BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 11:02 AM

I use gloves while dish-washing else my hands would get too dry and also the soap irritates my skin. We use an oil-soap for cleaning the floor; a clorox scrubbie thing for toilet cleaning; abrasive powder (Ajax) on the tub and sink; lemon oil to dust; oil-soap on the floors, and vinegar-water mix for everything else, as well as baking soda and vinegar to clean the drains and sinks.

One thing the dermatologist told me about lotions is to make sure they are labelled "non-comedogenic." After I learned that and changed products, a lot of little skin irritations cleared up.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 11:01 AM

Ah Richard - I've said this to several people today already, it's not the years, it's the mileage!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 08:38 AM

I don't use anti-bacterial agents on my skin - quite careful about it now, although when I was a tearaway teenager tuning cars I was pretty cavalier about petrol, paraffin, Jizer, Gunk, Swarfega, greases with all sorts of additives including molybedenum, paint strippers, cellulose thinners, all types of one-pack paints, two pack varnishes, etc, etc, - not probs apart from the time I soaked my jeans in petrol and thought "It'll dry".

Now, not so lucky. Must be age.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: sneeble
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 06:05 AM

not so many years ago I worked in agriculture and ran a horse breaking business, soap and water was the best thing then and it still is. Unlike others who used sanitisers I never suffered from health problems or from skin problems. Yet I see people all the time who ask me why dont I have skin problems....my advice is always this....stop using anti bacterial agents. It works every time.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 05:03 AM

Richard - you're right. Some of these sanitisers can be quite powerful and by stripping the skin of its natural coatings and defences, will make any skin condition worse. I'm sure you'll know that continuous washing makes it worse anyway, even with ordinary soap; imagine the damage a harsh de-greasing agent does when applied several times a day.

Once upon a time we had 4 main cleaning products - for floors and surfaces, toilets, dishes and for clothes. Now, in my bathroom alone there are 7 different cleansing products (that's including the washing machine but not the bathing products - those are legion).

There's even a spray for removing dirt left by soap.


LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 04:44 AM

I have an annoying skin problem - a type of eczema - of my hands. When I have been in circumstances where use of alcohol gels to decontaminate my hands (eg hospital visiting) would be usual, I have been concerned that these gels are or might be fairly strongly irritant to my skin. Generally speaking I have become gradually more concerned that we apply (intentionally, or in using them for other purposes) more and more things to our skin that are likely to damage it. Bleach, kitchen cleaners, glass cleaners, bathroom cleaners, washing powders, washing up liquid and dishwasher powders, air freshener/disinfectant sprays, deodorants, anti perspirants, engine oil, petrol, glues, weedkiller, paint and similar...   Even some hand creams seem to upset my hands.

Surely these gels will at the least de-grease the skin and make it more vulnerable, won't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 04:07 AM

I'm also a firm believer that rigidly sticking to anti-bacterial agents, 'best before' dates and scaremongering from advertising agencies is doing us no long term favours. This scaremongering builds on the lack of proper food hygiene taught in school these days, now that 'domestic science' is a pair of dirty words.

Since the demise of proper 'cookery' lessons for both sexes, safe food preparation has become the skill of a few, rather than the habit of all. So much food is pre-packaged and already prepared, that many people don't know how to do a simple thing like cook a healthy, nutritious meal from raw ingredients that still have stalks and dirt on them.

There was an interesting selection of adverts one afternoon last week. 1st up was an advert for Immodium, a diahorrea medicine, shortly followed by one for Senakot, a constipation medicine. Immediately following those was the one that starts 'Fact, there are more germs on your chopping board than on your toilet'. Does anyone else think that these three adverts are related and that proper education would eliminate the need for all three from the home?

There is a place for hand sanitisers - hospitals, where germs can and often do kill. They are not necessary in schools or the home where parents and teachers should teach the child proper hygiene - washing hands with soap and water when needed.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Cluin
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 12:04 AM

They rot your cuticles, I can attest.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Greg B
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 11:48 PM

For those of us who work around barns (with small and large
animals, from horses to feral cats) this stuff is the bread
of life.

Damned if I'm going to bring all the stuff of that space into
either the super-market or home to the house-cats on my hands.

Though to be fair, it's probably in my body anyway--- I try
not to let the feral cats rub up against me any more than
I can avoid (but what can I say? They like me!). But I do
let the horses have their full bonding 'way' with me, but
I figure the carnivores who live in the house probably can't
catch the stuff of herbivores who live in the fields.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 11:55 AM

Coincidently, an article about this very topic was in a supplement to today's paper. According to the author, Carol M. Ostrom of the McClatchy-Tribune News synidicate (and I'll just quote brief snatches):

The email story goes like this: School officials phoned Halle's dad...[she] was rushed to the emergency room...being severly lethargic and inchorerent.

