Posted by ff on 2/15/04

More | Report Post

Greg:

All the bickering makes little sense to me, neither do the
attacks on you. From what I gather, you are making honest
and successful attempts to remediate mold problems.

You have referenced Dr. Shoemaker several times, and I
knwo personally that his goal is to solve the problem.

My question is, setting aside any debate about mold for a
moment, have you had cases where clients were ill, mold
was present, the site was remediated, and the clients
returned to normal health.

What bothers me most about Mr. Connell's approach, is a
situation I will consider as an analogy to his methods and
conclusions. Sulfonylurea herbicides (SU) for example,
are known to be phytotoxic at concentrations below
detectable levels (including chemical analytical and
immunoassay). They cause damage, but cannot be detected.

In short, I suspect similar problems with current methods
employed by Mr. Connell and others.

In the SU situation, detection is accomplished through bio-
assays using sensitive plant species. If you're efforts
are successful, possibly the cause has been removed and
the "sensitive" clients improve (although the actial
toxin/s were not detected ising conventional methods.

ff

ToxBoard (Gen) Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST