On Sep 10, 11:29*am, Norminn wrote:
clipped







Besides the cleanup issue, there is the issue of what you have to
disclose to buyers when you go to flip it. * Like, if it's been
cleaned up
to all state regulations, procedures, etc, do you then still have to
disclose to buyers that it was a meth lab? *My guess would be that
there might be laws specific to the state that might address that
issue
and that absent that, it's still to me of such major significance that
I
think you should disclose it. *I could think of hypothetical cases
where
even if it's not required, if you didn't dsiclose and something were
missed
in the cleanup, it could come back to bite you.

And then having disclosed it, the next question is how do you figure
what impact that is going to have on the price? * I'm not particularly
afraid of chemicals, but if there are similar houses selling for X,
this
one would have to be at a substantial discount to interest me. *So,
you have multiple unknowns. *How much it will cost to clean it up
and what the house will later sell for. *I would not get involved in
this unless there was plenty of margin to cover all the above.

If I did decide to purchase, I would be most interested (at the outset)
in learning the conditions found when the cops went in...there is a
whole special task force dealing with disposal. *Considering the state
statutes, the residue before and after cleanup would be next. *I am not
by any means leaning toward this property, but without the meth lab
problem, it would be an ideal cheap property to remodel extensively
(good bones, good stable neighborhood, increasing prop. values;
properties are moving here). *That said, it had never before occurred to
me that a home might have once been contaminated with drugs.

I've read various descriptions of the meth lab odor, and cat urine is
mentioned....a former neighbor who had extensive knowledge (and who is
probably dead) said it was just a sickening sweet smell. *I've had
neighbors who dealt in coke, one of whom died at a young age of heart
attack, and now I wonder what the danger of coke residue is.
Come to
think of it, mebbe that has something to do with the "autism epidemic".

Good grief. Trying to link coke residue with autism?
Coke and meth are two very different things. Cocaine
is imported as such, already processed, not made in
a lab here. The processing lab is typically in South America.
You hear about meth lab operations being busted all the time. I've
never heard of a similar coke lab being busted in the USA.

And if there were an association between cocaine and
autism, then one would expect the huge increase in
numbers to be centered around populations where
cocaine usage is highest. Instead it seems to be
distributed everywhere.





* I put that in quotes because I expect that autism is pretty badly
overdiagnosed for access to social services. *Coke probably vastly more
pervasive than meth until fairly recently.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

clipped
attack, and now I wonder what the danger of coke residue is.
Come to
think of it, mebbe that has something to do with the "autism epidemic".

Good grief. Trying to link coke residue with autism?
Coke and meth are two very different things. Cocaine
is imported as such, already processed, not made in
a lab here. The processing lab is typically in South America.
You hear about meth lab operations being busted all the time. I've
never heard of a similar coke lab being busted in the USA.

Good grief is right ) For the record, I didn't have coke mfg. in
mind; it was the end product which allegedly contaminates most of the
currency in the US (and what else?).

And if there were an association between cocaine and
autism, then one would expect the huge increase in
numbers to be centered around populations where
cocaine usage is highest. Instead it seems to be
distributed everywhere.

Where is cocaine usage highest? Isolated there? How many college age
and older have never tried the stuff or come in contact with faint residues?





I put that in quotes because I expect that autism is pretty badly
overdiagnosed for access to social services. Coke probably vastly more
pervasive than meth until fairly recently.- Hide quoted text -


After all the hysteria trying to link vaccines with autism, coke seemed
a slightly more logical suspect ) I once had a neighbor with two
severly autistic children....they were wild! The rate of autism
diagnosis nowadays is about 1%....an epidemic like that should be
getting a lot more scientific study! Jeez!

On Sep 8, 4:30*pm, "Ralph Mowery" wrote:
"Oren" wrote in message

...

On Sat, 08 Sep 2012 14:18:51 -0400, Frank
wrote:

If interested, here is a website outlining the problem.
http://www.kci.org/meth_info/meth_cleanup.htm

I hate the kind of chemo-phobia engendered by sites like this.

I'm a retired chemist, in his seventies, in good health. *If chemicals
were this bad, I should have been long dead by now.

I was believing the meth lab dangers were more serious than what the
link indicated. *The site seems to minimize the dangers, to a degree.
Though there are dangers related to health still exist.

I often wonder *if things don't get blown all out of shape. *If you read
some of the dangers of the broken CFL lamps , they would not be allowed in
the US either.

All the chemicals I see listed are in common use every day. *Except the
lithium.

The problems are the CONCENTRATIONS of the
common chemicals "in use every day" as everyday
chemicals can be quite dangerous when used in
high concentrations...

On 9/10/2012 10:57 AM, Baron wrote:
"Frank" wrote in message
...
On 9/9/2012 4:07 PM, Baron wrote:
"

I hate the kind of chemo-phobia engendered by sites like this.

I'm a retired chemist, in his seventies, in good health. If chemicals
were this bad, I should have been long dead by now.

In fact, my graduate adviser, in his eighties, just got out of jail last
year after conviction 20 years ago of running a meth lab.

I'm fairly sure you did not work with the chemicals you were using
in
the same unsafe manner that cookers do in a meth lab. You were probably
in
a laboratory with soapstone horizontal surfaces and some sort of local
ventilation.




Certainly but that does not mean I was not exposed to chemicals or never
had problems with them. Had my share of fires and explosions and causing
building evacuations.

As said elsewhere, toxicity is dose related. None of the meth chemicals
appear particularly toxic.

I've become a fan of the Breaking Bad series where a chemistry teacher
goes into the meth business. He does everything safely.

You are correct. Acute toxicity is dose related. Chronic toxicity is
also dose related but requires much lower exposure levels. I would be
concerned with chronic exposure. Your own experience, while valid, is just
a single data point. It is anecdotal experience.

As for meth chemicals not being particularly toxic, it all depends on
what synthesis and conditions are being used. Off the top of my head, the
more common clandestine approaches use halogenated hydrocarbons and
anhydrous ammonia. I classify these as toxic, the ammonia acutely so.

I too am a fan of Breaking Bad. I would not hold up the lead character,
Walter White, as a typical meth cooker. Jessie is closer to reality. I
also disagree with your assessment that Walt does everything safely. He
does things in a way that minimizes the risk to himself, not to the
surroundings. His waste is obviously mislabeled and there is no reason for
him to minimize the release of vapors.



I'm a little more involved in toxicology experience and my personal
experience is a lot more than anecdotal.

What you say is true about chronic toxicity but it is also dose related.
Smokers for example have maybe 5% of their hemoglobin tied up by carbon
monoxide but it will not kill them.

Walt does protect himself as well as the interior of the home he uses.
I suspect fumes are not that bad or they would be reported as released
in a populated neighborhood. Where I worked it was amazing that we did
not get a lot of complaints. We put one hell of a lot of toxic fumes up
fume hoods. I could tell some horror stories but I won't.

clipped

Walt does protect himself as well as the interior of the home he uses.
I suspect fumes are not that bad or they would be reported as released
in a populated neighborhood. Where I worked it was amazing that we did
not get a lot of complaints. We put one hell of a lot of toxic fumes up
fume hoods. I could tell some horror stories but I won't.

Ah...fond memories of high-school chem (my favorite class). After an
especially thorough lecture about the dangers of releasing bromine gas,
we went on to do our experiment. Don't remember what we mixed, but as
was certifiably predictable, one class-mate didn't have his flask sealed
up and we had clouds of brown gas floating about the room. Another
time, probably a precursor of my adult cooking skill, we mixed
(sulfuric?) acid with carbon, probably sugar. Heat to boiling. Stir.
Fill out the workbook page and turn in at end of class. Only thing on
my workbook page after the experiment (aside from black glop splattered
all over it) were the words "I'm sorry. My experiment exploded all over
my workbook."

My grandson is taking advanced microbiology in HS. Students went around
school and took cultures from anything they wanted, then made agar and
grew the samples taken. Teacher got all serious about one sampling
taken from a drinking fountain...don't know what it was.

On 9/9/2012 3:44 PM, Integrity Carpentry wrote:
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 7:37:19 AM UTC-5, NorMinn wrote:
I've been looking at homes for sale and came upon one that is condemned

because it was used as a meth lab. The little research I've done shows

that there are certified contractors who can inspect and correct the

conditions to make a structure habitable. Anyone have experience with

this? What chemicals remain in the structure, how to be sure it is

safe, etc? The house needs work, just from observation, but looks like

a good candidate for rehab.

If you are unsure, no amount of money to be made can make up for the risks for the future owners or tenents. Our economy if full of companies making money, by using unsafe, or unproven, yet epa approved, chemicals, and technologies. Just start reading MSDS(material Safety Data Sheets) just because everyone uses paint, and people aren't being carted off to the hospital in droves the day after they paint, doesn't mean we aren't already being carted off in droves with all kinds of cancers, and unheard of diseases.

http://www.safemoldsolutions.com/chapter8.php I am not saying that guy is the Master. but I do think there is a lot more to the unseen world of chemicals that only a small percentage of people know. We can only google and piece together, and then decide whatever we want to do, based on our preconceived notions, and financial situations. Personally, I would say do, about 10 times the research you think you should do. the general public, and even police officers aren't normally qualified to give you the kind of answers you want. Do you trust a energetic first responder to do open heart surgery in a pinch? Find someone who is qualified. We all like to save money, and there are sharks in suits out there. But a $2 tube of caulk is a $2 tube of caulk and a $4 tube of caulk is a $4 tube of caulk. Just about every tube of caulk I have bought on sale has failed within 6 months. You can get a good deal, through negotiation, that is great.But the quick road to success as we americans wan
t it, leads to failure. There is something wonderful that happens to a person as they persevere, try, fall, get up and keep getting up.

I am not saying your trying the quick way. This topic is just something I lead things back to because it's one of my soap boxes.

Lastly, buy only zero-voc paint from a company that you can trust, that uses specific zero-voc tints. Normal tint, in zero- voc paint is.........
Sherwin Williams gladly gave me the MSDS sheets on their new zero-voc paint. I have been having a tremendous difficulty getting the msds sheets on their TINT.
Getting the run around.

Can paint off gass toxic chemicals for up to 3 years after applying?

Well, if you don't know FOR SURE, Do we have any business using regular paint in homes and businesses, with our family's health at risk?

That's it. I am not done, but I am ending my post. have a great, prosperous, blessed week.

Gabriel DeLapp



Most paint studies are either epidemiological study of painters or
residual chemicals shortly after painting.

I recall one done on vinyl acetate resin based paint as there was
residual monomer in the canned paint and vinyl acetate hydrolyzes to
acetic acid and acetaldehyde the latter which is carcinogenic.
As I recall, while there was acetaldehyde in the original paint it was
absent after the can was opened and none evolved from the painted rooms.
I think they measured for about two weeks after painting and there were
volatiles like acetic acid decreasing with time.

Point is, there have been lots of toxicity studies on paint and
similarly for other stuff in a house like foamed insulation and
carpeting both of which can give off nasties too.

On 9/9/2012 3:44 PM, Integrity Carpentry wrote:
On Saturday, September 8, 2012 7:37:19 AM UTC-5, NorMinn wrote:
I've been looking at homes for sale and came upon one that is condemned

because it was used as a meth lab. The little research I've done shows

that there are certified contractors who can inspect and correct the

conditions to make a structure habitable. Anyone have experience with

this? What chemicals remain in the structure, how to be sure it is

safe, etc? The house needs work, just from observation, but looks like

a good candidate for rehab.

If you are unsure, no amount of money to be made can make up for the risks for the future owners or tenents. Our economy if full of companies making money, by using unsafe, or unproven, yet epa approved, chemicals, and technologies. Just start reading MSDS(material Safety Data Sheets) just because everyone uses paint, and people aren't being carted off to the hospital in droves the day after they paint, doesn't mean we aren't already being carted off in droves with all kinds of cancers, and unheard of diseases.

http://www.safemoldsolutions.com/chapter8.php I am not saying that guy is the Master. but I do think there is a lot more to the unseen world of chemicals that only a small percentage of people know. We can only google and piece together, and then decide whatever we want to do, based on our preconceived notions, and financial situations. Personally, I would say do, about 10 times the research you think you should do. the general public, and even police officers aren't normally qualified to give you the kind of answers you want. Do you trust a energetic first responder to do open heart surgery in a pinch? Find someone who is qualified. We all like to save money, and there are sharks in suits out there. But a $2 tube of caulk is a $2 tube of caulk and a $4 tube of caulk is a $4 tube of caulk. Just about every tube of caulk I have bought on sale has failed within 6 months. You can get a good deal, through negotiation, that is great.But the quick road to success as we americans wan
t it, leads to failure. There is something wonderful that happens to a person as they persevere, try, fall, get up and keep getting up.

