Hand Sanitisers

[Griffin NoName]

Excellent Lindorm.

But we are always in a no-win situation. Throw away packets and towels are good for avoiding cross-contamination but add to the rubbish mountain. I think the only answer is auto dispensers, activated by the warmth of living hands, placed every fifty yards around the globe.

[The Meromorph]

But wot will der Zombeeeees use, eh!     

An' dey carries sum nasty lickul germys yuss dey duz...

[Griffin NoName]

Ok, we have to rid the world of Zombies first........

[pieces o nine]

It is a pity that you do not live closer to my sister in law, Grif. She always carries (at least) one large decanter of hand sanitizer in her Samsonite suitcase handbag at all times. My neice knows that a gift basket of all the latest colors and scents makes the perfect and perfectly appreciated Mother's Day, Mother's Birthday, or Mother's Christmas present. But I digress.

Wherever the family roam, they know to obediently hold up their hands in supplication when arriving at the theater, museum, or restaurant, while she dispenses glops of sanitizer to all, with the gravitas and authority of the Pope distributing communion.

Sotto voce aside: No one can fathom why bottle-fed niece's immune system is so poorly developed...

Have you considered schlepping your own small bottle? You can keep the 55 gallon drum refiller at home, thus cutting down on landfill waste of consumer packaging, while still conforming to the germ-free rules.

[Griffin NoName]

I now have my own handbag sanitiser..... I use it to sanitise my handbag.

[Earthling]

Personally, I think this whole germ thing is a giant conspiracy to get people to spend huge sums of money unnecessarily on ever-more-potent soaps and soaplike soap substitutes. I carry stuff around in my mouth if my hands are occupied carrying other stuff. I don't discriminate much about what I am willing to carry this way (though I will admit that I generally don't carry items scooped from the litterboxes in this fashion). Food that falls on the floor is still food under the five second rule, though I have been known to modify my interpretation with considerations of stickiness and yumminess, and the nature of the area into which the food item in question has fallen. I firmly believe that washing/rinsing with water alone is sufficient to remove at least 95% of these alleged germs from my hands, unless the presence of some ubiquitous sticky stuff renders the use of soap necessary. (Note the subtle render/soap joke there - looks like the ol' brain still has a few functioning synapses left! Ha!)
Ahem, um, well, anyway, I'm probably the most healthiest person I know, and have been for decades. I catch a cold maybe twice in three years, I get fewer than five headaches per year, in the ten years since we moved to this house I've been laid up with flu-like symptoms exactly once, and generally feel fine health-wise. I get four or five hours of sleep most nights, clean a minimum of 24 litterboxes every day, meet the Great Unwashed Horde on a regular basis at work, and lots of other cetera like that. When I was doing the home inspections, I was just as healthy, despite being sneezed on by everyone's five-year-olds, and snuffling around in some astonishingly disgusting basements and attics - to the point where there was usually at least one day a month where I would remove all my clothing before entering my own home. Maybe your immune system is just another muscle that gets stronger with exercise - mine certainly has had its share of exercise over the years.
So anyway that's my not-particularly-well-substantiated opinion - disgusting is in the eye of the beholder. Just because someone thinks something is icky doesn't mean it's bad for you. All this typing has made me hungry - think I'll go have a dirt sandwich.

[Swatopluk]

People working in the sewers are usually extremly healthy and germ resistant...if they survive the first year. On the other end, polar explorers usually catch the cold and other nasty stuff the moment they come back (while the common cold is virtually unknown in the arctic regions).

[pieces o nine]

Personally, I think this whole germ thing is a giant conspiracy to get people to spend huge sums of money unnecessarily on ever-more-potent soaps and soaplike soap substitutes.
...

Surely you jest.    [link]
psssst: see below image for two(!) other options...



Furthermore, one can only hope that all y'all are Doing It Right!


On a personal note, no one has ever answered to my satisfaction just how long all those alcohol-poisoned little germ corpses can languish about on my skin -- a veritable bacterial Gettysburg -- before they are attacked by dead-germ-eating-other-even-more-horrible-germs.



The mind boggles.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

On a personal note, no one has ever answered to my satisfaction just how long all those alcohol-poisoned little germ corpses can languish about on my skin -- a veritable bacterial Gettysburg -- before they are attacked by dead-germ-eating-other-even-more-horrible-germs.



The mind boggles.

Sadly, what most of these idiotic products do is simply cause the various bacteria to go into cyst state: where they can literally withstand boiling water and worse.

I remember back in microbi, we studied the efficacy of various common anti-bacterial agents.

Among the list, included 70% isopropyl alcohol, 90% isopropyl, 90% ethanol, common hand soap, distilled water, tap water (which had trace chlorine), salt water and so on.

