Re: SAHA toxic mold tests are negative Say what?

April 25, 2007

I think that its really depressing and also telling that the school board sees itself immediately as an adversary to the parents even though theparents are paying their salaries.. That right there should cause them to pause and reflect about this situation...

Quackadillan,

You need to realize that the school board members' charge is to take care of the school. They don't know anything more about mold that anyone else....in most cases. (some do!)

So these board members are being told by an allergist that mold does not cause the symptoms the children complain of. I bet the word "hysterical" has been used more than one in Louisiana this past week.

Then they have an IH telling them that there is no problem (most likely said "slightly elevated").

Also, no doubt by now, the school district attorneys have jumped into the equation. Deny, Deny, Deny.

So put yourself in the School Board Members' seats. They most likely think they are doing the right thing based on VERY BAD expert advice.

This school is just such a classic example of why this issue is so scary and contentious both, financially and physically.

It should be: There's mold....Clean it up. The children are sick....Get 'em a doctor. Opps! There are no trained doctors. If the doctors were trained, then the financial liability might go up, cuz the school would have to admit a problem if the children could prove it. So, the circle continues.

SharonSee what's free at AOL.com.

April 25, 2007

I think that its really depressing and also telling that the school board sees itself immediately as an adversary to the parents even though theparents are paying their salaries.. That right there should cause them to pause and reflect about this situation...

Quackadillan,

You need to realize that the school board members' charge is to take care of the school. They don't know anything more about mold that anyone else....in most cases. (some do!)

So these board members are being told by an allergist that mold does not cause the symptoms the children complain of. I bet the word "hysterical" has been used more than one in Louisiana this past week.

Then they have an IH telling them that there is no problem (most likely said "slightly elevated").

Also, no doubt by now, the school district attorneys have jumped into the equation. Deny, Deny, Deny.

So put yourself in the School Board Members' seats. They most likely think they are doing the right thing based on VERY BAD expert advice.

This school is just such a classic example of why this issue is so scary and contentious both, financially and physically.

It should be: There's mold....Clean it up. The children are sick....Get 'em a doctor. Opps! There are no trained doctors. If the doctors were trained, then the financial liability might go up, cuz the school would have to admit a problem if the children could prove it. So, the circle continues.

SharonSee what's free at AOL.com.

April 26, 2007

Group,

I arrived home yesterday evening to find some great posts that I plan to address. I am often delayed in my ability to respond in the same day which is frustrating for me.

I greatly appreciate all your responses in regard to the issue of withholding test results. Your willingness to allow this topic to be discussed and your participation with this is impressive. It is clear to me that you are individuals that are highly experienced, very dedicated to your work and have a lot to offer up.

It is my belief that for this industry to change for the better, those of you in this field must be willing and able to step out of your comfort zone. This will involve a demonstrated change of some accepted practices that no one wants to change. Whether you are willing and or able to do this as a group remains to be seen. I appreciate that some of you in your posts state your work has always been directed towards the health and safety of the occupant, however this is not manifesting as a whole in this industry.

I thank you for allowing me to participate on this message board especially in my being a voice representing another side that some may not always want to hear. Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QMESee what's free at AOL.com.

April 26, 2007

wrote: "It appears that what you are saying here is that it is OK for the consultants and others retained by the opposing parties to the occupants, to interpret the test results any way they want, but that it is not OK for the consultants and others retained by the residents. It is the withholding of test results from occupants by the opposing parties where this has been an accepted practice.",I'm still saying that sampling is a tool to be used by experienced, trained professionals to make decisions about what action to take with regard to further inspection or cleaning. When people who haven't seen many sets of mold testing data look at a lab report, they don't know what they are looking at and see what they want to see.

Steve, I agree with this. However the environmental consultant or any other entity involved does not have the right to withhold test results based upon the assumption that disclosure to an occupant will automatically result in the tests being misinterpreted. You are assuming that the occupant does not have their own experienced EC to do this, or a physician who is skilled in reading the results. You are also going on the assumption that the opposing party to the occupant has hired an ethical "experienced, trained professional" when they may have retained an IH as a hired gun willing to twist, distort and present non factual info in their assessment.

I agree with the logic behind the decision:"Education director Gayle Stucke said copies of the mould report aren't being released based on advice from the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Health. "It would not be meaningful to release reports to a person without the scientific knowledge," she said. Anyone wishing to review the tests with explanation from the board's consultant or a health and safety expert is welcome, she added."

If this were the case why not have a meeting early on with everyone together who wish to "review the tests with explanation." The copies could be passed out in the meeting where the expert would be present to discuss the results. It is not like they haven't been asking for and wanting to see the test results.

Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

It seems to me that the data is not the problem for School Administration but that the use of the data by people without the scientific knowledge is. Evidently, Administration doesn't trust the angry parents as much as vice versa.As long as there are "opposing parties" and sampling is being used to assess health risk, I don't see a problem being solved. I see lawyers making money. All the data will then be shared in the discovery process.

Question: I know of a number of cases now where restoration companies were called in to mitigate water damage due to a flood in the crawl space and ended up contaminating the inside of the house whereby the occupants developed reactions. In these cases

Again, people have unreasonable expectations with regard to the value of sampling in assessing health risk. Is it any wonder the Health Canada Annex wants people to get away from this approach?Steve TemesIn a message dated 4/24/2007 8:56:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, bobbinsbiomedaol writes:

In a message dated 4/23/2007 2:38:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time, AirwaysEnvcs writes:

In a message dated 4/23/2007 10:40:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, bobbinsbiomedaol writes:

Laws need to be passed making the practice of withholding test results [for mold sampling] from the occupant, illegal. Included in this law should be a set reasonable time frame for compliance. No builder, administrator, homeowner association, landlord, environmental company, consultant, IEP, restoration/remediation company or otherwise should have the right to withhold mold sampling results. This is especially important when it pertains to the health and safety of the occupant whose home was tested. Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

Be careful what you ask for, . No one will even take samples when anybody can interpret them to mean whatever they want.Steve Temes Steve, It appears that what you are saying here is that it is OK for the consultants and others retained by the opposing parties to the occupants, to interpret the test results any way they want, but that it is not OK for the consultants and others retained by the residents. It is the withholding of test results from occupants by the opposing parties where this has been an accepted practice. If there were laws in place specifically addressing this issue making it illegal to withhold test results from the residents (as the building occupants whose homes were tested), the only ones that would stop taking samples are those working for defense. There would be no change for those environmental consultants/IEPs that are retained by the occupants. The only entity that would withhold mold sampling results from the occupant would be the opposing parties to the occupant. It is the very consultants retained by the opposing parties that are interpreting results in a way that protects the opposing parties and in some cases in doing so, jeopardizes the health and safety of the occupants. The only time I have seen test results withheld from occupants is when the results reflect the liability of the party that is withholding these very results. Otherwise opposing parties have been more then glad to release their results to the residents whose homes they tested. There already exists in place ethical and legal obligations-duties of specific parties. All too often these are being breached in cases when a party withholds the test results from the building residents. This holds especially true where the health of the occupants may be affected by this action. However, this is simply ignored by all too many people. My best guess is that the IAQ, AIHA in setting new ethical standards and codes, will not be addressing this breach of ethics. However, I would much rather be wrong and happy then right and miserable. Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

See what's free at AOL.com.

