The issue of mold contamination has drawn the national and international
spotlight on the heels of publicity about prominent situations, such as a hotly
contended link between mold and severe illness—and one death—in 10 Ohio infants
in 1993 and 1994; a major 2001 insurance battle over the moldy Dripping
Springs, Texas, house of Melinda Ballard and her family; the mushrooming mold
infestations indoors and out along the Gulf Coast after Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita slammed ashore in 2005; and the mold infestation that helped spur the
February 2007 outcry over the treatment given to recuperating soldiers at
Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As recently as 25 years ago, inhaled mold was
considered primarily a nuisance, not a serious health threat. But the growing
scientific and medical evidence suggests the threat is widespread and, for some
people, quite serious.
In the 9 June 2006 report
Mold Prevention Strategies and Possible Health
Effects in the Aftermath of Hurricanes and Major Floods, the CDC concluded
that "excessive exposure to mold-contaminated materials can cause adverse
health effects in susceptible persons regardless of the type of mold or the
extent of contamination." The CDC based some of its findings on a landmark
2004 report,
Damp Indoor Spaces and Health, by the Institute of Medicine
(IOM) of the National Academies. Relying on the IOM report, and dozens of
studies and reports that have been published since, many organizations and
individuals that must deal regularly with mold problems have begun to take
steps to reduce the threat.
But many of the puzzle pieces—exactly who is vulnerable, to what extent, and
under what conditions—are still missing. The vast information gaps that remain
continue to feed significant controversy in the legal, insurance, political,
scientific, medical, public health, and building design, construction,
management, and maintenance arenas.
Growing Suspicion
Of the 100,000 or so known fungal species found on the planet, about 500
species are currently thought to be harmful to people, according to the CDC.
Some of those that pose ingestion threats (such as
Aspergillus, via
contaminated grains and nuts) or skin infection threats (such as
Trichophyton,
which causes athlete's foot) have been either well-recognized or strongly suspected
for years, even centuries. As for inhalational threats, although molds such as
Stachybotrys
and
Aspergillus have received perhaps the most popular attention,
scientists are not yet sure which species may be the worst for human health.
A few threats from inhaled molds have been perceived for a long time. Since
the 1890s, outdoor settings in the U.S. Southwest have been linked with
coccidioidomycosis, caused by a fungus in the soil. At least 50 years ago,
there were some indications of mold-related health problems in agricultural and
certain occupational settings, causing illnesses such as pneumomycotoxicosis.
In areas near rivers in the central United States, a fungus has been known for
at least 30 years to cause blastomycosis. By about 25 years ago, there was some
initial evidence that damp indoor spaces were linked with health problems such
as bronchitis, asthma, cough, wheeze, and shortness of breath. But there has
been little specific knowledge until recently.
Wherever they grow, molds must have some source of water and food. The
accumulating evidence has shown that problems with mold can surface anywhere in
the world after just one or two days of moisture exposure, in settings wet or
dry, hot or cold, north or south. The same conditions that give rise to mold
growth also support many bacteria. Many components and emissions from these
fungi and bacteria are known or suspected to harm human health. Mycotoxins,
which are secondary fungal metabolites, have been one primary focus, and more
than 180 have already been identified. Other components of fungi or bacteria in
damp spaces that are known or suspected to pose a threat include volatile
organic compounds, live or dead spores, fragments such as beta glucans, and
numerous allergens.
Mycotoxins have often been the main point of contention in recent insurance
claims and lawsuits over suspected harm from moldy buildings. In the 2004
EPA-funded report
Guidance for Clinicians on the Recognition and Management
of Health Effects Related to Mold Exposure and Moisture Indoors,
researchers at the Center for Indoor Environments and Health at the University
of Connecticut Health Center wrote that mycotoxins can elicit responses in
almost anyone they come in contact with, that the health effects are worrisome,
and that infants, at least, should be removed from suspect settings.
After reviewing the evidence available by 2004, the IOM concluded there are
moderately strong or at least limited links between damp indoor spaces and a
handful of health problems, such as asthma, cough, wheeze, hypersensitivity
pneumonitis, and a range of other upper and lower respiratory problems. For
other health problems under suspicion based on many anecdotal accounts and
limited scientific and medical evidence, such as headache, memory loss, nausea,
diarrhea, diabetes, fatigue, and fever, the lack of incontrovertible evidence
was typically due to a lack of rigorous research, not because of studies that
conclusively disproved a connection.
Among the weaknesses the IOM notes in many current studies is a tendency to
use self-reported visual or odor presence of mold, instead of actual
measurments of some kind, and little consideration of multiple exposures,
including additive or synergistic effects. In addition, the committee noted
that its findings did not address people with compromised immune systems.
Why Now?
