When every obvious test comes back negative, investigators have to look for another way to prove what caused the outbreak. So this episode takes a step sideways, from Bozeman, Montana to a small mountain village in the French Alps, where researchers faced a different kind of mystery: a cluster of ALS cases with no clear cause.
What they found there may help explain how scientists can link a mushroom to a devastating illness, even without finding a toxin.
In Episode 4 of A Morel Dilemma, we follow the investigation into Montchavin, mushrooms, environmental exposure, and the kind of epidemiologic detective work that becomes necessary when the lab tests do not give you the answer.
Select resources
- Mont Chavin investigation
- Mushroom Identification
A Morel DilemmaSupport the show
Review the show where ever your listening
Get Messages from Toxo (Join the Newsletter!)
Join as a supporting member
- Ad free episodes
- Bonus content and early access
- Discounts and give aways on GOTA PICCEM Mushroom card game
The GOTTA PICCEM Poisonous Mushroom Game!
The Poisonus Fungus Amongus Children's Book!
Tox trinkets (Rep the show at home!)
Reach the show
- Email: Toxtalk1@gmail.com
More Show Resources
Production Note: Unless otherwise noted, the news-style audio clips featured in this podcast, including those in the introductory theme song, are dramatizations based on real events, not actual news broadcasts. These segments were researched and written by the producer and brought to life using AI-generated text-to-speech. Earlier iterations used actual news recordings, but this approach was chosen to avoid potential copyright concerns associated with using original broadcasts.
People have strong feelings about AI, many of which are entirely legitimate, particularly concerns about outsourcing human creativity. However, text-to-speech technology predates the current wave of generative AI, and The Poison Lab has been using it for years. Its use is limited to generating spoken audio from human-written scripts in the introduction and occasional news-style clips, allowing us to maintain production quality and creativity while avoiding potential copyright disputes. All scientific research, writing, narration, interviews, and editorial content are human-created, representing countless hours of work on an independently produced, unfunded podcast.
To those inclined to dismiss an entire body of creative work simply because an introductory theme song contains synthetic voices, you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. However, I would encourage you to consider the distinction between using technology as a creative tool and using it as a substitute for creativity. Dismissing hundreds of hours of original work over a single production choice strikes me as intellectually lazy. It reflects the kind of binary thinking that leaves little room for nuance and, in my view, is a much larger problem in the world today. I would hope that an audience interested in science, of all people, could appreciate that distinction.
