RE: Airborne microbial sampling

[Guest guest]

Dear Colleagues:

IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the incredible

potential variability in the results that make their interpretation so

difficult. These variablilities include not only differences between

" aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling. As I may reach to assume

Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do aggressive sampling to assess

the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not just look directly for these

reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect approach of looking to stir up these

reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various labs due to

the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non reproducible. As such,

despite their cost, the results can be difficult to interpret and therefore

difficult to justify.

Just my perspective.

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--

Director of IAQ Programs

AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

www.AIRxpert.com

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: snk1955@...

> February 16, 2006

>

> Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

>

> By Yakin

> Times Herald-Record

> hyakin@...

> Middletown,NY

>

> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

>

> Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school

> buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.

>

> An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's

> school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report -

> ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

>

> Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden

> Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything

> that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope.

> They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air

> samples were taken, which bothered some residents.

>

> " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and

> removal. " I cannot believe they would say the building is safe

> without doing air sampling. "

>

> Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold

> problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with

> cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with

> respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had

> infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

>

> Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association,

> technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

> Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-

> up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things

> up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for

> spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

>

> Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to

> get a third opinion for concerned parents.

>

> " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, " in said.

February 16, 2006 Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say By YakinTimes Herald-Recordhyakin@...Middletown,NYhttp://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.htmlLiberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report - ostensibly good news - with suspicion.Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope. They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air samples were taken, which bothered some residents."It was just inadequate," said Hibbert, a district taxpayer who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and removal. "I cannot believe they would say the building is safe without doing air sampling."Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had infested the carpeting, books and shelves. Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association, technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling. Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to get a third opinion for concerned parents."You really don't need a remediator to come in here," in said.

[Guest guest]

,

It would seem that Terry did a good job of educating the school board administration (the consumer of his service) which hired him to do a cost-effective visual assessment of surfaces where organic material subject to moisture might be a source of microbial contaminants. Where surfaces could be screened with his field microscope, he could even determine the value of taking a tape lift sample in advance. BTW, his field microscope is probably the same one I have seen myself on two occasions where he was generous enough to let the audience pass it around during presentations he gave. It's a pretty cool portable microscope that you can place on just about any surface.

Mold doesn't grow in the air and if you find it in the air you are just back to looking for the source on a surface anyway.

It was the public/parents and the local home/mold inspector who wanted to see mold air sampling results. Everybody knows that when you want to know what the air quality is, you have to test the air. That's the public perception and perception of many "professionals" today, and the reason I don't/won't do a lot of testing jobs. It is very often a waste of money, but that's what they want to pay for. I have had plenty of homeowners tell me that they want the air tested because they have already looked for mold and couldn't find anything. Never mind that they don't know how or where to look.

Steve Temes

Considering the professional understanding of the extreme limitations of airborne microbial sampling, why is "understandable that people still want air samples"?

Isn't this a failure to educate the consumer?

Can someone please explain this to me.

Sincerely,

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

[Guest guest]

-

I agree with you that a thorough visual assessment is always the most

important first step on any project.

That is probably also why I'm not a rich consultant - lol! I just recently

had a project where I did a 2 and a 1/2 hour visual assessment on a home,

but did not take any samples. The seller of the home got very upset with my

report, which had many pages of photo documentation along with a plan of

action to address and correct the moisture issues which had led to the mold

growth in the first place. They proceeded to call in their own company who

came in and was directed where to sample by the seller's realtor. Of course

the air samples showed nothing substantial, never mind the growing carpet,

eaten tack strip, etc. etc.

Also, many of the companies in my area perform as both consultant and

remediator, so I have been called in for a second opinion on numerous

projects where my client was told they needed remediation based on the air

sample findings, when in fact everything was " normal. "

Most people don't understand how " fragile " sampling (especially for mold in

the air) really is, and all of the millions of variables, as well as all of

the things that can be done to " alter " sample results...

Just my opinion...

Terry Brennan is by far one of the leading people in this industry, so I

trust that he used his best judgment on this project.

