Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels

[Guest guest]

Jeff, Our book on Global Exposure Standards for over 6,000 chemicals has the WHO mycotoxin ingestion standards for:aflatoxin M1, fumonisins B1,

B2 and B3, ochratoxin A, and deoxynivaleno1Official standards are still missing for T-2 and HT-2 levels in food. It

can be assumed that the range would be of about 100 µg/kg for the total

T-2 + HT-2.Bob

I believe that it's not mold but chemical mycotoxins that will cause harm to anyone. With FEMA stating that T2 is a WMD and Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker stating that 1x10 -26 or 600 molecules could be enough to cause illness or response, just what are the known MELs or levels where mycotoxins are known to cause health hazard? Are there any safe levels of exposure to mycotoxins and if there are none surely this should be hazardous until proven safe? Jeff CharltonLondon

[Guest guest]

This article by the american college of medical toxicology seems to refute a lot of shoemakers work:http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=12 & _id=52 & zine=show

 My personal belief as a 15 year suffer (disabled and not working)  from mold related ilness is that we simply don't know what the relation of mold is to the illness.  Take aspergiliosis (fungal infection of the lung) if we didn't already know about aids it would be easy to assume that it was expousure to a moldy environment or WDB and not the fact that the aid's suffer's immune system is dammaged leaving them predisposed to the infection.

 Also this podcast gives an alternative view to a lot of the hystera surrounding the illness:http://moremark.squarespace.com/quackcast-list-mp3/  Scroll down the list till you find this one:

" quackcast 25 fungi shui "  Allthough I don't agree with Dr Crislip's sediment that mold related illness is imaginary (I do understand why he feels this way and don't fully blame him)  I think most of what he discusses is supported by the scientific evidence or lack there of which I respect. I highly recomend all of his podcast's they are a  very refreshing " alternative " to most the crap you find on the internet.

   snip " With respect to mycotoxins in indoor air, exposure modeling studies have concluded that even in moldy environments, the maximum inhalation dose of mycotoxins is generally orders of magnitude lower than demonstrated thresholds for adverse health effects.(3,7,8) The results of human studies in agricultural environments provide additional consistency for this finding, demonstrating that in moldy environments inhalation exposure to mycotoxins results in a dose that is far less than what is normally encountered from dietary exposure " snip

 

I believe that it's not mold but chemical mycotoxins that will cause harm to anyone. With FEMA stating that T2 is a WMD and Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker stating that 1x10 -26 or 600 molecules could be enough to cause illness or response, just what are the known MELs or levels where mycotoxins are known to cause health hazard? Are there any safe levels of exposure to mycotoxins and if there are none surely this should be hazardous until proven safe?

Jeff CharltonLondon

[Guest guest]

Just look at the years that the references used were pulblished.Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D.Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologistwww.drthrasher.orgtoxicologist1@...Cell: Lee Crawley, M.ED., LADCTrauma Specialistsandracrawley@... - Cell This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message (and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed. Thank you in advance for your compliance. Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels This article by the american college of medical toxicology seems to refute a lot of shoemakers work:http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=12 & _id=52 & zine=showMy personal belief as a 15 year suffer (disabled and not working) from mold related ilness is that we simply don't know what the relation of mold is to the illness. Take aspergiliosis (fungal infection of the lung) if we didn't already know about aids it would be easy to assume that it was expousure to a moldy environment or WDB and not the fact that the aid's suffer's immune system is dammaged leaving them predisposed to the infection.Also this podcast gives an alternative view to a lot of the hystera surrounding the illness:http://moremark.squarespace.com/quackcast-list-mp3/ Scroll down the list till you find this one:"quackcast 25 fungi shui"Allthough I don't agree with Dr Crislip's sediment that mold related illness is imaginary (I do understand why he feels this way and don't fully blame him) I think most of what he discusses is supported by the scientific evidence or lack there of which I respect. I highly recomend all of his podcast's they are a very refreshing "alternative" to most the crap you find on the internet.snip"With respect to mycotoxins in indoor air, exposure modeling studies have concluded that even in moldy environments, the maximum inhalation dose of mycotoxins is generally orders of magnitude lower than demonstrated thresholds for adverse health effects.(3,7,8) The results of human studies in agricultural environments provide additional consistency for this finding, demonstrating that in moldy environments inhalation exposure to mycotoxins results in a dose that is far less than what is normally encountered from dietary exposure"snip I believe that it's not mold but chemical mycotoxins that will cause harm to anyone. With FEMA stating that T2 is a WMD and Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker stating that 1x10 -26 or 600 molecules could be enough to cause illness or response, just what are the known MELs or levels where mycotoxins are known to cause health hazard? Are there any safe levels of exposure to mycotoxins and if there are none surely this should be hazardous until proven safe? Jeff CharltonLondon

[Guest guest]

You present reasoned argument that Shoemaker is wrong yet have suffered debilitating XYZ for 15 years. The only positive evidence that mould or XYZ is a possible cause of your symptoms is the failure of the established medical fraternity to provide a cure. Not just to mould related illness but to a vast range of illness known to man since the time of Hippocrates. Shoemaker may be wrong but he is providing evidence that supports his case. Dr. Crisp provides evidence of why mould is harmless or that it could be something else. I find it hard to understand how Dr.Crisp can in his pod cast mention a WDB that a test group was allowed to enter for 6 minutes and they felt no different symptoms to a palcebo group. I read Dr. Caomhill, Dr and American College of Medical Toxicology and accept everything they say, indeed Dr Shoemaker states that the WDB has a complex biological or toxic soup of which any component may be responsible for symptoms.My unqualified experience tells me decontamination and drying is a key to making a home healthy and measurement is a key to cleaning. Your point on HIV is well observed but equally how many suffers would live long in a mouldy home?Mycotoxins are apparently being discovered regularly and complex synergy is said to be occurring in homes. Who knows what these chemicals can do in minute dose on minute fragments of dead mould when in the alveoli and in direct contact with blood?RegardsJeff Charlton

[Guest guest]

This article by the american college of medical toxicology seems to refute a lot of shoemakers work:

http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=12 & _id=52 & zine=show

, I don't think the above is a correct statement. I know a bit about this paper, how it came to be, who authored it, what disclosures they made to ACMT, what they do for a living, what they cited for reference while misquoting the findings of the IOM and one of the research papers they cite.

This paper was originally written in the spring of 2006. One of the co-authors is a former employee of VeriTox. It came out one month after the VeriTox modeling theory was disallowed in a litigation in Sacramento with the judge calling it a "Huge Leap". The IOM report was the primary document that was used in the case to help discredit the flawed modeling theory of ACOEM/VeriTox/US Chamber.

When brought to the ACMT's attention of how their position statement was being used by its authors to support their businesses as professional defense witnesses and the flaws in the paper; the ACMT did the same thing AAAAI did. In early 2007, they added a disclaimer to this position statement, which lessened its impact on the courts and public health policy. The disclaimer states,

"Disclaimer While individual practitioners may differ, this is the position of the College at the time written, after a review of the issue and pertinent literature."

Sharon Noonan Kramer

[Guest guest]

>failure of the established medical fraternity  to provide a cure.Actually I would settle for at least a proper diagnosis. Nobody has even done this and I have been a big big critic of this shameful fact.

My emphsis on the soulution is to put pressure on authorities to garner money for research similar to what was done for aids, and polio and the like. Not law suites aimed at finding and punishing those we think may be guilty without extreemly convincing evidence to that extent. When this evidence is availible and " property stake holders " don't make the nessasary changes to there holdings to protect their occupents I say have at them with all the fury of hell. OH!, wait were already doing that

[Guest guest]

> " Disclaimer While individual practitioners may differ, this is the position of the College at the time written, after a review of >the>> >issue and pertinent literature. "

What flaws? Misquoting what findings of the IOM?Not sure how the above disclamer invalidates anything said in the paper?? If there was anything that was agreed unanimously to be grossly inaccurate wouldn't they amend it?  Couldn't their critics point it out and force them to do this?  Certain things that are stated as fact stand out to me particularly the part where they say people consume more mycotoxins in the food they eat than they do even in WDB's.  Do you believe this to  be a inaccurate?

I can't totally dismiss what your implying about the paper being misleading cause I know how easy it is for a few people to put a compelling spin in either direction on complicated issues like this, and how it could be easily missed by the majority of the members. If this is the case it would be scandalous and I would hope it would blow up in their faces and ruin all their reputations.  I didn't know that someone who makes a living defending mold suites had a hand in it which does denigrate the value but isn't enough to get me to dismiss it's overall value.

 For Dr Thrashers post I assume the reason it's not been revised since 06 is that there haven't been any ground breaking discoveries that contradict any of the statements made in the paper?