It is likely that building dampness and mold have caused widespread but
largely unrecognized adverse respiratory health effects for centuries, says
William Fisk, acting division director for the Environmental Energy Technology
Division at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. But the increasing
immune-compromised population around the world may be one reason why health
problems from inhaled mold and bacteria appear to be on the rise recently.
Population growth, higher percentage of elderly, emerging diseases such as HIV,
and increases in smoking and in many chronic illnesses (often for unknown
reasons) are only a few of the reasons that, compared to just a century ago,
there are hundreds of millions more peoplewith weak or stressed immune systems.
The CDC has identified many immunocompromised subpopulations, as well as
pregnant women, as being potentially more vulnerable to exposures in damp
indoor spaces.
In addition, the dramatic increase in the percentage of people living in
urban areas may be playing a part. Researchers at Hospital General
Universitario Gregorio Maranon in Spain reported in the June 2006 issue of
Medical
Mycology that
Aspergillus spores in outdoor air are more common in
urban than rural settings in the province of Madrid. Worldwide population
increases have also pushed more people into wetter settings, such as coastal
and riparian floodplains, other bottomlands, and hurricane-prone areas.
Other risk factors arise from modern building practices, conveniences, and
shortcuts. Poorly built flat roofs cannot shed rainwater, while venting clothes
dryers indoors can direct moist air to vulnerable interior surfaces. Tighter
building envelopes in modern homes slow the escape of water vapor associated
with bathing, cooking, and even breathing; newer homes also have
insulation-filled cavities that dry slowly after the inevitable small leaks.
Further, the tight seal on newer housing may exacerbate problems during the heating
of buildings, when humid indoor air contacts cold walls or windows (although
the reverse is true for an air-conditioned building when it is hot outdoors).
Also, there are many anecdotal reports that molds grow more readily on the
paper-coated surfaces of modern wallboard than on older plaster walls. A few
companies have introduced wallboard products they say are more resistant to
mold growth, but some critics say these products still may support mold in
settings that routinely get wet, such as kitchens, bathrooms, or areas with
leaks of some type.
The substantial increase in air conditioning all over the world is another
potential culprit, with more than fifteen studies consistently indicating a
strong link with numerous respiratory symptoms, says Fisk. Microbes thriving in
air conditioning systems, including fungi and bacteria, likely contribute to
that link, he says.
Buildings have often been constructed without sufficient attention paid to
indoor water problems. In an assessment of health and economic impacts of
dampness and mold published in the June 2007 issue of
Indoor Air, Fisk
and EPA indoor environment specialist David Mudarri found that approximately
47% of U.S. homes have dampness or mold problems. Their review of other studies
led them to conclude that schools, offices, and institutional buildings have
similar problems. The EPA Building Assessment Survey and Evaluation Study of
100 randomly selected U.S. office buildings supports that conclusion, with its
finding, reported at the 2002 9th International Conference on Indoor Air
Quality and Climate, that 45% had ongoing water damage problems. University of
Cincinnati environmental health professor Tiina Reponen and her colleagues
noted in a May 2006 study in the
Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Hygiene that the percentage of buildings of all types that have mold
contamination is likely much higher in tropical and subtropical settings.
Cracking the Mold Code
Many new studies have provided additional evidence that mold likely deserves
serious attention. Fisk and Mudarri demonstrated in their June 2007 assessment
that 21% of current U.S. asthma cases may be attributable to dampness and mold
in homes, with schools, offices, and institutional buildings playing a similar
unhealthy role. In a companion meta-analysis of 33 studies also published in
the June 2007 issue of
Indoor Air, Fisk and Berkeley Laboratory
colleagues found that dampness and mold exposures increase the occurrence of a
range of respiratory problems by 30–50%.
Many other examples of potentially significant findings have been published
in the past three years. In the
May
2004 issue of EHP, Kati Huttunen ofthe Finnish National Public
Health Institute and colleagues demonstrated synergism between various indoor
fungi and the bacterium
Streptomyces californicus, includingincreases in
production of tumor necrosis factor–α and interleukin-6 in various
circumstances. In the February 2006 issue of
Toxicology and Applied
Pharmacology, a Michigan State University team described exacerbated damage
when exposure to a mycotoxin was preceded by exposure to a bacterial fragment,
in this case the endotoxin component lipopolysaccharide. More detailed
knowledge of the wide-ranging olfactory system damage that a mycotoxin can
wreak appeared in the
July
2006 issue of EHP, and in the
following
month's issue, Case Western Reserve University researchers described how
they identified potential biomarkers of mycotoxin exposure. An article in the 3
June 2007 issue of
Toxicology addresses elucidation by a second Finnish
team of specific accelerated genotoxic and cytotoxic damage by a cultivated
fungus–bacterium mixture.
EPA research biologist Stephen Vesper and colleagues have performed a series
of experiments to develop better methodology for predicting mold exposure risk.
After almost a decade and a half of work, they have created a Relative
Moldiness Index that uses quantitative polymerase chain reaction to measure
concentrations of 36 indicator mold species present in floor dust samples taken
inside a building. This standardized analysis, described in the January 2007
issue of the
Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology,
is used to indicate the amount of water damage in a home, providing more
accurate exposure information that may help to predict health problems. They
expect to soon publish information about its successor, the Environmental
Relative Moldiness Index, which covers more buildings in more geographic
settings, and benefits from improved sampling protocols and analysis of
information.
As researchers explore the potential contributions of damp conditions to
human health problems, they'll need to be careful about exactly which test
animals they use. Several reports, such as a Harvard study in the October 2006
American
Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology, have shown that
different mouse strains vary significantly in their biological responses to a
tested fungus. In addition, scientists face the usual uncertainties inherent in
extrapolating results from any animal testing to humans.
Not Messing Around
Until very recently, building design was not widely acknowledged as an
important factor in preventing water problems. As recently as 2005, the
American Institute of Architects (AIA) emphasized in an issue brief to its
members that mold problems are tied to maintenance of a building's plumbing and
ventilation systems, not the initial building design. Just a year later,
however, an article in the 29 September 2006 edition of the AIA publication
AIArchitect
emphasized that design details are critical in preventing mold problems. Some
of the points of vulnerability highlighted included roof underlayments,
concrete foundation sealants, flashing around windows and doors, and grading
around the building.
Many contractors also are paying more attention. "We've told builders
to be vigilant about moisture issues in all stages and to treat it seriously,"
says David Jaffe, vice president of construction liability and legal research
with the National Association of Home Builders. But problems still occur, he
acknowledges, citing the continuing stream of insurance claims and lawsuits
over mold concerns in both residential and nonresidential buildings: "It's
an ongoing issue. We're always looking for ways to improve."Other
organizations, such as the American College of Occupational and Environmental
Medicine and the American College of Medical Toxicology, remain skeptical that
mold poses a serious threat to more than a small number of people.
Doubts about mold threats, uncertainty over who should be responsible for
problems that may arise, and variable guidance on appropriate remediation
continue to play a role in political responses to mold concerns. At least 46
states and the District of Columbia have approved some type of insurance
coverage limitation for residential policies, and such exclusions are becoming
more common for commercial properties, says Michael Barry, director of media
relations for the U.S. Insurance Information Institute. According to the
National Conference of State Legislatures, since 2001 at least 31 states have
approved, have rejected, or continue to consider laws that address mold problems
in some way, such as contractor liability, real estate agent or landlord
liability for disclosure, or licensing of mold inspectors, testers, and
remediators.
Given the evidence at hand, Health Canada has determined that mold may pose
a health hazard, and on 31 March 2007 released brief recommendations for
cleaning up mold in residences.The EPA is developing guidelines for moisture
control "best practices" in all phases of design, construction, and
maintenance, and may finalize the guidelines in 2008, says Laura Kolb, an
environmental health scientist with the agency's Indoor Environments Division.
Much more information continues to surface through research and public
health efforts around the world, and there is some communication among various
groups. But "not much has been done to move the science forward that's
applicable to broad populations," says Allison Stock, a toxicologist with
the CDC's National Center for Environmental Health. One roadblock may be that
there is no concerted, coordinated national or international effort to address
the dozens of information gaps identified in the IOM report.
Given such shortcomings, "We're still quite some way from being able to
set [exposure and remediation] standards," says Marsha Ward, a principal
investigator in the EPA Immunotoxicology Branch. In the interim, groups such as
the Restoration Industry Association are giving it their best shot and updating
remediation guidelines for their members, targeting completion by 2008, says
communications director Patricia Harman.
Another critical area requiring attention is the very limited repertoire of
effective medical treatments to prevent illness or treat people experiencing
certain ill effects such as allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis and acute
idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage, says Lynnette Mazur, a professor of pediatrics
at the University of Texas Medical School at Houston and coauthor of a 6
December 2006
Pediatrics policy statement on noninfectious health
effects from molds. Mazur points out that with respect to allergic rhinitis and
asthma, however, there are very effective environmental and pharmacological
treatments available.
Regardless of all the remaining uncertainties, the overall recommendations
of many organizations and agencies worldwide are reaching a common conclusion:
Don't mess with mold. If you can see or smell it—and especially if health
problems are occurring—clean it out, throw it out, or get out.
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2007/115-6/EHP115pa300PDF.PDF
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2007/115-6/focus.html
####
Pure Air Control Services
800-422-7873