Stacey Champion

Re: Airborne microbial sampling

Dear Colleagues:

IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the incredible

potential variability in the results that make their interpretation so

difficult. These variablilities include not only differences between

" aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling. As I may reach to assume

Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do aggressive sampling to

assess the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not just look directly for

these reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect approach of looking to stir up

these reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various labs due

to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non reproducible. As such,

despite their cost, the results can be difficult to interpret and therefore

difficult to justify.

Just my perspective.

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--

Director of IAQ Programs

AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

www.AIRxpert.com

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: snk1955@...

> February 16, 2006

>

> Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

>

> By Yakin

> Times Herald-Record

> hyakin@...

> Middletown,NY

>

> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

>

> Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school

> buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.

>

> An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's

> school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report -

> ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

>

> Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden

> Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything

> that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope.

> They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air

> samples were taken, which bothered some residents.

>

> " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and

> removal. " I cannot believe they would say the building is safe

> without doing air sampling. "

>

> Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold

> problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with

> cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with

> respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had

> infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

>

> Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association,

> technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

> Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-

> up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things

> up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for

> spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

>

> Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to

> get a third opinion for concerned parents.

>

> " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, " in said.

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

Spot on, Stacey...my

reports contain about 2 pages of discussion of the limitations of the air

sampling data...but people still want air samples. Understandable, really,

but given the state of the art, air sampling is often a waste of money.

Steve Carlson, CIAQC, CMRS

Liesch Associates, Inc.

Re: Airborne microbial

sampling

Dear Colleagues:

IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples

are based on the incredible

potential variability in the results that make

their interpretation so

difficult. These variablilities include not

only differences between

" aggressive' sampling versus " as

found " sampling. As I may reach to assume

Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do

aggressive sampling to

assess the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not

just look directly for

these reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect

approach of looking to stir up

these reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability

among the various labs due

to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly

non reproducible. As such,

despite their cost, the results can be difficult

to interpret and therefore

difficult to justify.

Just my perspective.

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--

Director of IAQ Programs

AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

www.AIRxpert.com

-------------- Original message

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

From: snk1955@...

> February 16, 2006

>

> Liberty mold problem not severe, experts

say

>

> By Yakin

> Times Herald-Record

> hyakin@...

> Middletown,NY

>

> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

>

> Liberty - A pair of building

consultants say Liberty's school

> buildings are wet, but there isn't a

lot of mold.

>

> An audience of about 50 listened as they

said this at Monday night's

> school board meeting, but many in the crowd

viewed the report -

> ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

>

> Building scientists Terry Brennan and

Mike in of Camroden

> Associates went through the schools

room by room, checking anything

> that looked like mold or water stains

under a portable microscope.

> They took tape-lift samples and sent

them to a lab, but no air

> samples were taken, which bothered some

residents.

>

> " It was just inadequate, " said

Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> who works as a home consultant and does mold

inspections and

> removal. " I cannot believe they would

say the building is safe

> without doing air sampling. "

>

> Over the past few years, the district has had

a significant mold

> problem, particularly in the middle school.

After helping with

> cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian

was stricken with

> respiratory and immune-system problems

triggered by mold that had

> infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

>

> Over the summer, at the request of the

Liberty Faculty Association,

> technicians from the National Institute

for Occupational Safety and

> Health inspected all three schools and

recommended extensive clean-

> up and repairs. Since then, the

district has worked to clean things

> up. A major renovation project to fix

roofs and leaks is planned for

> spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

>

> Superintendent Lawrence e said the

district hired Camroden to

> get a third opinion for concerned parents.

>

> " You really don't need a

remediator to come in here, " in said.

FAIR USE NOTICE:

This site contains copyrighted material the use of

which has not always been

specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We

are making such material

available in our efforts to advance understanding

of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair

use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section

107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,

the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have

expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research

and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this

site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain

permission from the copyright

owner.

[Guest guest]

Dear Colleagues:

Considering the professional understanding of the extreme limitations of

airborne microbial sampling, why is " understandable that people still want air

samples " ?

Isn't this a failure to educate the consumer?

Can someone please explain this to me.

Sincerely,

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--------- Re: Airborne microbial sampling

>

> Dear Colleagues:

>

> IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the incredible

> potential variability in the results that make their interpretation so

> difficult. These variablilities include not only differences between

> " aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling. As I may reach to assume

> Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do aggressive sampling to

> assess the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not just look directly for

> these reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect approach of looking to stir up

> these reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

>

> Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various labs due

> to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non reproducible. As such,

> despite their cost, the results can be difficult to interpret and therefore

> difficult to justify.

