Health Care
ask questions, discuss topics, solve problems
Topic
As Michael pointed out, the recent study on the impact of overly diluted cleansers and innefective cleansers on microbrial growth is significant. It was also good to see that bleach was considered a 'gold standard' in efficacy with the comments showing that even MRSA are not safe from straight bleach.
My question relates to the concentration of bleach necessary and the amount of exposure time necessary to be efficaceous. If there was a simple agreed level for this, could a cleaner be 'certified' as effective at reaching 100% of microbes for the surfaces that it properly contacted (assuming that directions were followed)?
When people see "99+% effective" they may think that they are taking care of everything, but the study shows that its the <1% that is left behind that can lead to MRSA.
How would consumers have to be empowered/educated to create a product that gives them confidence they are getting the <1% of bad bugs? What level of NaClO concentration/dilution would uphold this claim?
Comment
I am not an expert in "certifying" disinfectants, but I doubt that there is a chemical out there that can guarantee 100% disinfection. Even if it was 100% effective at killing microorganisms, improper use or "missing a spot" and making mistakes, or waiting too long to clean a surface can lead to stray bugs that will infect others. Personally, there are no guarantees.
Consumers can be empowered by learning the proper use of cleaning agents, and cleaning thoroughly and regularly.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Mark,
Although we have not been able to identify all of the pathogens out there, the major ones can be grown on petri- dishes. In this case the standard test for antimicrobial efficacy is called an Antibiotic Disc sensitivity test, however there may be a a more simple test with a standardized blend of commonly found household pathogens. See info on the disc test here:
I know we are not shooting for sterility here but the industry standard for disinfecting foods etc is called " log reduction" for so if you can imagine a surface such as a countertop that has 1,000,000 CFU / square cm (CFU = colony forming units) and a spray and wipe with brand X disinfectant causes a 3 Log reduction it would mean that in that same 1 sq cm spot you now have 1,000 CFU. NaClO works well in this respect, even if it is a free radial, but MSRA is actually caused by overuse of antibiotics, and finding more powerful disinfectants seems to be exacerbating the problem. MSRA is opportunistic and only affects immunocompromised folks, who should be addresssing their problems and using hospital grade cleaners. The only safer natural suggestions i can offer are colloidal silver, oregano, neem, and olive leaf extract, which of course would have to be tested.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Rachel and Marco -
Thank you for your feedback. I can see that the notion of sterilization in real world applications is not a repeatable goal for the general public. As you have explained, the issue truly lies with both the product and the use of the product by the consumer.
We have explored very similar situations in researching various disease states such as Alzheimer's, cardiovascular medicine, head trauma, metabolic syndrome, wound healing and others. In all of these cases, after spending hours of time with people in their homes, we have been able to see the health challenge through the patient's experience and perspective of the disease and their attitudes toward available medicines, self-care, and healing.
The study results in December that pointed to the ability for MRSA strains to develop outside the body and without influence of antibiotics are a wake-up call. The study showed that people must have a higher awareness of their cleaning behavior, and that no cleaning product can be 'certified' to clean their house for them.
Where I see an opportunity, is in the ongoing challenge of guiding people towards better cleaning behavior. The "Cleaner Home" and "Healthier Lives" section of the Clorox website does a fantastic job of this. The '5 second rule' outreach through Twitter was another great example. By understanding the patient/customer's experience, more opportunities will emerge that will influence people's behavior and help them take better care of their families.
I think that there are further examples worth looking into... Dove's campaign for real beauty, pharmaceutical companies' programs to help people stay compliant with their medications, smoking cessation products' programs for quitting, weight loss products are another good example. These programs went beyond the education and either approached individuals or groups to help them experientially change the way they behave. Our current project is focused on addressing the leading cause of adult blindness in the US. There is an overwhelming amount of education available in this field as well as a truly remarkable product that stops vision loss - yet people continue to lose their vision. Our research focuses on translating patient experience into new outreach programs that deliver education proactively, so that fewer people lose their vision.
I hope these thoughts are helpful and would be happy to discuss further,
-- Mark
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this