History could add some light to the challenges faced today in Health and Safety building design, but would not offer total solution to the search for better approach towards Health and Safety of the end users. This is due to the fact that design changes; climate is ever dynamic and changes over time. This article intends to draw the attention of the reader to the elements of a building as a factor that controls the level of SBS effect on end users. Understanding Health and Safety in design supersedes the field of architecture alone. One of the challenges of Health and Safety planning is that it cuts across all field of endeavour (Hallowell & Gambatese, 2009). An architect alone cannot claim to have answers for “Sick Building Syndrome” issues in a building. Due to these interwoven principles of Health and Safety planning in all fields, various principles and modulus on Health and Safety are developed and published, stating its superiority over other fields. The challenges here is while Builders struggles to gain attention in the field of Health and Safety planning, engineers, architects, landscape designer etc. also creates principles that favours their own field thereby in some instances contradicting each other.However many studies or research has always followed the line of the remedial effect, this work intends to research through preventive effect, how SBS effect on the end users can be minimized using design building elements as a tool. Moisture level in a building determines to a great extent the mold formation and also mold formations also are caused from damp walls, ceilings, Deck or even foundation. The purpose of this work also is to find and recommend ways to eliminate SBS in our buildings through appropriate historical analysis.