Re: stachy spores still toxic after three years, books

[Guest guest]

Yep, same experience with books exposed to mold spores, HEPA vacuumed and

cleaned. The sense I get is that these mycotoxins are here to stay and remain

just as potent as ever after time. In storage they stay, until something better

comes along if ever...

In a message dated 4/23/06 6:41:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

jeaninem660@... writes:

> think the study was done by straus, listed at schoolmoldhelp.

> after three years of dry storage of stachy spores, they were still

> puttting off mycotoxins.

> I wiped down my books with ammonia and water,have done this twice, they

> dont bother me inless I open them. the pages still smell moldy.

> I cant open them and stick them under my nose to read

> but I cant do that with a new book either.

> maybe someday. stored in containers for now.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think that trichothecenes are relatively stable, so I would not be

surprised if they remained in an environment for many many years. Once

produced by molds, they can become airborne as powder. These toxins

are at that point, soluable in solvents like alcohol.

At that point, they are not recognizable as being from mold in the

sense that they are just chemical toxins. They may collect in spots

where solvents in the environment concentrate them, perhaps in earth

or in dust. (As far as I know, most people know very little about the

'fluid' dynamics of these toxins in the environment, but it seems to

be a subject worth studying, given the danger they present.)

Oxidation might change the mycotoxins into something nontoxic, but I

don't know how this might be achieved.

On 4/23/06, bobbinsbiomed@... <bobbinsbiomed@...> wrote:

> Yep, same experience with books exposed to mold spores, HEPA vacuumed and

> cleaned. The sense I get is that these mycotoxins are here to stay and remain

> just as potent as ever after time. In storage they stay, until something

better

> comes along if ever...

>

> In a message dated 4/23/06 6:41:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> jeaninem660@... writes:

>

> > think the study was done by straus, listed at schoolmoldhelp.

> > after three years of dry storage of stachy spores, they were still

> > puttting off mycotoxins.

> > I wiped down my books with ammonia and water,have done this twice, they

> > dont bother me inless I open them. the pages still smell moldy.

> > I cant open them and stick them under my nose to read

> > but I cant do that with a new book either.

> > maybe someday. stored in containers for now.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

LiveSimply wrote:

>At that point, they are not recognizable as being from mold in the

sense that they are just chemical toxins.<

And when one realizes this, the futility of counting spores is

immediately apparent.

-

[Guest guest]

---exactly , and this is the part that many have a hard time

soaking in. includeing some of the comapanys out there that do air

testing, lawyers, exc. maybe in the beganing when toxic molds start

growing if its mainly in your bedroom, you may be getting exposed

before others, but after awhile, its in the air everywhere in your

home and all there will be exposed. the more air tight your home is,

the more consentrated it would

be.

In , " erikmoldwarrior "

<erikmoldwarrior@...> wrote:

>

> LiveSimply wrote:

>

> >At that point, they are not recognizable as being from mold in

the

> sense that they are just chemical toxins.<

>

>

> And when one realizes this, the futility of counting spores is

> immediately apparent.

> -

>

[Guest guest]

There is a lot of money and energy invested in the spore testing area,

and it is definitely a big part of the picture, esp. in newer homes

(where mycotoxins have not had the time to build up the way they seem

to over time)

However, I think that spore testing is often wrong on a situation,

esp. when air testing and hidden mold is involved, or when sampling is

only done a few times, or on one day.. and in those situations its

absolutely tragic how often a building is cleared when it clearly

still has a problem. If fact, often the problem is rated by occupants

as subjectively worse after 'remediation'.

There is one big remaining technical problem though, and I don't think

any of us wil argue with this.

*There are so many mycotoxins, and no researcher will not admit

upfront that many significant ones still have not been discovered

yet*. (in other words, toxinogenic molds like stachybotrys in the real

world are quite possibly substantially more toxic than the 20 or so

mycotoxins we know about to date that they produce in cumlative effect

might indicate - at the very least it is clear that these mycotoxins

synergize and have all sorts of combinatory effects in the body. And I

have never seen a situation where a WDB has produced only one

toxinogenic mold colony.. genetically homogenous - of course, its

quite the opposite..)

