<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>David, </div>At this point, he's aiming to proceed as far down the road with treatment as possible. Something he finally explained to me about the situation that wasn't really clear before is that it's possible to treat the "biologicals" as the living organisms get called (just exactly the right method with a piano is still to be determined); but the real problem is that he isn't allergic to the mold itself, but rather the chemical compound it secretes as a defense against other molds possibly getting a foothold on its territory. You can get rid of the mold, but the poisonous residue stays behind. But where is it exactly? If you don't even see evidence of mold, is the poison compound there? It's not "alive" of course, so getting rid of it is a very vague, indeterminate process that involves a lot of cleaning, but no sure outcome. Seems like whatever he does in the end, it's going to involve a big leap of faith. </div>Greg Granoff </div>Humboldt State University </div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:26 AM, David Skolnik <<a href="mailto:davidskolnik@optonline.net" target="_blank">davidskolnik@optonline.net</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div> Greg - How is he coping during this period of strategizing? It seems like this becomes a de facto trial. James Schmit - can you identify some of those cutting edge techniques you referred to? David Skolnik Hastings on Hudson, NY<div><div class="h5"> At 03:25 PM 1/11/2013, you wrote: <blockquote type="cite">Wim, a follow up here, as I see my original to you reply didn't go to CAUT. This is a Cable grand, near 6'. The customer knows (we've had a conversation) it really isn't worth rebuilding completely, and so until he works through the nightmare of logistics that he may face if he decides to keep it and try to "treat" it instead, that sort of ends the conversation, I guess. Thanks for yours, and everyone's help and input! Greg On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:12 PM, <<a href="mailto:tnrwim@aol.com" target="_blank">tnrwim@aol.com</a>> wrote: <dl> <dd>Greg. Would you mind telling us the name of the piano? Is it worth it to completely rebuild, new finish, new strings, etc. new action? </dd><dd>Wim </dd><dd>Sent from my iPhone </dd><dd>On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:06 PM, "Gregory J. Granoff" <<a href="mailto:Gregory.Granoff@humboldt.edu" target="_blank"> Gregory.Granoff@humboldt.edu</a>> wrote: <blockquote type="cite"> <dd>I don't think you missed anything, but I think what I failed to make clear is that he really likes this piano--though it is a fairly indifferent and generic late 20's 5' 9-ish grand that had an action rebuild only a few years ago. Thus, though money is indeed not really the issue, there remained a desire to see if a proven route to decontaminating the piano was available that didn't involve rebuilding. My (and his) interest was in knowing if, specifically, a reliable method for doing this existed, and what it would be, and did anyone have experience with this. I am not under the impression that the piano itself is suspected to be the actual source of the problem, but rather being in the same environment, thoroughness of remediation demands that something be done with everything in the home that could be affected--whether actually needed or not. </dd><dd> He will undoubtedly not decide what to do until some information/recommendation from me is forthcoming, though, again, if I say, "buy another piano, because that's the easiest route", (and that seems like it might be the emerging consensus) he's likely to consent, because, of course, that option was always there. But I agreed to find out what the CAUT community at large knew, and everyone's take on it was of value to me, whether they thought they were addressing the central issue or not. In fact, for me, sometimes misunderstandings can generate new views on the proceedings that shed light where not originally expected. </dd><dd>I agree that knowing what it would cost to get a professional to assess and treat (if possible) the instrument would be of great interest. An ozone tent was mentioned, and I'm going to follow that up a bit out of curiosity and see what I can turn up. I'll let the list know if anything comes of it. </dd><dd>He mentioned to me the idea of selling it to a friend who knows exactly what's going on, has been in his house a lot and has no symptoms, and wants a piano. A scenario like this could skirt the ethics issues you bring up quite easily, and might be the only recourse if the legal/ethical problems of trying to avoid outright destruction of the piano became too weighty. </dd><dd>Greg </dd><dd>On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:06 PM, David Skolnik <<a href="mailto:davidskolnik@optonline.net" target="_blank"> davidskolnik@optonline.net</a>> wrote: <dl> <dd>Sorry if I'm missing something. If money is, as they say, 'no object', then let him get another piano, or another house, whatever. If money is 'an object', then the question is, what is the most efficacious way of determining if the piano is contributing to his problem? Either remove the piano, temporarily (he could rent something if need be), or wrap it. However, you say: <blockquote type="cite"> <dd> I suspect he's decided that the piano will either be treated in some tried and proven way, or be rebuilt or replaced</dd></blockquote> </dd><dd>So if he's already decided what he wants to do, it becomes an issue of little further interest. It would be of interest to know how much it would cost to have a certified individual determine the piano's toxicity, and if any, how much it would cost to remediate (and how it would be done). For that matter, it would of more than passing interest to contemplate the ethics of disposing of such an instrument. Can you sell it without disclosing your reason? If it is contaminated, can you donate it? etc. </dd><dd>It reminds me of my experience (which I've cited before) dealing with a piano that had been treated with (what turned out to be) Paris Green, a substance containing arsenic, which had been used, especially in the south, to control insects. Once officially identified (by village fire department), the legitimate (legal) recourse asserted itself. A company was brought in to inspect, and subsequently advised removing (and disposing of) the piano, a step which, frankly, had I continued to be involved in the process, I would have at the very least, challenged. I retain some degree of