Turn out that classmates had seen Halle "like the sanitizer from her hands."

Snopes.com, according to the article, cites television reports out of Oklahoma and says the story is basically true.

HOWEVER...the article also quotes William Hurley, medical director of the Washing state Poison Control Center. Hurley said that an average-size five year old would have to ingest almost six teasponns -- about one ounce -- of an ethanol-based gel to cause toxicity, and about half that from isopropyl gels. Regardless, it's more than the typical squeeze on the hands.

According to Hurley, the article states, the state poison control center has received 656 reports of children ingesting hand sanitizer gels; only 25 of the kids showed minor signs of toxicity such as coughing or vomiting, and just 1 showed signs of intoxication -- and she had drank an estimated half to two-tirds of a 16-ounce bottle. "She was a little goofy in speech and in walking, but not sedates or in any danger," [Hurley] said.

Hurley also makes two more points: children should be supervized when using the gel and the gel dispensed by an adult, containers should be labeled with a "Mr. Yuk" sticker and kept out of reach of children. The second point is that a 2005 study (uncited) shows a 59% decrease in the spread (emphasis supplied) in gastrointestinal illnesses when families used the products.

Make of it what you will. I'm going to use them when I must and wash thoroughly, with soap and water and vigourously rubbing my hands together for 20 to 30 seconds, when I can.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 10:34 AM

I agree, too. We don't use any antibacterial anything except for the small bottle of hand-sanitizer I carry in my purse which we use in a pinch.

When I worked in retail, many, many moons ago, we weren't allowed to leave the floor except for breaks. Emptying crates, cleaning shelves, etc. our hands would get very dirty. We weren't worried about germs, but we did have to be clean and neat. It was standard practice to use a bit of hand lotion, followed by a paper towel to get our hands clean.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: JennyO
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 10:23 AM

I strongly believe you are right, sneeble (cute name by the way).

My mother had a germ phobia, and she used to wipe everything with a disinfectant we have here in Oz, called Solyptol. There was a bottle of it on the basin which she wiped her hands with regularly. The whole house smelt of Solyptol. In fact I only have to smell the stuff and it reminds me of my mother's house.

She always seemed to be coming down with gastric infections and anything else that happened to be around, even though she was living alone - whereas my kids and I were a normal healthy bunch. And no, she didn't have any underlying medical condition to cause it, and we didn't visit if any of us were sick (which didn't happen often anyway), so we weren't passing on any obvious infectious diseases.

I always thought that because she lived such a germ-free existence most of the time, she had no natural resistance to any of the normal germs that occasionally showed up, and I'm sure this is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: sneeble
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 09:54 AM

personally I am not a fan of the stuff for the ordinary person. Good hygiene and common sense should be and is the best defence. There is a societal change to be germ phobic, we have anti-bacterial solutions for everything and over time the natural resistance we as humans have built up is slowly but surely dropping.
More often than not the families which are healthy and dont suffer from chronic health problems generally regard anti-bacterial substances as garbage and tend to stick with soap and water for everything. Most of these cleansers have been dreamt up not as a public safety product but as a product to make money, they are marketed to pick on the weak emotive triggers - family, health, children, germs, environment. Do these triggers suck you in?

As for the bird flu, it circulates every 20 years or so. It has been around for a very long time and it will be around again in the future.
A little research and a little common sense can easily cut through any journalistic scaremongering.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 07:06 AM

I think the only advantage of gel-type hand cleansers is that they are not intended to be rubbed dry. No need for germ laden towels, hot air blowers, or wads of paper tissue.

Good old soap and water, correctly applied (and removed) does the job.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: JennyO
Date: 14 Jul 07 - 05:16 AM

On the subject of washing your hands to kill germs - it seems most people don't do it nearly thoroughly enough. They say that you are supposed to keep washing your hands for as long as it takes to sing the "Happy Birthday" song right through twice. I doubt whether many people do that!

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 09:58 PM

Folklore

There is a great Aussie Story about the shearer's cook who would always buy cartons of 'Lemon Essence' - they wondered why he was always drunk...

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 07:09 PM

Kat, I think it's a good idea to use hand sanitizers, too - when soap and water is not available. I still haven't any indication at all that these "sanitizers" are better than soap and water. Logic tells me that it is better to wash contaminants away, down the drain; rather than just putting a chemical on that might kill some of the contaminants. And yes, I am well aware that many organisms stay on hands even after a long scrub.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Mickey191
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 05:12 PM

Why get hysterical about hand sanitizer?

Joe, I don't think any of us are hysterical. The reason I posted was as a warning. If your child is able to reach the product while your back is turned, one squirt could make the child sick. That was my only intent. Just as you wouldn't leave a mouse trap or ant poison or a bottle of vino within reach - this was just a caution. Because one might not even think that it could be harmful. I wouldn't want to be responsible for a child falling ill or worse because I was not aware of this threat.   