>

> Just my perspective.

>

> W. Bearg, PE, CIH

> Concord, MA

>

>

>

> --

> Director of IAQ Programs

> AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

> www.AIRxpert.com

>

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> From: snk1955@...

> > February 16, 2006

> >

> > Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

> >

> > By Yakin

> > Times Herald-Record

> > hyakin@...

> > Middletown,NY

> >

> > http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

> <http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html>

> >

> > Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school

> > buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.

> >

> > An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's

> > school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report -

> > ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

> >

> > Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden

> > Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything

> > that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope.

> > They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air

> > samples were taken, which bothered some residents.

> >

> > " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> > who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and

> > removal. " I cannot believe they would say the building is safe

> > without doing air sampling. "

> >

> > Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold

> > problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with

> > cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with

> > respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had

> > infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

> >

> > Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association,

> > technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

> > Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-

> > up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things

> > up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for

> > spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

> >

> > Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to

> > get a third opinion for concerned parents.

> >

> > " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, " in said.

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

> This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been

> specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material

> available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

> political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

> issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

> copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

> distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

> receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

> For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

> <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.>

> If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

> own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

> owner.

>

[Guest guest]

When I said " people " I am of course speaking of the layperson. When I am asked to do an investigation, usually in a workplace in response to employee complaints, I will carefully discuss the limitations of air sampling with the person in charge of hiring us, making it very clear what I can and more importantly cannot accomplish with the air samples. Even when I am convinced they understand what I am telling them, 9 times out of 10 they still want air samples, I think because they believe it will carry more weight with the complaining employees than a more efficient and appropriate observational report - just as Stacey found out (below).

Short of holding a class for all the occupants of each project site, I am not sure how to do more in the way of education...but I am open to suggestions.

D. Carlson, CIAQC, CMRS

Liesch Associates, Inc.

RE: Airborne microbial sampling

Dear Colleagues:

Considering the professional understanding of the extreme limitations of airborne microbial sampling, why is " understandable that people still want air samples " ?

Isn't this a failure to educate the consumer?

Can someone please explain this to me.

Sincerely,

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--------- Re: Airborne microbial sampling

>

> Dear Colleagues:

>

> IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the incredible

> potential variability in the results that make their interpretation so

> difficult. These variablilities include not only differences between

> " aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling. As I may reach to assume

> Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do aggressive sampling to

> assess the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not just look directly for

> these reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect approach of looking to stir up

> these reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

>

> Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various labs due

> to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non reproducible. As such,

> despite their cost, the results can be difficult to interpret and therefore

> difficult to justify.

>

> Just my perspective.

>

> W. Bearg, PE, CIH

> Concord, MA

>

>

>

> --

> Director of IAQ Programs

> AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

> www.AIRxpert.com

>

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> From: snk1955@...

> > February 16, 2006

> >

> > Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

> >

> > By Yakin

> > Times Herald-Record

> > hyakin@...

> > Middletown,NY

> >

> > http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

> <http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html>

> >

> > Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school

> > buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.

> >

> > An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's

> > school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report -

> > ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

> >

> > Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden

> > Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything

> > that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope.

> > They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air

> > samples were taken, which bothered some residents.

> >

> > " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> > who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and

> > removal. " I cannot believe they would say the building is safe

> > without doing air sampling. "

> >

> > Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold

> > problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with

> > cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with

> > respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had

> > infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

> >

> > Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association,

> > technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

> > Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-

> > up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things

> > up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for

> > spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

> >

> > Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to

> > get a third opinion for concerned parents.

> >

> > " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, " in said.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Group,

As you know I've been empahsizing the vagaries of sampling for some

time and agree with the direction of the discussion. Using numbers to

" sell " remediation services is just one side of the problem and was

well described earlier. I agree and don't need to repeat it.

I'd now like to point out the other side of the abuse of numbers -

using negatives (that are as likely to be false as not) to " sell

against " remediation when it is otherwise indicated. Like most of

you, I frequently see reports that say something like this, " I can

smell mold, I can see it, I can see the water leaks and water damage,

but the inside numbers are lower (or the same, or whatever) than the

outside numbers so there is not a mold problem. "

Those looking to protect themselves from accusations interpret this

to mean " There is no problem " vs " there is no MOLD problem. " Even

when they deliberately limited the assessment to just mold, or to a

" limited mold assessment " and not any other sources, and definitely

not an EXPOSURE assessment. Which is what the " victims " are intending

to ask for.

But the (non-industrial) public is at the end of the line of exposure

concerns and looking for help could care less about the subtle

technicalities. They are frequently left in an angry daze in the

midst of continuing (or at least suspected) harm by events not caused

by themselves but promulgated by the very authorities they are told

to rely on.

So, both sides have been presented on the the harm caused and

exacerbated by the abuse of numbers. We should be done with this for

awhile, right?

NEXT STEP: What helps solve the problem rather than continuing the

problem? First, stop the finger pointing, stop laying blame, stop

egotistical behind-the-back nebulous accusations and start working

together. Those truly interested in helping can use the scientific

method as a model to identify the problem, create a hypothesis, test

it and revise as needed to reach the truth. And then - this is

important - have the guts to set aside personal agendas and

proactively offer what they have learned, listen to what others have

learned, and stay with the process.

Not that I have an opinion.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> Spot on, Stacey...my reports contain about 2 pages of discussion of

> the limitations of the air sampling data...but people still want air

> samples. Understandable, really, but given the state of the art, air

> sampling is often a waste of money.

>

> Steve Carlson, CIAQC, CMRS

> Liesch Associates, Inc.

>

> Re:

> Airborne microbial sampling

>

> Dear Colleagues:

>

> IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the

> incredible potential variability in the results that make their

> interpretation so difficult. These variablilities include not only

> differences between " aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling.

> As I may reach to assume Terry decision making process, perhaps if you

> do aggressive sampling to assess the presence of microbial reservoirs,

> why not just look directly for these reservoirs, as opposed to the

> indirect approach of looking to stir up these reservoirs and see what

> gets into the air.

>

> Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various

> labs due to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non

> reproducible. As such, despite their cost, the results can be

> difficult to interpret and therefore difficult to justify.

>

> Just my perspective.

>

> W. Bearg, PE, CIH

> Concord, MA

>

>

>

> --

> Director of IAQ Programs

> AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

> www.AIRxpert.com

>

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> From: snk1955@...

> > February 16, 2006

> >

> > Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

> >

> > By Yakin

> > Times Herald-Record

> > hyakin@...

> > Middletown,NY

> >

> > http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.htm

> > l

> <http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

> > > > Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school >

> buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold. > > An audience of

> about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's > school board

> meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report - > ostensibly good

> news - with suspicion. > > Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike

> in of Camroden > Associates went through the schools room by

> room, checking anything > that looked like mold or water stains under

> a portable microscope. > They took tape-lift samples and sent them to

> a lab, but no air > samples were taken, which bothered some

> residents. > > " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a

> district taxpayer > who works as a home consultant and does mold

> inspections and > removal. " I cannot believe they would say the

> building is safe > without doing air sampling. " > > Over the past few

> years, the district has had a significant mold > problem,

> particularly in the middle school. After helping with > cleanup

> efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with > respiratory

> and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had > infested the

> carpeting, books and shelves. > > Over the summer, at the request of

> the Liberty Faculty Association, > technicians from the National

> Institute for Occupational Safety and > Health inspected all three

> schools and recommended extensive clean- > up and repairs. Since then,

> the district has worked to clean things > up. A major renovation

> project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for > spring. BOCES does

> quarterly air sampling. > > Superintendent Lawrence e said the

> district hired Camroden to > get a third opinion for concerned

> parents. > > " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, "

> in said.

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

> This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

> always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are

> making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding

> of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

> scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this

> constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided

> for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title

> 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed

> without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

> receiving the included information for research and educational

> purposes. For more information go to:

> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

> <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.> If you wish to use

> copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go

> beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

> owner.

[Guest guest]

It's understandable that people desire the ultimate reassurance that ALL

risks to their safety has been identified and removed - and they want

documented proof that this is so. Proof (to them) comes in the form of a

report with numbers that they perceive to be " hard data " which makes them

feel safe ... or not.

