SC - Soap and cleanliness

[Glenda Robinson]

Hi,

Saw them in two test results a couple of years ago - one from a final year
Chemistry student at Uni, and another by a person from some well respected
Govt. organisation on a current affairs show. The "scrub really hard with a
clean cloth/paper came out recently, from a Doctor of Chemistry at one of
the Unis, if I remember. All these were Australian findings. These tests
were run on solid soaps, rather than liquid.
If I remember, washing your hands in tepid water is the worst, as most
harmful-to-humans bacteria thrive in near-human temperatures. Best was said
to be either nearly hotter than people can handle, or really cold water.

A lot of tests have been run by a consumer association here, and they've
found that these so-called anti-bacterial soaps kill off 99% of so of the
weaker bacteria, over time leaving the 1% of the strongest bacteria to breed
up a super-resistant strain that's unable to be killed by regular treatment,
as well as killing nearly all the good bacteria too. Some of my friends are
nurses, and they won't buy anti-bacterial products for their homes, because
many of them have seen antibiotic resistant strains working, and it's not
pleasant.
Mind you, that's not to say these anti-bacterial soaps don't have their
place, especially with kitchens used in public places by lots of people (too
many cross-contamination risks), but I've heard scientists recommend the use
of bleach to really kill them bugs.

Glenda.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Trigg" <fyrebyrd at scadian.net>
To: <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December 2000 12:33
Subject: Re: SC - Soap and cleanliness


> Glenda Robinson said in Re: SC - Soap and cleanliness at 30/Nov/00Thu
14:20:
>
> > Hand washing's all very well and good, but tests have been run on soaps
> > (and indeed tap handles), and it seems to be (on the whole) 'cleaner' to
> > not use the soap (especially those in public areas), as these soaps
> > contain more bacteria than was on the washer's hands already (and
> > sometimes more than in a toilet bowl). If I remember, a GOOD rinse with
> > cold water, then a long towel off with a clean towel is more anti-germ.
>
> I'm curious as to where you saw these tests. I know they've found that
anti-
> bacterial soaps aren't any better than regular soaps (though the kitchens
> of the school I am attending use anti-bacterial liquid soap), and may
cause
> people to be less careful about washing their hands, but not that they
> contained bacteria. I just had a kitchen sanitation & safety class about
> four weeks ago and we were taught the following (for commercial kitchens
in
> the U.S.; the bracketed words are mine):
>
> "Proper handwashing procedure: 1. Wet your hands with hot running water.
> [As hot as you can stand.] 2. Apply soap [enough to get a good lather]. 3.
> Rub hands [and halfway down the forearm] together for at least twenty
> seconds.  4. Clean under fingernails and between fingers. 5. Rinse hands
> thoroughly under running water. Turn off the faucet using a sanitary
single-
> use paper towel. 6. Dry hands [using a single-use paper towel or warm-air
> hand dryer]." -- "ServSafe Coursebook," National Restaurant Association
> Educational Foundation, 1999.
>
> We were also taught that proper hand-washing (as part of good personal
> hygiene) was one of the most important ways of preventing food-borne
> illnesses.
>
> --Nostas'ia Stepanova
> Barony of Ponte Alto, Atlantia
>
============================================================================
>
> To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
> Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".
>
>
============================================================================