Alternative Health Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Fashion Headline mold

Are You Suffering from Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome? How Junk Science and Corrupt Judges Hide Mold Toxicity from the Public

Sad frustrated middle aged woman photo

by John P. Thomas
Well being Influence Information

If I used to be to announce that my home simply burned right down to the bottom and I misplaced all my possessions, there can be an outpouring of sympathy and gives of assist. If I additionally stated I didn’t have any insurance coverage, then individuals would offer shelter and there would undoubtedly be donations to a Go-Fund-Me web page to assist me begin life once more.

Nevertheless, if I introduced that my home has gotten water broken, mould has set in, and it’s making me so sick that I’ve to go away it behind together with the whole lot I personal with a purpose to protect my life, there can be little help for me or assist for my losses. Individuals may say sort issues, however they might in all probability be considering… 

“Wow that’s actually excessive! I by no means heard of such a factor.”

“Why can’t you simply purchase a gallon of bleach and wash every part – I’m positive you possibly can clear it up.”

 “I by no means get sick when I’m round mould – it’s actually not an issue to be involved about.” 

“Can’t you simply take some Benadryl in your allergy?” 

“Perhaps your drawback is one thing else – like stress – perhaps it is best to go to a psychiatrist.”

Within the first case with the hearth, it’s straightforward to see when a constructing burns down and the whole lot is destroyed. The proof that proves the constructing is not inhabitable is seen within the heaps of ashes.

Within the second case with a water-damaged constructing and mould progress, the constructing nonetheless stands, and the proof that it’s unsafe for human habitation shouldn’t be clear to the informal observer.

It’d odor dangerous, or there is perhaps black and inexperienced stains rising on the partitions and on possessions, nevertheless, most individuals mistakenly nonetheless consider that is all innocent.

A Propaganda Marketing campaign is getting used to Make us Consider Indoor Mould is Innocent 

The assumption that indoor mould is innocent is the direct results of a nationwide propaganda marketing campaign that has been quietly happening for almost 20 years.

Mould propaganda has been patterned after this system utilized by Huge Tobacco, which efficiently satisfied People to consider that there was no well being danger linked to tobacco use.

The Scope of this Article

This text will expose the propaganda that the majority People have been led to consider about mould, which is the lie, “mould that grows in water-damaged buildings is innocent.”

Indoor mould might be extraordinarily dangerous to many individuals – even life-threatening. I’ll describe mould sickness which is known as Persistent Inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS) on this article, and clarify who’s in danger.

I may also determine those that set the propaganda marketing campaign in movement, how they created a defective danger evaluation mannequin to “show” that indoor mould is innocent, and the way toxicology consultants have been utilizing this flawed science in courtroom to reject the claims of mold-injured people who find themselves looking for damages from those that prompted their publicity.

Future articles will present how the California judicial system has been used to intimidate a vocal whistleblower who has dared to talk out concerning the flawed science and the particular curiosity teams who created it, and the way professional witnesses are utilizing the mannequin in courtroom with out indicating that they’re the authors of the paperwork.

Sharon Kramer was sued and framed for libel with the intent of utilizing the courts to completely shut her up. She has been preventing again within the courts since 2005 to protect her free speech proper to show the practices of toxicology consultants who’re deceptive judges and juries with their testimony based mostly on their “junk science” [1] danger evaluation mannequin. [2]

Sharon Kramer’s 14-year encounter with the California courtroom system has been marked by quite a few judicial errors, case fixing, document tampering and even threats from the courtroom.

She has been jailed and had liens positioned towards her residence for talking out towards fraudulent science, and for complaining about felony exercise within the California courtroom system.

Regardless of the intimidation, she continues to speak concerning the two junk science toxicology reviews, and the exercise of the courts that are defending particular curiosity teams and denying justice to mold-injured individuals.

Mould Sickness known as Continual Inflammatory Response Syndrome

Persistent Inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS) is a diagnosable medical situation that outcomes from publicity to water-damaged buildings. It isn’t an allergic response restricted to a runny nostril and purple/dry eyes. [3]

It’s a continual immune system response that’s brought on by irritation. It impacts a number of physique methods and consists of many signs. There’s a variety of variability from individual to individual, however those that endure might face life-threatening circumstances.

Briefly, individuals turn into significantly ailing when they’re uncovered to water-damaged buildings the place there are fungi, micro organism, actinomycetes, and mycobacteria. These dwelling organisms will not be the entire drawback — it’s also the poisonous chemical compounds (biotoxins) these organisms produce. [3]

The biotoxins they produce embrace: inflammagens from fungal fragments; beta glucans, mannans, hemolysins, spriocyclic drimanes, and microbial risky natural compounds.