Like most of you I believe that sampling is a useful tool for evaluation of

difficult cases and I have been " forced " to collect samples in some

unwarranted situations no matter how much I tried to " educate " (and I work

at a university). Sometimes results say what the occupant wants to hear ...

sometimes they don't. In either case my standard qualifier is - " Although

air sampling is helpful to broadly quantitate air quality with respect to

mold, many variables come into play that severely limit it's effectiveness

to draw hard and fast conclusions. "

What's not understandable to me is " professionals " who sample (many times

unnecessarily) and portray the data to mean more than it is in order to

provide reassurance that all is safe. The occupant feels better, the

" professional " collects a check, and everyone feels good, even though the

end result of the air quality in question would have been the same without

sampling.

N. Walsh

Louisiana State University

Health & Safety Officer

twalsh@...

LSU Home

RE: Airborne microbial sampling

Dear Colleagues:

Considering the professional understanding of the extreme limitations of

airborne microbial sampling, why is " understandable that people still want

air samples " ?

Isn't this a failure to educate the consumer?

Can someone please explain this to me.

Sincerely,

W. Bearg, PE, CIH

Concord, MA

--------- Re: Airborne microbial sampling

>

> Dear Colleagues:

>

> IMHO, the reasons against doing airborne samples are based on the

incredible

> potential variability in the results that make their interpretation so

> difficult. These variablilities include not only differences between

> " aggressive' sampling versus " as found " sampling. As I may reach to

assume

> Terry decision making process, perhaps if you do aggressive sampling to

> assess the presence of microbial reservoirs, why not just look directly

for

> these reservoirs, as opposed to the indirect approach of looking to stir

up

> these reservoirs and see what gets into the air.

>

> Also, there is a tremendous amount of variability among the various labs

due

> to the fact that airborne sampling is incredibly non reproducible. As

such,

> despite their cost, the results can be difficult to interpret and

therefore

> difficult to justify.

>

> Just my perspective.

>

> W. Bearg, PE, CIH

> Concord, MA

>

>

>

> --

> Director of IAQ Programs

> AIRxpert Systems, Inc.

> www.AIRxpert.com

>

>

> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> From: snk1955@...

> > February 16, 2006

> >

> > Liberty mold problem not severe, experts say

> >

> > By Yakin

> > Times Herald-Record

> > hyakin@...

> > Middletown,NY

> >

> > http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html

> <http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/16/news-hymold-02-16.html>

> >

> > Liberty - A pair of building consultants say Liberty's school

> > buildings are wet, but there isn't a lot of mold.

> >

> > An audience of about 50 listened as they said this at Monday night's

> > school board meeting, but many in the crowd viewed the report -

> > ostensibly good news - with suspicion.

> >

> > Building scientists Terry Brennan and Mike in of Camroden

> > Associates went through the schools room by room, checking anything

> > that looked like mold or water stains under a portable microscope.

> > They took tape-lift samples and sent them to a lab, but no air

> > samples were taken, which bothered some residents.

> >

> > " It was just inadequate, " said Hibbert, a district taxpayer

> > who works as a home consultant and does mold inspections and

> > removal. " I cannot believe they would say the building is safe

> > without doing air sampling. "

> >

> > Over the past few years, the district has had a significant mold

> > problem, particularly in the middle school. After helping with

> > cleanup efforts, a middle school librarian was stricken with

> > respiratory and immune-system problems triggered by mold that had

> > infested the carpeting, books and shelves.

> >

> > Over the summer, at the request of the Liberty Faculty Association,

> > technicians from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

> > Health inspected all three schools and recommended extensive clean-

> > up and repairs. Since then, the district has worked to clean things

> > up. A major renovation project to fix roofs and leaks is planned for

> > spring. BOCES does quarterly air sampling.

> >

> > Superintendent Lawrence e said the district hired Camroden to

> > get a third opinion for concerned parents.

> >

> > " You really don't need a remediator to come in here, " in said.

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

> This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always

been

> specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such

material

> available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

> political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social

justice

> issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

> copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright

Law.

> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site

is

> distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

> receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

> For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

> <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.>

> If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of

your

> own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the

copyright

> owner.

>

[Guest guest]

While an accomplished professional like Terry Brennan does a fine job with his "direct microscopic examination" technique, it would not be very cool for every Texas Licensed Mold Consultant (Suggested Motto: we may not be competent but at least we aren't convicted felons) to be able to peek into their magic scope and say that they see or don't see what will clear or not clear a mold remediation job. Some of you know just how close the State of Texas came to having that particular debacle on their hands.

(At this point I offer my apologies in advance for my Motto comments above, and no disrespect intended to all of the competent professionals that had to get Licensed in Texas in order to compete with all of the incompetent non-professionals albeit non-felons to whom disrespect is intended. I must admit that I have been surprised that the incoming incompetent for the Mold licensing is a trickle of what occurred for Asbestos in the early 1990's. It does make sense in retrospect as the great Texas Mold Rush was already over when licensing occurred and asbestos was just becoming a commodity business when TX licensed that assessment and abatement).

Anyway, I digress. One of the reasons that people want laboratory analysis of surface and/or air samples is that they want quantitative data that is not dependent solely on the whims of a verbal opinion. They just don't trust us, imagine that. Now of course we all know that a lot of what passes for quantitative analysis in the mold consulting world is frequently not as good as a simple photo of a visual observation, but the bottom line is that with some consultants saying that surfaces without visible mold are a problem and others saying they are not, the public has every right to be confused. Because the mold assessment business is full of people that are quick to validate unfounded fears, so that no one else, no matter how competent, is going to convince them otherwise.

These days anyone that doesn't have a CV equivalent to Terry Brennan's better do a little sampling to validate their verbal opinions, or as an alternative make sure their E & O insurance premium is all paid up. I think Mold litigation is far from over.

B. Dotson, CIH, CSP

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of AirwaysEnv@...Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 1:24 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: Airborne microbial sampling,It would seem that Terry did a good job of educating the school board administration (the consumer of his service) which hired him to do a cost-effective visual assessment of surfaces where organic material subject to moisture might be a source of microbial contaminants. Where surfaces could be screened with his field microscope, he could even determine the value of taking a tape lift sample in advance. BTW, his field microscope is probably the same one I have seen myself on two occasions where he was generous enough to let the audience pass it around during presentations he gave. It's a pretty cool portable microscope that you can place on just about any surface.Mold doesn't grow in the air and if you find it in the air you are just back to looking for the source on a surface anyway.It was the public/parents and the local home/mold inspector who wanted to see mold air sampling results. Everybody knows that when you want to know what the air quality is, you have to test the air. That's the public perception and perception of many "professionals" today, and the reason I don't/won't do a lot of testing jobs. It is very often a waste of money, but that's what they want to pay for. I have had plenty of homeowners tell me that they want the air tested because they have already looked for mold and couldn't find anything. Never mind that they don't know how or where to look.Steve Temes

Considering the professional understanding of the extreme limitations of airborne microbial sampling, why is "understandable that people still want air samples"?Isn't this a failure to educate the consumer?Can someone please explain this to me.Sincerely, W. Bearg, PE, CIHConcord, MA

[Guest guest]

" Carl E. Grimes " wrote:

> Group,

As you know I've been empahsizing the vagaries of sampling for some

time and agree with the direction of the discussion. Using numbers

to " sell " remediation services is just one side of the problem and

was well described earlier. I agree and don't need to repeat it.

>

> NEXT STEP: What helps solve the problem rather than continuing

the problem? First, stop the finger pointing, stop laying blame,

stop egotistical behind-the-back nebulous accusations and start

working together. Those truly interested in helping can use the

scientific method as a model to identify the problem, create a

hypothesis, test it and revise as needed to reach the truth. And

then - this is important - have the guts to set aside personal

agendas and proactively offer what they have learned, listen to what

others have learned, and stay with the process.

>

> Not that I have an opinion.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

Carl, as I demonstrated to Dr Marinkovich by " vectoring " a spore

plume in his reception room, a person at an extreme Personal Impact

Rating can sense mold well enough to adjust airborne testing in any

desired direction.

I can simply step to one side of a spore plume and remove myself

from an intense cloud of spores to an area that probably wouldn't

make anybody ill, including me.

Even Sick Buildings have their good days and bad, and I tell which,

for this has been essential for me.

A " renegade " mold responder could conceivably work for the insurance

companies by testing areas which " feel " the least intense.

I'm certain that just as realtors have been known to employ mold

responders to avoid investing in " bad buildings " , the converse

utilization of a sensitive individual to bolster claims of safety

and lack of contamination must have crossed someones mind by now.

All that is required is suitable sensitivity and " ethical

flexibility " .

I've spent many years being slammed by mold while some of the

people next to me show no signs of ill effect and have had no means

to pursuade doctors that their concepts only extend up to the point

of dealing with the problems of a person at a lesser PIR.

Anyone who has arrived at the level of reactivity in which they are

affected by items brought from their mold contaminated environment

are subject to contaminated articles that have passed through the

many mold impacted buildings where even " new " items are manufactured

and stored.

There is no real time test that applies to people at this level,

and there are many of us.

Yet there is no real need for such a test, as people who are

sensitive enough to be affected can also be trained to monitor their

own exposures and determine for themselves what actions are suitable

or necessary.

Education in the principles of perception, avoidance, and

decontamination are the only viable options for extreme responders

if medical intervention is ineffective or unavailable.

-

[Guest guest]

I firmly believe that a practical approach based on swift action to correct a problem causing mold growth is much more valuable to prevent health threats than sampling to “prove†what should be obvious.

Well, sit down! For the second time in a row, I would agree with you that in many instances this is true - in a perfect world. Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world. There are many self professed experts involved in this issue who have no more business providing expert advice on remediation than I do. And I don't have any business doing that.

I think New Orleans provides a unique situation and your position would be logical because of the need to rapidly address the situation. But in typical scenarios, the more data one can collect to address a complicated situation, the more everyone is protected.

Sharon

[Guest guest]

The Government building that made me sick had North East consultants come in

and do testing. The report was hidden for a year until I became ill. This

report was soooo bad it even recommenbded those of us who worked there should be

told so we could seek medical advise. How can OUR government or ( Portsmouth

Naval Shipyard) get away with withholding that information. I year before and I

wasnt this ill.

Janet s

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

I’m going to mark my calendar to commemorate

the day we agreed on somethingJ. It’s kind of ironic that we were composing our last posts

at about the same time. The description of your experience explains a lot and I

am truly sorry that such gross ineptitude led to the severe problems you’ve

experienced. From your description it appears that air sampling was helpful to

make a legal case against the contractors, but I don’t believe it was

helpful in any way to prevent the sequence of horrible events, except maybe to

slow down what should have been a swift, aggressive remediation of an obvious problem,

especially in light of a health issue as serious as CF. Please trust that I

clearly understand the devastation that mold exposure can cause in some

instances, and I thank you for clarifying your experience, but I firmly believe

that a practical approach based on swift action to correct a problem causing

mold growth is much more valuable to prevent health threats than sampling to “prove”

what should be obvious.

Wei,

I understand the concept you/IHMO

present, but I don’t agree with it based on the innate flaws of sampling

and analysis of airborne mold spores. That said, I believe that post

remediation sampling may serve (at best) as one qualitative gauge of successful

removal of an indoor source of mold. I truly hope that one day I may be able to

have confidence that sampling will provide the assurance that “the job is

done” and that “the health threat has been removed” –

that day is not here in my opinion.

N. Walsh

Louisiana State University

Health & Safety Officer

twalsh@...

From:

iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of snk1955@...

Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

6:47 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Airborne

microbial sampling

In a message dated 2/22/2006 3:28:00 PM

Pacific Standard Time, twalsh@... writes:

One last thing that is sure to put me on

many of your #@ & * list (if it’s not already) … I believe that

as human health hazards go in this world airborne mold spores simply do not

rank anywhere near the top of the list and that it is a disservice to our

fellow man to make it appear to be so.

Tom,

I don't think that

statement would put you on anyone's list. It is a misconception that

those of us who understand the health devastation that mold exposure can cause,

think that mold is public enemy number 1 - not to be tolerated at all.

The reality is that mold is

only a severe health threat when one is exposed to an excessive amount - and

typically for a long period of time in a water damaged, moldy building.

