Mold question for Scott W, Forsythe and other chemists

[Hoody]

The other day I went to bid on a mold remediation job. The client was explaining to me how a competitor said there is a product that is a green biodegradable enzyme that eats the protein in mold rendering it harmless.

Any ideas on if this is fact or not ?

 

[Desk Jockey]

I'm no chemist, but I did have a chemistry set as a kid. I've also stayed at a Holiday Inn.
shiteatinggrin

Isn't Syrum 1000 basically peroxide and once it boils off the mold it resorts back to h2o? So wouldn't that fit the bill for the product or type of product you're describing?

 

[timnelson]

I have seen only one product like this (I'm sure there must be others). The explanation of how the product functioned -- against both molds and bacteria -- did not sound plausible whatsoever. Also, the product website never mentioned EPA registration.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

The person may be referring to this product, or one like it. I have seen Mold Remediation companies walking the thin line when they make claims for their service, using unregistered products.

http://biosolutionsproducts.com/products.html

There is a lot of misinformation that arises when products attributes are communicated from person to person to person.

The first person describes the product as a "cleaner", who tells another, and then that person describes it a little differently to another, calling it a "remover", and then on down the line until someone says it is a "Mold Killer".

If anyone who is actually selling the product or service inaccurately describes the product or service as having legal attributes of being a fungicide, and the product or manner in which said product is used as a service, is not EPA registered as such, then that person could be in violation of federal law, if such description inaccurately conveys attributes that may not be legally claimed, per EPA regulations.

On the other hand, in actual fact, it is perfectly legal to "clean" a surface of mold, as long as proper clearance testing is place to ascertain the effectiveness of the cleaning process. However, if you actually claim that a fungus is "killed" or altered to render harmless, then you are quickly proceeding out of the gray area into pesticide claims.

 

[Hoody]

Thanks Shawn, and others.

This company wanted someone else to do the demolition/removal, and then wanted to come in and "treat" the concrete and wall studs, ect ect. I told the home owner that if he wants us to do any work that we must handle it all from start to finish. Because in the event their product is useless or ineffective, its going to come back on me. He completely understood.

 

[Desk Jockey]

The Serum 1000 will pass IH testing provide you used enough product that it no longer foams and that you do a thorough job of HEPA vacuuming. We've even paid for testing just because we were not total believers of the product.

 

[rhino1]

Some sales reps claim their enzyme based products will eliminate mold by using up their food source, whatever that is. I don't know anything about mold but I didn't believe it.

 

[Hoody]

I've worked with Serum 1000 before, and it is a good product. I was just not comfortable with allowing another company to finish the job with a product I've not heard of or worked with before. Especially when they never even talked about HEPA vacuuming after treatment.

 

[SMRBAP]

Contain - "Kill" - Remove - Seal, 4 steps we always do, any one step requested not done by a custy, out comes the claims waiver.

I doubt any of these companies have proven medical/lab testing across the board that their "treated" spores are harmless to one and all, so you are not getting out of step 3, and I'd still never skip step 4 - so what does the "new fancy doo dad" do for you, what has it saved, is it less costly than typical fungicides?

Without any advantage, why reinvent the "kill" part, a proven fungicide is enough for me.

I'm suddenly remembering the youtube video someone posted here of the ozone wielding, mold killing expert, licking a wall