Re: Mold Free

[Guest guest]

No, it's the opinion of many based on what chemo and radiation due to

the body, but I don't believe there is any proof.

> Most die

> from treatment rather than cancer.

>

> Barb, this is an accurate epidemiology stat from somewhere?

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be

worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through

their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke

down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't

had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I

don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested.

I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around

building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little

practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy

regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least

amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-

targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not

exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain

instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I

believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should

continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding

applications where they may make sense.

And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate

each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we

can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge.

Regards,

Althouse, President

Air Intellect

Tallahassee, Florida

[Guest guest]

Barb,

I work often for insurers

as well as other parties. In today’s need for disclosure, in my reports, I

now provide a section on my biases in working for a particular party including

limits of the investigation and when required, sampling and analysis. Meaning, stating

what my assignment is and is not, and how I intend or achieved my conclusions,

is part of the “foundation” of my report.

This way, I do not get in

the crossfire between one or more parties and other experts when two years from

now, my reports become part of a future litigation case.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of barb1283

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

7:43 AM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

That the insurance company is party that is trying to

be pleased is

true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The

wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where

insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize

it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to

the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the

premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an

ideal time to throw that in.).

>

> Good point, .

> Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance

company

> and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification

> report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client?

My

> attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check.

> Ken

[Guest guest]

Barb,

It’s all about a known or unknown bias.

Complaints that we hear in the health industry are the carriers drive the

services. I can see their (the carriers) point when it comes to cost. I can see

the insured’s side when it comes to care. I can see the provider’s

end when it comes to payments. Each has their biases. Now when it comes to

contractor where do his/her biases derive? It’s about who is writing the

check.

rs are never the payer. All proceeds

are to be directed to the insured (per contracture language) unless an

authorization has been signed by the insured for direct payments. One must

suffer a loss to be reimbursed. Your health insurance is exactly that, insuring

your health (present and future). If your health suffers a loss (you get sick)

the carrier pays for the loss (doctor’s visit).

Technically the payments are being

reimbursed back to the insured for any cost paid out (or expected to be paid

out). Because the industry knows most insured do not have the money to pay

directly and seek reimbursement, they may feel they are able to offer more

pressure to the end of securing better pricing.

So any contractor that thinks he/she is really

working for the carrier is misinformed (or is the public).

Bob/Ma.

From:

iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of barb1283

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

10:43 AM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

That the insurance company is party that is trying to

be pleased is

true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The

wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where

insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize

it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to

the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the

premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an

ideal time to throw that in.).

>

> Good point, .

> Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance

company

> and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification

> report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client?

My

> attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check.

> Ken

[Guest guest]

Lila C. Albin, Ph.D Senior Industrial Hygienist Dept. REM Purdue University 550 Stadium Mall Dr. West Lafayette IN 47907-2051 phone: fax:

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of envconsultingSent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:39 AMTo: iequality Subject: Re: "Mold Free"

I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, PresidentAir IntellectTallahassee, Florida

[Guest guest]

CMHC (the Canadian federal housing agency) also supports the use of the least toxic approach. There are so few things that we know for sure about many of the chemicals in use that to use few unless there are no alternatives makes a great deal of sense.

Although it is not an easy site to negotiate, all in this group should know the CMHC site well (enter through www.cmhc.ca and spend some time there). I helped contribute to much of the earlier health and housing work and believe that it is still quite good. Work goes on without me.

Jim H. White SSC

Re: "Mold Free"

I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested. I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding applications where they may make sense. And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge. Regards, Althouse, PresidentAir IntellectTallahassee, Florida

[Guest guest]

A pathologist from WI who works mostly with tricothecenes

recommended to me ammonia for decontaminating surfaces. Since

mycotoxins have described to be sticky substances, one wonders if

the grease cutting properties of similar type cleaners would be good

for decontaminating mycos. Just a reader here. No credentials.

Cancer survivor (so far) who lived in moldy house unknowingly for 15

years.

>

> Lila C. Albin, Ph.D

> Senior Industrial Hygienist

> Dept. REM

> Purdue University

> 550 Stadium Mall Dr.

> West Lafayette IN 47907-2051

> phone:

> fax:

>

> ________________________________

> From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]

On Behalf Of envconsulting

>

> I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as bleach, to be

> worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through

> their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach

broke

> down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present.

[Guest guest]

There was a good study presented in 2006

on bleach denaturing several allergens (including mold) by aerosol spraying.

Tony

.......................................................................

" Tony " Havics,

CHMM, CIH, PE

pH2, LLC

5250 E US

36, Suite 830

Avon, IN

46123

off

fax

cell

90% of Risk Management is knowing where to

place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM)

This message is from pH2. This message and

any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and

are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the

addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed

to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message

and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and

attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by

phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any

person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive

confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the

sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or

distributed without this statement.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Albin,

Lila C

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

12:59 PM

To: 'iequality '

Subject: RE: " Mold

Free "

Lila C. Albin, Ph.D

Senior Industrial Hygienist

Dept. REM

Purdue University

550 Stadium Mall Dr.

West Lafayette IN 47907-2051

phone:

fax:

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of envconsulting

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

11:39 AM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

I find the debate regarding fungicides, such as

bleach, to be

worthwhile. I recall hearing verbally from Texas Tech U., through

their noted Center for Indoor Air Quality Research that bleach broke

down the structure of tricothecene mycotoxin when present. I haven't

had time to verify that lead, but I can if there is interest. And I

don't believe phenolics, quats, citric acid and others were tested.

I have strong reservations about sodium hypochlorite use around

building occupants. And in my consulting, we have found little

practical need for germicides in solving problems. My philosophy

regarding chemicals is one of prudence in trying to use the least

amount of the least toxic chemical to do the job, and then precision-

targeting or controlling chemical use in a way so occupants are not

exposed. Admittedly though, chemicals can be useful tools in certain

instances. If the hazards are well understood and planned for, I

believe that virtually any chemical can be used safely. We should

continue to debate the options, their hazards, and finding

applications where they may make sense.

And I hope that we can find a way to appreciate or at least tolerate

each other's differences without confrontation on the board. If we

can do so, each of us will gain useful knowledge.

Regards,

Althouse, President

Air Intellect

Tallahassee, Florida

[Guest guest]

,

Wise decision.

Bob/Ma.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Moffett

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

12:49 PM

To: iequality

Subject: RE: " Mold

Free "

Barb,

I work often for insurers as well as other parties. In

today’s need for disclosure, in my reports, I now provide a section on my

biases in working for a particular party including limits of the investigation

and when required, sampling and analysis. Meaning, stating what my assignment

is and is not, and how I intend or achieved my conclusions, is part of the

“foundation” of my report.

This way, I do not get in the crossfire between one or more parties

and other experts when two years from now, my reports become part of a future

litigation case.

From: iequality

[mailto:iequality ]

On Behalf Of barb1283

Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

7:43 AM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

That the

insurance company is party that is trying to be pleased is

true and the crux of many problems to get things done right. The

wrong client is being served. This may be true in remediation where

insurance is payer but more importantly when you get sick you realize

it's why our health system is so messed up. Everyone is catering to

the insurance company rather than the sick person who paid the

premiums in the first place (just a reader here but seemed like an

ideal time to throw that in.).

>

> Good point, .

> Help me out with this one...If you are working for the insurance

company

> and you write an assessment, protocol, and finally a verification

> report, who owns the documents? The insurance company or the client?

My

> attorney's definition of a client is the person who writes the check.

> Ken

[Guest guest]

why " off-line " ? that's nonsense. post it (or them here) for all the

world to see.

we've asked before, again and again. what the h*%@ is " strong bleach " ?

straight out of the bottle? 50% dilution?

we'll believe it when we see it.

>

> Jim,

>

> I will contact you with the references off line. I have several.

Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone.

Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to dry after bleach-treating?

As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins left to denature.

You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks.

Steve Temes

,

The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations.

Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature).

Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as "preventative treatments".

Curtis Redington, RS

Environmental Quality Specialist

City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health

[Guest guest]

,

The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations.

Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature).

Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well as "preventative treatments".

Curtis Redington, RS

Environmental Quality Specialist

City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of gary rosenSent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:19 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: "Mold Free"

Jim,

I will contact you with the references off line. I have several. Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does.

Re: " Mold Free"> > > > Thanks Amy,> > > > I get many clients that are chemically sensitive and mold > > sensitive... . perhaps 1/2 of my work. Most of my co-workers don't > > want to deal with them due to liability issues or they price work > too > > high. > > > > Many people on this chat board argue that all remediation work > should > > be done by groups of people with separate specialties: Assessment, > > Remediation, HVAC & Reconstruction. I have found that careful work > > with one reponsible party (and good prices because many such people > > have limited funds) is the key to servicing this group of sensitive > > people with their special requirements. Our firm does the > assessment, > > remediation, post-remedation testing, sealing and cleaning of > supply > > and return air plenums and reconstruction all ourselves. So we can > > be very competitive on the price (when we have to) and still do a > > good job.> > > > We focus on removal of problem materials and replacement with new. > We > > are very careful to investigate and find solutions forproblems with > > HVAC systems and ducting. And we only use household cleaners such > as > > Tilex and Lysol that do not leave any residues. We explain that > > sometimes the work and cleaning are an iterative process and we > > always follow up and return phone calls with advice and provide an > > unconditional 1 year warranty on the work. > > > > Of coursehaving a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and having written 5 books > > on mold does help with the group of clients! > > > > Rosen, Ph.D.> > www.Mold-Books. com> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----> > From: barb1283 <barb1283yahoo (DOT) com>> > To: iequality@yahoogrou ps.com> & g Release Date: > > 2/25/2007 3:16 PM> > > > > > > > > > > > Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.> >

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

Never miss an email again!Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.

[Guest guest]

Curtis,

One conclusion I have discovered by

participating on this list is when science and supportive data conflicts with one’s

profits it seems trying to get the science across really become the greater challenge.

Bob/Ma.

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Redington, Curtis

Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007

10:19 AM

To: iequality

Subject: RE: " Mold

Free "

,

The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized

Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building

Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including

Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One

of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at

least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to

keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if

the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill

and/or denature the remaining background concentrations.

Using strong bleach poses many

problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good

disinfectant. It is

a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation

contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then

keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or

denature).

Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet

(radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile,

but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to

maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts

as well as " preventative treatments " .

Curtis Redington, RS

Environmental Quality Specialist

City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health

Re: " Mold

Free "

Jim,

I will contact you with the references off line. I have

several. Dilute bleach does not. Strong bleach does.

Re: " Mold Free "

> >

> > Thanks Amy,

> >

> > I get many clients that are chemically sensitive and mold

> > sensitive... . perhaps 1/2 of my work. Most of my co-workers don't

> > want to deal with them due to liability issues or they price work

> too

> > high.

> >

> > Many people on this chat board argue that all remediation work

> should

> > be done by groups of people with separate specialties: Assessment,

> > Remediation, HVAC & Reconstruction. I have found that careful

work

> > with one reponsible party (and good prices because many such people

> > have limited funds) is the key to servicing this group of sensitive

> > people with their special requirements. Our firm does the

> assessment,

> > remediation, post-remedation testing, sealing and cleaning of

> supply

> > and return air plenums and reconstruction all ourselves. So we can

> > be very competitive on the price (when we have to) and still do a

> > good job.

> >

> > We focus on removal of problem materials and replacement with new.

> We

> > are very careful to investigate and find solutions forproblems with

> > HVAC systems and ducting. And we only use household cleaners such

> as

> > Tilex and Lysol that do not leave any residues. We explain that

> > sometimes the work and cleaning are an iterative process and we

> > always follow up and return phone calls with advice and provide an

> > unconditional 1 year warranty on the work.

> >

> > Of coursehaving a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and having written 5 books

> > on mold does help with the group of clients!

> >

> > Rosen, Ph.D.

> > www.Mold-Books. com

> >

> >

> >

> > ----- Original Message ----

> > From: barb1283 <barb1283yahoo (DOT) com>

> > To: iequality@yahoogrou ps.com

> & g Release Date:

> > 2/25/2007 3:16 PM

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.

>

>

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

Never

miss an email again!

Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.

Check it out.

[Guest guest]

Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas that

certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab.

They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave

a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup

of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach.

The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or

3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7.

Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in

the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and

metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores

(I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence

time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out

the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe,

takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness if my memory

serves.

This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water

Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of

our " borrowed " processes probably need a little more work before

applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF

you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for

a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use

one.

It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like

a " chemical bleachy " odor. So it is less offensive than a " straight

up " bleach water mix.

[Guest guest]

If bleach were not a powerful caustic it would not work as well. We always rinse with water that includes a quat disinfectant. Rinsing is not a problem. We then ecapsulate. Electrical boxes have thick galvanize and are not affected by bleach. High hat (that's the metal material you nail ceiling sheetrock to) is easily tarnished by bleach but half the time that is tarnished anyway and I have never had a problem with complaints about high hat tarnishing.

Rosen, Ph.D.

www.Mold-Books.com

Re: "Mold Free"

It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to dry after bleach-treating?As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins left to denature.You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks.Steve TemesIn a message dated 3/1/2007 10:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, credingtonwichita (DOT) gov writes:

, The Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter) allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations. Using strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period (sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature). Remember, we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That goes for remediation efforts as well

as "preventative treatments". Curtis Redington, RSEnvironmental Quality SpecialistCity of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health

It's here! Your new message!Get

new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.

[Guest guest]

Dana,

The EPA link on using bleach to decontaminate anthrax is at:

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/chemicals/bleachfactsheet.htmThe article is called:

"Bleach; Use of Bleach in Anthrax Decontamination"

Rosen, Ph.D.

www.Mold-Books.com

Re: "Mold Free"

Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas that certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab. They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach. The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or 3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7. Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores (I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe, takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness

if my memory serves.This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of our "borrowed" processes probably need a little more work before applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use one.It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like a "chemical bleachy" odor. So it is less offensive than a "straight up" bleach water mix.

Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debatein the Yahoo! Answers Food Drink Q&A.

[Guest guest]

This is sad.

EPA should know better than to call it “Anthrax”

decontamination.

Anthrax is a disease, you don’t

decontaminate it.

Bacillus anthracis is the agent.

Tony

.......................................................................

" Tony " Havics,

CHMM, CIH, PE

pH2, LLC

5250 E US

36, Suite 830

Avon, IN

46123

off

fax

cell

90% of Risk Management is knowing where to

place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM)

This message is from pH2. This message and

any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and

are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the

addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed

to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this

message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and

attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by

phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any

person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive

confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the

sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or

distributed without this statement.

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

Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 4:16

AM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

Dana,

The EPA link on using bleach to decontaminate anthrax is

at:

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/chemicals/bleachfactsheet.htm

The article is called:

" Bleach; Use of Bleach in Anthrax

Decontamination "

Rosen, Ph.D.

www.Mold-Books.com

Re: " Mold Free "

Good points there Curtis. There is an outfit in Euless, Texas

that

certifies sanatizers for the EPA. I think their name is MicroLab.

They tested various sanatizers, and the best one they found they gave

a recipe for. That mix is 1 gallon of water, to which you add a cup

of white vinegar to get the ph down, and then add a cup of bleach.

The bleach (which is NOT 100% solution, it is a 5% commercial mix or

3.5% consumer mix) released FAR more free chlorine around a ph of 7.

Normal wervice water from a Public Drinking Water source must be in

the 8.2-8.3 range because of the corrosion protection and lead and

metals issue. This mixture kills 99.99% of anthrax equivilent spores

(I do not remember the test critter) with a retention or residence

time of about 20-30 minutes. So Curtis you are correct to point out

the need to spray and wait. To merely spray, then immediately wipe,

takes this concoction down to an 80% effictiveness if my memory

serves.

This was tested for the food services area, just like the Water

Activity most of it came for the food services issues. Some of

our " borrowed " processes probably need a little more work before

applying it to mold related issues. However IF and that is ONLY IF

you need a sanatizer, here is one you can make literally GALLONS for

a couple dollars. That is if you need a sanatizer and want to use

one.

It is pretty neat too, it smells like a swimming pool, and not like

a " chemical bleachy " odor. So it is less offensive than a

" straight

up " bleach water mix.

Food

fight? Enjoy some healthy debate

in the Yahoo!

Answers Food & Drink Q & A.

[Guest guest]

,

Wrong. It works better if you lower

the pH to get more free Cl.

Common household bleach (sodium hypochlorite) has a pH of 12 to

prolong its shelf life. To achieve effective sporicidal activity, bleach must

be diluted with water to increase the free available chlorine and acetic acid

to change the pH of the solution to 7.

See:

Inactivation

of Bacillus anthracis Spores,

Emerg Infect Diseases 9(6). 2003.

Sagripanti

J, Bonifacino A. Comparative sporicidal effects of liquid chemical agents. Appl

Environ Microbiol 1996;62:545–51.

Tony

.......................................................................

" Tony " Havics,

CHMM, CIH, PE

pH2, LLC

5250 E US

36, Suite 830

Avon, IN

46123

off

fax

cell

90% of Risk Management is knowing where to

place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%(SM)

This message is from pH2. This message and

any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and

are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the

addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed

to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this

message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and

attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by

phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any

person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive

confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the

sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or

distributed without this statement.

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

Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007

5:57 PM

To: iequality

Subject: Re: " Mold

Free "

If bleach were not a powerful caustic it would not

work as well. We always rinse with water that includes a quat

disinfectant. Rinsing is not a problem. We then ecapsulate.

Electrical boxes have thick galvanize and are not affected by bleach.

High hat (that's the metal material you nail ceiling sheetrock to) is easily

tarnished by bleach but half the time that is tarnished anyway and I have never

had a problem with complaints about high hat tarnishing.

Rosen, Ph.D.

www.Mold-Books.com

Re: " Mold Free "

It is a powerful caustic that can cause corrosion long after

the remediation contractor is gone.

Which is why bleach needs to be rinsed with clear water to remove the

crystalline residue afterward. That's even more water. Anyone ever

see the white fluffy crystals grow on concrete when a dehumidifier is used to

dry after bleach-treating?

As for denaturing of allergens, I agree that if you remove the particles in a

proper cleaning procedure, there should not be significant remaining proteins

left to denature.

You raise very important points, Curtis. Thanks.

Steve Temes

In a message dated 3/1/2007 10:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,

credingtonwichita (DOT) gov writes:

,

The

Clorox funded study (Aerosolized Sodium Hypochlorite Inhibits Viability and

Allergenicity of Mold on Building Materials) seemed to support the idea that

dilute bleach (including Tilex) can destroy (or at least significantly alter)

allergens. One of the big problems with this, however, would be keeping

everything wet for at least 10 minutes with an active solution. That's a lot of

water, especially to keep the vertical surfaces wet. Then there is also the key

point that if the area was reasonably well cleaned to start with, you shouldn't

need to kill and/or denature the remaining background concentrations.

Using

strong bleach poses many problems. Insufficiently diluted bleach (sodium

hypochlorite) is not a good disinfectant. It is a powerful caustic that can

cause corrosion long after the remediation contractor is gone. And, yes, you

still need to first clean the surfaces, then keep it wet for an extended period

(sufficient dwell time to kill and/or denature).

Remember,

we live on a dirty, moldy planet (radioactive, too). People shouldn't live in

the equivalent of a compost pile, but they also shouldn't be led to believe you

can achieve (and expect to maintain) some artificial level of sterility. That

goes for remediation efforts as well as " preventative treatments " .

Curtis

Redington, RS

Environmental

Quality Specialist

City of Wichita Dept. of

Environmental Health

It's here! Your new

message!

Get new

email alerts with the free Yahoo!

Toolbar.

[Guest guest]

...and the best way, or one good way, is to do this is to add vinegar?

>

> ,

>

> Wrong. It works better if you lower the pH to get more free Cl.

>