UK Centre for Mould Safety Calls Calls for New Guidlines on Mould Removal

Why the UK Centre for Mould Safety Is Calling for New Guidance on Mould Removal

For decades, households across the UK have been told to “kill mould” with sprays, fogging systems and chemical washes. Supermarkets, hardware stores and social media adverts have normalised the idea that mould is simply a cleaning problem with a chemical solution.

But what if that advice has been wrong?

A new paper published by the UK Centre for Mould Safety argues that current approaches to indoor mould contamination may be increasing health risks instead of reducing them.

The paper calls for urgent new public health guidance on the safe removal of indoor microbial contamination and updated guidance on the use of biocides inside homes and buildings.

“Mould Must Be Removed, Not Killed”

At the centre of the report is a simple but important message:

Mould contamination should be physically removed, not chemically “killed”.

According to the paper, all parts of mould growth can affect health, including spores, fragments, hyphae, microbial volatile organic compounds (MVOCs), β-glucans and mycotoxins.

The report highlights scientific studies showing that disturbing mould colonies can release extremely high levels of microscopic fungal fragments into the air. In some cases, these fragments can outnumber spores by up to 320 times.

These particles are often smaller than spores, meaning they can travel deeper into the lungs when inhaled.

This is particularly significant because many common mould sprays are applied directly onto visible mould growth using trigger sprays, creating airflow disturbance and aerosolising contamination into the breathing zone.

The paper warns that this approach may increase inhalation exposure during remediation.

International Guidance Is Changing

The paper references the 2024 guidance published by the German Environment Agency, which states that the use of biocides in mould remediation is “not necessary, nor effective” in most cases.

The German guidance also states:

“The use of biocides to kill microorganisms before the removal of contaminated building materials or cleaning and spraying biocides to treat the indoor air is not necessary.”

The UKCMS paper explains that this aligns with guidance from the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the New Zealand Environment Agency and the ANSI/IICRC S520 professional mould remediation standard.

Instead of relying on chemical toxicity, the guidance focuses on safe removal methods such as:

• Physical removal of contaminated materials

• HEPA vacuuming

• Damp wiping

• Surfactant-based cleaning using household detergents

• Addressing the underlying moisture source

The paper explains that surfactants disrupt mould cell membranes physically, allowing contamination to be removed from surfaces without relying on hazardous chemical action.

Concerns About Chemical Exposure Indoors

The report raises concerns about widespread indoor use of biocides and disinfectant chemicals in enclosed spaces.

It references studies linking exposure to cleaning agents and disinfectants with respiratory symptoms, asthma and occupational lung disease.

The paper also highlights concerns around didecyldimethylammonium chloride (DDAC), a quaternary ammonium compound commonly used in mould sprays and disinfectants.

UKCMS argues that while Safety Data Sheets frequently warn about respiratory irritation, asthma exacerbation, inhalation risks and eye damage, many products are advertised or demonstrated in ways that appear inconsistent with those warnings.

The paper also questions the growing use of “biocide fogging” systems marketed as “non-toxic”, “family-safe” or “pet-safe”.

The German Environment Agency guidance specifically discourages nebulisation or fogging of biocides indoors except in inaccessible cavities.

A Public Health Issue, Not a Cosmetic One

The report argues that mould contamination has increasingly been framed as a cosmetic cleaning issue rather than a public health issue.

It states that product marketing, shelf space, influencer campaigns and long-standing industry practice have normalised chemical-based remediation approaches for decades.

The paper also raises concerns about social housing procurement systems, noting that mould sprays and biocidal products are often embedded into standard “schedule of rates” specifications used by contractors working in millions of homes.

UKCMS warns that the increased pressure created by Awaab's Law timelines may unintentionally lead to a rise in quick “chemical wash and stain block” responses instead of proper remediation and moisture control.

The Human Story Behind the Campaign

The paper also explains the lived experience that led to the creation of UKCMS.

Founder Lisa Malyon describes collapsing with pneumonia after repeatedly spraying mould remover products inside her home over several years.

That experience led to the creation of a public health-focused organisation dedicated to improving understanding of indoor microbial contamination and promoting safer remediation approaches.

UKCMS Is Calling for Action

The paper calls on multiple stakeholders to review existing guidance and practices, including:

• Department of Health and Social Care

• Health and Safety Executive

• UK Health Security Agency

• Advertising Standards Authority

• Trading Standards

• Industrial Injuries Advisory Council

• British Retail Consortium

The organisation says the goal is not to create fear, but to improve public understanding of how indoor microbial contamination should be safely managed.

As awareness of indoor air quality continues to grow, UKCMS believes mould remediation must move away from cosmetic “kill mould” approaches and toward evidence-led public health practices focused on safe removal, exposure reduction and prevention.

Read the full UKCMS paper here.