You'd swab the area the same, with each agent, then culture for bacterial growth for 3 days.

Among the results, some surprises: 

-- tap water is pretty good. 
-- distilled water is not as bad as you'd think; it doesn't *support* growth, but it doesn't inhibit it either.
-- salt water is good, if not too concentrated.
-- hand soap (like Ivory brand) is very good.
-- 70% is superior to 90% -- in every way!

This last one is interesting.  90% is simply too strong, and the bacteria quickly grow into a protective state of suspended animation, a cyst like casing.  Once the alcohol is gone, the bacteria break out of the cyst-covering and continue to grow, as if nothing happened.

At 70%, however, most of the bacteria can tolerate it well enough, for a time-- so it does not trigger the protected state. But, it is mildly toxic, and the bacteria that don't encyst, absorb a little bit of the alcohol at a time, until they absorb too much, and burst.

Which is why the 15 minute rule is just as important as the 70% rule... you have to expose the bacteria to the alcohol long enough, but not too concentrated, to destroy the cell wall.

Soap works differently than alcohol does; it directly attacks the cell membrane.  The alcohol just goes into the cell itself, eventually disrupting it.  Salt water works, by dehydrating the bacteria enough that it dies-- too strong a salt solution, and the bacteria simply goes into cyst state.   

That was fun.... (assuming my 50 year old memory-bank is trustworthy.... )

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I guess the question then is how those work against virii. 

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I guess the question then is how those work against virii. 

Depends on the virus.

Some have very hard outer coats, and can survive very high temperatures, very low, no moisture, etc.

Others are quite vulnerable to any conditions not ideal, and require fluid-to-fluid transfer as a medium.  And, the fluid cannot change it's temperature, or the virus dies, the fluid cannot evaporate much (which increases the dissolved salts) and the virus dies.  HIV is one of these (well, it's a retro-virus, so it's in a different class, but it's delicate.  Fortunately.)

Some are somewhere in-between; too harsh conditions, dead virus.  But not too harsh?  They live quite awhile, until they find favorable environment again.  Flu is one of these, unfortunately.   A sneeze expelling droplets can contain flue virus.  These can drift on the air for quite awhile, until inhaled.....  But, if they land on the counter, and dry out?  The virus dies.

Again?  This from memory... 

[Griffin NoName]

Surely hand sanitiser is a fashion not a cleansing product? - rather like those amazingly varied lip salves - I always feel under-dressed when a friend takes yet another wonderful different lip salve out of their handbags.

[Darlica]

 

I know what you mean.

[The Meromorph]

In response the the MRSA panic, HCA reviewed doctors and nurses sanitation habits between patients. They were horrified at the results.
According to their intensive research (very serious money, as well as patient lives were at stake), a 'medical hand wash' between patients was medically satisfactory, but takes a minimum of 5 minutes to do properly. a 'surgical hand wash' takes about 15 minutes, and uses particularly expensive materials as well. The timing with a 'medical hand wash' would have at least doubled or tripled the average time per patient, and posed serious skin care problems when done at such frequency.
They investigated hand sanitizers, and concluded that a medical grade hand sanitizer with skin conditioners incorporated, was more effective than a 'medical hand wash', indeed it was 95% as effective as a 'surgical hand wash', and took only 20 seconds, ten seconds of which could be done while walking to, or even talking to, the next patient. Seeing their care provider, still sanitizing their hands as they approach is also immensely reassuring to most patients.
They immediately (within a month for every facility and office) provided sanitizer dispensers (wall mounted - push with an arm or elbow while holding a hand underneath) adjacent to every patient and in every restroom.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

In response the the MRSA panic, HCA reviewed doctors and nurses sanitation habits between patients. They were horrified at the results.
According to their intensive research (very serious money, as well as patient lives were at stake), a 'medical hand wash' between patients was medically satisfactory, but takes a minimum of 5 minutes to do properly. a 'surgical hand wash' takes about 15 minutes, and uses particularly expensive materials as well. The timing with a 'medical hand wash' would have at least doubled or tripled the average time per patient, and posed serious skin care problems when done at such frequency.
They investigated hand sanitizers, and concluded that a medical grade hand sanitizer with skin conditioners incorporated, was more effective than a 'medical hand wash', indeed it was 95% as effective as a 'surgical hand wash', and took only 20 seconds, ten seconds of which could be done while walking to, or even talking to, the next patient. Seeing their care provider, still sanitizing their hands as they approach is also immensely reassuring to most patients.
They immediately (within a month for every facility and office) provided sanitizer dispensers (wall mounted - push with an arm or elbow while holding a hand underneath) adjacent to every patient and in every restroom.

Interesting.  Reference? (curious, is all..)