 

[Guest guest]

: May I suggest you review the literature on this subject. Much has been published since 2006.Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D.Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologistwww.drthrasher.orgtoxicologist1@...Cell: Lee Crawley, M.ED., LADCTrauma Specialistsandracrawley@... - Cell This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message (and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed. Thank you in advance for your compliance. Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels >"Disclaimer While individual practitioners may differ, this is the position of the College at the time written, after a review of >the>> >issue and pertinent literature."What flaws? Misquoting what findings of the IOM?Not sure how the above disclamer invalidates anything said in the paper?? If there was anything that was agreed unanimously to be grossly inaccurate wouldn't they amend it? Couldn't their critics point it out and force them to do this? Certain things that are stated as fact stand out to me particularly the part where they say people consume more mycotoxins in the food they eat than they do even in WDB's. Do you believe this to be a inaccurate?I can't totally dismiss what your implying about the paper being misleading cause I know how easy it is for a few people to put a compelling spin in either direction on complicated issues like this, and how it could be easily missed by the majority of the members. If this is the case it would be scandalous and I would hope it would blow up in their faces and ruin all their reputations. I didn't know that someone who makes a living defending mold suites had a hand in it which does denigrate the value but isn't enough to get me to dismiss it's overall value. For Dr Thrashers post I assume the reason it's not been revised since 06 is that there haven't been any ground breaking discoveries that contradict any of the statements made in the paper?

[Guest guest]

My free time in front of computer is very limited could you point me towards specific information which is simplified enough for a layperson to read? Something like the acom or acmt articles where they remove a lot of the jargon and gear it towards laypeople.

Thanks On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D. wrote:

 

: May I suggest you review the literature on this subject. Much has been published since 2006.

Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D.Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologistwww.drthrasher.orgtoxicologist1@...

[Guest guest]

I am referring to peer revieed publish literature that is available by searchin pubmed. I do not have all of the free time myself.Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D.Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologistwww.drthrasher.orgtoxicologist1@...Cell: Lee Crawley, M.ED., LADCTrauma Specialistsandracrawley@... - Cell This message and any attachments forwarded with it is to be considered privileged and confidential. The forwarding or redistribution of this message (and any attachments) without my prior written consent is strictly prohibited and may violate privacy laws. Once the intended purpose of this message has been served, please destroy the original message contents. If you have received this message in error, please reply immediately to advise the sender of the miscommunication and then delete the message and any copies you have printed. Thank you in advance for your compliance. Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels My free time in front of computer is very limited could you point me towards specific information which is simplified enough for a layperson to read? Something like the acom or acmt articles where they remove a lot of the jargon and gear it towards laypeople.Thanks On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D. wrote: : May I suggest you review the literature on this subject. Much has been published since 2006.Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Ph.D.Toxicologist/Immunotoxicologist/Fetaltoxicologistwww.drthrasher.orgtoxicologist1@...

[Guest guest]

I do have serious doubts as to my postion maybe shoemakers right, but than again maybe it isn't mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some other dynamic at play. I feel until this information see's the light of day my position is the only responsible one to hold.

I did another mold illness consulting job today. It was yet another case of acquired chemical hypersenstitivity to MVOCs. The pattern only becomes evident when you look at the real individual cases instead of statistics about causal associations and "toxic" exposures. It's the kind of thing that people throughout society live with that you won't read about in the present medical/scientific literature.

My client today told me that he took great offense when his doctor suggested that he should see a psychologist about his neurologic symptoms. He is a straight-shooting Jersey wise guy type whose response, according to my client, will probably make his doctor think twice about "calling somebody crazy" next time. I wish I could have been there.

Steve Temes

Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels

>failure of the established medical fraternity to provide a cure.

Actually I would settle for at least a proper diagnosis. Nobody has even done this and I have been a big big critic of this shameful fact.

My emphsis on the soulution is to put pressure on authorities to garner money for research similar to what was done for aids, and polio and the like. Not law suites aimed at finding and punishing those we think may be guilty without extreemly convincing evidence to that extent. When this evidence is availible and "property stake holders" don't make the nessasary changes to there holdings to protect their occupents I say have at them with all the fury of hell. OH!, wait were already doing that.

The way I understand it is that Shoemakers work has been almost unaminosly rejected by his peers. Please anyone who knows contrary step in and correct me.

Dr Crislip is'nt providing any evidence only anylizing other peoples or the lack there of and giving his opinion which I mostly agree with. One thing to note also is that he's not financially motivated unlike most those on both sides of the issue. I will admit he is no doubt quite biased on the side of MRI (mold related illness) being total crap.

