Unfortunately, yes. Just add one more thing to the taxpayer bill caused by dumb people in this country.

In a perfect world we could make the former idiot-owners pay to clean it up. Since most of the methies are either crazy, dead or in jail, it does unfortunatley fall to the taxpayer. Perhaps to save some heartache, home inspectors should be trained to check for any chemicals present during a typical home inspection. The cost is then on the furture homebuyer, but it can’t be nearly as expensive as paying to clean it up later or paying for health issues.

The exposures would be so small no one should worry. I wish “experts” would stop trying to scare the public.

The exposures are small to who? I for one would not want to be in these peoples place. Did you ever think about how they must feel? Well maybe you should take a minute to really think about it. The “experts” must know what they are talking about I mean they are called “experts” for a reason. And maybe its not to scare the public but to inform them of what is really going on.

Is there documented medical proof that Meth residue in a home has caused health problems to occupants? What kind of problems?

I haven’t heard of any. Is this just another fixing of a problem that doesn’t exist?

Here’s the important questions:

What residues are we talking about, which chemicals in what concentrations?
There is a document available for pretty much every chemical that is out there for commercial sale called the Material Safety Data Sheet. It lists the known hazards, AND the known dangerous concentrations of these chemicals. It also lists mitigation methods. Look it up.

I guess what I’m saying is that just because something is there at a low level, doesn’t make it a hazard. By the way, do you have a jug of paint thinner in your basement? Have you ever poured some into an empty coffee can to soak a brush? Are you aware that you just poisoned the environment in your home for the next year by doing that?

If you have a house ‘cleaned up’ from Meth residue, you better be asking what they used to clean it up. It could be the residue from the cleanup is worse than what was there in the first place.

I absolutely think that Illinois and Missouri need to do something more to protect innocent people from buying or renting a meth lab home. In fact, I think every state needs to insure that people are not allowed to live in a home that has been made toxic by the manufacturing of meth.

It is the purpose of my blog site methlabhomes.com to educate others about this situation. My son bought a former meth lab as a foreclosure in TN in 2004, which prompted me to start my site. I have published my son’s story on my website as a way to help keep other people safe, especially those with young children. It cost him thousands of dollars to make his home “safe” by government standards to live in, even though someone else contaminated the home. The cost of the health consequences they have and will have costs that can not measured but will far exceed the cleanup costs.

States need to mandate testing of homes of homes that are being sold. They do it for lead, yet they don’t do it for homes that have known toxins in them that make people sick. That needs to change.

I guess that residue is found shouldn’t be too surprising. I have seen homes of people who fry food a lot and some kitchen walls are something else (and the person is elderly and really couldn’t/shouldn’t climb to scrub it).
I’ve also seen yellowing walls in homes of heavy smokers.

What surprised me was the health risks associated with the meth lab residue. I guess this is a wake-up call for home buyers to check-out the history of their homes. Maybe I’ll start a business like CarFax for homes. (e.g. This one was flooded. This one was a meth lab. This one was infested with xxx for years while it sat empty.)

After further research on my own house, I have found out that it was once a MATH lab. There is a possibility of side effects from the chalk residue of years of calculus problem solving.

When you sell a home you are supposed to disclose everything that you know is wrong with the house so you would assume that this should be on that list. Not being too naive of a person I could see where this would not exactly be anything the previous owner would be too proud of so…
My answer to the question is yes. I would like to see a disclosure law that demands that the previous owner has to tell that the house may be contaminated due to meth being made there the same way I would want to know about toxic mold. It’s not like the neighbors wouldn’t be at your door pronto after you moved in to tell you all the houses little secrets anyway.