Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

December 9, 2006

,

You made the following statement:

" Normal is typically defined as having a species distribution similar

to the outdoor "

This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the

time.

The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this definition.

The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a different

humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.

(Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your

living room filled with dirt.)

Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.

Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion

history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly

higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

distributions.

One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the

establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a

18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings

tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight

buildings.

Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once

established, predominate indoors.

Bob

December 9, 2006

,

I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of

them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being

criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.

Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting

samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group

earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables

that can skew the comparisons.

My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer

from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only

mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that

there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or

visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the

sampling period).

If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be

taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time

difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure

is negative compared to the outside).

The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially

zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside

air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)

thereby negating the transfer time.

Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I

am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that

allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the

same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC

observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to

see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies

isn't done by spore counting.

Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation

site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold

thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology.

As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human

thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between

the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is

where we have great difficulty.

Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We

haven't been " caught " yet because this is a new " science " and many

ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't

repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on

the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant

habitability. If only that were true!

Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical

comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,

including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data

aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?

Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate " mold

testing " right along with " toxic mold " and " black mold. " Except for

PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> ,

>

> You made the following statement:

>

> <bold><fontfamily><param>Times New

> Roman</param><smaller><smaller> " Normal is typically defined as having

> a species distribution similar to the outdoor "

>

> </smaller></smaller></fontfamily></bold><fontfamily><param>Times New

> Roman</param><smaller><smaller>

>

> This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the

> time.

>

> The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this

> definition.

>

> The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a

> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.

>

> (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your

> living room filled with dirt.)

>

> Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.

>

> Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion

> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly

> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

> distributions.

>

> One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the

> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a

> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

>

> The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings

> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight

> buildings.

>

> Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once

> established, predominate indoors.

>

> Bob

December 9, 2006

Bob,

That is a very interesting point. In your area mold growth inside is normal. Therefore the indoor spore count in such a normal situation would be different from outdoor. And I am sure that is the case in Canada and the tight buildings and basements in your area.

Of course if normal is mold growth inside then the indoor spores distribution will be different from the outside. And it certainly makes clearance more complex.

I will restate saying "normal for homes that do not have indoor mold growth is that indoor mold profiles are typically similar to outdoor. But the indoor levels are typically much lower than the outside."

In our area of this country that does not have basements; are relatively leaky compared to Canada and are air conditioned which control the indoor humitidy ... which means the absense of indoor mold growth ... normal spore count means similar types of mold to the outside.

Thanks for the correction. Your environment in Canada is completely different from many locations in the US such as the SE and the West. When there are very tight buildings and they have basements and the indoor humidity is not monitored and controlled there certainly will be indoor mold growth as "normal".

Rosen

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,You made the following statement:"Normal is typically defined as having a species distribution similar to the outdoor"This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the time.The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this definition.The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.(Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your living room filled with dirt.)Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable distributions.One of the best

studies was done in canada that tracked the establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight buildings.Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once established, predominate indoors.Bob

,You made the following statement:<bold><fontfamily><param>Times New Roman</param><smaller><smaller>"Normalis typically defined as having a species distribution similar to theoutdoor" </smaller></smaller></fontfamily></bold><fontfamily><param>Times New Roman</param><smaller><smaller>This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all thetime. The research on mold species in homes does NOT support thisdefinition. The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, adifferent humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors. (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in yourliving room filled with dirt.)Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times. Generally, the

number of species in a home (with no water intrusionhistory) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightlyhigher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also adifference between the total spore distributions and the culturabledistributions. One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked theestablishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a18 month period after it was built new and then occupied. The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildingstended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tightbuildings. Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, onceestablished, predominate indoors. Bob</smaller></smaller></fontfamily>

Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

December 10, 2006

Carl,

I don't disagree with anything you said. When we remediate we remove the problem materials. That's how we determine that the remediation was done. We also make sure the water problem is fixed.