skepticism. </dd><dd>My last word: whatever. </dd><dd>David Skolnik </dd><dd>At 02:26 PM 1/10/2013, you wrote: <blockquote type="cite"> <dd>David, </dd><dd>You're correct, there was no mention of water damage. The house is fine from that perspective, as far as anyone knows. As I said to James in my response to him, the issue is probably the Humboldt climate well known for dampness, especially along the coast where we are. He is a musician, records, gigs, and uses the piano frequently, though as he is more a wind player and guitarist, and associates are more likely to use the piano than he in actual rehearsals and so forth. </dd><dd>All your suggestions are useful, but I suspect moving the piano to a different local in the house probably isn't going to fly, since I suspect he's decided that the piano will either be treated in some tried and proven way, or be rebuilt or replaced. No one has any idea whether the piano is even infected; they just want to cover all the bases in </dd><dd>the most direct way possible. I'm getting the feeling--as others have suggested--that the simplest thing is to replace it, period. </dd><dd>I'm going to check in with this guy very soon about what I'm learning here. </dd><dd>I'm not familiar with the ozone tent Andrew speaks of. Any idea what it is/does? Andrew? </dd><dd>Thanks very much for everyone's help! </dd><dd>Greg </dd><dd>On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:52 AM, David Skolnik <<a href="mailto:davidskolnik@optonline.net" target="_blank"> davidskolnik@optonline.net</a>> wrote: <dl> <dd>Greg, James - </dd><dd>Without getting into technical details beyond my immediate knowledge, the data seems somewhat incomplete. I may have missed something, but I don't understand the basis for James assumption that the piano suffered water damage. It would be interesting to know the suspected cause of the mold, i.e. a water leak, flooding, Humbolt climate? Does he use the piano? Can the piano be moved to a part of the house that he doesn't frequent, to see if that makes a difference? If his condition suddenly improves, that would narrow it down a bit. I would be wary of going immediately the off-site 'expert evaluation' route, partly for the initial expense (it can't be cheap, unless the wife does it herself or knows someone), and then question of what to do, based upon the assessment results. I suppose you could move it off-site to do a thorough cleaning (or take it out in the back on a sunny day - whenever that might be- and blow it out). </dd><dd>It would be interesting to see (photo) how the house has been cleansed without eliminating all elements of comfort. </dd><dd>David Skolnik </dd><dd>At 11:32 AM 1/10/2013, you wrote:<blockquote type="cite"> <dd>Greg, </dd><dd> Of all the things that are be almost impossible to remove from a piano without rebuilding, mildew and mold are at the top of the list. It is more difficult then smoke and smoke odor There simply is not a way to clean it out without removing and replacing parts. You have a living organism that is not just sitting there, is is growing If I were in your place I wold first have the piano removed to a water damage restoration specialist and let is sit in an uncontaminated area for evaluation and then decide the next step from there. Most of the time you can see it but not always. Getting the input from some folks that deal with it on a regular basis is helpful. </dd><dd>Yours </dd><dd>James Schmitt </dd><dd>On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:57 AM, Gregory J. Granoff wrote: <blockquote type="cite"> <dd>David, </dd><dd>I'm not sure what the story is on discovery there, but his wife is a long time professional allergist, and they have come quite a distance already in getting rid of all furniture and permeable surfaces in the house (carpeting, etc.), cleaning, painting, etc., with no turning back. I'm not going to say anything about finding what you tend to look for, if you know what I mean; but he did develop some pretty unpleasant symptoms when he's in his house--difficulty regulating body temp, feelings of mild atrophy in extremities, and mental cloudiness, among others, according to him. </dd><dd>The question really is now: what do with the piano. He's aware--assuming that all this other stuff is correct-- that the piano might need to be replaced entirely, so it isn't a question of that being do-able if necessary. </dd><dd>He just wants to know if that route is the only choice, and if it isn't, what are the realistic options for the existing piano? </dd><dd>Thanks, </dd><dd>Greg </dd><dd>On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:08 AM, David Skolnik <<a href="mailto:davidskolnik@optonline.net" target="_blank"> davidskolnik@optonline.net</a>> wrote: <dl> <dd>Greg - </dd><dd>How was the original mold assessment made? How is the rest of his house being treated? Did a reliable expert locate the primary source, and reason for its presence? </dd><dd>David Skolnik </dd><dd>At 12:26 PM 1/8/2013, you wrote:<blockquote type="cite"> <dd>Hello list, </dd><dd>I'm looking for info regarding a customer who has been diagnosed with a serious allergy to poisonous mold spores that have apparently infected his house. He asked me whether there was any way to treat permeable surfaces such as felt, unfinished wood, etc. in pianos for the spores which can lodge there that didn't involve replacing everything. I have no experience with this issue at all. Anybody know? </dd><dd>Thanks so much in advance for any advice and knowledge! </dd><dd>Greg Granoff </dd><dd>Humboldt State University </dd><dd>No virus found in this message. </dd><dd>Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com/" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a> </dd><dd>Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/6016 - Release Date: 01/07/13</dd></blockquote></dd></dl></dd></blockquote></dd></blockquote></dd></dl></dd></blockquote></dd></dl></dd></blockquote></dd></dl></blockquote> <dd>No virus found in this message. </dd><dd>Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a> </dd><dd>Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/6021 - Release Date: 01/09/13 </dd><dd>No virus found in this message. </dd><dd>Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a> </dd><dd>Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2637/6023 - Release Date: 01/10/13 </dd> No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a> </div></div> Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2638/6029 - Release Date: 01/12/13</div> </blockquote></div> </div>