April 26, 2007

JOINT INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATIONSMEMBER ETHICAL PRINCIPLESCONFIDENTIAL/DRAFT 3.0-A. Responsibilities to the Professional Organizations and the Profession.In order to satisfy organizational and legal policies and rules, members should:1. Comply with laws, regulations, policies, and ethical standards governing professional practice and related activities, including those of professional associations and credentialing organizations.2. Provide accurate and truthful information to professional associations and credentialing organizations.3. ate with professional associations and credentialing organizations concerning ethics matters and the collection of related information.4. Report apparent violations of applicable professional organizations' ethical standards to appropriate organizations and agencies upon a reasonable and clear factual basis.5. Refrain from any public behavior that is clearly in violation of accepted professional and legal standards.6. Promote equal opportunity and diversity in professional activities.7. Support and disseminate the association's ethics principles to other professionals.B. Responsibilities to Clients, Employers, and the Public.In order to provide ethical professional services, members should:1. Deliver competent services in a timely manner, and with objective and professional judgment.2. Recognize the limitations of professional ability, and to provide services only when qualified. The member is responsible for determining his/her own professional abilities based on education, knowledge, skills, practice experience, and other relevant considerations.3. Provide appropriate professional referrals when unable to provide competent professional assistance.4. Maintain and respect the confidentiality of sensitive information obtained in the course of professional or related activities unless: the information pertains to an illegal activity; a court or governmental agency lawfully directs the release of the information; or, the client/employer expressly authorizes the release of specific information.5. Provide truthful and accurate representations to the public in advertising, public statements/representations, and in the preparation of estimates concerning costs, services, and expected results.6. Properly use professional credentials and provide truthful and accurate representations concerning education, experience, competency and the performance of services.7. Recognize and respect the intellectual property rights of others, and to act in an accurate, truthful, and complete manner, including activities related to professional work and research.8. Affix or authorize the use of his/her seal, stamp or signature only when the document is prepared by the certificant/candidate or someone under their direction and control.9. Refrain from business activities and practices that unlawfully restrict competition.C. Conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety.In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements concerning possible conflicts of interest, members should:1. Disclose to clients, employers, or customers significant circumstances that could be construed as a conflict of interest, or an appearance of impropriety.2. Avoid conduct that could cause a conflict of interest with a client, employer, employee, or customer.3. Ensure that a conflict of interest does not compromise legitimate interests of a client, employer, employee, or customer, or influence/interfere with professional judgments.4. Refrain from offering, or accepting inappropriate payments, gifts, or other forms of compensation or benefits in order to secure work, or which are intended to influence professional judgment.D. Public health and safety.In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements concerning public health and safety, members should:1. Follow appropriate health and safety procedures to protect clients, employers, customers, employees, and the public from conditions where injury and damage are reasonably foreseeable.2. Inform appropriate governmental or professional bodies of violations of legal and organizational professional requirements.

That is much better! I know with real estate, in order to protect ALL involved, the rule is "when in doubt disclose". Which is logical from ethical and financial standpoint. Can I join AIHA and vote "yes" for this change?

WR,

SharonSee what's free at AOL.com.

April 26, 2007

Don,

I hope you understand that I realize you are highly regarded in your field and that I am not questioning your years of dedication and service. None of what I say is directed at you, just sometimes addressed to you as a representative of this industry. With that said:

Don wrote: "In December, 2006, a proposed change to the Ethical Principles was made, and I have printed the proposal below. Please note Section D on 'Public Health and Safety'. I think that this answers some of your questions on this matter. This is still being reviewed, but I expect that it will be adopted soon by all of the industrial hygiene organizations (ABIH, AIHA, AAIH, AGCIH)."

First in regard to these new proposed changes to the Ethical Principals, without a disciplinary system in place to enforce these new changes, this means little. The organizations such as the board itself, the ABIH announced there will be no disciplinary system set in place.

Both section A3 and B4 reinforce the industries accepted practice of withholding sampling results from occupants. This continues to allow and support the industrial hygienist to lurk in the shadows of the parties that retain their services, that are breaching fiduciary duties by refusing to disclose sampling results to the [residential] occupants. Sadly, "the need to withhold" for purposes of financial gain overrides "the need to know" for the health and safety of the occupant. Actions of this industry speak louder than their words.

Section B discusses the responsibilities to the client, the employees and the public. B.4 is the statement regarding 'sensitive information', and its release with permission of the client. This may, in some cases, also involve medical data of employees. I think that there does need to be an agreement, preferably agreed before the project begins, as to how and when information on sampling will be disclosed. I always discuss this with my clients before proceeding with the work.

-A. Responsibilities to the Professional Organizations and the Profession.3. ate with professional associations and credentialing organizations concerning ethics matters and the collection of related information.

B. Responsibilities to Clients, Employers, and the Public.4.Maintain and respect the confidentiality of sensitive information obtained in the course of professional or related activities unless: the information pertains to an illegal activity; a court or governmental agency lawfully directs the release of the information; or, the client/employer expressly authorizes the release of specific information.

I am not sure of what you are referring to in the way of "medical data." Could you tell me in what context this might be applicable and to what type of data that might be involved with these new ethical codes?

D.Public Health and Safety1. Follow appropriate health and safety procedures to protect clients, employers, customers, employees, and the public from conditions where injury and damage are reasonably foreseeable.

2. Inform appropriate governmental or professional bodies of violations of legal and organizational professional requirements

Sharon:I understand your concerns about the current joint industrial hygiene Code of Ethics, regards to disclosal of information gathered during an inspection of a facility. Please keep in mind that, until very recently, most CIH's worked for the company rather than as an outside consultant. This has changed, obviously, over the last 10-15 years. But there are still a large number of CIH's that are employed by the corporations who are not consultants to the public.In addition, it is important to remember that CIH's employed by consultants are not public health officials. They do not make the decisions on the disclosal of test results at schools or public buildings. This is left to the Health Department of the city or state. I worked in many situations with public health officials, and they have a tough job to do, to determine what information is to be released to the public. It is about risk communication and management, and making sure the data is accurate. Misinformation and miscommunication, in many cases, is a worse 'hazard' than the initial situation.

The issue of disclosure does become more complex when it involves a public building, which is why I have attempted to address the issue of disclosure for now, in terms of residential occupants.

In December, 2006, a proposed change to the Ethical Principles was made, and I have printed the proposal below. Please note Section D on 'Public Health and Safety'. I think that this answers some of your questions on this matter. This is still being reviewed, but I expect that it will be adopted soon by all of the industrial hygiene organizations (ABIH, AIHA, AAIH, AGCIH). Section B discusses the responsibilities to the client, the employees and the public. B.4 is the statement regarding 'sensitive information', and its release with permission of the client. This may, in some cases, also involve medical data of employees. I think that there does need to be an agreement, preferably agreed before the project begins, as to how and when information on sampling will be disclosed. I always discuss this with my clients before proceeding with the work.Finally, I agree that it is a terrible situation when people are exposed to potentially hazardous environments. That is why I got into this profession, to help people to avoid illness and remain healthy at their workplace, and now at home. I don't know of a single CIH that doesn't feel the same as I do about this. We work hard every day to protect people who find themselves in this situation.

I have never had a client tell me directly not to disclose sampling data that shows a hazardous exposure to an employee. I would not work for a client that requested that. I believe that the vast majority of CIH's would act in the same manner. Don

Have you ever been told indirectly not to disclose sampling data that shows a hazardous exposure to an employee? Have you ever had a client tell you directly or indirectly not to disclose sampling data that shows a hazardous exposure to a resident? If not, I wanna move to where you live. Let me know if I should start packing my bags. I am looking for a new place to live. (Sorry Don, I could not resist this one.)

Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

JOINT INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATIONSMEMBER ETHICAL PRINCIPLESCONFIDENTIAL/DRAFT 3.0-A. Responsibilities to the Professional Organizations and the Profession.In order to satisfy organizational and legal policies and rules, members should:1. Comply with laws, regulations, policies, and ethical standards governing professional practice and related activities, including those of professional associations and credentialing organizations.2. Provide accurate and truthful information to professional associations and credentialing organizations.3. ate with professional associations and credentialing organizations concerning ethics matters and the collection of related information.4. Report apparent violations of applicable professional organizations' ethical standards to appropriate organizations and agencies upon a reasonable and clear factual basis.5. Refrain from any public behavior that is clearly in violation of accepted professional and legal standards.6. Promote equal opportunity and diversity in professional activities.7. Support and disseminate the association's ethics principles to other professionals.B. Responsibilities to Clients, Employers, and the Public.In order to provide ethical professional services, members should:1. Deliver competent services in a timely manner, and with objective and professional judgment.2. Recognize the limitations of professional ability, and to provide services only when qualified. The member is responsible for determining his/her own professional abilities based on education, knowledge, skills, practice experience, and other relevant considerations.3. Provide appropriate professional referrals when unable to provide competent professional assistance.4. Maintain and respect the confidentiality of sensitive information obtained in the course of professional or related activities unless: the information pertains to an illegal activity; a court or governmental agency lawfully directs the release of the information; or, the client/employer expressly authorizes the release of specific information.5. Provide truthful and accurate representations to the public in advertising, public statements/representations, and in the preparation of estimates concerning costs, services, and expected results.6. Properly use professional credentials and provide truthful and accurate representations concerning education, experience, competency and the performance of services.7. Recognize and respect the intellectual property rights of others, and to act in an accurate, truthful, and complete manner, including activities related to professional work and research.8. Affix or authorize the use of his/her seal, stamp or signature only when the document is prepared by the certificant/candidate or someone under their direction and control.9. Refrain from business activities and practices that unlawfully restrict competition.C. Conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety.In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements concerning possible conflicts of interest, members should:1. Disclose to clients, employers, or customers significant circumstances that could be construed as a conflict of interest, or an appearance of impropriety.2. Avoid conduct that could cause a conflict of interest with a client, employer, employee, or customer.3. Ensure that a conflict of interest does not compromise legitimate interests of a client, employer, employee, or customer, or influence/interfere with professional judgments.4. Refrain from offering, or accepting inappropriate payments, gifts, or other forms of compensation or benefits in order to secure work, or which are intended to influence professional judgment.D. Public health and safety.In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements concerning public health and safety, members should:1. Follow appropriate health and safety procedures to protect clients, employers, customers, employees, and the public from conditions where injury and damage are reasonably foreseeable.2. Inform appropriate governmental or professional bodies of violations of legal and organizational professional requirements.

Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Polls

See what's free at AOL.com.

April 27, 2007

My comments in blue italics below:

n a message dated 4/25/2007 7:52:07 AM Pacific Daylight Time, AirwaysEnv@... writes:

wrote: "It appears that what you are saying here is that it is OK for the consultants and others retained by the opposing parties to the occupants, to interpret the test results any way they want, but that it is not OK for the consultants and others retained by the residents. It is the withholding of test results from occupants by the opposing parties where this has been an accepted practice."

,

I'm still saying that sampling is a tool to be used by experienced, trained professionals to make decisions about what action to take with regard to further inspection or cleaning. When people who haven't seen many sets of mold testing data look at a lab report, they don't know what they are looking at and see what they want to see.

Steve, I agree with this. However the environmental consultant or any other entity involved does not have the right to withhold test results based upon the assumption that disclosure to an occupant will automatically result in the tests being misinterpreted. You are assuming that the occupant does not have their own experienced EC to do this, or a physician who is skilled in reading the results. You are also going on the assumption that the opposing party to the occupant has hired an ethical "experienced, trained professional" when they may have retained an IH as a hired gun willing to twist, distort and present non factual info in their assessment.

Geyer stated the situation very well with respect to the ownership of the test results. They belong to the party who paid for them. The IH does not have the right to give his/her client's property to anyone who asks. I'm sure that the IH would gladly release the test results and any other information if so authorized by the client. Your demand upon the consultant to release information that belongs to the client may seem reasonable in a "right-to-know" context, but the obligation of the consultant is to treat the information as confidential to the client unless authorized or compelled otherwise. As stated, there are mechanisms available to acquire the information through legal means if their isn't cooperation and good faith dealing between the parties.

You may feel strongly that you are entitled to receive the test results because it reflects upon your health. I don't dispute your right to feel this way. However, you should not "go after" the consultant because the party he is working for is not cooperative. You should hire your own attorney and consultant, preferably in that order, and build your own case. If the "opposing party to the resident" has, in fact, withheld information indicating a hazardous condition, like said, he will be roasted.

I agree with the logic behind the decision:

"Education director Gayle Stucke said copies of the mould report

aren't being released based on advice from the Ministry of Labour

and the Ministry of Health.

"It would not be meaningful to release reports to a person without

the scientific knowledge," she said.

Anyone wishing to review the tests with explanation from the board's

consultant or a health and safety expert is welcome, she added."

If this were the case why not have a meeting early on with everyone together who wish to "review the tests with explanation." The copies could be passed out in the meeting where the expert would be present to discuss the results. It is not like they haven't been asking for and wanting to see the test results.

Now you're talking. This is EXACTLY what should have happened and what I would have tried to coordinate if I had been the consultant on the project.

Steve Temes

Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

April 27, 2007

,

You wrote: "I respectfully disagree with your recommendation that there is an issue with confidentiality statements and their use. Currently, I believe they are appropriate and they are adequate. And when we have more knowledge regarding what constitutes a clear and immanent threat of death or serious injury associate with mold, then I believe there are sufficient practices, requirements, and laws already in place."

Well I like your tone. "Respectfully disagree" That's a first. Thank you. But.....

"And when we have more knowledge regarding what constitutes a clear and immanent threat of death or serious injury associate with mold,"

As many years as you have been involved in this issue as a professional, are you really trying to say that we just don't know everything yet and therefore are justified in not warning occupants of moldy buildings, even when various testings indicate it is a sickbuilding...because of a business relationship with the building stakeholder? Or are you trying to say it is ethically justified not to warn your fellow man of a hazardous situation for some other reason?

"The mere presence of mold in a house or office building, even when walls are covered with black mold, does not represent the same risk of harm; because some people will be harmed and some people will not."

So are you saying because some will not be harmed, it is inappropriate to warn those who will? What about families with small children and infants? Is it ethically correct to not share test results that clearly show elevated mold..with mothers of infants living within the moldy buildings? Or mothers of kindergarteners that are in a moldy classroom? If you have 30 children in a moldy classroom, it is not logical to assume that some will be harmed?

"Moreover, what may be a clear and immanent mold threat to an asthmatic or an immuno-compromised person, may be vastly different to a more normal and typical individual, or a healthy and robust person. I donâ€™t see too many folks walking around with â€œI am immuno-compromisedâ€ tattooed in big red letters on their forehead....so how am I supposed to know who may be harmed and who may not?"

As a professional who has superior knowledge over the occupant, don't you think it might be your role to ask this question? Or is it that you do not want to know?

"This said, because of my certifications and licenses, I have a professional duty to inform and disclose a clear and immanent threat to public health that could result in death or serious injury â€“ regardless of my clientâ€™s wishes or the contract language between us."

Yes. You do.

Sharon

See what's free at AOL.com.

April 27, 2007

Sharon:

Confidentiality, confidential work product, and proprietary information....are all standard stuff. It is part of business. You may not like it, and yes, there may be times when the withholding of confidential information may harm someone. On the other hand, if all my work-product was to be released to the public, I would not have any work, nor would anyone else, and if the AIHA, IAQA, or any other organization REQUIRED the release of a member’s work-product to the public (for general consumption), I, for one, would bail-out of that organization as would many other members. Confidential work-product is an underlying principle of PRIVATE enterprise, not PUBLIC service. This said, because of my certifications and licenses, I have a professional duty to inform and disclose a clear and immanent threat to public health that could result in death or serious injury – regardless of my client’s wishes or the contract language between us. And herein lies the crux of the problem with mold......At what point or threshold is a “clear and immanent threat?” Moreover, what may be a clear and immanent mold threat to an asthmatic or an immuno-compromised person, may be vastly different to a more normal and typical individual, or a healthy and robust person. I don’t see too many folks walking around with “I am immuno-compromised” tattooed in big red letters on their forehead....so how am I supposed to know who may be harmed and who may not? My professional duty is not based on selectivity, individual preferences/predispositions, etc. It is a general-duty clause. Moreover, I am not a medical professional, therefore I cannot practice medicine, make medical recommendations, or make medical determinations; in general practice or for selective individuals. On the other hand, as an engineer, I can clearly opine on a structural deficiency regarding potential building collapse; as a CIH, I can clearly opine on client practices when they store their nitric acid in the same closet with open drums of potassium cyanide. These examples clearly represent immanent threats of death or serious injury; and if there were an event, EVERYONE is gonna get harmed; not just the select few who may be predisposed. The mere presence of mold in a house or office building, even when walls are covered with black mold, does not represent the same risk of harm; because some people will be harmed and some people will not.

I respectfully disagree with your recommendation that there is an issue with confidentiality statements and their use. Currently, I believe they are appropriate and they are adequate. And when we have more knowledge regarding what constitutes a clear and immanent threat of death or serious injury associate with mold, then I believe there are sufficient practices, requirements, and laws already in place.

For what it is worth....

and All,

At the risk of going into a touchy subject, the concept that CIH's, thru their cannons of ethical conduct, are to keep info confidential from those living and working within the building...and are only to release this info with the permission of the client/employer, has always bothered me and many others, too. Shouldn't the first ethical obligation be to the health and safety of fellow man (and children) over the business relationship with a client? (I only site AIHA cuz I don't know what IAQA and others say).

And I don't mean to be rude, but you guys need to know this. This is something that does not bode well for the perception of integrity of your industry in the eyes of teachers, employees, school children, parents, insureds, new home buyers, workers comp appliers, etc. It makes people not think highly of the industrywide ethics, when they and their loved ones have been left unaware in a sick environment - while you all (you all is an " in general term " not directed at ANYONE) knew it was sick, yet did not immediately inform because of a business obligation with the owner/insurer, etc.

I can't tell you how bad it personally angered me, when I read this practice was stated as an " ethical cannon " .

>From the AIHA Code of Ethics:

CANONS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT AND INTERPRETIVE GUIDELINES

Industrial Hygienists shall:

1. Practice their profession following recognized scientific principles with the realization that the lives, health and well-being of people may depend upon their professional judgment and that they are obligated to protect the health and well-being of people.

Industrial Hygienists should base their professional opinions, judgments, interpretations of findings and recommendations upon recognized scientific principles and practices which preserve and protect the health and well-being of people.

Industrial Hygienists shall not distort, alter or hide facts in rendering professional opinions or recommendations.

Industrial Hygienists shall not knowingly make statements that misrepresent or omit facts.

2. Counsel affected parties factually regarding potential health risks and precautions necessary to avoid adverse health effects.

Industrial Hygienists should obtain information regarding potential health risks from reliable sources.

Industrial Hygienists should review the pertinent, readily available information to factually inform the affected parties.

Industrial Hygienists should initiate appropriate measures to see that the health risks are effectively communicated to the affected parties.

Parties may include management, clients, employees, contractor employees, or others dependent on circumstances at the time.

3. Keep confidential personal and business information obtained during the exercise of industrial hygiene activities, except when required by law or overriding health and safety considerations.

Industrial Hygienists should report and communicate information which is necessary to protect the health and safety of workers and the community.

If their professional judgment is overruled under circumstances where the health and lives of people are endangered, industrial hygienists shall notify their employer or client or other such authority, as may be appropriate.

Industrial Hygienists should release confidential personal or business information only with the information owners' express authorization, except when there is a duty to disclose information as required by law or regulation.

There are no laws or regulations that require a CIH to disclose the info to the occupants, are there?

4. Avoid circumstances where a compromise of professional judgment or conflict of interest may arise.

Industrial Hygienists should promptly disclose known or potential conflicts of interest to parties that may be affected.

Industrial Hygienists shall not solicit or accept financial or other valuable consideration from any party, directly or indirectly, which is intended to influence professional judgment.

Industrial Hygienists shall not offer any substantial gift, or other valuable consideration, in order to secure work.

Industrial Hygienists should advise their clients or employer when they initially believe a project to improve industrial hygiene conditions will not be successful.

Industrial Hygienists should not accept work that negatively impacts the ability to fulfill existing commitments.

In the event that this Code of Ethics appears to conflict with another professional code to which industrial hygienists are bound, they will resolve the conflict in the manner that protects the health of affected parties.

If a CIH is working for a property owner and test results show that the molds/levels are hazardous for the occupants, yet the CIH is required by the Code of Ethics not to tell the occupants unless the owner gives permission, then isn't everyday a conflict of interest?

Sharon

April 27, 2007

Hi, Sharon:I am certainly glad that you are in favor of these revised Code of Ethics. Now it is on to IAQA and a revision of their Code of Ethics. I would recommend that you apply for an AIHA membership, and I will support your application. :)Don

Don,

Thank you! I would be honored to be a member of AIHA, just as I would IAQA. But I intentionally do not hold a membership or sit on any board of directors for non-profits involved in the mold issue. Even the mold advocacy groups, I hold no memberships. I like to remain autonomous. Since my focus of study is conflicts of interest - mainly from the medical side - its better that way. People don't like it when you are looking into their potential conflicts of interest. I would rather it just be me they hate, rather than a whole organization.

SharonSee what's free at AOL.com.

April 27, 2007

Hi, Sharon:I am certainly glad that you are in favor of these revised Code of Ethics. Now it is on to IAQA and a revision of their Code of Ethics. I would recommend that you apply for an AIHA membership, and I will support your application. :)Don

Don,

Thank you! I would be honored to be a member of AIHA, just as I would IAQA. But I intentionally do not hold a membership or sit on any board of directors for non-profits involved in the mold issue. Even the mold advocacy groups, I hold no memberships. I like to remain autonomous. Since my focus of study is conflicts of interest - mainly from the medical side - its better that way. People don't like it when you are looking into their potential conflicts of interest. I would rather it just be me they hate, rather than a whole organization.

SharonSee what's free at AOL.com.

April 27, 2007

Hi, Sharon:

I am certainly glad that you are in favor of these revised Code of

Ethics. Now it is on to IAQA and a revision of their Code of

Ethics. I would recommend that you apply for an AIHA membership, and

I will support your application.

Don

>

> In a message dated 4/25/2007 3:56:15 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

> don.weekes@... writes:

>

> JOINT INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATIONS

> MEMBER ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

> CONFIDENTIAL/CONFIDENT

>

> -A. Responsibilities to the Professional Organizations and the

> Profession.

> In order to satisfy organizational and legal policies and rules,

> members should:

> 1. Comply with laws, regulations, policies, and ethical standards

> governing professional practice and related activities, including

> those of professional associations and credentialing organizations.

> 2. Provide accurate and truthful information to professional

> associations and credentialing organizations.

> 3. ate with professional associations and credentialing

> organizations concerning ethics matters and the collection of

> 4. Report apparent violations of applicable professional

> organizations' ethical standards to appropriate organizations and

> agencies upon a reasonable and clear factual basis.

> 5. Refrain from any public behavior that is clearly in violation

of

> accepted professional and legal standards.

> 6. Promote equal opportunity and diversity in professional

activities.

> 7. Support and disseminate the association'7. Support and dissemin

> other professionals.

> B. Responsibilities to Clients, Employers, and the Public.

> In order to provide ethical professional services, members should:

> 1. Deliver competent services in a timely manner, and with

objective

> and professional judgment.

> 2. Recognize the limitations of professional ability, and to

provide

> services only when qualified. The member is responsible for

> determining his/her own professional abilities based on education,

> knowledge, skills, practice experience, and other relevant

> considerations.

> 3. Provide appropriate professional referrals when unable to

provide

> competent professional assistance.

> 4. Maintain and respect the confidentiality of sensitive

information

> obtained in the course of professional or related activities

unless:

> the information pertains to an illegal activity; a court or

> governmental agency lawfully directs the release of the

information;

> or, the client/employer expressly authorizes the release of

specific

> information.

> 5. Provide truthful and accurate representations to the public in

> advertising, public statements/represenadvertising, public

> preparation of estimates concerning costs, services, and expected

> results.

> 6. Properly use professional credentials and provide truthful and

> accurate representations concerning education, experience,

competency

> and the performance of services.

> 7. Recognize and respect the intellectual property rights of

others,

> and to act in an accurate, truthful, and complete manner,

including

> activities related to professional work and research.

> 8. Affix or authorize the use of his/her seal, stamp or signature

> only when the document is prepared by the certificant/only when

> someone under their direction and control.

> 9. Refrain from business activities and practices that unlawfully

> restrict competition.

> C. Conflict of interest and appearance of impropriety.

> In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements

> concerning possible conflicts of interest, members should:

> 1. Disclose to clients, employers, or customers significant

> circumstances that could be construed as a conflict of interest, or

> an appearance of impropriety.

> 2. Avoid conduct that could cause a conflict of interest with a

> client, employer, employee, or customer.