If the house was already dirty and full of mold we clean and test each day over time. The major source of comparison is to the prior day. The outdoor samples are useful because they will influence rooms that you are walking into from the outside. We don't keep the windows open when we are trying to clean as the outside air makes it more difficult to determine how well you are cleaning and when you are done.

Rosen

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables that can skew the comparisons. My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the

time difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure is negative compared to the outside).The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?) thereby negating the transfer time. Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies isn't done by spore counting. Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead

of mold thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology. As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we have great difficulty.Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We haven't been "caught" yet because this is a new "science" and many ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant habitability. If only that were true!Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant, including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data aren't occupant inclusive, then

what exactly are we doing?Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate "mold testing" right along with "toxic mold" and "black mold." Except for PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores. Carl GrimesHealthy Habitats LLC-----> ,> > > You made the following statement:> > > <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> "Normal is typically defined as having> a species distribution similar to the outdoor" > > </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily> </bold><fontfami ly><param> Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>> > This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the> time. > > > The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this>

definition. > > > The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors. > > (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your> living room filled with dirt.)> > > Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times. > > > Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable> distributions. > > > One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied. >

> > The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight> buildings. > > Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once> established, predominate indoors. > > > Bob

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.

December 10, 2006

Carl,

>>You stated ... It is more accurately described as a methodology based on the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant habitability. If only that were true!

Are you saying that the absence of elevated indoor spores in the air and settled dust is not a useful indicator for habitability/ clearance criteria for the purposes of S520 / mold remediators?

I can understand if blasting or sanding were used and copious micro-particles were produced. But if such techniques were not used, mold spore counts I should think would be highly useful.

Appendix D in my book Locating Hidden Toxic Mold is a fairly detailed discussion on the problems associated with assuming that a simple comparison between indoor and outdoor counts is useful. I'd be happy to send you a copy.

Rosen

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables that can skew the comparisons. My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the

time difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure is negative compared to the outside).The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?) thereby negating the transfer time. Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies isn't done by spore counting. Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead

of mold thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology. As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we have great difficulty.Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We haven't been "caught" yet because this is a new "science" and many ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant habitability. If only that were true!Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant, including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data aren't occupant inclusive, then

what exactly are we doing?Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate "mold testing" right along with "toxic mold" and "black mold." Except for PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores. Carl GrimesHealthy Habitats LLC-----> ,> > > You made the following statement:> > > <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> "Normal is typically defined as having> a species distribution similar to the outdoor" > > </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily> </bold><fontfami ly><param> Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>> > This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the> time. > > > The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this>

definition. > > > The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors. > > (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your> living room filled with dirt.)> > > Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times. > > > Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable> distributions. > > > One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied. >

> > The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight> buildings. > > Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once> established, predominate indoors. > > > Bob

Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

December 10, 2006

,

My comments weren't meant so much as a specific criticism of you or

your methods as they were a springboard for a criticism of indoor vs

outdoor comparisons and mold sampling in general. Or, put another

way, a reliance on mold sampling that is beyond what it is capable

of. Sort of like claiming an accuracy of a calculation to 4

significant figures when the most accurate measurment is to only 2.

I see this discussion describing the state of the art (or lack

thereof) as 5000 ECs with 7000 opinions. We really need to reduce

that to as few as possible.

Which relates to the other current thread about how do consumers

intelligently choose whom to inspect and then conduct the work? Even

we don't agree. How do consumers become informed when the ones that

actually do the research come away as confused as we are?

These are some of the BIG challenges that need discussion, debate and

research. Edicts, laws and certifications of self-interest provide

only appearances, not real solutions for real people.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

> Carl,

>

> I don't disagree with anything you said. When we remediate we remove

> the problem materials. That's how we determine that the remediation

> was done. We also make sure the water problem is fixed.

>

> If the house was already dirty and full of mold we clean and test each

> day over time. The major source of comparison is to the prior day. The

> outdoor samples are useful because they will influence rooms that you

> are walking into from the outside. We don't keep the windows open when

> we are trying to clean as the outside air makes it more difficult to

> determine how well you are cleaning and when you are done.

>

> Rosen

>

> Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

>

> ,

>

> I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them

> and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized

> is HOW determinations are being conducted.

>

> Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting

> samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group

> earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables

> that can skew the comparisons.

>

> My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer

> from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only

> mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there

> is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa

> if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).

>

> If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be

> taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time

> difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure

> is negative compared to the outside).

>

> The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially

> zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside

> air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)

> thereby negating the transfer time.

>

> Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am

> really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that

> allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the

> same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC

> observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see

> if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies

> isn't done by spore counting.

>

> Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation

> site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold

> thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology.

> As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human

> thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the

> two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we

> have great difficulty.

>

> Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We

> haven't been " caught " yet because this is a new " science " and many ECs

> don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't

> repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on

> the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant

> habitability. If only that were true!

>

> Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical

> comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,

> including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data

> aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?

>

> Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate " mold

> testing " right along with " toxic mold " and " black mold. " Except for

> PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

December 10, 2006

,

Good question, right to the point. (Note: My use of capitals is for

emphasis, not shouting).

You asked: Are you saying that the absence of elevated indoor spores

in the air and settled dust is not a useful indicator for

habitability/clearance criteria for the purposes of S520 / mold

remediators?

Exactly. And irrelevant. You have intertwined several objects and

subjects: Habitability, clearance criteria, spores counts,

remediators, S520, indicator and the implicaton of " determinant. "

EXACTLY, that is what I mean, because of the ineffeciencies of

collection, errors inherent with all collection methods, lack of

viable spores when culturing, excess debris in samples for

microscopy, untrained or tired or hurried microscopists, etc etc etc

and all the other reasons for the very real prevalence of false

negatives, let alone incorrect results.

Even more so for the undeniable experience of sick people who

continue to react at zero or near zero spore levels yet stop reacting

with further removal and/or cleaning (of mold). And absolutely for

those reacting to mold indoors yet the spore testing result is low,

less than outside, or even zero. Not all effects are from the spores

alone and no sampling/analytical combination eliminates the unknown

prevelance of false negatives.

The November Symposium in Vegas in 2004 concluded as much and

suggested some sort of " cleanliness " methodology (with its own

controversy). Brochure is at:

http://www.cese.utulsa.edu/moldsymposium

A quick synopsis of opinions from experts, including several from the

November Symposium can be found in Indoor Environment Connections

from April 2005 at:

http://www.ieconnections.com/archive/apr_05/apr_05.htm#article2

This is also IRRELEVANT, because S520 sets no clearance criteria and

was not intended to. Nowhere does S520 mention spore counts. It does

mention sampling in general but nothing beyond that and certainly not

that sampling is the sole or main criteria for determining when mold

should be removed or how clean is clean. In fact, the foreward and

the IEP Standard section 15 clearly state that because of the lack of

such criteria from professional organizations the number method is

being replaced in S520 with (page 31):

" ...definitions, descriptions and conditions (1,2,3), and GENERAL

guidance, which when properly applied, can ASSIST remediators and

others in determing criteria that trigger remediation activities or

confirm remediation success. " (emphasis mine)

Sampling is but one tool of many (moisture measurements; odors;

length of time; past events; building type, use, materials and

history; type of occupant and their reports; and many others) along

with training, education, experience and professional judgement.

, awhile back, I made a pledge to myself to break my addiction by

taking no mold samples for a year, especially with the hypersensitive

clients. My investigation and interview skills increased and my

success rate actually improved. Breaking that addiction had all the

doubts and suffering of the soul that can occur with substance

addition (coffee and cigarettes, not drugs! A potato used to give me

more than enough of a " distorted " experience).

On the other hand, I recently finished a fairly large verification

project where I collected only one sample in most units and as many

as 20 in a couple of them. Why? My sampling plan depends on what

questions I need answered that cannot first be answered without

sampling. That helps prevent my over-use and over-reliance on

evidence that appears to be definitive simply because it is expressed

in numbers. Which meant I also gave up my belief in " numerology " as

applied to spore numbers.

As for your book: I'll show you mine if you show me yours. (trade?)

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

>

> Carl,

>

> >>You stated ... It is more accurately described as a methodology

> based on the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of

> occupant habitability. If only that were true! Are you saying that the

> absence of elevated indoor spores in the air and settled dust is not a

> useful indicator for habitability/ clearance criteria for the purposes

> of S520 / mold remediators?

>

> I can understand if blasting or sanding were used and copious micro-

> particles were produced. But if such techniques were not used, mold

> spore counts I should think would be highly useful.

>

> Appendix D in my book Locating Hidden Toxic Mold is a fairly detailed

> discussion on the problems associated with assuming that a simple

> comparison between indoor and outdoor counts is useful. I'd be happy

> to send you a copy.

>

> Rosen

>

> Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

>

> ,

>

> I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them

> and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized

> is HOW determinations are being conducted.

>

> Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting

> samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group

> earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables

> that can skew the comparisons.

>

> My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer

> from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only

> mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there

> is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa

> if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).

>

> If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be

> taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time

> difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure

> is negative compared to the outside).

>

> The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially

> zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside

> air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)

> thereby negating the transfer time.

>

> Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am

> really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that

> allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the

> same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC

> observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see

> if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies

> isn't done by spore counting.

>

> Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation

> site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold

> thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology.

> As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human

> thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the

> two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we

> have great difficulty.

>

> Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We

> haven't been " caught " yet because this is a new " science " and many ECs

> don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't

> repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on

> the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant

> habitability. If only that were true!

>

> Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical

> comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,

> including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data

> aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?

>

> Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate " mold

> testing " right along with " toxic mold " and " black mold. " Except for

> PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores.

>

> Carl Grimes

> Healthy Habitats LLC

>

> -----

> > ,

> >

> > You made the following statement:

> >

> > <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New

> > Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> " Normal is typically defined as

> having

> > a species distribution similar to the outdoor "

> >

> > </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily> </bold><fontfami ly><param>

> Times New

> > Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>

> >

> > This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all

> the

> > time.

> >

> > The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this

> > definition.

> >

> > The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a

> > different humidity profile and different growth media than

> outdoors.

> >

> > (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in

> your

> > living room filled with dirt.)

> >

> > Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.

> >

> > Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion

> > history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a

> slightly

> > higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

> > difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

> > distributions.

> >

> > One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the

> > establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building

> over a

> > 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

> >

> > The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings

> > tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight

> > buildings.

> >

> > Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once

> > established, predominate indoors.

> >

> > Bob

>

> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

>

December 11, 2006

All,

I think the problem resides in the fact

that it is easier to define something that is not a normal fungal ecology that

to define what a normal fungal ecology is.

In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

there is a long discussion about the definition of quality. Everyone knows quality when they see it but it

is impossible to define.

I agree with Steve that in order to have a

condition it must be definable. The more specific the better.

Sometimes, though, we have to define things by what they are not. Think hepatitis nonA

nonB nonC.

I think it will be a long time before we

(as a group) will agree on this one.

Mark Doughty

Re:

Normal Fungal Ecology

,

You made the following statement:

" Normal is typically defined as having a species

distribution similar to the outdoor "

This

statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the time.

The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this definition.

The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a different

humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.

(Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your living

room filled with dirt.)

Research by Soloman and Reponen

has clearly shown this many times.

Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion history) is

very limited with penicillium spores making up a

slightly higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

distributions.

One of the best studies was done in canada that

tracked the establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building

over a 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago

when buildings tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight buildings.

Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once established,

predominate indoors.

Bob

December 11, 2006

,

Where are you getting your make-up air? If

the house is dirty; are you aware you are (most assuredly) drawing any

contaminants from the dirty locations? Now are you using the un-cleaned

areas as background?

Bob/Ma.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of gary rosen

Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006

12:17 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Normal

Fungal Ecology

Carl,

I don't disagree with anything you said. When we remediate we

remove the problem materials. That's how we determine that the remediation was

done. We also make sure the water problem is fixed.

If the house was already dirty and full of mold we clean and test each

day over time. The major source of comparison is to the prior day.

The outdoor samples are useful because they will influence rooms that you are

walking into from the outside. We don't keep the windows open when we are trying

to clean as the outside air makes it more difficult to determine how well you

are cleaning and when you are done.

Rosen

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,

I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of

them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being

criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.

Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting

samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group

earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables

that can skew the comparisons.

My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer

from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only

mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that

there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or

visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the

sampling period).

If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be

taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time

difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure

is negative compared to the outside).

The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially

zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside

air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)

thereby negating the transfer time.

Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I

am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that

allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the

same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC

observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to

see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies

isn't done by spore counting.

Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation

site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold

thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology.

As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human

thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between

the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is

where we have great difficulty.

Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We

haven't been " caught " yet because this is a new " science "

and many

ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't

repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on

the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant

habitability. If only that were true!

Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical

comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,

including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data

aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?

Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate " mold

testing " right along with " toxic mold " and " black

mold. " Except for

PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> ,

>

> You made the following statement:

>

> <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New

> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> " Normal is typically defined as having

> a species distribution similar to the outdoor "

>

> </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily>

</bold><fontfami ly><param> Times New

> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>

>

> This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the

> time.

>

> The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this

> definition.

>

> The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a

> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.

>

> (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your

> living room filled with dirt.)

>

> Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.

>

> Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion

> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly

> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

> distributions.

>

> One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the

> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a

> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

>

> The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings

> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight

> buildings.

>

> Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once

> established, predominate indoors.

>

> Bob

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo!

Answers. Try it now.

December 11, 2006

Bob/Ma.

If a house is dirty and it needs to be cleaned after remediation we air wash the entire house with electric leaf blowers and put a 20,000 cfm fan in the front door to stuck out the air.

Then we Swiffer all the surfaces including fan blades, tops of furniture and even walls and ceiling of the person is mold sensitive.

Then we close the windows and air scrub. We test every day over a period of several days and get the test results back the next afternoon to see how well we are doing.

We never use any abraisive mold removal techniques that can result in mold fragments which cannot be detected by air sampling.

We have many other possible steps and techniques that include the use of strong bleach and an alcohol based antiseptic called Sklar. Most of the techniques are summarized in our free workbook downloadable from my web site. It is called Mold and Black Water Clean-Up and Restoration

Rosen

www.Mold-Free.org

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables that can skew the comparisons. My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples

should be taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure is negative compared to the outside).The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?) thereby negating the transfer time. Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies isn't done by spore counting. Neither will spore counting document the return

of the remediation site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology. As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we have great difficulty.Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We haven't been "caught" yet because this is a new "science" and many ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant habitability. If only that were true!Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant, including the majority

under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate "mold testing" right along with "toxic mold" and "black mold." Except for PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores. Carl GrimesHealthy Habitats LLC-----> ,> > > You made the following statement:> > > <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> " Normal is typically defined as having> a species distribution similar to the outdoor" > > </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily> </bold><fontfami ly><param> Times New> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>> > This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the> time. >

> > The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this> definition. > > > The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors. > > (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your> living room filled with dirt.)> > > Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times. > > > Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable> distributions. > > > One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment

building over a> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied. > > > The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight> buildings. > > Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once> established, predominate indoors. > > > Bob

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.

Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

December 11, 2006

,

I think there is another alternative but,

Ok, what about in cold climate conditions?

Bob/Ma.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of gary rosen

Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006

5:03 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: Normal

Fungal Ecology

Bob/Ma.

If a house is dirty and it needs to be cleaned after remediation we air

wash the entire house with electric leaf blowers and put a 20,000 cfm fan in

the front door to stuck out the air.

Then we Swiffer all the surfaces including fan blades, tops of

furniture and even walls and ceiling of the person is mold sensitive.

Then we close the windows and air scrub. We test every day over a

period of several days and get the test results back the next afternoon to see

how well we are doing.

We never use any abraisive mold removal techniques that can result in

mold fragments which cannot be detected by air sampling.

We have many other possible steps and techniques that include the use

of strong bleach and an alcohol based antiseptic called Sklar. Most of

the techniques are summarized in our free workbook downloadable from my web

site. It is called Mold and Black

Water Clean-Up and Restoration

Rosen

www.Mold-Free.org

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology

,

I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of

them and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being

criticized is HOW determinations are being conducted.

Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting

samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group

earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables

that can skew the comparisons.

My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer

from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only

mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that

there is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or

visa versa if the house is under positive pressure during the

sampling period).

If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be

taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time

difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure

is negative compared to the outside).

The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially

zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside

air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)

thereby negating the transfer time.

Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I

am really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that

allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the

same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC

observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to

see if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies

isn't done by spore counting.

Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation

site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold

thriving. Humans and mold spores each need a very different ecology.

As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human

thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between

the two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is

where we have great difficulty.

Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We

haven't been " caught " yet because this is a new " science "

and many

ECs don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't

repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on

the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant

habitability. If only that were true!

Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical

comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,

including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the data

aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?

Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate " mold

testing " right along with " toxic mold " and " black

mold. " Except for

PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

> ,

>

> You made the following statement:

>

> <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New

> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> " Normal is typically defined

as having

> a species distribution similar to the outdoor "

>

> </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily>

</bold><fontfami ly><param> Times New

> Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>

>

> This statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all the

> time.

>

> The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this

> definition.

>

> The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a

> different humidity profile and different growth media than outdoors.

>

> (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in your

> living room filled with dirt.)

>

> Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times.

>

> Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion

> history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a slightly

> higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a

> difference between the total spore distributions and the culturable

> distributions.

>

> One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the

> establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building over a

> 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied.

>

> The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings

> tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight

> buildings.

>

> Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once

> established, predominate indoors.

>

> Bob

Any questions? Get

answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.

Cheap Talk? Check

out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.

December 11, 2006

Carl,

From your web site: http://www.habitats.com/ link to your article: http://www.ieconnections.com/archive/apr_05/apr_05.htm#article2

Chin Yang sums up my position. If you have accurate pre-remediation base line data, sampling can help you confirm clearance. See quote from Chin Yang taken from your article.

Chin Yang, also with Aerotech P & K, agrees with Fetveit’s comments that these are limitations and a widespread abuse of testing. Despite that, however, he insists accurate characterization is not only scientifically possible but also affordable by using the relatively new technology of PCR with extended sample times. “PCR is more expensive at a per-sample rate,” he said. “But one six-hour PCR, for example, would replace 50 or more spore trap samples. ... The important part of sampling is accurate characterization before remediation begins. Only then can you find the markers necessary for confirming clearance. But of course, the education and skill of the one developing and executing the sampling plan is critical.”

Rosen

Re: Normal Fungal Ecology> > ,> > I admire and am in agreement with you helping people. I am one of them> and that is a major underpinning to my work. What is being criticized> is HOW

determinations are being conducted.> > Comparing indoor to outdoor spore data is not as simple as collecting> samples indoors and outdoors. There was a discussion on this group> earlier this year that concluded with a quite long list of variables> that can skew the comparisons. > > My favorite was, and still is, the time it takes the mold to transfer> from the outside to the inside. A difference between the two may only> mean the inside hasn't caught up yet to the outside and not that there> is or isn't a source of spore generating growth inside. (Or visa versa> if the house is under positive pressure during the sampling period).> > If the transfer time is 5 minutes then the inside samples should be> taken 5 minutes after the outside. If it is 60 minutes, then the time> difference should be 60 minutes. (Again, assuming the house pressure> is negative compared to

the outside).> > The only conditions that I could see transfer time being essentially> zero is when, as Bob said, the windows are wide open. Or, the outside> air is uniform and unchanging for a sustained period of time, (?)> thereby negating the transfer time. > > Fungal ecology of built environments, Bob's subject line and what I am> really concerned with, describes the environmental conditions that> allows, supports and encourages (or not) mold growth. That is not the> same subject as the transportation of spores and fragments. An EC> observing, measuring and assessing the environmental conditions to see> if spores, regardless of source, can germinate and produce babies> isn't done by spore counting. > > Neither will spore counting document the return of the remediation> site to one that is conducive to human thriving instead of mold> thriving. Humans

and mold spores each need a very different ecology.> As the human environment becomes more damp it shifts away from human> thriving and more towards mold thriving. The large overlap between the> two extremes, and the complications of micro-environmants, is where we> have great difficulty.> > Spore counting to compare inside to outside is overly simplistic. We> haven't been "caught" yet because this is a new "science" and many ECs> don't know better. It is not a science because the results aren't> repeatable. It is more accurately described as a methodology based on> the belief that spore counts are an accurate indicator of occupant> habitability. If only that were true!> > Final comment 1: The latest lab usage of multiple statistical > comparisions is interesting but completely ignores the occupant,> including the majority under the bulge of the Bell curve. If the

data> aren't occupant inclusive, then what exactly are we doing?> > Final comment 2: I would like to see our terminology eliminate "mold> testing" right along with "toxic mold" and "black mold." Except for> PCR we don't test for mold. We sample only for spores. > > Carl Grimes> Healthy Habitats LLC> > -----> > ,> > > > > > You made the following statement:> > > > > > <bold><fontfamily> <param>Times New> > Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller> "Normal is typically defined as > having> > a species distribution similar to the outdoor" > > > > </smaller></ smaller>< /fontfamily> </bold><fontfami ly><param> > Times New> > Roman</param> <smaller> <smaller>> > > > This

statement would only be accurate if the windows were open all > the> > time. > > > > > > The research on mold species in homes does NOT support this> > definition. > > > > > > The indoor environment has a different temperature profile, a> > different humidity profile and different growth media than > outdoors. > > > > (Unless, of course, one has a pile of leaves and grass growing in > your> > living room filled with dirt.)> > > > > > Research by Soloman and Reponen has clearly shown this many times. > > > > > > Generally, the number of species in a home (with no water intrusion> > history) is very limited with penicillium spores making up a > slightly> > higher percentage than found outdoors distribution. There is also a> > difference

between the total spore distributions and the culturable> > distributions. > > > > > > One of the best studies was done in canada that tracked the> > establishment of normal fungal ecology in an apartment building > over a> > 18 month period after it was built new and then occupied. > > > > > > The Outside vs Inside concept was put forth years ago when buildings> > tended to be a lot more leaky. This is not truth with todays tight> > buildings. > > > > Mold species that can grow with very low water activity, once> > established, predominate indoors. > > > > > > Bob> > > > > > > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.> >

Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on

Yahoo! Answers.

December 11, 2006

Bob,

>>I think there is another alternative but, Ok, what about in cold climate conditions?

That's why simple comparison of indoor total spore counts to outdoor are not useful (I did not say testing is not useful nor did I say comparisons without outdoor samples should not be done.).

In Las Vegas the outdoor counts are always very low. In Sarasota FL, the outdoor counts in the summer are about 20,000 spores per cubic meter. Outdoor spore counts can vary by 10x from day to day.

The indoor spore count in an air conditioned space is much more a function of the MERV rating of the air filter (and if the fan is left ON or on Auto) than the outdoor spore counts.

And homes with old/ dirty carpets always have high indoor spore counts.

Rosen, Ph.D.

www.Mold-Books.com