I went to the Dial hand sanitizer site-they stressed that the product is meant to kill germs. It is not meant to take the place of soap,water & a good scrub.So your instincts were correct to not place it near the sinks in Ladies Room.

I tried every way to find the ingredients of the Dial product. One would assume that info would be easy to find. It is NOT! I could not believe all the info that they want if one contacts by email. They have nerve to ask the family income. That is ridiculous!

Thank you all who posted the info. on the various forms of alcohol. Much appreciated.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: heric
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 04:41 PM

Dude there is no fecal matter in my mouth!

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 04:18 PM

I think that we have to learn to balance risk against risk. Waterless hand sanitizers have been with us for quite some time and they are great in situations where there is no soap and water: e.g., "vault toilets" in public campgrounds or the porta-potties at big events.

They have been shown to dramatically reduce bed-to-bed contamination in hospitals, which is usually caused by medical personnel failing to wash their hands before examining another patient. Doctors and nurses hang a small tube of the hand cleanser on their clothes and use it when walking from one patient to the next.

Would you rather have E. Coli or Staph. A. or take the very slight risk represented by these hand cleaners?

Polio was found to be caused by ingestion of fecal-contaminated food and other things (Take that finger out of your mouth NOW!!), for example. So is cholera, dysentery, and a host of other diseases ranging from those causing mild discomfort to those that will kill you in pretty horrible ways.

We live in a shell, and our defenses are actually few. I'll take every advantage I can get.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 04:10 PM

Oops, I stand corrected, sorry.

Mickey, my apologies. I would still appreciate a link, if one is available.

Joe, I like to see the stuff used, esp. in doctors' offices and hospitals. My doc always wants to shake hands. I won't unless I see him use the stuff beforehand (no pun intended.)

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:58 PM

Oops.... Minelli.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:58 PM

Maybe that's what happened to Lysol Mineli?

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: heric
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:57 PM

Yes, my daughter did this for her fourth grade science project and grew more stuff in her petri dish agar for hand sanitizers, and a little less for antibacterial soap, when compared to regular soap. So there you have it. But be aware that triclosan in antimicrobial soaps reacts with chlorinated water to produce chloroform. In the presence of sunlight the reaction might be producing dioxin. Yes, indeed. No one is safe.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:46 PM

I wonder about these hand sanitizers. They seem to be appearing everywhere. In general, I think they're a good substitute in situations where soap and water is not available, but they seem to be coming into use by food handlers instead of soap and water, often placed right next to a wash basin instead of soap.

I do the maintenance work for a women's center that serves a variety of women, including some who are homeless, drug users, or prostitutes. The nuns in charge had me put up half a dozen hand sanitizer dispensers, but I refused to put them next to sinks - I had previously installed soap dispensers next to the sinks, and I keep them filled with antibacterial soap. I noticed recently that somebody has put sanitizer bottles next to the sinks, most noticeably next to the kitchen sinks.

From what I've read, soap and water is still the best sanitizer because contaminants are washed down the drain. Anybody have additional information on the effectiveness of these sanitizers, compared with soap and water?

As for the dangers of the alcohol in hand sanitizers, I have my doubts. No cleaning substances are meant to be ingested, so reasonable precautions should be taken with all of them - but I see no particular reason for alarm about hand sanitizers. It's probably not good for kids to eat laundry soap or hand soap or bleach or drain cleaner, either. Why get hysterical about hand sanitizer?

Well, come to think of it....I knew a college-educated woman who would spray Lysol on her kid's pacifiers and bottle nipples when they got dirty - and then give the thing to the kid with the wet Lysol still on it.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Greg B
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:33 PM

Maybe they should weigh the risks of the stuff against the risks
presented by Staph A. bacteria, among others.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:31 PM

Unless it's intended for me to drink I don't think I'd do it. But then again, folks sniff gasoline (petrol) and a lot of other stuff for the "high".

As for alcohol-containing things consider perfumes, after shave lotions, pre-electric shave lotions, eyeglasses cleaners, computer screen cleaner, medicines, flavoring agents such as vanilla, automobile fuel additive, heat source, and a myriad of other things you'll probably find around you house.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:28 PM

Correction, January 2007 Oklahoma, by May 2007 the story was being re-hashed in Sydney

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 03:24 PM

Snopes Urban Myths & Legends gives this one as TRUE. Original story from May 2007 Oklahoma

CHEERS
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Micca
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 02:20 PM

I am dairly certain that Iso-propyl Alcohol would give you a "positive" on most brethalysers as they test for the "=OH" (alcohol)Radical whether it would make you "drunk"? I for one dont know but I guarantee that, since one of its principle metabolites(if the body would metabolize it at all), would be Iso-propyl aldehyde which would give you a BASTARD of a hangover. How do I know this? I inhaled the vapour of isp-propyl aldehyde in the lab once by accident and had a 4 day headache and was pig-sick and off work for 3 of them!!!! It was, BTW, a reportable Industrial acccident

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: heric
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 01:10 PM

"'ethyl alcohol 62%'"

That's 124 proof!"