I don't think he should intimate the way he does that the illness is imaginary when he has no way of knowing this or as Dr Dean Eddel used to say "we've researched this inside and out" (refering to CFS and it's impluasability as a real medical condition and it's unworthness of any serious attention from authorities).

Didn't Shoemaker simply move the goalpost a little bit from mycotoxins to endotoxins leaving the burden on others to disprove? I have very little respect for those that pose as authorities make accusations like this and leave the heavylifting for others to disprove.

I think I've done quite a bit to try to regain my health:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x74/antares41_41/house1_2.jpg

and while avoidance does prevent symptoms and I have taken what I think are pretty extreme measures I still suffer a lot. I couldn't imagine going back to my moldy house where this all started and do emphizise deeply for those that live in those condtions with this illness. Below is some mold I pulled out from underneath my kitchen floor:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x74/antares41_41/floor.jpg

I do have serious doubts as to my postion maybe shoemakers right, but than again maybe it isn't mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some other dynamic at play. I feel until this information see's the light of day my position is the only responsible one to hold.

Here is some information I jotted down from Crislip's podcast:

--------------------------------------------

fungal spores in the air "OUTDOORS"

"100's to tens of thousands per millileter of air"

"10,000,000 spores in 6 liters of air every minute"

"fortunally our immune system keeps it at bay"

"avoiding mold is like trying to avoid stupidity"

----------------------------------------------

Here he mentions assosiation and causation and the fallacy in drawing a conclusion soley on that:

-----------------------------------------

"There are epidemiologic trials"

"May show an assosiatin of the pressense of mold in some symptom complex or another"

"ummmm" assosiatin is not causeation "ummmmm"

"Most of these studies suffer from a form of the sharp shooters fallacy"

------------------------------------------

I suspect part of the reason I can't regain a decent percentage of my health back is becuase there is so much mold in the air "outdoors" that and the possibility of other things causing me problems (grass seed, pollen, dust, etc.) I'm hoping to make a trip up north this winter living in a specialized all metal trailer (if I can afford it) this should eliminate or include some of these varables once I conduct the test. If you go to any weather site they include in their forcast's pollen mold grass seed and the like and they generally are .2 on a scale of 1-10 where it is freezing and snowing out.

I place no stock at all in all the nonsense about throwing out all of your belongings except in extreme examples like water damaged carpet, furiture, wood products, or anything that can actually harbor living colonies of mold, etc. I believe too many people take this concept to the point of absurdity. Once you do that you have to pick and choose what your going to implicate as "contaminated" because there is a certain background level you can never escape from.

Christ

You present reasoned argument that Shoemaker is wrong yet have suffered debilitating XYZ for 15 years. The only positive evidence that mould or XYZ is a possible cause of your symptoms is the failure of the established medical fraternity to provide a cure. Not just to mould related illness but to a vast range of illness known to man since the time of Hippocrates.

Shoemaker may be wrong but he is providing evidence that supports his case. Dr. Crisp provides evidence of why mould is harmless or that it could be something else. I find it hard to understand how Dr.Crisp can in his pod cast mention a WDB that a test group was allowed to enter for 6 minutes and they felt no different symptoms to a palcebo group.

I read Dr. Caomhill, Dr and American College of Medical Toxicology and accept everything they say, indeed Dr Shoemaker states that the WDB has a complex biological or toxic soup of which any component may be responsible for symptoms.

My unqualified experience tells me decontamination and drying is a key to making a home healthy and measurement is a key to cleaning. Your point on HIV is well observed but equally how many suffers would live long in a mouldy home?

Mycotoxins are apparently being discovered regularly and complex synergy is said to be occurring in homes. Who knows what these chemicals can do in minute dose on minute fragments of dead mould when in the alveoli and in direct contact with blood?

Regards

Jeff Charlton

[Guest guest]

Lol! I would have loved to of been there also. I've always seen this as quite hypocritical main stream criticizes the fringe for not having impeccable scientific evidence for there hypothesis and diagnosis's  yet they still think they can simply apply this diagnosis to any symptoms that can't be easily explained any other way. As if they already know everything and that's the only option left.  

Ever since I discovered my stomach bloat (and brain fog and fatigue) was also due to food intolerance's gluten almost certainty and not directly related to mold exposure I've been reading that the estimates for gluten intolerant individuals in the not too distant past was 1 in roughly 1000.  Now there saying more like 1 in 130 or something to this effect.  

My thinking being do they label these individuals fruitcakes also and if so is there any shame? Christ

 

I do have serious doubts as to my postion maybe shoemakers right, but than again maybe it isn't mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some other dynamic at play.  I feel until this information see's the light of day my position is the only responsible one to hold.

I did another mold illness consulting job today.  It was yet another case of acquired chemical hypersenstitivity to MVOCs.  The pattern only becomes evident when you look at the real individual cases instead of statistics about causal associations and " toxic " exposures.  It's the kind of thing that people throughout society live with that you won't read about in the present medical/scientific literature.

My client today told me that he took great offense when his doctor suggested that he should see a psychologist about his neurologic symptoms.  He is a straight-shooting Jersey wise guy type whose response, according to my client, will probably make his doctor think twice about " calling somebody crazy " next time.  I wish I could have been there.

[Guest guest]

Often those who denied most vigorously can be heard, years later, saying it was all trivial and self-evident. When challenged they seem unaware of their earlier stances.

Hate people like this.

 

The history of science is replete with the ongoing denial of new p

[Guest guest]

Steve -

I agree that telling someone " It's in your head " is remarkably

unhelpful. (Any of you who are married, suggest this to your spouse

when s/he state that they are ill, and see what response you get!).

However, I think that some people with likely illness from a water

damaged building are tremendously stressed, and may benefit from

talking to a mental health professional about their stress. Some may be

grieving their losses, and could likewise benefit. It's a difficult

distinction to make, but to categorically throw out all mental health

assistance is foolish, IMHO.

But of course, many stressed people, may not have the time and funds to

do so.

Henry Slack

>I do have serious doubts as to my position maybe shoemakers right, but than

again maybe it isn't >mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some

other

dynamic at play. I feel until this >information see's the light of day my

position is the only responsible one to hold.

>

>I did another mold illness consulting job today. It was yet another case of

acquired chemical >hypersenstitivity to MVOCs. The pattern only becomes

evident

when you look at the real individual >cases instead of statistics about

causal

associations and " toxic " exposures. It's the kind of thing that >people

throughout society live with that you won't read about in the present

medical/scientific >literature.

>

>My client today told me that he took great offense when his doctor

suggested

that he should see a >psychologist about his neurologic symptoms. He is a

straight-shooting Jersey wise guy type whose >response, according to my

client,

will probably make his doctor think twice about " calling somebody >crazy "

next

time. I wish I could have been there.

>

>Steve Temes

[Guest guest]

Mr. Henry,

That is exactly right as I understand it. Ironically, one of the things that GREATLY adds to the emotional distress and mental anguish that makes the physical symptoms worsen from lack of proper treatment, is when the doctors dismiss the patients concerns of symptoms caused by exposure and state the physical symptoms are caused solely by mental issues/stress.

Its scary, degrading, and anger causing to turn to medical professionals for help with an environmental illness only to be told by a pompous, unknowing physician that he knows the symptoms are caused solely mental issues.

It happens somewhere in America every single day. It has been mass promoted into physician education for the purpose of staving off liability for causation of illness.

That fact alone, has caused much mental anguish (and unnecessary litigation) for many.

Sharon

Steve -I agree that telling someone "It's in your head" is remarkablyunhelpful. (Any of you who are married, suggest this to your spousewhen s/he state that they are ill, and see what response you get!).However, I think that some people with likely illness from a waterdamaged building are tremendously stressed, and may benefit fromtalking to a mental health professional about their stress. Some may begrieving their losses, and could likewise benefit. It's a difficultdistinction to make, but to categorically throw out all mental healthassistance is foolish, IMHO.But of course, many stressed people, may not have the time and funds todo so.Henry Slack

Sharon Noonan Kramer

[Guest guest]

Henry

Great comments as usual!

The new spirituality often has inputs on our ability to change the way that we react by accepting just one fact: about the only freedom all of us have is our ability to choose our attitude to what is happening. When we are involved in a "bad" situation we can choose to accept the fact that 'Sh**' happens but we do not have to suffer; the pain is inevitable but suffering is optional. I have been trying to find ways of telling people who have lost so much because their homes were water-damaged and they are reacting to that damage, but they do not have to suffer in the long run.

I never found a way to express my now-internalized belief/knowledge that they can always change their attitude, but I have never been successful. They all got angry at me and said I was trying to say that there was no real problem and I was just one more that said it was all in their head. What I was trying to say was that part of the solution was in their head and the problem would get mostly better, while the source was being corrected, when they changed their attitude and saw the situation as one over which they had a great deal of control.

One of the most difficult communication problems I know is how to tell someone that "Victimhood is a chosen state." without the recipient seeing that this was not an attack, but a way of effectively dealing with the situation; once you choose not to be a victim of the situation you are already much better. The situation is bad but not hopeless.

Many of my clients were living in houses that were poorly designed, built or maintained, all by others. There was real water damage and I often got quite ill by just being in them long enough to find the problem and learn enough to define a set of solutions. As soon as I tried to tell them that they would not feel as ill if they accepted the fact that others had let them down, but they could still see the problem as one that could be corrected so that they could get better, they said I was trying to blame the victim.

I anyone has come up with a way of helping those who were made ill by a water-damaged (plus often a VOC-emitting as well) buildings, I would love to hear about it. I am no longer doing building investigations but I am still thinking of writing up my approach to making housing healthier, so I could use a few ways of wording things so that the book would not get thrown across the room.

Jim H. White System Science Consulting

Re: Mycotoixin exposure levels

Steve -I agree that telling someone "It's in your head" is remarkablyunhelpful. (Any of you who are married, suggest this to your spousewhen s/he state that they are ill, and see what response you get!).However, I think that some people with likely illness from a waterdamaged building are tremendously stressed, and may benefit fromtalking to a mental health professional about their stress. Some may begrieving their losses, and could likewise benefit. It's a difficultdistinction to make, but to categorically throw out all mental healthassistance is foolish, IMHO.But of course, many stressed people, may not have the time and funds todo so.Henry Slack>I do have serious doubts as to my position maybe shoemakers right, but than again maybe it isn't >mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some other dynamic at play. I feel until this >information see's the light of day my position is the only responsible one to hold. > >I did another mold illness consulting job today. It was yet another case of acquired chemical >hypersenstitivity to MVOCs. The pattern only becomes evident when you look at the real individual >cases instead of statistics about causal associations and "toxic" exposures. It's the kind of thing that >people throughout society live with that you won't read about in the present medical/scientific >literature. > >My client today told me that he took great offense when his doctor suggested that he should see a >psychologist about his neurologic symptoms. He is a straight-shooting Jersey wise guy type whose >response, according to my client, will probably make his doctor think twice about "calling somebody >crazy" next time. I wish I could have been there. > >Steve Temes

[Guest guest]

It's hard to have a good attitude when your being raped every day which is what it's like to suffer every day from an illness that is not recognized by science.The only thing that is going to help most of us is for authorities to take our problem seriously and address it in a responsible manor.

Christ

 

[Guest guest]

Henry,

He described feeling a dry irritation with his tongue when he came home. And when he left the house, after a short while or when he went to the gym, he could again feel the sensation with his tongue. People under stress don't just make stuff like that up. I have heard this before. It is the neural sensors recovering to the point that they can pick up ppb or ppt concentrations in exhaled breath. That's why saunas work. The inhaled and absorbed volatiles come out of you afterward.

When people sense that I understand what they are experiencing, sometimes they tell me things that they haven't mentioned to anyone else before for fear of being thought of as crazy. You can learn a lot by interviewing thousands of people about their building-related health effects.

Stress can certainly exacerbate neurogenic symptoms.

Steve Temes

Steve -

I agree that telling someone "It's in your head" is remarkably

unhelpful. (Any of you who are married, suggest this to your spouse

when s/he state that they are ill, and see what response you get!).

However, I think that some people with likely illness from a water

damaged building are tremendously stressed, and may benefit from

talking to a mental health professional about their stress. Some may be

grieving their losses, and could likewise benefit. It's a difficult

distinction to make, but to categorically throw out all mental health

assistance is foolish, IMHO.

But of course, many stressed people, may not have the time and funds to

do so.

Henry Slack

>I do have serious doubts as to my position maybe shoemakers right, but than

again maybe it isn't >mycotoxins/endotoxins at all but is WDB with some other

dynamic at play. I feel until this >information see's the light of day my

position is the only responsible one to hold.

>

>I did another mold illness consulting job today. It was yet another case of

acquired chemical >hypersenstitivity to MVOCs. The pattern only becomes evident

when you look at the real individual >cases instead of statistics about causal

associations and "toxic" exposures. It's the kind of thing that >people

throughout society live with that you won't read about in the present

medical/scientific >literature.

>

>My client today told me that he took great offense when his doctor suggested

that he should see a >psychologist about his neurologic symptoms. He is a

straight-shooting Jersey wise guy type whose >response, according to my client,

will probably make his doctor think twice about "calling somebody >crazy" next

time. I wish I could have been there.

>

>Steve Temes