ProLabs Rebuttal to Consumer Reports

[Guest guest]

ProLab has published some specific information that directly impacts

what some of the results mean, what the report actually identifies

and even which molds will grow.

Consumer Reports tested four mold test kits and failed all four.

ProLab was one of them. D. Shane, Ph.D., VP of Lab services at

ProLab responded to CR's five points in the Aug-Oct issue of Mold &

Moisture Management Magazine, page 6. (my paraphrase unless in

quotation marks).

1. " The vials with media leaked. "

ProLab states they are aware of rare instances of leakage, have taken

corrective action and recalled all products that leaked.

2. " No expiration date. "

ProLab states that expiration dates apply to the gel, not the liquids

that make the gel. The kit has liquids that must be mixed at time of

use so they don't need expiration dates.

3. " Claims that the kit(s) can identify toxic mold, but the report

the lab sends you can't tell you this. "

ProLab states that the molds that can produce mycotoxins are easily

grown on their culture plates and be identified, which is what they

report.

(my note: Identifying mold on the plate that CAN produce mycotoxin is

not the same as identifying mold on the plate that IS producing

mycotoxin. For many of you concerned about the presence of

mycotoxins, this is a critical difference).

4. " Unused plates came back positive for mold growth. "

ProLab states the liquids must be mixed under clean conditions like

found in post remediation containment. If they are mixed in normal

conditions they will grow mold without being exposed.

(my note: This is CRITICAL for those of you that use this type of

kit. If you don't mix the liquids in a non-mold location, then the

mold in the air where you mix will be in the gel before the plate is

ever exposed. The results on the report will therefore be the

combination of what got mixed into the gel plus what settled on the

gel during the exposure).

5. The culture media is malt extract.

ProLab states that they use a proprietary culture media.

(my note: This means you may not be able to accurately compare

results from their plates with plates from any other source or lab

such as from Dallas, Mold Chek, or even from the professionals. Why?

Different culture media grow different molds. Malt extract (MEA)

favors some molds but inhibits others in a pattern that is different

from potato dextrose (PDA), corn meal (CMA), rose bengal (RBA),

tryptic soy (TSA), cellulose, sheep blood or any other media. They

did not identify the characteristics of their proprietary media).

ProLab further clarifies in their rebuttal letter:

A. " ...the most informative level of interpretation usually requires

that the analyst be able to distinguish among the predominant

different kinds. "

B. " The analyst must also be sufficiently experienced to detect

differences in seasonal frequency in outdoor air according to

location. "

C. " The ProLab test kit is an inexpensive screening test that will

aid in locating and examining mold amplifiers in residential

buildings. " (my note: this is not the same as determining whether or

not mold is a problem that needs remediation).

D. " The kits are best used in combination with a thorough inspection

to detect any macroscopically visible mold growth. "

Consumer Reports direct link:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/home-garden/home-improvement/after-

the-storm-cleaning-up-mold-206/mold-test-

kits/index.htm?resultPageIndex=1 & resultIndex=1 & searchTerm=mold%20test%

20kit

Or, go to http://www.consumerreports.org and search for " mold test

kits " It will be the first listing.

Mold and Moisture Managment Magazine is at: http://www.moldmag.com/

This issue isn't on the Web yet, but you can order a free

subscription to (hopefully) obtain the rebuttal letter on page 6. Or

I can e-mail you the scanned page if requested.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC