Re: Mold Prevention - MicroShield Environmental Services
Posted by DD on 9/24/05
Thanks for the information on the chemical they are using. It seemed strange that over the course of
only a day or two we had a big spurt of builders recommending them yet not one of them said anything
about the chemical being used. If you ask me they were schills because there's no way in hell a
major home builder would recommend a mold prevention company without discussing the actual chemical
being used. The only thing these so-called biggy builders discussed was the level of service they
got from the company (how they showed up on time and gave them some nice paperwork), it's beyond
silly to think we would fall for that kind of non-sense. When you are in the business of building
hundreds of homes a month you don't just willy nilly hire someone to cover 1/2 million dollar plus
homes with a pesticide without taking an interest in the type of chemical being used. You would
definately make it the focus of your discussion when you hop online to talk with others in the
business, and you would most certainly would take in interest in the material you just posted.
These mold prevention yahoos are idiots if they think service with a warranty is all a builder is
looking for. In addition, we've seen alot of these guys making product claims that can't be verified
and numerous companies trying to disguise who the manufacturer of their product is. The latter, I
presume, is due to the fact that they don't want others knowing where they get their product and/or
they don't want us verifying the claims they are making on someone else's product.
How many more times are we going to hear someone say their product is EPA registered only to find
out there is no EPA registration on the product they are selling?
How many more times are we going to hear someone say their product is patented and can't be bought
anywhere else only to find out they don't have any patents on the product?
How many more times are we going to hear someone say they are the manufacturer only to find out they
are not the manufacturer?
How many more pesticide product claims are we going to hear about that can't be verified?
If you are in the business of mold prevention and want to promote your product and/or service
here I would suggest providing the following information from the get-go before you get your
company's butt ran through the wringer in this dicussion forum:
Links to the Material Safety Data Sheets, Technical Data Sheets, Product Labels, EPA
registrations and State Pesticide registrations that exist, if they do exist, on the product you are
using or selling. (note: It's apparent that most of you do not understand what kind of claims
you can make regarding your product under the rules followed by the EPA. I suggest you bone up on it
at EPA.GOV before discussing what the benefits are of using your product because sure as shit if you
make a claim that is not allowed on your product someone here is probably going to drop a dime on
your ass with the EPA.)
The length of time you have been in business.
Level of product liability and general liability insurance you have.
If applicable, any current federal and state licenses you have secured.
Any warranties your firm offers with a link to those warranties in full and the name of the company
backing the warranty.
Also note: if there are any judgments, liens, licensing issues, or other matters of public record
that can be found on your company or the principles involved in your company they will probably be
uncovered during the course of the discussion here (this is a law forum in case you haven't
On 9/23/05, TJB wrote:
> MicroShield ES (with microban qgc)
> MICROBAN’s Active Ingredient is “Triclosan”
> There is mounting evidence that “Triclosan” is potentially dangerous to human health and the
> Builders would be crazy to apply triclosan to the frames of residential homes by using Microshield
> The following excerpts are from a recent report on triclosan.
> Body Absorption.
> A Swedish study found high levels triclosan in three out of five human milk samples, indicating
> that triclosan does in fact get absorbed into the body, often in high quantities.24 Additionally,
> triclosan is lipophilic, so it can bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. Concerns over triclosan
> interfering with the body’s thyroid hormone metabolism led to a study that found that triclosan
> had a marked hypothermic effect, lowering the body temperature, and overall causing a “nonspecific
> depressant effect on the central nervous system” of mice.25 Although the chemical structure of
> triclosan closely resembles certain estrogens, a study on a Japanese species o fish did not
> demonstrate estrogenic e. ects.26 However, it did find that triclosan is weakly androgenic,
> causing changes in fin length and sex ratios.27
> Dioxin Link.
> Recently, there have been a number of concerns about triclosan and its link to dioxin. Dioxin can
> be highly carcinogenic and can cause health problems as severe as weakening of the immune system,
> decreased fertility, altered sex hormones, miscarriage, birth defects, and cancer.32 Triclosan is
> listed as “could be” and “suspected to be” contaminated with dioxins in EPA’s draft. Dioxin
> Reassessment.33 Because of the chemical structure as a polychloro phenoxy phenol, it is possible
> that dioxin can be found in triclosan as synthesis impurities.34 In addition to being formed
> during the manufacturing process, dioxin may also be formed upon incineration of triclosan.35
> Researchers who added triclosan to river water and shined ultraviolet light on the water found
> that between one and twelve percent of the triclosan was converted to dioxin in the water, leading
> to fears that sunlight could transform triclosan to dioxin naturally.36 An even more serious
> health threat may stem from treatment of triclosan-tainted water at water treatment plants—
> sunlight could convert chlorinated triclosan into highly toxic forms of dioxin.37 Exposure to
> sunlight in the solid state of triclosan, such as on commercial textile products, also causes
> formation of dioxin, albeit in smaller amounts than aqueous solutions.38
> Resistance Concerns.
> A number of recent studies have raised serious concerns that triclosan and other similar products
> may promote the emergence of bacteria resistant to antibiotics.39 One concern is that bacteria
> will become resistant to antibacterial products like triclosan, rendering the products useless to
> those who actually need them, such as people with compromised immune systems. Scientists also
> worry that because triclosan’s mode of action and target site in the bacteria is similar to
> antibiotics, bacteria that become resistant to triclosan will also become resistant to
> antibiotics. There are also at least two other proven resistance mechanisms that are similar for
> both triclosan and antibiotics.40 Triclosan does not actually cause a mutation in the bacteria,
> but by killing the normal bacteria, it creates an environment where mutated bacteria that are
> resistant to triclosan are more likely to survive and reproduce.41 With so many products on the
> market containing triclosan, the speed with which resistance develops is likely to be increased.42
> Laboratory studies with triclosan have found a number of different strains of mutated bacteria
> that are resistant to triclosan.43 These studies found that these mutant strains
> of bacteria also showed resistance to certain antibiotics, including a drug widely used for
> treatment of tuberculosis, an experimental antibiotic currently under development, and a number of
> other “clinically relevant” antibiotics.44 While most resistant bacteria grow more slowly than
> sensitive bacteria, E. coli strains that are resistant to triclosan actually have increased growth
> rates. Constant exposure to triclosan will cause these resistant strains to tolerate it better,
> become increasingly hardy, and ever more resistant.45 Because antibiotic resistance has become an
> increasingly serious problem worldwide, the link to antibacterials may prove to be very
> important.46 In a recent review of the subject, one researcher concluded, “It is therefore quite
> possible that widespread use of triclosan may indeed compound antibiotic resistance.”47
> Allergy Link.
> Another potential problem with overuse of triclosan is the link to allergies. The “hygiene
> hypothesis,” theorizes that there is a correlation between too much hygiene and increased
> allergies and asthma.28 This hypothesis is based on studies that have found an increase in the
> frequency of allergies, asthma, and eczema in persons who have been raised in more sterile and
> hygienic environments. Through over-cleaning ourselves, the theory states, the body’s immune
> system is not challenged, and thus prevent it is prevented from developing
> and maturing.29 In one study, children who grew up on farms had fewer allergies than did their
> counterparts who did not live on farms.30 In another study, researchers found that respiratory
> allergies were less frequent in people who were heavily exposed to microbes, leading the
> researchers to conclude that, “Hygiene and a westernised, semisterile diet may facilitate atopy by
> influencing the overall pattern of commensals and pathogens…thus contributing to the epidemic of
> allergic asthma and rhinitis in developed countries.”31
> Environmental Effects
> Over 95&37; of the uses of triclosan are in consumer products that are disposed of in residential
> drains.48 Since wastewater treatment plants fail to remove triclosan from the water and
> the compound is highly stable for long periods of time,49 a huge amount of triclosan is expected
> to be emitted into waterways. In a U.S. Geological Survey study of 95 different organic wastewater
> contaminants in U.S. streams, triclosan was one of the most frequently detected compounds, and in
> some of the highest concentrations.50 A study of triclosan in bodies of water in Switzerland also
> found high concentrations of the chemical in several lakes and rivers, as well as lower levels of
> methyl triclosan, its breakdown by-product.51 Methyl triclosan, which is formed by a process
> called biological methylation, is actually more lipophilic than its parent compound, and thus more
> bioaccumulative.52 Triclosan can have detrimental effects on aquatic ecosystems. It has been found
> to be highly toxic to different types of algae.53 Triclosan effluents affect both the structure
> and the function of algal communities in stream ecosystems.54 Because algae are the first-step
> producers in aquatic ecosystems, high levels of triclosan discharged into the environment may
> cause possible destruction of the balance of aquatic ecosystems.55 The risks are especially high
> immediately downstream from wastewater treatment plants.56 Because of its lipophilic nature and
> resistance to degradation, triclosan in waterways is readily available for absorption and
> bioaccumulation by aquatic organisms in the environment.57 Researchers in Sweden found high levels
> of triclosan present in the bile of fish that were placed in cages downstream of sewage treatment
> works in Sweden.58 Methyl triclosan has also been found in fish.59 Although little is
> known about the effects on fish, triclosan has been found to be highly toxic to Japanese medaka
> fish in their early life stages, and may be a weak endocrine disruptor. 60
> Regulatory Issues.
> In 1997, the EPA acted to prevent the manufacturer of Playskool toys, Hasbro, Inc. (which sells
> toys made with Microban® plastic containing triclosan), from making false claims about
> protecting children from infectious diseases caused by bacteria because it did not prove efficacy
> to EPA. Labels and advertisements for the toys suggested that the treatment protects children from
> health risks, when in fact it protects only the plastic in the toy. The company is prevented from
> making such claims due to a lack of reliable data to support them.
> Under the agreement, Hasbro had to publish large advertisements in certain newspapers and
> magazines about misrepresentation of the public health claim.63 Overall, the FDA and the EPA have
> done little to warn consumers of the possible health and environmental effects of triclosan.
> European countries, by contrast, have taken a much different approach to this chemical. In 2000,
> the Danish EPA, National Board of Health, National Central Laboratory and the Danish Consumer
> Information Center issued a joint statement advising consumers against the routine use of
> antibacterial household and personal hygiene products, stating that their use is unnecessary for
> domestic use and potentially harmful to the environment as they “are extremely persistent and
> highly toxic in the marine environment.”64 Six Finnish public authorities also issued a statement
> urging consumers to not use certain anti-bacterial chemicals, stating they are unnecessary and
> that their growing use increases the risk of spreading antibiotic resistance in microbial
> populations. The joint statement, also issued in 2000, stated, “Even Finnish hospitals don’t use
> such chemicals for routine cleaning operations. In households we see more disadvantages than
> advantages.” 65 That same year, soap and detergent manufacturers in Europe agreed to a ban on any
> increase in its use over 1998 levels.66
> 1 FDA. 2001. Glossary of Pesticide Chemicals. > gov/~acrobat/pestglos.pdf> (Accessed July 26, 2004).
> 2 American Medical Association. 2000. Use of Antimicrobials in Consumer
> Products. Report 2 of the Council on Scienti. c A. airs (A-00).
> 3 Lurie, Z. 2004. Engaging in germ warfare. Journal Gaze. e. > fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/929628.htm> (Accessed 8/2/04).;
> SLACK, Inc. 2000. Overuse of triclosan may be creating resistant bacteria.
> Infectious Disease News.
> 4 Levy, S. B. 2001. Antibacterial Household Products: Cause for Concern.
> Emerging Infectious Diseases 7(3, Supplement): 512-515.
> 5 Ref. #2.
> 6 FSNET. 2000. Survey of U.S. Stores reveals widespread availability of
> soaps containing potentially harmful antibacterial agents. Centre for Safe
> Food, University of Guelph. September 10. > fsnet/2000/9-2000/fs-09-10-00-01.txt> (Accessed 8/26/04). Of that half, a
> small amount contained triclocarban instead of triclosan. Triclocarban is
> an analogue of triclosan.
> 7 Adolfsson-Erici, M., M. Pe. ersson, J. Parkkonen, and J. Sturve. 2002.
> Triclosan, a commonly used bactericide found in human milk and in the
> aquatic environment in Sweden. Chemosphere 46:1485-1489.
> environment in Sweden. Chemosphere 46:1485-1489.
> 8 U.S. EPA, O. ce of Preventions, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances. 2003.
> Chapter 2: What is a pesticide? Label Review Manual. 3rd ed. Washington,
> DC. (Accessed
> October 18, 2004).
> 9 Simpson, W. M., Jr. (Ed.). 2004. From the Literature. Agromedicine Program
> Update 16(8), August 15.
> (Accessed October 18, 2004).
> 10 McMurry, L. M., M. Oethinger, and S. B. Levy. 1998. Triclosan targets
> lipid synthesis. Nature 394: 531-532.; Levy, C. W., A. Roujeinikovai,, S.
> Sedelnikova, P. J. Baker, et al. 1999. Molecular Basis of Triclosan Activity.
> Nature, 398: 383-384.
> 11 Levy et. al 1999 (Ref. #10); Ref. #6.
> 12 Levy, et al. 1999. (Ref #10)
> 13 Levy, S. B. 2002. Antimicrobial Consumer Products. Archives of Dermatology
> 14 Ref #4.
> 15 Larson, E. L., S. X. Lin, C. Gomez-Pichardo, and P. Della-La. a. 2004.
> E. ect of anti-bacterial home cleaning and handwashing products on
> infectious disease symptoms: a randomized, double-blind trial. Annals
> of Internal Medicine 140:321-329.
> 16 Ref. #3.
> Pesticides and You
> Beyond Pesticides/National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides
> Page 16 Vol. 24, No. 3, 2004
> 17 Bhargava, H.N., and P.A. Leonard. 1996. Triclosan: applications and
> safety. Am J Infect Control 24(3): 209-18.
> 18 Ref. #19; Strer E, K.J. Koh, and L. Warren. 2004. Severe contact dermatitis
> as a result of an antiseptic bath oil. Australasian Journal of Dermatology
> 45(1): 73-75.; Triclosan: Allergic contact dermatitis following occupational
> exposure: case report. Reactions 1(894): 11; Wong, C.M, and M.
> H. Beck. 2001. Allergic contact dermatitis from triclosan in antibacterial
> handwashes. Contact Dermatitis 45(5): 307; Perrenoud D. et al. 1994. Frequency
> of sensitization to common preservatives in Switzerland. Contact
> Dermatitis 30: 276-279.
> 19 Durbize E., M. Vigan, E. Puzenat, et al. 2003. Spectrum of cross-photosensitization
> in 18 consecutive patients with contact photoallergy to
> ketoprofen: associated photoallergies to non-benzophenone-containing
> microbes. Contact Dermatitis 48(3): 144-149; Haz-Map > nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/hazmap_search> (Accessed 7/27/04)
> 20 Haz-Map (Ref #19).
> 21 Sta. ord, J. 5 May 1997. Germ Warfare. Voices, Health and Fiction.
> 22 Triclosan. Material Safety Data Sheet, CNCCC.
> 23 Ref. #17.
> 24 Ref. #7.
> 25 Miller, T.L., Lorusso D. J., Walsh M. L., and M. L. Deinzer. 1983. The
> acute toxicity of penta-, hexa-, and heptachlorohydroxydiphenyl ethers in
> mice. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 12 (2-3):245-53.
> 26 Foran C.M, E. R. Benne. , and W. H. Benson. 2000. Developmental
> evaluation of a potential non-steroidal estrogen: triclosan. Marine Environmental
> Research 50:153-156.
> 27 Ibid.
> 28 Strachan D.P. 1989. Hay fever, hygiene, and household size. BMJ
> 299:1259-1260; Rook G.W., Stanford J.L. 1998. Give us this day our daily
> germs. Immunology Today 19:113-6.
> 29 Ref. #4.
> 30 Braun-Fahrlander C.H., M. Gassner, L. Grize, U. Neu, et al. 1999. Prevalence
> of hay fever and allergic sensitization in farmer’s children and their
> peers living in the same rural community. Clin Exp Allergy 29: 28-34.
> 31 Matricardi P.M., F. Rosmini, S. Riondino, M. Fortini, et al. 2000. Exposure
> to foodborne and orofecal microbes versus airborne viruses in relation to
> atopy and allergic asthma: epidemiological study. BMJ 320: 412-417.
> 32 US Dept of Health and Human Services. 1998. Toxicological pro. le for
> chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins. Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic
> Substances and Disease Registry; US EPA. 1994. Estimating exposure to
> dioxin-like compounds, Vol. II: Properties, sources, occurrence and background
> exposures. O. ce of Research and Development. Review dra. .
> Washington DC, June.
> 33 U.S. EPA. 1994. Estimating exposure to dioxin-like compounds, Vol.
> II: Properties, sources, occurrence and background exposures. O. ce of
> Research and Development. Review dra. . Washington DC, June. Pages
> 34 Menoutis, J. and A. I. Parisi. 2001. Triclosan and its impurities. Triclosan
> Review Series, Quantex Laboratories, Inc. > com/triclosan.htm> (Accessed July 26, 2004).
> 35 Kanetoshi, A., H. Ogawa, E. Katsura, H. Kaneshima, and T. Miura. 1988.
> Formation of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins upon combustion of commercial
> textile products containing 2,4,4’-trichloro-2’hyroxydiphenyl ether
> (Irgasan® DP300). Journal of Chromatography A 442: 289-299.
> 36 Latch, D.E., J.L. Packer, W..A. Arnolda, and K. McNeill. 2000. Photochemical
> conversion of triclosan to 2,8-dichlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in aqueous
> solution. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry
> 37 BBC News. 2003. Fears over antibacterial ingredient. Published 4-15-03,
> BBC MMIV. < h. p://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/2950867.stm >
> (Accessed 7/26/04).
> 38 Kanetoshi A., H. Ogawa, E. Katsura, H. Kaneshima, and T. Miura. 1988.
> Formation of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin from 2,4,4’-trichloro-2’hyroxydiphenyl
> ether (Irgasan® DP300) and its chlorinated derivatives by
> exposure to sunlight. Journal of Chromatography A 454: 145-155.
> 39 Heath, R., et al. 2000. Inhibition of the Staphylococcus aureus NADPHdependent
> enoyl-acyl carrier protein reductase by triclosan and hexchlorophene.
> J. Biol Chem. 275: 4654-59; Chuanchuen, R., K. Beinlich, T.T. hoang,
> A. Becher, et al. 2001. Cross-resistance between triclosan and antibiotics
> in Pseudomanas aeruginosa is mediated by multidrug e. ux pumps:
> exposure of a susceptible mutant strain to triclosan selects nfxB mutants
> overexpressing MexCD-OprJ. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
> 45: 428-432.
> 40 Ref. #2.; Chuanchuen, R. 2001 (Ref. #38).
> 41 Ref. #6.
> 42 Ref. #6.
> 43 Ref. #4.
> 44 Ref. #4.; Ref. #2.
> 45 Stenson, J. September 30, 2002. Antibacterial products may fuel growth
> of superbugs. ReutersHealth.
> (Accessed 7/26/04).
> 46 Ref. #4; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center
> for Infectious Diseases. 2004. Antimicrobial Resistance. < h. p://www.cdc.
> gov/drugresistance/ > (Accessed 8/25/04)
> 47 Ref. #2.
> 48 Reiss, R., N. Mackay, C. Habig, and J. Gri. n. 2002. An ecological risk
> assessment for triclosan in lotic systems following discharge from wastewater
> treatment plants in the United States. Environmental Toxicology
> and Chemistry 21(11): 2483-2492.
> 49 Ref. #7; Ref. #48, Ref. #50, Ref. #51.
> 50 Kolpin, D. W., E. T. Furlong, M. T. Meyer, E. M. Thurman et al. 2002.
> Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants
> in U. S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance. Environ. Sci. Technol.
> 51 Lindstrom, A., I. J.Buerge, T. Poiger, P. Berqvist et al. 2002. Occurrence
> and environmental behavior of the bactericide triclosan and its methyl
> derivative in surface waters and in wastewater. Environmental Science
> and Technology 36(11): 2322-2329.
> 52 Ibid.
> 53 Tatarazako, N., H. Ishibashi, K. Teshima, K. Kishi, and K. Arizono.
> 2004. E. ects of triclosan on various aquatic organisms. Environmental
> Sciences 11(2):133-140.; Wilson, B.A.; Orvos, D.R., D.J. Versteeg, J. Inauen,
> M. Capdevielle, et al. 2002. Aquatic Toxicity of Triclosan. Environmental
> Toxicology and Chemistry 21(7): 1338-1349.
> 54 Wilson, B.A., V.H. Smith, F. deNoyelles Jr., and C.K. Larive. 2003.
> E. ects of three pharmaceutical and personal care products on natural
> freshwater algal assemblages. Environmental Science and Technology
> 55 Tatarazako et al, 2004. (Ref. #53.)
> 56 Reiss, R., N. Mackay, C. Habig, and J. Gri. n. 2002. An ecological risk
> assessment for triclosan in lotic systems following discharge from wastewater
> treatment plants in the United States. Environmental Toxicology
> and Chemistry 21(11): 2483-2492.
> 57 Ref. #7.
> 58 Ibid.
> 59 Balmer, M. E., T. Poiger, C. Droz, K. Romanin et al. 2004. Occurrence
> of methyl triclosan, a transformation product of the bactericide triclosan,
> in . shfrom various lakes in Switzerland. Environmental Science and
> Technology 38:390-395.
> 60 Ishibashi, H., N. Matsumura, M. Hirano, M. Matsuoka et al. 2004.
> E. ects of triclosan on the early life stages and reproduction of medake
> Oryzias latipes and induction of hepatic vitellogenin. Aquatic Toxicology
> 61 McCourt, Joy. Triclosan: the birth of a biocide.> com/dreamerblue/triclosan.pdf> (Accessed 8/26/04).
> 63 U.S. EPA. April 18 1997. EPA acts to prevent Playskool toy manufacturer
> Hasbro, Inc. from false claims about protecting children from microbial
> infections. Press Release. Washington, DC.
> 64 Environment News Daily. 2000. Denmark discourages household
> antibacterials. ENDS Report 862: October 26.
> 65 Environment News Daily. 2001. Finnish warning on anti-bacterial
> chemicals. ENDS Report 933: February 16.
> 66 Environment News Daily. 2000. Toxicity fears limit triclosan use. ENDS
> Report 309: October 12-13.
> 67 Environment News Daily. 2001. German appeal to limit anti-bacterial
> use. ENDS Report 957: March 22.
Posts on this thread, including this one