OT: Am I missing something?

[Man at B&Q]

Such as this one on the sfaety of Triclosan

"Many experts agree that soap containing triclosan does little or nothing extra to remove bacteria that using soap without the ingredient, as washing the hands physically removes the excess bacteria"

MBQ

[Man at B&Q]

I've only seen alcohol based gels and foams, not antibacterial soap, but then I don't work in one.

Straight from the Horse's mouth:

"For some consumer products, there is clear evidence that triclosan provides a benefit. In 1997, FDA reviewed extensive effectiveness data on triclosan in Colgate Total toothpaste. The evidence showed that triclosan in this product was effective in preventing gingivitis.

For other consumer products, FDA has not received evidence that the triclosan provides an extra benefit to health. At this time, the agency does not have evidence that triclosan in antibacterial soaps and body washes provides any benefit over washing with regular soap and water."

Presumably (I maybe wrong) the point about toothpaste is that during a normal brushing session the triclosan remains in contact with the gums to actually do something. handwashing is generally much quicker, hence the lack of any benefit.

Or, how about this

"ConclusionsThe data is lacking to demonstrate that the use of specific consumer antiseptics reduces the incidence of infection or transmission of disease. There are a limited number of studies published that compare the infection rates of users of antimicrobial versus nonantimicrobial soaps. None of the studies demonstrate a benefit of the antimicrobial soap over the nonantimicrobial soap with regard to infection reduction."

MBQ

[Bruce]

>Quote "For some consumer products, there is clear evidence that

>"Conclusions>The data is lacking to demonstrate that the use of specific consumer

So this "wider scientific community" of yours is one single US FDA report on one single antiseptic ingredient. Then, out of sheer desperation, you post thee different references to the same report as though it was three different reports.

"Wider scientific community"? Complete bollocks.

But I congratulate you on your barefaced cheek. ;-)

What I *do not* congratulate you on are your unhygienic habits, and your attempts to justify them. You're just a dirty bastard.

[Jim K]

mouth:

> >Quote "For some consumer products, there is clear evidence that

this

> >"Conclusions

Rather the FDA than your sole smug recollection of ancient, expenses based, pissed up trips across the pond, brown nosing some opinionated academic..... ;>)

Jim K

[John Rumm]

Try it on a goose! ;-)

[John Rumm]

The fact the fluff etc is accumulating in the machine would suggest that is is subtracting at least some of the fluff etc already in the airflow.

[Andy Dingley]

Copper & brass have pretty good antibacterial properties for this.

[geoff]

In message , Bruce writes

Steady on ladies - aren't we getting a bit too much up our own arses?

[The Medway Handyman]

Never seen that in the several I've taken apart.

[Nightjar]

You don't understand how marketing people think, in which you are not alone. I've had to look into their world over the past few years and they do have an entirely different view of life.

I used to make sterile medical devices and sterilisation processes only provide an acceptably high probability of destroying harmful bacteria if the starting level - the bioburden - is below a certain level. I would have been very happy if our products had gone off with only a few hundreds of bacteria on them.

Colin Bignell

[Bruce]

It's not my own arse I'm worried about, it's the bacteria from other people's. And I don't like bacteria being shared around by people who reject basic principles of hygiene on the basis of tittle-tattle.

[Chris J Dixon]

So, the real problem is washing hands under running water:

1 Turn on tap, thus contaminating it. 2 Wash hands (with whatever soap product). 3 Turn off tap, re contaminating hands.

Chris

[Man at B&Q]

If you took the time to actually read some of the posts, you'll see that it's the more extreme marketing BS based principles that are being rejected, not basic handwashing.

MBQ

[stuart noble]

I remember when pubs had bowls of free peanuts on the counter. Now that would be asking for trouble.

[The Natural Philosopher]

wash tap wash hands again

turn off now pristine sparkling Lo-germ tap.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I hardly ever wash my hands. I don't die of bacterial infections. In fact the main trouble is yeast infections off fruit, and viral infections off other people. Oh and bacterial infections off live french cheeses. haha!

I do wash everything below the belt and above teh knees though, every day at least.

[Jim K]

tony doesn't have time to read all the posts - he was a "very important" man don't cha know....

;>)

[geoff]

Live with it, it exists

It has done since the dawn of time

You seem to have lost the plot big time

[Tim Streater]

Eugh disgusting!

TMI alert !!

[The Natural Philosopher]

healthy, though.