applecruncher
Senior Member
Wouldn't hold your breath waiting for atomizer to post a reliable anything.
As always, I believe you are correct.Wouldn't hold your breath waiting for atomizer to post a reliable anything.
Settle down, the sun will rise tomorrow...A lesson in what? Lying?
Do you REALLLLLYYYYYY believe all that she said? Really? Naw, come on, really?
She just waited a good time frame to report back, just to prove her point. You know it and I know it.
Yes, they can prove mold exist, but they won't say it was mold that caused her illness. Even you stated, "no established threshold as per toxicity". A little double talk here on your side. You said that they can prove mold caused the problem, and than say it is hard to establish the degree of toxicity to cause her problem.I realize this post is old, but I have to ask: how on terra firma were you able to come to THAT conclusion?!
Physicians who specialize in infectious diseases, allergies, occupational health, and pulmonary diseases/disorders most certainly can confirm such a case. And any environmental lab can certainly test for the presence of mold, especially but not limited to "black mold" (aka Strachybotrys chartarum).
However, as the OP may have discovered, there is no established threshold as per toxicity.
Common sense rules that it up to state and local health departments. But why play games with them on the mold issues. It is a lost cause. If they know the Federal Gov doesn't set limits or standards as to what types or levels of mold exposure or of mold presence is healthy or unhealthy," hopefully they will save themselves a lot of trouble trying to prove their point. I am only trying to help them save their money.Quite true. It's up to local and state health departments to do so.
Why would you think the Federal government would concern itself with mold?
False. I don't know if mold was indeed, her problem. But I do know they can diagnose complications arising from mold exposure. They CAN and they often DO.Yes, they can prove mold exist, but they won't say it was mold that caused her illness.
Even you stated, "no established threshold as per toxicity". A little double talk here on your side. You said that they can prove mold caused the problem, and than say it is hard to establish the degree of toxicity to cause her problem.
No, I don't "know that." I have no experience with claims of mold exposure. Perhaps, if you do, you might want to change your habits ... or who you hire to perform contracting work.And I doubt that it was black mold. They always cry mold caused their illness, you know that and I know that. Don't pacify them.
Florida (in so many ways ~ this is not an isolated case) is wrong. While there is no industry standard test at the moment (still pending approval from the FDA) there are SEVERAL tests to determine the creation of antigen/antibodies in the presence of SC/SA using sera. Urine? I would not know.Here is a little tidbit from the Florida Health Dept.
Currently, there is no test to determine whether Stachybotrys growth found in buildings is producing toxins. There is also no blood or urine test that can tell if an individual has been exposed to Stachybotrys chartarum spores or its toxins.
Yes, but must you make it so easy?!Ok, as I stated and you will prove me right, you have to have the last word. Take care...
Um. Okay. If you understand that concept, why on terra firma did you mention FEDERAL law?!Common sense rules that it up to state and local health departments.
Play games with whom?!But why play games with them on the mold issues.
Um. The Federal government, in the foreseeable future will not "set ANY limits" as to mold exposure.If they know the Federal Gov doesn't set limits or standards as to what types or levels of mold exposure or of mold presence is healthy
*sigh* Of course. You can't simply be wrong, can you? It must be some sort of agenda or conspiracy. Absolutely.What are you trying to prove? That you have to be right and have the last say as you always seem to manage on here?
Thank you so much! I have now found absolute bliss! Again, much, much thanks!CreativeBlock, please check your profile. I sent you a visitor message.
You don't know what you're talking about. There's more to blood culturing than you realize. Routine and fungal cultures, have to be cultured 4 no less than 5 days. This is followed by a gram stain if any growth is seen. The organism is then sub cultured into the appropriate media. In the event that the organism is a fungi, then it may take up to 6 weeks to get proper growth and identification. Not all fungi grow at the same rate or need the same environmental conditions, depending on what grows, further sub plating may be necessary. This however does not mean that a prelim report cannot be sent to the physician and treatment cannot be started. Sorry for lecture but somebody had to do it.ERs aren't equipped for MANY situations. Sending cultures out is common. Not an exception.
Which is why I referenced sending samples out to an environmental testing facility. However, an ER physician can certainly order such tests.
If done on the "cheap," yes. Current techniques and protocols? No. You can have a turnaround in as little as two days. The largest obstacle being getting said sample to the facility/lab quickly.
I know of no sample that can't be cultured in less than a week. If you do, and have a reliable cite, please provide.
DoD, who does quite a bit of biological sampling (and I worked for in my other field as a government contractor ~ Human Factors Engineering ~ my major was Psychology, but my minor is in HFE), disagrees.You don't know what you're talking about. There's more to blood culturing than you realize. Routine and fungal cultures, have to be cultured 4 no less than 5 days. This is followed by a gram stain if any growth is seen. The organism is then sub cultured into the appropriate media. In the event that the organism is a fungi, then it may take up to 6 weeks to get proper growth and identification. Not all fungi grow at the same rate or need the same environmental conditions, depending on what grows, further sub plating may be necessary. This however does not mean that a prelim report cannot be sent to the physician and treatment cannot be started. Sorry for lecture but somebody had to do it.
Regretfully, as atomizer was vocalizing through his/her sizable sphincter, I had to respond. However, hopefully you can see that I am done.You're quite welcome. Yes, bliss indeed.
I have 30 years in the field a ASCP certified technologist thisDoD, who does quite a bit of biological sampling (and I worked for in my other field as a government contractor ~ Human Factors Engineering ~ my major was Psychology, but my minor is in HFE), disagrees.
Some of my past programs included: JSLIST, BMDS, JBTDS, JPBDS, JMDS ... the list goes on. Unless you have a TS clearance, any questions on such programs may or may not be answered in full.
Have fun making Google your compadre.
Just because YOU might have "experience" with lesser technology does not mean that others do. While I don't believe the OP has/had access to the same level of technology that I did, it does exist. And your estimates on culturing growth are WRONG.
And yes, we DID use lesser forms of contaminants to test for ... shall we say, larger and nastier forms of contaminants. Molds included.
So, YOUR standards would fall under the category of "on the cheap."
Lecture over. I'm done with you, child.
Blocked and ignored. And rightfully so.
Edite!d to add: And DO feel FREE to blather on idiotically. Actually, I prefer that you do. Everyone needs a little entertainment now-and-again. And your sort of entertainment, as shows like "Jersey Shore" and "Jerry Springer" can attest, seems to be rather popular.
Once more. Please Google: JSLIST, BMDS, JBTDS, JPBDS, JMDS ... the list goes on.I have 30 years in the field a ASCP certified technologist this
is my field. You on the other hand have no credentials.