Caoimhín P. Connell
06-12-2012, 08:43 AM
Hello All!
As some of you know, I belong to a number of national and international organizations and think-tanks, and rub elbows with health regulators on a regular basis. This morning, I received an email from a regulator in a state that has been dealing with debunking the toxic mould issue for quite some time. Since this regulator discussed the Home Inspection business, I thought I would share with you the initial email and my response.
This past fall we had a hurricane and then winter storm (1 month apart). Both caused an unprecedented amount of damage. Citizens were telling us that realtors and insurance agents were telling them ridiculous things to do regarding mold. That kind of pushed me over the edge to write something specifically aimed at those groups. As a result of this new document, I have been giving talks for groups of realtors to go over the document. It has been very well received by these groups. Next, I’m going to re-visit the home inspector groups with the same talk.
Let me ask your opinion about this- as you know, there are camps of home inspectors that do their own mold testing. They view my attacks of this as taking business away from them, despite my reassurance that I am actually bringing them more business by telling citizens to call a home inspector to locate leaks and other moisture sources.
During the past year, I have had some opportunities to play with IR Thermography. I think this is an awesome tool to locate moisture, but realize that it takes a lot of training and experience to properly use this tool and be able to interpret the results. What do you think about talking to home inspectors about becoming educated enough to use this tool as part of their inspections? Right now, the weatherization folks use it to look at temperature differentials. Many of those folks have similar education levels.
And my response:
Good morning, XXXXXX!
I frequently give talks to Home Inspection organizations on various issues, and about five years ago, we began to really turn the Home Inspection industry around on the mould issue. The primary thrust for Home Inspectors to begin sampling was the one or two-day classes they could attend to become “certified” in moulds – of course, the “classes” were primarily taught by labs who merely taught the inspectors how to collect a sample and send their sample to the lab.
Based on my experience, we have had a 90% (fake statistic) turn-around in the thinking of Home Inspectors, and the remaining 10% that are still collecting samples are what I call “The Elvis Factor” (those who also believe that Elvis Presley is still alive and living in Bolivia.. or wherever….).
Generally, the Home Inspectors who are still collecting samples are those who are not well connected to their professional organizations, and who are not particularly well educated, and who also tend to believe in anti-scientific conspiracies such as toxic mould; one will never get through to that faction since they exhibit "invincible ignorance."
We try to encourage Home Inspectors to perform inspections for mould, by pointing out that they already possess the necessary skills for such an assessment (in fact, superior skills), provided they don’t engage in sampling and testing. In fact, we stress that they are in fact, better educated in moulds if they have NOT gone through a “certification” class, and had their heads filled with a lot of anti-scientific nonsense. An intelligent, common sense, Home Inspector is perfectly qualified to perform a mould inspection, they have just been lead into thinking they are not qualified.
Many of the Home Inspector are now using thermography, and using it very effectively to identify structural deficiencies. I think it is an excellent tool in the right hands.
Keep up the good work!
Public service announcements, Health Department White Papers, and other such outreaches simply do not have the panache and flare and sensationalism of an headline that reads “Ed McMahan’s Canary DIES from Toxic Mold”…. or whatever the scare du jour happens to be. Neither do Health Department engage in scare mongering employed by “Certified Mould Inspectors.” And since it is easier to sell fear than facts, PSAs such as the one I’ve linked here fall on deaf ears.
Nevertheless, most states have PSAs that are very similar to this one: http://forensic-applications.com/moulds/CT_MoldGuidance_Insurance_Jan12.pdf
I know that Colorado, Nevada, NJ, California, NY have very similar PSAs. Just food for thought.
Cheers!
Caoimh*n P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. - Home (http://www.forensic-applications.com)
(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)
AMDG
As some of you know, I belong to a number of national and international organizations and think-tanks, and rub elbows with health regulators on a regular basis. This morning, I received an email from a regulator in a state that has been dealing with debunking the toxic mould issue for quite some time. Since this regulator discussed the Home Inspection business, I thought I would share with you the initial email and my response.
This past fall we had a hurricane and then winter storm (1 month apart). Both caused an unprecedented amount of damage. Citizens were telling us that realtors and insurance agents were telling them ridiculous things to do regarding mold. That kind of pushed me over the edge to write something specifically aimed at those groups. As a result of this new document, I have been giving talks for groups of realtors to go over the document. It has been very well received by these groups. Next, I’m going to re-visit the home inspector groups with the same talk.
Let me ask your opinion about this- as you know, there are camps of home inspectors that do their own mold testing. They view my attacks of this as taking business away from them, despite my reassurance that I am actually bringing them more business by telling citizens to call a home inspector to locate leaks and other moisture sources.
During the past year, I have had some opportunities to play with IR Thermography. I think this is an awesome tool to locate moisture, but realize that it takes a lot of training and experience to properly use this tool and be able to interpret the results. What do you think about talking to home inspectors about becoming educated enough to use this tool as part of their inspections? Right now, the weatherization folks use it to look at temperature differentials. Many of those folks have similar education levels.
And my response:
Good morning, XXXXXX!
I frequently give talks to Home Inspection organizations on various issues, and about five years ago, we began to really turn the Home Inspection industry around on the mould issue. The primary thrust for Home Inspectors to begin sampling was the one or two-day classes they could attend to become “certified” in moulds – of course, the “classes” were primarily taught by labs who merely taught the inspectors how to collect a sample and send their sample to the lab.
Based on my experience, we have had a 90% (fake statistic) turn-around in the thinking of Home Inspectors, and the remaining 10% that are still collecting samples are what I call “The Elvis Factor” (those who also believe that Elvis Presley is still alive and living in Bolivia.. or wherever….).
Generally, the Home Inspectors who are still collecting samples are those who are not well connected to their professional organizations, and who are not particularly well educated, and who also tend to believe in anti-scientific conspiracies such as toxic mould; one will never get through to that faction since they exhibit "invincible ignorance."
We try to encourage Home Inspectors to perform inspections for mould, by pointing out that they already possess the necessary skills for such an assessment (in fact, superior skills), provided they don’t engage in sampling and testing. In fact, we stress that they are in fact, better educated in moulds if they have NOT gone through a “certification” class, and had their heads filled with a lot of anti-scientific nonsense. An intelligent, common sense, Home Inspector is perfectly qualified to perform a mould inspection, they have just been lead into thinking they are not qualified.
Many of the Home Inspector are now using thermography, and using it very effectively to identify structural deficiencies. I think it is an excellent tool in the right hands.
Keep up the good work!
Public service announcements, Health Department White Papers, and other such outreaches simply do not have the panache and flare and sensationalism of an headline that reads “Ed McMahan’s Canary DIES from Toxic Mold”…. or whatever the scare du jour happens to be. Neither do Health Department engage in scare mongering employed by “Certified Mould Inspectors.” And since it is easier to sell fear than facts, PSAs such as the one I’ve linked here fall on deaf ears.
Nevertheless, most states have PSAs that are very similar to this one: http://forensic-applications.com/moulds/CT_MoldGuidance_Insurance_Jan12.pdf
I know that Colorado, Nevada, NJ, California, NY have very similar PSAs. Just food for thought.
Cheers!
Caoimh*n P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. - Home (http://www.forensic-applications.com)
(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)
AMDG