"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

HeyBub wrote:

"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry and
look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in question.

HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


Hey Bub-
The quote you cited includes the phrase "so far". And if you look at the full
Wall Street Journal article in the URL you included in your posting (above), the
second paragraph of the full article explicitly identifies the government's
report as "preliminary".

In your rush to condemn the government, you are ignoring inconvenient
information that negates your criticism.

The alleged structural damage done by the off-gassing from the suspect drywall
took time to develop due to the relatively low concentrations of whatever
volatile chemicals may be responsible. In order to scientifically establish
whether or not the drywall is at fault, it is probably necessary to do a
thorough chemical analysis of the off-gasses, including their concentration, and
then expose typical home construction materials to the same mixture of gasses at
the same concentrations and same conditions of temperature and humidity.

You cannot always extrapolate the effects of low level exposure by using a
higher concentration for a shorter exposure period to accelerate the testing
time. Many toxic and/or corrosive substances exhibit a threshold effect, where
low or very low levels of exposure produce a different (or even null) effect
compared with a higher exposure. Doing the science properly takes a certain
amount of time that cannot always be rushed, despite what you may believe.

In article ,
Retirednoguilt wrote:


You cannot always extrapolate the effects of low level exposure by using a
higher concentration for a shorter exposure period to accelerate the testing
time.
Yet this is the basis for much of the rat lab testing for cancer
status. Feed the rat a couple orders of magnitude more than the human
equivalent and wonder why bad things occur.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

Retirednoguilt wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that
their sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of
sulfur gases and strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no
evidence so far that the emissions were to blame for health problems
and metal corrosion reported by at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


Hey Bub-
The quote you cited includes the phrase "so far". And if you look at
the full Wall Street Journal article in the URL you included in your
posting (above), the second paragraph of the full article explicitly
identifies the government's report as "preliminary".

In your rush to condemn the government, you are ignoring inconvenient
information that negates your criticism.


You make a good point, yet your point raises an even more interesting
question:

If the results (so far) are inconclusive, equivocal, almost meaningless, and
merely suggest a hint of a shadow of a possible trend, why say anything at
all?

Is the obviously premature report a mistake in its release or an attempt to
influence something: Diplomatic relations, pending lawsuit results, the
World Series winner?

on 10/30/2009 10:04 AM (ET) Kurt Ullman wrote the following:
In article ,
Retirednoguilt wrote:



You cannot always extrapolate the effects of low level exposure by using a
higher concentration for a shorter exposure period to accelerate the testing
time.

Yet this is the basis for much of the rat lab testing for cancer
status. Feed the rat a couple orders of magnitude more than the human
equivalent and wonder why bad things occur.


Even drinking clean water can cause death.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16614865/


--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Retirednoguilt wrote:


You cannot always extrapolate the effects of low level exposure by using
a
higher concentration for a shorter exposure period to accelerate the
testing
time.
Yet this is the basis for much of the rat lab testing for cancer
status. Feed the rat a couple orders of magnitude more than the human
equivalent and wonder why bad things occur.


Isn't that what happened to the saccharin ban that caused cancer in rats ?
They fed them enough that a person would have to eat about a gallon of it a
day to produce the same results.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Retirednoguilt wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that
their sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of
sulfur gases and strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no
evidence so far that the emissions were to blame for health problems
and metal corrosion reported by at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


Hey Bub-
The quote you cited includes the phrase "so far". And if you look at
the full Wall Street Journal article in the URL you included in your
posting (above), the second paragraph of the full article explicitly
identifies the government's report as "preliminary".

In your rush to condemn the government, you are ignoring inconvenient
information that negates your criticism.


You make a good point, yet your point raises an even more interesting
question:

If the results (so far) are inconclusive, equivocal, almost meaningless,
and merely suggest a hint of a shadow of a possible trend, why say
anything at all?


Because it's interesting, and because there are people who prefer not to buy
defective and/or dangerous **** from dictatorships.

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Reminds me of the toxic carpeting thing years ago. The EPA* insisted
unequivocally that no carpeting they tested outgassed any harmful levels
of toxins, despite thousands of serious health complaints by consumers.
They only reversed their position when they built a new building for
themselves, installed new carpeting, and promptly made many of their own
employees too sick to come to work.

(*IIRC, it was the EPA, but it may have been another of the many
benevolent agencies of the federal gov't.)

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Retirednoguilt wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that
their sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of
sulfur gases and strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no
evidence so far that the emissions were to blame for health problems
and metal corrosion reported by at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


Hey Bub-
The quote you cited includes the phrase "so far". And if you look at
the full Wall Street Journal article in the URL you included in your
posting (above), the second paragraph of the full article explicitly
identifies the government's report as "preliminary".

In your rush to condemn the government, you are ignoring inconvenient
information that negates your criticism.