> 3. Ensure that a conflict of interest does not compromise

legitimate

> interests of a client, employer, employee, or customer, or

> influence/interfere with professional judgments.

> 4. Refrain from offering, or accepting inappropriate payments,

gifts,

> or other forms of compensation or benefits in order to secure

work,

> or which are intended to influence professional judgment.

> D. Public health and safety.

> In order to satisfy organizational policies and legal requirements

> concerning public health and safety, members should:

> 1. Follow appropriate health and safety procedures to protect

> clients, employers, customers, employees, and the public from

> conditions where injury and damage are reasonably foreseeable.

> 2. Inform appropriate governmental or professional bodies of

> violations of legal and organizational professional requirements.

>

> That is much better! I know with real estate, in order to protect

ALL

> involved, the rule is " when in doubt disclose " . Which is logical

from ethical and

> financial standpoint. Can I join AIHA and vote " yes " for this

change?

>

> WR,

> Sharon

>

> ************************************** See what's free at

http://www.aol.com.

>

April 27, 2007

:

I appreciate your kind remarks, and I do want you to know that I

don't necessarily represent all IH's, or anything close to that. But

I am willing to answer for myself, and what I have seen over the last

32 years of work.

Second, you should be aware that there is an Ethics Complaint system

in place for AIHA, and some of us are in the midst of utilizing it

against certain labs. The ABIH has its' own mechanism for the

removal of the title, CIH, which is mainly focussed around the

individual's certification maintenance (CM) point total over a six

year period. This is strictly an individual's responsibility to

maintain. There are no corporate members for ABIH. Many CIH's have

lost their designation by their failure to gather sufficient CM

points in the six year time frame.

What would I expect from a professional organization such as AIHA

when it reviews an Ethics complaint, particularly against a corporate

member? I would expect a thorough investigation regarding the

complaint, and, if the complaint is proven, the appropriate 'action'

to be taken. What might be that action? Non-renewal of membership,

removal of logos from brochures and websites, and, if the corporation

refuses to comply, legal action against the corporation.

As you can imagine, this is a rare event for a variety of reasons.

Generally, an Ethics complainant is a fellow CIH, and most individual

CIH's are not willing to spend the time and energy to file a

complaint, much less follow it up. Additionally, AIHA is not in the

disciplinary and enforcement business with regards to its members.

It is, at this point in time, fortunate to continue to have 10,000

members, given the ageing of the individual members (average age:

50+). It would require an particularly egregious breach of ethics

for this type of complaint to be filed.

Regarding disclosure: I really don't think that you will find many

CIH's 'lurking in the shadows' regarding sampling results. If

anything, these are the individuals that are standing up in front of

the crowd answering questions about the results. Actions DO speak

louder than words, and that is what I see my fellow CIH's doing on a

daily basis.

Now that doesn't mean that there aren't a few 'bad actors' out

there! But I would surmise that the vast majority of the individuals

that you are referring to are not CIH's, or any other accredited

designation. They DO ruin the reputation of the profession, and, if

you have reading some of the other posts regarding conflict of

interest, you know that there is a group of us who are attempting

to 'clean up' the industry, particularly the EC side.

Regarding 'medical data': when I begin the questioning of the

individuals who are affected by the indoor air quality conditions,

including mold, in their workplace, it is often true that I receive a

lot of information from the workers about their medical conditions.

I have been provided with symptoms, medical reports, presciptions,

diagnoses, etc. In some cases, the corporate doctor is also

providing me with the medical records of the individuals in

question. This 'medical data', although it may not be 'official'

medical data, is in my mind confidential information. I certainly

would not be at liberty to disclose this data, nor the air sampling

data that may correlate with that individual's medical condition

until this has been fully discussed with their physician and/or the

medical director of the corporation.

Start packing your bags! Actually, since over the last 32 years,

I have worked throughout the US and Canada, you won't have to pack,

you are already there! This is mainly because I make sure that

my client knows, in advance BEFORE I take a single sample, what they

will have to do with the data from the sampling. If a client does

not wish to disclose the results, then I walk away. Strangely, that

has happened only once that I remember, more than 20 years ago.

Since OSHA's Hazard Communication Regulation went into effect in the

1980's, it has never come up as an issue. Remember: they call me, I

don't call them. They want my services, and they will take them as I

offer them.

Now, OSHA does not apply to residences, but it certainly applies to

school employees. For residents in a home, I ask the insurance

company if I can send a copy of my report, and the insurance company

always says 'Yes'. I have never had a client say 'No'. Again I make

sure before I start that the client knows what will happen to the

data once I receive it back from the lab. So it has never been a

problem.

Don

" In December, 2006, a proposed change to the Ethical

Principles

> was

> made, and I have printed the proposal below. Please note Section D

> on 'Public Health and Safety'. I think that this answers some of

> your questions on this matter. This is still being reviewed, but I

> expect that it will be adopted soon by all of the industrial

hygiene

> organizations (ABIH, AIHA, AAIH, AGCIH). "

>

> First in regard to these new proposed changes to the Ethical

Principals,

> without a disciplinary system in place to enforce these new

changes, this means

> little. The organizations such as the board itself, the ABIH

announced there

> will be no disciplinary system set in place.

>

> Both section A3 and B4 reinforce the industries accepted practice

of

> withholding sampling results from occupants. This continues to

allow and support

> the industrial hygienist to lurk in the shadows of the parties

that retain

> their services, that are breaching fiduciary duties by refusing to

disclose

> sampling results to the [residential] occupants. Sadly, " the need

to withhold "

> for purposes of financial gain overrides " the need to know " for

the health and

> safety of the occupant. Actions of this industry speak louder

than their

> words.

>

> Section B discusses the responsibilities to the client, the

employees

> and the public. B.4 is the statement regarding 'sensitive

> information'information'<WBR>, and its release with permission of t

> may, in some cases, also involve medical data of employees. I think

> that there does need to be an agreement, preferably agreed before

the

> project begins, as to how and when information on sampling will be

> disclosed. I always discuss this with my clients before proceeding

> with the work.

>

> -A. Responsibilities to the Professional Organizations and the

> Profession.

> 3. ate with professional associations and credentialing

> organizations concerning ethics matters and the collection of

>

> B. Responsibilities to Clients, Employers, and the Public.

> 4.Maintain and respect the confidentiality of sensitive

information

> obtained in the course of professional or related activities

unless:

> the information pertains to an illegal activity; a court or

> governmental agency lawfully directs the release of the

information;

> or, the client/employer expressly authorizes the release of

specific

> information.

>

> I am not sure of what you are referring to in the way of " medical

data. "

> Could you tell me in what context this might be applicable and to

what type of

> data that might be involved with these new ethical codes?

>

> D.Public Health and Safety

> 1. Follow appropriate health and safety procedures to protect

> clients, employers, customers, employees, and the public from

> conditions where injury and damage are reasonably foreseeable.

> 2. Inform appropriate governmental or professional bodies of

> violations of legal and organizational professional requirements

>

> In a message dated 4/25/2007 3:56:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> don.weekes@... writes:

>

> Sharon:

>

> I understand your concerns about the current joint industrial

hygiene

> Code of Ethics, regards to disclosal of information gathered

during

> an inspection of a facility. Please keep in mind that, until very

> recently, most CIH's worked for the company rather than as an

outside

> consultant. This has changed, obviously, over the last 10-15

years.

> But there are still a large number of CIH's that are employed by

the

> corporations who are not consultants to the public.

>

> In addition, it is important to remember that CIH's employed by

> consultants are not public health officials. They do not make the

> decisions on the disclosal of test results at schools or public

> buildings. This is left to the Health Department of the city or

> state. I worked in many situations with public health officials,

and

> they have a tough job to do, to determine what information is to

be

> released to the public. It is about risk communication and

> management, and making sure the data is accurate. Misinformation

and

> miscommunication, in many cases, is a worse 'hazard' than the

initial

> situation.

> The issue of disclosure does become more complex when it involves

a public

> building, which is why I have attempted to address the issue of

disclosure for

> now, in terms of residential occupants.

>

> In December, 2006, a proposed change to the Ethical Principles was

> made, and I have printed the proposal below. Please note Section D

> on 'Public Health and Safety'. I think that this answers some of

> your questions on this matter. This is still being reviewed, but I

> expect that it will be adopted soon by all of the industrial

hygiene

> organizations (ABIH, AIHA, AAIH, AGCIH).

>

> Section B discusses the responsibilities to the client, the

employees

> and the public. B.4 is the statement regarding 'sensitive

> information'information'<WBR>, and its release with permission of t

> may, in some cases, also involve medical data of employees. I think

> that there does need to be an agreement, preferably agreed before

the

> project begins, as to how and when information on sampling will be

> disclosed. I always discuss this with my clients before proceeding

> with the work.

>

> Finally, I agree that it is a terrible situation when people are

> exposed to potentially hazardous environments. That is why I got

> into this profession, to help people to avoid illness and remain

> healthy at their workplace, and now at home. I don't know of a

> single CIH that doesn't feel the same as I do about this. We work

> hard every day to protect people who find themselves in this

> situation.

>

> I have never had a client tell me directly not to

> disclose sampling data that shows a hazardous exposure to an

> employee. I would not work for a client that requested that. I

> believe that the vast majority of CIH's would act in the same

manner. Don

>

> Have you ever been told indirectly not to disclose sampling data

that shows

> a hazardous exposure to an employee? Have you ever had a client

tell you

> directly or indirectly not to disclose sampling data that shows a

hazardous

> exposure to a resident? If not, I wanna move to where you

live. Let me know

> if I should start packing my bags. I am looking for a new place

to live.

> (Sorry Don, I could not resist this one.)

>

> Bobbins, RN, L.Ac, QME

>

April 28, 2007

Sharon:

My response to your questions are shown below in BOLD CAPS

Regards,

,

You wrote: " I respectfully disagree with your recommendation that there is an issue with confidentiality statements and their use. Currently, I believe they are appropriate and they are adequate. And when we have more knowledge regarding what constitutes a clear and immanent threat of death or serious injury associate with mold, then I believe there are sufficient practices, requirements, and laws already in place. "

Well I like your tone. " Respectfully disagree " That's a first. Thank you. But.....

" And when we have more knowledge regarding what constitutes a clear and immanent threat of death or serious injury associate with mold, "

As many years as you have been involved in this issue as a professional, are you really trying to say that we just don't know everything yet and therefore are justified in not warning occupants of moldy buildings, even when various testings indicate it is a sickbuilding...because of a business relationship with the building stakeholder? Or are you trying to say it is ethically justified not to warn your fellow man of a hazardous situation for some other reason? NEITHER. YOU ARE TAKING MY COMMENTS OUT OF CONTEXT AND INFERING ELEMENTS THAT I DID NOT.

" The mere presence of mold in a house or office building, even when walls are covered with black mold, does not represent the same risk of harm; because some people will be harmed and some people will not. "

So are you saying because some will not be harmed, it is inappropriate to warn those who will? What about families with small children and infants? Is it ethically correct to not share test results that clearly show elevated mold..with mothers of infants living within the moldy buildings? Or mothers of kindergarteners that are in a moldy classroom? If you have 30 children in a moldy classroom, it is not logical to assume that some will be harmed? YOUR QUESTIONS ARE MYOPIC AND AGAIN, YOU ARE TAKING MY COMMENTS OUT OF CONTEXT AND INFERING ELEMENTS THAT I DID NOT. QUESTION TO YOU....WHICH IS MORE OF AN IMENENT DANGER......30 CHILDREN IN A MOLDY CLASSROOM, 30 CHILDREN IN AN UNSTALBE CLASSROOM BUILDING THAT MAY SUDDENLY COLLAPSE AT ANY TIME, OR 30 CHILDREN IN A SCIENCE CLASSROOM THAT CONTAINS 1-MOLAR NITRIC ACID IN THE SAME CABINET WITH OPEN DRUMS OF POSTASSIUM CYANIDE? HAVE I PUT THIS INTO PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU?!? DEFINE “MOLDY CLASSROOM?” IS IT MOLD UNDER THE SINK CABINET? IS IT MOLD ON CEILING TILES? IS IT MOLD ON A WALL? IS IT MOLD ON ALL THE WALLS? IS IT ACTIVE MOLD OR DRY MOLD? IS IT A SINGLE EVENT OR RE-OCURRING? IS IT...... THE ISSUE WITH MOLD IS IN THE DEFINITION, SCOPE, PERSPECTIVE AND CHARACTERISTIC. A BUILDING OF POSSIBLE COLLAPSE, OR CHEMICALS OF SUDDEN DEATH, DO NOT WARRANT DEFINITION OR PERSPECTIVE TO SUBSTANTIATE IMMEDIATE HARM. MOLD DOES.