Hell, maybe you could run it through a Brita filter then knock it back.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: M.Ted
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:51 PM

Isopropyl alchohol, is typically cut with methyl achohol to discourage its use as an intoxicant--the idea being that it is better to die than to get drunk---The Purrell label doesn't include methyl alchohol as an ingredient, though this may be because our "conservative" leaders have decided that full disclosure interfers with the right of corporations to poison us--

At any rate, the stuff is a highly flammable gel, which makes it doubly dangerous, especially around children.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:36 PM

"ethyl alcohol 62%"

That's 124 proof!

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:34 PM

2-Propanol or Isopropyl Alcohol: from the Material Data Fact Sheet for 90-100% pure compound:

Inhalation:
Inhalation of vapors irritates the respiratory tract. Exposure to high concentrations has a narcotic effect, producing symptoms of dizziness, drowsiness, headache, staggering, unconsciousness and possibly death.

Ingestion:
Can cause drowsiness, unconsciousness, and death. Gastrointestinal pain, cramps, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may also result. The single lethal dose for a human adult = about 250 mls (8 ounces).

Skin Contact:
May cause irritation with redness and pain. May be absorbed through the skin with possible systemic effects.

Eye Contact:
Vapors cause eye irritation. Splashes cause severe irritation, possible corneal burns and eye damage.

Chronic Exposure:
Chronic exposure may cause skin effects.

Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions:
Persons with pre-existing skin disorders or impaired liver, kidney, or pulmonary function may be more susceptible to the effects of this agent.

The bottle of Purell in my desk lists ethyl alcohol 62% as the active ingredient and a whole slew of inactive stuff. This is grain or drinking alcohol, although I certainly wouldn't do that!

Kimberley Clark's Sani-Fresh lists lists 55.8% isopropyl alcohol as the active ingredient and three inactive ones.

I suspect it depends upon what sanitizer was used.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:25 PM

"Also, it is isopropyl alcohol which you cannot get drunk on."

Are you sure? I thought that isopropyl, like methyl, WOULD get you drunk, but would poion you in the process. And what is it in Sterno? That WILL get you drunk, before it poisons you.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: GUEST,Mickey 191
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:21 PM

Kat, I gave my source. NBC News-Today show-Matt Lauer interview. What more can I add to identify my source???   

The child was in the bathroom alone. She appeared to be 3 or 4 yrs. old. Of course she drank it. Kids get into trouble.

I have posted what was said - the amount of alcohol lead to the conclusion that she was past the legal limit. If, as you say, isopropyl alchohol cannot cause a drunken state, one wonders why the conclusion was made that she was over the legal limit. It's possible that not all of these products use that benign form of alcohol. Especially with the bad job the FDA is doing of late.

The fact that almost 12,000 were sickened was my main reason for the post.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: PoppaGator
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 12:18 PM

The hand sanitizers contain enough isopropyl alcohol to poison if not intoxicate a person ~ at least, a small person.

Howevcer, it should be noted that they are made with a evil-tasting ingredient which will discourage kids from ingesting more than a small initial taste. That's probably why today's news in the first time any serious problem has come to light, even though this product has been in increasingly widespread use for a few years.

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 11:53 AM

I just picked up a couple of small bottles for my daughter (age 18) to use. She works at a mall. Where she works they wash their hands all of the time (it's a food place--makes sense!) but out around the mall itself you can't always wash when you need to. She doesn't have a spleen now (long story) so is learning to live with low doses of penicillin daily and to wash her hands more often. This is another tool in her arsenal. I don't like the anti-bacterial soaps because they tend to create resistant strains, but I think this functions differently, it's simply a gel with alcohol that kills germs on contact.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 09:22 AM

My grandson's preschool teacher told me it is illegal for them to have it around with children under a certain age. That said, my grandson has known how to use it since he was about 1.5, but we are always very careful he only gets a small dab and it stays away from his mouth. If that woman smelled it on her kid's breath, the kid must've been drinking it. Also, it is isopropyl alcohol which you cannot get drunk on.

It's a good idea, Mickey, to post your source when able...an excerpt or link would be good.

Subject: BS: Dangerous Hand Sanitizers
From: GUEST,Mickey191
Date: 13 Jul 07 - 09:04 AM

Just heard this on NBC Today Show--thought it worth posting. Over 11,900 children in the U.S. were sickened by hand sanitizers which contain alcohol. Story focused on a little girl who had to "squirts" of the stuff. Her Mother smelled it on her breath & took her to hospital. The child had enough alcohol in her to be termed legally drunk.

I'd never heard about this threat before. Thought you'd want to know.