[Guest guest]

LiveSimply wrote:

> There is a lot of money and energy invested in the spore testing

area, and it is definitely a big part of the picture, esp. in newer

homes (where mycotoxins have not had the time to build up the way

they seem to over time)

>

> There is one big remaining technical problem though, and I don't

think any of us wil argue with this.

*There are so many mycotoxins, and no researcher will not admit

upfront that many significant ones still have not been discovered

yet*.

If you would read Dr Shoemakers books, you might see that the far

more important technical problem than pursuing conventional

cytotoxicity effects from mycotoxins is the necessity for

understanding immune resprogramming by innate complement activation

factors in biotoxin mediated illnesses, which is what makes these

types of illness a mystery from the normal toxicological point of

view.

And before you conclude that new buildings are likely to be free of

mycotoxins simply because they are freshly built, I suggest you go

try to sleep in some of them.

As Dr " D " said after touring new homes built with moldy wood, " I

couldn't live here if they GAVE this place to me " .

-

[Guest guest]

,

I've read " Mold Warriors " several times, (even though that that is the

only Dr. S book I've read to date) but you have several times accused

me of not having read them. Is there some all-important concept in

there that I'm failing to grasp? All in all, I think Dr. Shoemaker is

probably the most clued in medical practitioner working with mold

victims. I only wish that I was flush enough to afford - which in my

case would mean travelling across a continent - to see him.

On 4/24/06, erikmoldwarrior <erikmoldwarrior@...> wrote:

>

> If you would read Dr Shoemakers books, you might see that the far

> more important technical problem than pursuing conventional

> cytotoxicity effects from mycotoxins is the necessity for

> understanding immune resprogramming by innate complement activation

> factors in biotoxin mediated illnesses, which is what makes these

> types of illness a mystery from the normal toxicological point of

> view.

Yes, I've often thought this myself..But since I don't know enough to

speak on this subject,

I haven't spoken much about it.

>

> And before you conclude that new buildings are likely to be free of

> mycotoxins simply because they are freshly built, I suggest you go

> try to sleep in some of them.

Hey, please don't get mad at me. I was just speculating that the

likelihood of mycotoxin buildup might be higher in old buildings than

new.. not saying that new buildings were somehow blessed by

nontoxicity...

> As Dr " D " said after touring new homes built with moldy wood, " I

> couldn't live here if they GAVE this place to me " .

> -

>

Neither could I, I'm sure.. I have never liked new, manufactured housing.

Thank God I don't live in it.

BTW, re Dr. S.

I'm trying to figure out a way to get the tests he describes in his

book and papers, even though my insurance in all probability won't pay

and right now, I can't afford them. (I think its terrible the way

doctors seem scared to deal with them and him.)

Is that faith enough for you? I hope that I have not been

unintentionally criticizing him or you, if I seemed to, it certainly

was never intentional.

[Guest guest]

LiveSimply wrote:

> ,

I've read " Mold Warriors " several times, (even though that that is

the only Dr. S book I've read to date) but you have several times

accused me of not having read them. Is there some all-important

concept in there that I'm failing to grasp? <

There are a number of issues you have speculated about that were

addressed in the book, so I thought that you must not have read it.

Such as the mechanism for CSM that separates it from charcoal and

bentonite, dissociation response, intensification reaction, the

peculiarity that " CFS: The Illness " , was actually defined using

moldies as prototypes, although the CDC and CFS researchers have

admitted it yet. (So the role of fungal toxins is truly the hidden

side of the story - as you surmised).

But you are really right on target when you said that " At that

point, they are not recognizable as being from mold in the

sense that they are just chemical toxins. "

Understanding this was critical to my strategy of concerted

avoidance, because up until that point, I had been trying Hepa

filters, and basing my ideas on spore avoidance. Once I got slammed

from some binoculars that I had washed underwater - that couldn't

possibly be throwing off a cloud of spores, I shifted my focus to

mycotoxin avoidance and quit wasting my time trying to detect spores.

This is one of the instances where I was lucky to have gone through

this before certain mold concepts were presented so authoritatively

that they have been accepted as basic truth - so I had the advantage

of not having to " unlearn " it.

-