The vast majority of the population will never experience this. The vast

majority of buildings are not water damaged moldy structures.

To use my daughter's Cystic

Fibrosis as an analogy. One out of 20 caucasion carry the recessive CF

gene. Only one in 2000 births results in CF. So CF is not as

prevelant of problem as many other diseases. But it is a legitimate,

serious illness for those afflicted. It requires serious medical treatment.

And that is the same thing

for mold victims. We realize there is a very specific scenario we have

experienced that most will not. Yet, these illnesses are real, and

deserve to be treated just as much as those who suffer from CF.

The heartbreak for some of

us who have been through the mold ordeal is, that unlike CF, mold illnesses are

completely preventable. If someone had just told most mold victims what

could happen to their health - they wouldn't be sick. And MANY mold

victims are quite vocal because they do not want to see anyone else

unnecessarily go through the tragedy they have experienced simply because of

lack of information and education.

But are there other

illnesses that are probably much more prevelent? Of course.

Sharon Kramer

[Guest guest]

, That's why we are all here in this forum. Try to see what we have, what we can use, and how to make it better. During the progress, we still have to use whatever the best tool we have available. Hopefully, the day you feel confident about the air sampling method will soon arrive. Wei Tang QLAB" N. Walsh" wrote: Sharon, I’m going to mark my calendar to commemorate the day we agreed on somethingJ. It’s kind of ironic that we were composing our last posts at about the same time. The description of your experience explains a lot and I am truly sorry that such gross ineptitude led to the severe problems you’ve experienced. From your description it appears that air sampling was helpful to make a legal case against the contractors, but I don’t believe it was helpful in any way to prevent the sequence of horrible events, except maybe to slow down what should have been a swift, aggressive remediation of an obvious problem, especially in light of a health issue as serious as CF. Please trust that I clearly understand the devastation that mold exposure can cause in some instances, and I thank you for clarifying your experience, but I firmly believe that a practical approach based on

swift action to correct a problem causing mold growth is much more valuable to prevent health threats than sampling to “prove” what should be obvious. Wei, I understand the concept you/IHMO present, but I don’t agree with it based on the innate flaws of sampling and analysis of airborne mold spores. That said, I believe that post remediation sampling may serve

(at best) as one qualitative gauge of successful removal of an indoor source of mold. I truly hope that one day I may be able to have confidence that sampling will provide the assurance that “the job is done” and that “the health threat has been removed” – that day is not here in my opinion. N. Walsh Louisiana State University Health & Safety Officer twalsh@... From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of snk1955@...Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:47 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: Airborne microbial sampling In a message dated 2/22/2006 3:28:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,

twalsh@... writes: One last thing that is sure to put me on many of your #@ & * list (if it’s not already) … I believe that as human health hazards go in this world airborne mold spores simply do not rank anywhere near the top of the list and that it is a disservice to our fellow man to make it appear to be so. Tom, I don't think that statement would put you on anyone's list. It is a misconception that those of us who understand the health devastation that mold exposure can cause, think that mold is public enemy number 1 - not to be tolerated at all. The reality is that mold is only a severe health threat when one is exposed to an excessive amount - and typically for a long period of time in a water damaged, moldy building. The vast majority of the population will never experience this. The vast majority of buildings are not water damaged moldy structures. To use my daughter's Cystic Fibrosis as an analogy. One out of 20 caucasion carry the recessive CF gene. Only one in 2000 births results in CF. So CF is not as prevelant of problem as many other diseases. But it is a legitimate, serious illness for those afflicted. It

requires serious medical treatment. And that is the same thing for mold victims. We realize there is a very specific scenario we have experienced that most will not. Yet, these illnesses are real, and deserve to be treated just as much as those who suffer from CF. The heartbreak

for some of us who have been through the mold ordeal is, that unlike CF, mold illnesses are completely preventable. If someone had just told most mold victims what could happen to their health - they wouldn't be sick. And MANY mold victims are quite vocal because they do not want to see anyone else unnecessarily go through the tragedy they have experienced simply because of lack of information and education. But are there other illnesses that are probably much more prevelent? Of course. Sharon Kramer Wei Tang, Ph.D.Lab DirectorQLABCherry Hill, NJ