I am not saying your trying the quick way. This topic is just something I lead things back to because it's one of my soap boxes.

Lastly, buy only zero-voc paint from a company that you can trust, that uses specific zero-voc tints. Normal tint, in zero- voc paint is.........
Sherwin Williams gladly gave me the MSDS sheets on their new zero-voc paint. I have been having a tremendous difficulty getting the msds sheets on their TINT.
Getting the run around.

Can paint off gass toxic chemicals for up to 3 years after applying?

Well, if you don't know FOR SURE, Do we have any business using regular paint in homes and businesses, with our family's health at risk?

That's it. I am not done, but I am ending my post. have a great, prosperous, blessed week.

Gabriel DeLapp



Hells Bells! I've been breathing "off gassing" from oil space heaters,
wood stoves, paint, paint remover, mineral spirits, and cigarette smoke
for a lot of years. Guess I've lived on borrowed time for quite a
while. Funny how folks worry about INDOOR chemicals but ignore what the
atmosphere and ground water are loaded with. Folks get all ****y about
someone smoking a cigarette within 10 ft of a public building, then get
into their gas guzzler and go home to their cozy fire place, then get up
in the morning and spread poison all over the inside and outside of
their home.

One of the most astonishing efforts was to protect babies in hospitals
from cig smoke carried on the clothing of hospital staff (whilst same
hospital staff kill a bunch of people due to failure to wash their hands).

Most ground water supplies nowadays are contaminated with
something...pesticides, prescription medications. Worry about paint
offgassing for 3 years? Later.

On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:28:32 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

Cocaine
is imported as such, already processed, not made in
a lab here. The processing lab is typically in South America.

Yes as powder. Gasoline is used mixed in the Coco leaves.Then later
crack rocks were made here.

Remember what Richard Pryor said about catching on fire after smoking
freebase. "That **** makes you run fast!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjD4PHojNBU

On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:10:32 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:28:32 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

Cocaine
is imported as such, already processed, not made in
a lab here. The processing lab is typically in South America.

Yes as powder. Gasoline is used mixed in the Coco leaves.Then later
crack rocks were made here.

Remember what Richard Pryor said about catching on fire after smoking
freebase. "That **** makes you run fast!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjD4PHojNBU

The difference between Richard Prior and Michael Jackson:
Richard Prior was burnt by coke.
Michael Jackson was burnt by Pepsi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgb-zCnz9mE

Norminn wrote:


After all the hysteria trying to link vaccines with autism, coke seemed
a slightly more logical suspect ) I once had a neighbor with two
severly autistic children....they were wild! The rate of autism
diagnosis nowadays is about 1%....an epidemic like that should be
getting a lot more scientific study! Jeez!

It gets a whole lot of scientific study. The problem is that those
affected don't like the results: genetics and aged gravidas (mothers).

Females have all the eggs they're ever going to have at birth (theirs)
and those eggs age and are perhaps contaminated by various events that
happen to the mothers (e.g., radiation and even maybe cocaine) so
along comes a 40+ pregnancy with damaged eggs and hence damaged genes.
Currently they're trying to blame the aged sperm of the fathers but
that's unlikely because males generate sperm all the time. Any
environmental damage is either recent or if it damages the Sertoli
cells (the sperm-producing cells) it will probably result in
sterility.

Naturally this possible causation is likely to cause considerable
guilt feelings in those capitainesses of industry who have deferred
childbirth because of their careers so they're wiggling like crazy to
find some other cause. Similarly breast cancer.

The other aspect is simply bad genes to start with but there are PC
aspects here too. There's a series on Charlie Rose (PBS) called the
"Brain Series" which assembles some pretty heavy scientists in each
particular disease subset and they usually also include a sufferer or
in the case of autism, a mother. Although the scientists generally
admit some genetic involvement they rarely come out with the brutality
I would. In the case of autism they stumbled around the genetic
question until the mother, after having described her day-to-day
problems, mentioned that her brother was autistic! Everyone went quiet
until Charlie (PC to the hilt) jumped in and moved the conversation
off the point. I guess asking, "Why the hell did you breed?" wouldn't
have been an acceptable comment.