Guest guest Posted January 18, 2006 Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 " Carl E. Grimes " wrote: As you know, I've been preaching the inaccuracies of testing and the misinterpretation of what the results mean to the point that no one really knows.< I was very fortunate that doctors knew nothing about mold when I started out, otherwise I would have had to " unlearn " all the disinformation they've been putting out as scientific fact. Since I can perceive mold plumes, I could see that it didn't make sense to rely on airborne testing when the spores don't diffuse evenly through a room. They " waft " just like cigarette smoke. One can simply move to one side of the plume and alter the result dramatically. This is what I demonstrated in Dr Marinkovich's reception room when I showed him how to 'vector' a plume. He was amazed when the only plate in the entire office to have a positive result was in the exact spot that I indicated. He was even more amazed that that I had found the place where water damage and mold growth had occurred, " But it had been professionally remediated. You shouldn't have been able to feel anything there " . Someone who understands and perceives mold plumes would find it easy to manipulate findings in any direction that is desired. These IEQ types have a lot to learn. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.