" Moreover, what may be a clear and immanent mold threat to an asthmatic or an immuno-compromised person, may be vastly different to a more normal and typical individual, or a healthy and robust person. I don’t see too many folks walking around with “I am immuno-compromised” tattooed in big red letters on their forehead....so how am I supposed to know who may be harmed and who may not? "

As a professional who has superior knowledge over the occupant, don't you think it might be your role to ask this question? Or is it that you do not want to know? NO, AND SOMETIMES YES. SHARON, IT IS CLEAR TO ME THAT YOU DO NOT FULLY GRASP THE CONCEPT AND/OR THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE IEP. IF WE, AS IEPs, FEEL STRONGLY THAT PERSONS ARE AT SIGNIFICANT RISK, THEN WE HAVE A MORAL, AND ETHICAL DUTY, FAR AND ABOVE A PROFESSIONAL DUTY, TO SAY SOMETHING. HOWEVER, IF WE EMBARK ON OUR OWN AND INFORM OCCUPANTS OF A BUILDING OF OUR FINDINGS (I.E., WARN THEM BASED ON OUR OPINION OF A PERCEIVED HAZARD), WHEN WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL DUTY TO OUR CLIENT, WE WILL GET OUR PROFESSIONAL ASSES SUED! IF I HAVE A NEED TO INFORM ANYONE, IT WILL FIRST BE COMMUNCATED TO MY CLIENT – THE CLIENT HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY, DUTY AND, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, THE AUTHRITY TO ACT. SECOND, IF THE CLIENT DOES NOT ACT AND I FEEL THAT PERSONS ARE STILL AT SIGNIFICANT RISK, I WILL INFORM THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF MY FINDINGS, BUT NOT MY RECOMMENDATIONS. I WILL NOT, NEVER, INFORM THE OCCUPANTS UNLESS AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THE CLIENT. TO DO SO WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION IS PROFESSIONAL SUICIDE. INFORMING THE LOCAL ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, AND IN THE CASE OF MOLD IT IS OFTEN THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, IS THE BEST AND MOST APPROPRIATE ENTITY TO INFORM IN THIS SITUATION. TO INFORM THE OCCUPANTS IS TO INFLAME AND INCITE OPPOSSING PARTIES, WHICH WILL OFTEN RESULT IN INACTION AND LITIGATION, NOT PROTECTION AND MITIGATION.

" This said, because of my certifications and licenses, I have a professional duty to inform and disclose a clear and immanent threat to public health that could result in death or serious injury – regardless of my client’s wishes or the contract language between us. "

Yes. You do.

Sharon

April 28, 2007

Hi ,

You write: "SHARON, IT IS CLEAR TO ME THAT YOU DO NOT FULLY GRASP THE CONCEPT AND/OR THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE IEP.... IF WE EMBARK ON OUR OWN AND INFORM OCCUPANTS OF A BUILDING OF OUR FINDINGS (I.E., WARN THEM BASED ON OUR OPINION OF A PERCEIVED HAZARD), WHEN WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL DUTY TO OUR CLIENT, WE WILL GET OUR PROFESSIONAL ASSES SUED!"

I do understand. "IF WE EMBARK ON OUR OWN AND INFORM OCCUPANTS OF A BUILDING OF OUR FINDINGS (I.E., WARN THEM BASED ON OUR OPINION OF A PERCEIVED HAZARD)"

You seem to think I am complaining AT you. I am not. I am actually complaining on your behalf. We all know that there is a level of mold contamination that one can logically deduce could pose a threat to human health. And when that occurs, regardless of your fiduciary duty to your client, you have a duty to warn. But if you warn, where are the physicians to back up your concerns? They are nowhere because of the teachings of ACOEM falsely promoting that symptoms of toxicity are not plausible to occur from mold exposure indoors, thus keeping the physicians that you need to support you, ignorant of the matter.

And who is further promoting this false stance that leaves YOU in a conflicted position of warn - possibly get sued, don't warn - leave children unknowingly in a probably hazardous situation? Your own association that is meant to protect YOU, AIHA.

The "not plausible" stance based on examining mold in rodents to deduce from a single calculation, absence of human symptoms indicative of toxicity from indoor mold exposure has been:

1. Outed as junk science on the front page of the Wall Street Journal

2. Denounced as junk science by the IOM Damp Indoor Spaces and Health, Mycotoxin author.

3. Not found to be an acceptable modeling theory to deduce absence of human illness in the Harold case, Sacramento, CA.

Yet, it appears your association is going to allow this unscientific information be given as education for members of AIHA:

http://www.aiha.org/Content/CE/aihce/aihce-techmon.htm#213

Recently Published Evaluations of the Association of Mycotoxins and Health Effects in Indoor Environments. B. D. Hardin, Veritox, Inc., Redmond, WA.

Insurance Perspectives and Impacts on Indoor Mold Claims. M.W. Ladd, CNA, Chicago, IL..I believe this to be a code of ethics violation by the governing body of AIHA that is detrimental not only to the health of the public, but to the members of AIHA itself. It's what leaves you in a position of having to worry if you warn small children of a health hazard, you "might get your ass sued". Because of these unscientific, false teachings, you are being left holding the bag to: EMBARK ON OUR OWN AND INFORM OCCUPANTS OF A BUILDING OF OUR FINDINGS (I.E., WARN THEM BASED ON OUR OPINION OF A PERCEIVED HAZARD)"..or choose to look the other way to the detriment of the public.

Code of Ethics, AIHA:

1. Practice their profession following recognized scientific principles with the realization that the lives, health and well-being of people may depend upon their professional judgment and that they are obligated to protect the health and well-being of people.

2. Counsel affected parties factually regarding potential health risks and precautions necessary to avoid adverse health effects.

http://www.policyholdersofamerica.org/newsletter/feb_2007/6-9.pdf

Sharon

See what's free at AOL.com.

April 28, 2007

/Sharon,

As someone that does quite a bit of work with people ill from mold ... I consider myself quite in tune with the potential for mold to cause illness.

Making any statements about the potential for indoor mold growth to cause illness is certainly not for anyone in our profession to do.

If someone is not sensitive to mold, even quite high levels of mold will not affect them. I have found of course that massive levels of mold can effect almost anyone, but at those levels there will be quite a bit of visible mold and smells and it will be clear to everyone that there is a mold problem.

If small children are involved, the aged, persons undergoing chemotherapy, chemically and/or mold sensitive people are involved and there is a potential elevated mold my personal approach is:

Take off my mask and do the investigation without one. I am moderately mold sensitive. If I get irritated or my eyes burn I tell the occupants that my eyes are burning or I am not feeling well and don't recommend that anyone sensitive stay in the house or office. But I don't give them any test results as that is not their property. If someone wants to sue for for may actions saying I got sick from the mold ... take a shot. That will not be an easy lawsuit in FLA.