medical

community, which is why mold illness is misunderstood and why mold

victims are demanding that this oversight be corrected.

This lack of interest should not be construed as evidence that no

interest should be taken.

My " theory " consists of accompanying people complaining of chemical

sensitivities into mycotoxin zones and witnessing a reaction.

Many have asked their doctors if their response could be to mold and

they have been dissuaded of this notion - perhaps incorrectly.

Perhaps the question should be " Why is there not ONE MOLD reference

in their research? "

-

[Guest guest]

Then why do ALL the people I PERSONALLY know with CI have NO REACTIONS to

mold?!

Others I know in other areas OUTSIDE OF VEGAS developed SOME and noticed I

said SOME reaction but NOTHING that I have seen posted on this borad.

Granted there are a few on this board that really suffer from mold related

expsoures. That does NOT equated that mold sensitivity is going to be

acquired by everyone!

On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, erikmoldwarrior wrote:

> Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:34:02 -0000

> From: erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: [] Re: Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Debate: We know

> the answer to this

>

> Angel!! wrote:

>

>> DO a web search on University in Ohio and see the FUNDED

> research on REAL chemical injury and you will NOTICE that there is not

> ONE MOLD reference in their research.

>>

>

> Nor is there much interest in mold from the mainstream medical

> community, which is why mold illness is misunderstood and why mold

> victims are demanding that this oversight be corrected.

> This lack of interest should not be construed as evidence that no

> interest should be taken.

> My " theory " consists of accompanying people complaining of chemical

> sensitivities into mycotoxin zones and witnessing a reaction.

> Many have asked their doctors if their response could be to mold and

> they have been dissuaded of this notion - perhaps incorrectly.

> Perhaps the question should be " Why is there not ONE MOLD reference

> in their research? "

> -

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

>

>