These poisonous substances trigger sickness in individuals whose our bodies are unable to regulate inflammatory responses, who’ve genetic susceptibility, and who’ve irregular inflammatory occasions when they’re uncovered. [3]

Do You Stay or Work in a Musty/moldy smelling constructing?
Do Your Youngsters Attend faculty in a Musty/moldy smelling constructing?

Not everybody who’s uncovered to moldy indoor environments develops CIRS. These are signs of CIRS. This listing has been compiled from a number of sources. It’s a information to those that are questioning if their publicity to musty/moldy smelling buildings may be the reason for their well being issues.

Signs of CIRS might embrace:

Fatigue, weak spot, aches, muscle cramps, uncommon ache, ice decide ache, headache, mild sensitivity, pink eyes, blurred imaginative and prescient, tearing, sinus issues, persistent cough, shortness of breath, stomach ache, diarrhea, joint ache, morning stiffness, reminiscence points, focus/focus points, phrase recollection points, decreased capacity to study new information, confusion, disorientation, pores and skin sensitivity, temper swings, urge for food swings, sweats (particularly night time sweats), temperature regulation or dysregulation issues, extreme thirst, elevated urination, static shocks, numbness, tingling, vertigo, metallic style, tremors, a number of chemical sensitivities. [4, 5]

Individuals may be recognized with different sicknesses, together with a number of sclerosis, persistent fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and melancholy, nevertheless, there are exams that can be utilized to determine if CIRS is the underlying explanation for signs. [5]

Along with signs, the Visible Distinction Sensitivity (VCS) check is used to verify CIRS. It measures one of many neurological features of imaginative and prescient referred to as distinction. Individuals with CIRS may have a decreased capacity to understand modifications in visible distinction. This is a vital marker that must be mixed with signs and a historical past of publicity to water-damaged buildings previous to analysis. [6]

There’s an internet VCS screening check that folks can take to assist assess their well being standing with respect to mould. [6]

What number of Individuals will turn out to be Sick from Indoor Mould Publicity?

Analysis carried out by one of many world’s most well-known mould researchers and doctor, Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker, M.D., has persistently proven that 24% of people who find themselves repeatedly uncovered to water-damaged buildings will grow to be sick. [5, 7]

The 24% determine was additionally obtained by a CDC’s NIOSH (Nationwide Institute for Occupational Security and Well being) research. [8] 

The NIOSH research in contrast the well being standing of staff at a water-damaged highschool in New Orleans with a management highschool in Ohio with out water-damage.

The research confirmed that 24% of the employees in New Orleans had signs of Persistent Inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS). [7,8]

How do Buildings get Water-Broken?

Anytime water is allowed to go the place it ought to by no means be current in a constructing there can be water associated injury and virtually all the time mould progress. Widespread sources of water intrusion embrace:

  • Defective development of crawl areas, flat roofs or pretend stucco cladding with out enough caulking;
  • Basements uncovered to surrounding soil that’s saturated with water;
  • Sudden leaks from frozen pipes or previous washer hoses;
  • Uncared for repairs of leaking roofs, home windows and doorways; or 
  • Mould remediation packages that didn’t shield the constructing from the unfold of poisonous supplies throughout mould removing and clean-up. [9,10]

Water-Injury can also happen in Closed Buildings When Moisture Ranges are Excessive

Water doesn’t should pour right into a constructing to wreck it. Extreme moisture within the air can saturate porous supplies and condense out of the air on chilly arduous surfaces when moisture can’t escape. 

Beginning within the 1980s, considerations over power effectivity led architects and constructing contractors to start out producing hermetic buildings. They wrapped buildings in plastic sheets to cease all drafts. The unanticipated consequence was that the plastic trapped moisture inside and prevented the buildings from respiration.

They put in entire home air-conditioning, which when used as an alternative of opening home windows tends to raise indoor moisture ranges.

To economize, builders additionally switched to using inexpensive particle board, cardboard sort sheathing, and using paper coated sheetrock.

Mould likes to develop in closed moist environments. It likes to eat moist particle board, the paper on sheetrock, and different cellulose constructing supplies.

Consequently, buildings turned big Petri dishes that have been good for rising mould – and mould started to quietly develop.

Generally, water-damaged buildings could have a moldy musty odor, however not all the time. The musty odor of mould in new buildings could also be masked by the odor of latest paint and new carpet, and never observed for a lot of months or till residents begin getting sick.

Propaganda Marketing campaign Denies the Existence of CIRS

If we all know a lot concerning the dangers of creating CIRS from spending prolonged quantities of time in moldy buildings, and we all know how buildings turn into moldy, then why does mould associated sickness (CIRS) stay controversial and off the radar display of most typical physicians and federal coverage makers in the USA?

The reply is straightforward. A propaganda marketing campaign was carried out in 2001 to “train” physicians and to “educate” judges that mould in water-damage buildings might by no means attain a degree that might be dangerous to human well being. [11]

The Insurance coverage business and the constructing development business have been the first beneficiaries of the marketing campaign. The American School of Occupational and Environmental Drugs (ACOEM), and the US Chamber of Commerce organized the marketing campaign.

Numerous US authorities businesses hid their administrative heads within the sand whereas the marketing campaign was unfolded throughout America and even supported it by refusing to do their very own unbiased analysis. The California judiciary enabled the advertising of propaganda by way of judicial corruption, defective selections, and fraudulent report retaining.

The small print of how these numerous teams carried out the propaganda marketing campaign might be mentioned intimately in future articles. At this level I merely will clarify why it turned a excessive precedence.

Why was it so Necessary to Develop a Mould Propaganda Marketing campaign? 

The brief reply is “worry of dropping cash!”

A serious courtroom case shook the insurance coverage and development industries when it was settled in 2001.

A rich lady named Linda Ballard constructed a model new mansion in Texas, which turned completely permeated with extremely poisonous mould.

A jury awarded her 32 million dollars. The mansion needed to be torn down. Her husband, who was an funding banker, needed to retire due to reminiscence loss, and their Three-year-old youngster developed critical cognitive impairments. [2, 12]

Insurance coverage corporations and constructing development companies have been shocked and shortly turned afraid that the brand new era of hermetic buildings would result in a speedy improve in variety of insurance coverage claims and lawsuits for mould injury. 

Distribution of Propaganda Masquerading as Science

ACOEM logo

A plan was hatched to cease the potential landslide of lawsuits. A propaganda doc masquerading as science can be created and distributed all through america.

Two paperwork have been ready — one for physicians and the opposite for legal professionals, judges, and most of the people.

In accordance with Sharon Kramer, that is how the paperwork got here into being:

In 2001 the American School of Occupational and Environmental Drugs (ACOEM) made preparations with GlobalTox to organize a scientific report concerning the well being dangers of mould in water-damaged buildings.

Dr. Bruce Kelman of GlobalTox was joined by Dr. Brian Harden who had retired as an Assistant Surgeon Basic of the USA and Deputy Director of NIOSH. Dr. Andrew Sackson of UCLA was additionally introduced in to writer this place assertion.

The US Chamber of Commerce then employed GlobalTox consultants to supply a simplified model of the ACOEM place paper.

Lower than a yr later, on July 17, 2003, the simplified model of the place assertion was launched to the general public at a serious fanfare presentation in Washington, D.C. Their danger evaluation mannequin was shared with individuals representing constructing, insurance coverage, real-estate, and mortgage corporations. [2]

These paperwork have been then utilized by toxicology specialists in courtroom continuing all through the USA to defend insurance coverage corporations and builders from private damage lawsuits. The paperwork have been hailed as plain proof that mould inside water-damaged buildings shouldn’t be dangerous. 

It seems these paperwork have additionally been utilized by federal businesses to form and restrict the attain of their mould associated insurance policies and to disclaim the complete extent of hurt that may be brought on by publicity to water-damaged buildings. 

In consequence, physicians all through the USA have been falsely knowledgeable concerning the dangerous results of mould from water-damaged buildings.

They don’t acknowledge CIRS (biotoxin sickness), and thus don’t present correct remedy for his or her sufferers. 

Those that are chargeable for approving or denying claims of hurt brought on by mould publicity proceed to make use of the flawed junk science contained in these reviews to disclaim damage claims.

In consequence, individuals are left to languish and even die from mould sickness, whereas the belongings of companies and authorities businesses are protected. 

The report ready beneath the sponsorship of ACOEM was entitled, “Place Paper on Mould, Opposed Human Well being Results Related to Molds within the Indoor Setting.” The paper might be summarized in a single sentence: 

Scientific proof doesn’t help the proposition that human well being has been adversely affected by inhaled mycotoxins within the residence, faculty or workplace setting. [13]

The danger evaluation mannequin was based mostly on a single rodent research that uncovered lab animals to a single excessive dose of inhaled mould. The animals didn’t get sick or die when mould was shoved down their throats.

The conclusion made by the authors of the report was not logical or scientifically legitimate – it was nothing greater than flawed propaganda. If rats didn’t get sick from one excessive dose of mould, then people who expertise continuous low degree publicity from dwelling or working in moldy indoor areas might by no means get sick.

Hundreds of Analysis Research Stand in Opposition to the Flawed Analysis Papers

The 2002 ACOEM paper was revised in 2011 after excessive criticism from the medical and scientific communities.

Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker commented on the revised doc. He said:

Lastly, after many months of in depth assessment, ACOEM 2011 is right here. I hoped to seek out one thing within the new model of the substitute paper, ACOEM 2002 that may profit society.

I’m sorely disillusioned.

The unhappy fact is that there’s nothing within the article that may help the general public with understanding the mechanisms of publicity and the potential affiliation with sickness.

Somewhat, ACOEM, an entity that purports to exist within the curiosity of public well being, is publishing a press release with the only function of being a doc protection consultants can level to as they attempt to assist the insurance coverage business defeat legitimate claims of people who’ve turn into sick following publicity to water-damaged buildings (WDB).

When knowledgeable affiliation is making a coverage assertion, the feedback of the group ideally are supposed to assist the general public not directly, not harm them. ACOEM 2011 has nothing to assist injured individuals.

So many individuals anticipated that ACOEM 2011 would truly say one thing scientifically legitimate, intellectually trustworthy and new. The previous report was criticized mercilessly (as nicely it ought to have been) as flawed science, distributed with a scarcity of thoroughness and lack of transparency.

Said plainly: ACOEM 2002 was nothing greater than junk science. As we see, so is ACOEM 2011.

There isn’t any room for (1) absence of thoroughness; (2) absence of rigor; and (Three) absence of transparency in public paperwork that can be learn by sufferers and people physicians who’re charged with the sacred obligation of treating the sick.

We swore an oath to take action; we didn’t swear an oath to guard belongings of insurance coverage corporations.

As soon as once more we see the identical unreferenced (and wholly incorrect) opinion about persistent exposures: “A cumulative dose delivered over a interval of hours, days or perhaps weeks is predicted to be much less acutely poisonous than a bolus dose.”

Anticipated by whom? There isn’t any foundation in fact to the concept repeat exposures suppress the next inflammatory response. Truly, simply the reverse is true. With re-exposure, “sicker, faster.” [1]

The Flawed Science Nonetheless won’t Die

So right here we’re, in 2019, after the existence of CIRS has been clearly established, after the genetic markers for CIRS have been recognized, and after the Visible Distinction Sensitivity check has been perfected to a 98.5% accuracy price. [7]

But, attorneys representing insurance coverage corporations and development corporations nonetheless rent consultants to advertise the 2002/2011 ACOEM danger evaluation mannequin as if it precisely mirrored the present scientific image.

It wasn’t correct in 2002 or in 2011, and it definitely isn’t correct immediately. It was even silently faraway from the ACOEM web site in 2015. [14]

Why isn’t this Junk Science Formally Retracted and Completely Withdrawn?

The reply to this query can be introduced within the subsequent articles.

The articles will present further particulars about how the propaganda marketing campaign unfolded and the way the authorized system is defending the flawed science and people who market it, whereas the courts proceed to terrorize Sharon Kramer with continuous persecution to the purpose the place she now fears for her safety and her life.

Concerning the Writer

John P. Thomas is a well being author for Well being Impression Information. He holds a B.A. in Psychology from the College of Michigan, and a Grasp of Science in Public Well being (M.S.P.H.) from the Faculty of Public Well being, Division of Well being Administration, on the College of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.


[1] “ACOEM 2011 Report Evaluation,” Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker, M.D., Three/9/2011. 

[2] I interviewed Sharon Kramer by telephone on 2/12/2019. 

[3] “Continual Inflammatory Response Syndrome Acquired After Publicity to Water-Broken Buildings (CIRS-WDB),” Dr. Robin Thomson, 

[4] “Is Poisonous Mould Publicity the Explanation for Your Signs?” Jill Carnahan, MD, Retrieved 2/eight/2019. 

[5] “CIRS -Persistent Inflammatory Response Syndrome,” Retrieved 2/eight/2019. 

[6] “VCS Check – Visible Distinction Sensitivity,” Surviving Mould, Retrieved 2/26/2019. 

[7] I interviewed Dr. Richie Shoemaker, M.D., by telephone on 2/11/2019.

[8] Gregory Thomas, MD, MS; Nancy Clark Burton, PhD, MPH, CIH, Charles Mueller, MS; Elena Web page, MD, MPH; “Comparability of Mould Exposures, Work-related Signs, and Visible Distinction Sensitivity between Staff at a Severely Water-damaged Faculty and Staff at a Faculty with out Vital Water-Injury,” Well being Hazard Analysis Report HETA 2005-0135-3116, Alcee Fortier Senior Excessive Faculty, New Orleans, Louisiana, September 2010. 

[9] “What’s a Water Broken Constructing?” Surviving Mould, Retrieved 2/eight/2019. 

[10] “Water Injury Statistics” Retrieved 2/eight/2019. 

[11] “Amid Fits Over Mould, Specialists Put on Two Hats,” David Armstrong, Wall Road Journal, January 10, 2007. 

[12] “Ballard from the Starting,” Retrieved 2/27/2019. 


[14] “American School of Occupational and Environmental Drugs Mould Coverage Paper,” Moe Bedard, Mould Details, Mould Protected Options, Oct 24, 2016.


Revealed on March four, 2019

s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)(window, doc,’script’,
fbq(‘init’, ‘928755773879843’);

About the author