Mold Testing after rain

For your info I do work in Law enforcement and have been for 23 years. SO i guess I am committed. We book 56,000 a year and I bet some where probably
Forensic Industrial Hygienst. So good work on your investigation of my committment Columbo

O.K. Mr. Enstein tell us what good training we should get?

I guess you have to go get a degree to know anything. I for one read and study, attend classes. But you say we are dumb. What was your grade point average. Can you post it here.

How dare you come on this board and call us miss trained and dumb. I love every inspector who belongs to this org. You just slapped 10,000 members in the face. I have not been this mad in along time.

Methinks you oversimplify the situation for the sake of generating $$$$$ for what real end? Some quotes from some of the best:

John Bower, owner, The Healthy House Institute, Bloomington, Ind.:
"The worst thing that has happened to the indoor air quality marketplace in the last year or so is mould. This is because much of the media coverage is designed to sensationalize the topic and frighten the public - so much so, that the word ‘mould’ always seems to be preceded by the adjective ‘toxic’. Thus*, homeowners and building managers are scared to death** of any minor infestation that might possibly be toxic mould, and they often ignore other health issues, such as combustion byproducts, VOC’s, second-hand tobacco smoke and poor ventilation."*

•• Dr. Joseph Lstiburek, president, Building Science Corp., Westford, Mass.: "The biggest news is the insurance people getting out of covering mould claims. This is great news because the easy money is gone. Now we are dealing with real money——yours and mine; insurance money was always viewed as someone else’s. Now, attorneys are wary of taking mould cases on contingency. They actually have to work for their money" (and you may have to pay them whether you win or lose- our comment)

"If you see it or smell it, you do not have to test for it. It is more important to get rid of the mould rather than spend a lot of money trying to find out more about it***.***" (by sampling and identifying the species of mould- our comment)

•• Larry D. Robertson, president and CEO, Mycotech Biological Inc, Jewett, Texas:
"As industry leaders, our failure to have in place an appropriate outlet for public knowledge and education has resulted in* gross misrepresentations and misunderstandings of basic Indoor Air Quality fundamentals." ***

Why Air Sampling Results Are Undependable
Jim H. White, Former senior researcher at Canada Mortgage & Housing Corp.

The problem with most air sample methodologies is that they take a “snapshot” of a highly variable measurement. Several studies have shown that the number of viable spores in a building, at a given location, varies by orders of magnitude over a few days to weeks. This is due to changes in weather (and the way air moves through the building), changes in colony condition (moisture and food availability, energy available for sporulation, and so on), etc. Sampling outcomes are also highly dependent on the specific location of the sampling, especially if the mould is growing.”


A bit about Harriet Burge (with whom I had a long conversation about “mould testing” way back in 1990-1)

An opinion about mould toxicity:

This is great for years end.
I have enjoyed this thread more than any this year.
Good to see there is some light out there in the dark mold inspection world.

“It is unconscionable for a non-home inspector to do a mold inspection. A non-home inspector is simply unqualified.”

I really feel terrible because of this quote, we have performed over 840 mold inspections this year and according to EMSL labs well over 2,000 samples.
(you get money back from the lab when you do alot of business with them)

If this year is any indication, we did the right thing in hiring a new guy from michigan who is not a home inspector. He starts next month, we need the help, there are only 2 of us now.

Life is good in South Florida for real mold inspectors.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year
Doug Wall, CIE
Radon & Mold Professionals

Mr. Connell writes;
Gents – I wonder if you realize that this forum is not insular – it is searchable, and viewable by anyone and that my detractors on this forum are some of my best advertisement, and their posts could become the rope by which you hang yourselves in the event of litigation?

Please don’t stop. You are the kind of “inspectors” that prove my point. Because the general public reads these pages and see you for who you are. It’s ironic that you are actually my best advertising. Prospective clients read these exchanges, make their own conclusions, then hire me.

Mr. Connell

Have you thought of the possibility that the exact opposite will occur? That consumers will see you for what you are, a money grabbing IH. The Home Inspectors that provide this service are concerned with finding the source of moisture and giving recommendations for repairs first and foremost. As Nick stated we as HI are uniquely qualified to do this. You on the other hand (IMO) have no clue.
We have some NACHI members that worship you on this MB and that’s OK but don’t think for a moment that you can fool all of us.

1 Like

He has a similar view on radon testing. He thrives on our attention.

No need to feel terrible, :roll: :roll:
send nick 289.00, take his on line quiz, he will certify you, then all will be fine :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Radon testing, ah ha,
I heard nicks the best one, the most qualified, out there to provide that certification.:twisted: :twisted:

Nope, Illinois has state certification requirements for radon testing.

I’m done with him Linas!!

Me too

Dan you can be a very respected NON-Member here on this MB but you insist on being an as$hole. Can I ask why?

That is like asking a duck why he quacks…:mrgreen:

A sample is a snap-shot in time. Albiet perhaps a blurry thumb over the lens polaroid.

I’m unconvinced speciation (viable sampling) is frequently necessary.

I could defintitely see a call for in:

  • A medical setting (hospital, doctors office, etc)
  • Where there is pre-existing knowledge of a clients allergy or medical condition
  • In a sick building situation where the source of the mold is not readily apparent or associated with a gross water intrusion event
    I’m curious why you emphasize that along with non-viable sampling. Clients rarely have the budgets to allow for a full suite of sampling (Hawaii laboratory prices are rather highish) so full statistical confidence/rigourous data quality objectives are generally not possible.

For me then the litmus test for a sample is what action or decision can I make based on a sample, the physical evidence in front of me, observations, and the desired endstate.

Edwin, I tend to agree. The fact that apparent visible mould has been confirmed as mould, does not require that the genus or the species be identified.

As for the rest of this thread, which has mad me wince, smile, spit and swear as I read through it I have this to add.

Detection of apparent mould, in my view is sufficient to tell a prospective home buyer that there is a moisture issue. Moisture and mould in sufficient quantities = damage to property. It is the property we are inspecting, not the health of an individual.

OK it may or may not be damaging to health to, but that’s NOT our call to make.

That said, if someone has an allergy to mould, and they want to confirm it is mould rather than visible apparent mould, then they have to wait for the tests to come back. This should only a non-viable test, because again, the Genus of the mould should be confirmed first in order to keep the costs down for the client, (and the return time up to establish a positive problem)

If mould is proven, then the client needs to take that lab report to their medical professional. If you live in Canada this alone could take upwards of 2 weeks!

If the health professional finds out through tests (another 4 weeks) that the Client has allergies to a particular specie of the Genus, then do a Viable Test to identify the species found in the non-viable mould test.

Being an microbiologist/aero-microbiologist doesn’t identify the problem with the property other than to say there’s mould therefore there’s a moisture. Nor does their profession give them the information to even start to look where the cause of the mould problem might be coming from. An engineer (assuming they are a construction engineer not a micro-processing, electrical, aeronautical or other non-building science related engineer) is in the same position, because their capabilities are (unless they are also a trained home inspector) specific to their skills.

Berating one profession because they are not capable of performing what you are capable of is nothing more, in my opinion, than sour grapes and one-upmanship. It shows that you have an over-inflated opinion of your own profession to the point where you denigrate the skills and education of anyone that touches on it.

Saying a home inspector is, ‘not capable of performing a home mould inspection’, or from having an opinion on the subject, because they lack the skills of a microbiologist or aero-microbiolgist is elitist and does not present your profession in a very good light.

It is IMHO akin to an civil-engineer pooh-poohing the ability of ancient Egyptians to building structurally sound buildings.

Something they have proved they could, and something modern day engineers have not, with all their education, been able to re-produce.

As for the original tenure of this thread, you can test for mould in the rain, in the snow, in ice, in boiling heat outside. My take on it is this: if you test for mould inside the house, and find it, then as a home inspector we better identify where the moisture and organic matter is coming from to supply the mould with it’s necessary nutrients or we have failed our clients.

If the mould is in the air or on a surface INSIDE the home, it’s immaterial whether it exists outside, we need to allow the home owner to be able to fix the problem inside the home.

The fact that airborne mould exists outside and inside is a given. If the Genus is the same, and the concentration outside and inside is the same SO WHAT? If inside the home it’s higher, or of a different genus than outside then there’s a problem with the home, with either organic material or moisture or both being somewhere it shouldn’t be.

An IAC2 Mold Certified Inspector has the ability to identify what that problem might be caused by, purely because they are a home inspector, with all the knowledge that comes with the skills we have.

You can knock us, you can berate us, but you can’t take our skills away from us, in the same way we can’t take anyone elses away from them. It doesn’t make us better or worse than any other skilled worker, just different. Our mandate should be “to be the best at what we do” continued education is the way there. NACHI and IAC2 help us do that.

This message board also helps us deal with the social side of the business, congratulators and detractors alike. How to deal with them better is also something we need to learn, but then I suspect every professional has that problem. :twisted:

Testing of mold outside with snow cover is not necessary because what is producing the spores is covered up. Also testing outside below 40 degrees is not recommended because the silica, that is in the air trap which the spores stick to, will freeze solid when the cold air is pulled through the trap. Just use your detection limit as your outside count for Asp/Pen comparison. Other than that, Leonard, good post!

Also Mr. Connell had admitted a few years back that he had no formal training in mold. Just like anybody else do that does not know what he is talking about due to ignorance should be ignored. His talking down home inspectors has been well documented on this message board.


Who has time to dig up a thread like this?
Recieved Gov “Mold Remediation Specifications” the other day, thought this would also be a good spot to post the link. :cool:
Mid 80’s here, today, nice winter day

July 2011
The US government now has “mold remediation specifications” that require the use of mold assessors that hold at least one of certain certifications for federal mold assessment / inspections.

American Board of Industrial Hygienist, (CIH)
ACAC Certifications such as**:**
Council-Certified Indoor Environmentalist, (CIE)
Council-Certified Indoor Environmental Consultant, (CIEC)
Council-Certified Mold Consultant, (CMC)

· Florida law requires mold assessors pass the CIE or CIEC or CMC exam to be licensed.

· Most Florida mold assessors were “grandfathered” into their mold license and are not a CIH or CIE or CIEC or CMC.