You make a good point, yet your point raises an even more interesting
question:

If the results (so far) are inconclusive, equivocal, almost meaningless,
and merely suggest a hint of a shadow of a possible trend, why say
anything at all?


Because it's interesting, and because there are people who prefer not to buy
defective and/or dangerous **** from dictatorships.

Jesus, Joe, we don't hear anything from you for what, six months, and
then you blindside us with a venomous non-sequitur. You didn't actually
read the thread, did you?

"Smitty Two" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Retirednoguilt wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that
their sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of
sulfur gases and strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no
evidence so far that the emissions were to blame for health problems
and metal corrosion reported by at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


Hey Bub-
The quote you cited includes the phrase "so far". And if you look at
the full Wall Street Journal article in the URL you included in your
posting (above), the second paragraph of the full article explicitly
identifies the government's report as "preliminary".

In your rush to condemn the government, you are ignoring inconvenient
information that negates your criticism.


You make a good point, yet your point raises an even more interesting
question:

If the results (so far) are inconclusive, equivocal, almost
meaningless,
and merely suggest a hint of a shadow of a possible trend, why say
anything at all?


Because it's interesting, and because there are people who prefer not to
buy
defective and/or dangerous **** from dictatorships.

Jesus, Joe, we don't hear anything from you for what, six months, and
then you blindside us with a venomous non-sequitur. You didn't actually
read the thread, did you?


If you think it's a non-sequitur, you're too busy with other tasks. Come
back when you can focus.

"Pete C." wrote in message
ster.com...

HeyBub wrote:

"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases
and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported
by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry and
look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in question.

One major bit of commonality: the houses were occupied by living, breathing
humans.

On Oct 30, 2:01*pm, "Charlie" wrote:

snip

One major bit of commonality: the houses were occupied by living, breathing
humans.

Like cows emit methane, homo sapiens emits hydrogen sulfide, and kitty
litter emits ammonia. Has anyone tracked down the emissions of the
ubiquitous 'palmetto bugs' that Floridians live with?
Endless possibilities...

Joe

Ralph Mowery wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Retirednoguilt wrote:


You cannot always extrapolate the effects of low level exposure by using
a
higher concentration for a shorter exposure period to accelerate the
testing
time.
Yet this is the basis for much of the rat lab testing for cancer
status. Feed the rat a couple orders of magnitude more than the human
equivalent and wonder why bad things occur.


Isn't that what happened to the saccharin ban that caused cancer in rats ?
They fed them enough that a person would have to eat about a gallon of it a
day to produce the same results.

What saccharin ban? All they ever got was a warning on the label which
nobody cares about, the stuff is still selling quite well today.

In article .com,
"Pete C." wrote:

What saccharin ban? All they ever got was a warning on the label which
nobody cares about, the stuff is still selling quite well today.

The FDA banned it in '72 but was overruled by Congress. BTW: Canada
banned it entirely.
Probably confusion with cyclamate where the ban stuck.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

In article .com,
"Pete C." wrote:

What saccharin ban? All they ever got was a warning on the label which
nobody cares about, the stuff is still selling quite well today.

The FDA banned it in '72 but was overruled by Congress. BTW: Canada
banned it entirely.
Probably confusion with cyclamate where the ban stuck.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

DGDevin wrote:

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

I prefer to buy US made products where I can, but if I needed drywall
urgently and there was a shortage as there was when this stuff was
mostly used, I'd consider it.

DGDevin wrote:

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

I prefer to buy US made products where I can, but if I needed drywall
urgently and there was a shortage as there was when this stuff was
mostly used, I'd consider it.

Pete C. wrote:

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

I prefer to buy US made products where I can, but if I needed drywall
urgently and there was a shortage as there was when this stuff was
mostly used, I'd consider it.

Okay, you'd consider it, but would you install it?

With not only the value of your home but your family's health at risk, would
you install *any* product that had raised alarms as to its safety before
knowing for sure if it's safe or not?

Pete C. wrote:

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

I prefer to buy US made products where I can, but if I needed drywall
urgently and there was a shortage as there was when this stuff was
mostly used, I'd consider it.

Okay, you'd consider it, but would you install it?

With not only the value of your home but your family's health at risk, would
you install *any* product that had raised alarms as to its safety before
knowing for sure if it's safe or not?

"DGDevin" wrote in
m:

Pete C. wrote:

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese
bigotry and look at what else may be in common in the problem
houses in question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

I prefer to buy US made products where I can, but if I needed drywall
urgently and there was a shortage as there was when this stuff was
mostly used, I'd consider it.

Okay, you'd consider it, but would you install it?

With not only the value of your home but your family's health at risk,
would you install *any* product that had raised alarms as to its
safety before knowing for sure if it's safe or not?




You know those register receipts that print out rebates automatically?
Probaby will print out a Chinese Drywall real estate addendum.

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?



Of buy toys which probably contain lead in their paint, because the Chinese
find it inconvenient to adhere to safety precautions which are common in
developed countries?

On Oct 31, 2:56*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"DGDevin" wrote in message

m...

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese bigotry
and look at what else may be in common in the problem houses in
question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

Of buy toys which probably contain lead in their paint, because the Chinese
find it inconvenient to adhere to safety precautions which are common in
developed countries?

My friend has been building a house doing most of the work himself now
for about two years. The other day when he opened up a hole in the
drywall it smelled stongly of rotten eggs. The odor disipated fairly
quickly. Is this typical of Chinese drywall?

Jimmie

JIMMIE wrote in
:

On Oct 31, 2:56*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"DGDevin" wrote in message

m...

Pete C. wrote:

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...

Both. I'd say it points to a need to get beyond anti Chinese
bigotry and look at what else may be in common in the problem
houses in question.

In the meantime would you install Chinese drywall in your home?

Of buy toys which probably contain lead in their paint, because the
Chine
se
find it inconvenient to adhere to safety precautions which are common
in developed countries?

My friend has been building a house doing most of the work himself now
for about two years. The other day when he opened up a hole in the
drywall it smelled stongly of rotten eggs. The odor disipated fairly
quickly. Is this typical of Chinese drywall?

Jimmie


Who really knows. It's also possible it's a discarded egg McMuffin.

On Nov 1, 8:45*am, Red Green wrote:

Who really knows. It's also possible it's a discarded egg McMuffin.

LOL! Riiiiiight. Who doesn't finish an Egg McMuffin?! That's got to
be the biggest stretch I've seen on a newsgroup today. Then again,
the day is young.

R

HeyBub wrote:
"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125682903154416173.html

Who to believe? The government or your own watery eyes?

Let me think...


A couple other drywall factoids I got from a friend:
Drywall can contain asbestos. If a material contains less than 1%
asbestos it is not regulated [1% seems rather high to me]. Some Chinese
drywall has been found to have 3% asbestos.

Drywall contains gypsum (it is also called gypsum board). Gypsum is
calcium sulfate, so 'normal' drywall contains sulfur (but bound in the
gypsum molecule).

On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:44:40 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"[WASHINGTON] Federal product-safety regulators said Thursday that their
sampling of Chinese drywall emits higher concentrations of sulfur gases and
strontium than U.S.-made product, but found no evidence so far that the
emissions were to blame for health problems and metal corrosion reported by
at least 1,900 U.S. homeowners."

idiots

OK, read *carefully*, it doesn't declare the stuff innocent, just that
they have "found no evidence". Well, where do you LOOK for such
evidence?


They verified what can be easily verified, that the emissions are
there.

But they need a time machine to go back and watch the damage that was
done a year ago.


J.

I've been hearing this story for months. I don't understand how this
happened. Drywall is supposed to be gypsum, but supposedly some of the
troubling drywall that was USA-made had cellulose in it and emitted
formaldehyde as well as sulfide. Is this some sort of go-green
recycling issue? Did the Chinese make this drywall for us or did they
also use it for themselves? In the 1970s folks pumped foam between
their walls and choked from formaldehyde. Is there some insulation
additive? I sometimes freak when I find all the additives in stuff I
buy for the house. I mean, when I buy one thing, I can mix the other
stuff myself (I'm a chemical engineer!). THat's how we got asbestos
and other stuff into our homes. The 1965 late engineer told my late
dad the asbestos siding was "a new material that never needs
replacing." Well, not in their lifetimes. The asbestos siding on my
block that hasn't beenreplaced or covered has a lot of paint fading.

- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

In 1985 NYC air had 1 fiber of asbestos/cc and the Germans workplace
standard was .2/cc and the USA one 2/cc. Plus I seem to recall Vermont
"white" asbestos is at least one order of magnitude less dangerous
than South African "blue" and fiberglass is at least one order of
magnituded less hazardous than "white".

*+-Drywall can contain asbestos. If a material contains less than 1%
*+-asbestos it is not regulated [1% seems rather high to me]. Some Chinese
*+-drywall has been found to have 3% asbestos.



- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

I can't wait to hear a reply on the recycling issue.

I often wonder about all those wierd specs I see in the cardboard
backing on my writting paper pads.


- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

Why is gypsum used instead of lime?

I've noticed patching compound is sometimes now made of lime instead
of gypsum. I think lime won't crack like gypsum (which is why gyspum
needed asbestos or horse hair or straw before today's plastics).

In Greece, the preferred building material is quicklime. But USA
(dolomitic) lime has magnesium, while Greek is almost pure calcium.
THey even use it in making fruit preserves. When I had a dog we
painted his house with lime because he bit it and I felt it was
safest. (I added some food oil to the conventional lime sold for lawns.)

- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

sometimes the asbestos comes from the mine, but I wonder if it
got there by recycling.


- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 04:40:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
In 1985 NYC air had 1 fiber of asbestos/cc and the Germans workplace
standard was .2/cc and the USA one 2/cc. Plus I seem to recall Vermont
"white" asbestos is at least one order of magnitude less dangerous
than South African "blue" and fiberglass is at least one order of
magnituded less hazardous than "white".

asbestos costs money. No chinese drywall maker is going to go to the cost
of using it.

The problem I have in ordering stuff from CHina is they don't know how to
deal with a lot of issues. I got a USB sim card reader but the software was
for the serial version and they were like deer in the headlights. I got a
Linpus laptop and I couldn't add any other Linux software (especially Octave,
Maxima, emacs, R) to it. The major problem isn't inherently China, but the
fact that they haven't been free, live by fear, are eager to superficially
please then move on. People in India have a longer experience with individual
human relations. The idea about their owning our debt is weak because they
don't trust their own contry with their money anyway. Our Politicians really
goofed in not supporting Tienanmen. CHina would have developed more normally
if we had. My Taiwanese and ex-HongKong friends agree with what I say.

- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

I'm crossposting to the geologists so they can better tell us what the
typical content of gypsum and quicklime (regular or dolomitic)
are. I've even heard asbestos is found in talc but I never confirmed.
Also how the minerals found in China are different from those
customarily used in American construction.

*+-A couple other drywall factoids I got from a friend:
*+-Drywall can contain asbestos. If a material contains less than 1%
*+-asbestos it is not regulated [1% seems rather high to me]. Some Chinese
*+-drywall has been found to have 3% asbestos.

*+-Drywall contains gypsum (it is also called gypsum board). Gypsum is
*+-calcium sulfate, so 'normal' drywall contains sulfur (but bound in the
*+-gypsum molecule).


- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

Dear vjp2...:

On Nov 28, 9:35*pm, wrote:
I've been hearing this story for months.

Like the story of leaded paints on toys, and melamine added to baby
formula.

I don't understand how this happened.

They are still learning. The person that decides to do the shortcut
is praised for the savings, and (usually) cannot suffer a penalty.

Drywall is supposed to be gypsum, but
supposedly some of the troubling drywall
that was USA-made had cellulose in it and
emitted formaldehyde as well as sulfide.

I hadn't heard about USA made stuff doing that, but then again, when
you start cutting "unnecessary" personnel...

Is this some sort of go-green recycling issue?

Probably not.

*Did the Chinese make this drywall for us

Yes.

or did they also use it for themselves?

I heard they did that too.

*In the 1970s folks pumped foam between
their walls and choked from formaldehyde.

.... and from loss of circulation, getting air into the house. We (and
sometimes our heaters) remove oxygen from the atmosphere, and add
CO2. So somehow this needs to be equilibrated to normal atmospheric
levels, without losing too much heat / cold in the process...

David A. Smith

Katrina construction played a major role in the expansion of steel-stud
construction (they use sheet metal in C or I sections) which can even be
CAD/CAM prefabbed. During WW2 Chinag Kai Shek mothballed his nvy in New
Orleans and since they were wooden, they brought over unusually aggressive
termites. THose termites have spread so much that south of Mason-Dixon you
can't insure new wood-stud construction. CHina has also had a building
boom. Ditto the Kemp-Cuomo subprime boom. We have had a lot of innovation,
but also there is a lot of room for mistakes when you do things in a hurry. I
have friends whose 1970s houses (in one of the five wealthiest zip codes in
the country) frighten me: leaking skylights which cook everyone in the
summer, plywood floors that keep needing more beams to keep from collapsing;
yet these houses continue to fetch astronomical prices. The worst asbestos
came about by government mandates and public works booms in the
1930s. Sheetrock was invented largely because of the GI Bill. The financial
crisis happened because people introduced too many new things without testing
them sufficiently. Edmunde Burke used to advocate making changes slowly
because you never know which thread you pull will disintegrate the entire
fabric. Such mistakes are inevitable, but I think instead of dropping our
guard when we are in a hurry, we should enhance it.

*+-At the time people were buying this drywall they just felt lucky to
*+-get any drywall from anywhere. It was right after Katrina and in the
*+-middle of a building boom that had already swallowed up all the
*+-drywall the US could produce.



- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]

Sorry for the clutter, but I think I figured it out: the "cellulose"
(that was added either to insulate or cheapen) released formaldehyde
which then reacted with the gypsum which then releaed HS gas?????

THe question which still bugs me is why they added cellulose.
(THis was the guy who submitted AMERICAN MADE sheetrock to MIT for testing.)


- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]