Get that swine flu off your hands!

[Fazor]

With all the H1N1 fears going around, some people are really going overboard with the whole anti-germ thing. Well, *I* feel it's overboard anyway. Maybe I just have a death wish.

Anyway, the other day my manager dropped off bottles of "waterless hand sanitizer" at each desk, and said we should use it regularly. She also bought some antiseptic wipes to use on things like phones and doorknobs and what not.

I've never been a fan of that stuff. Let your immune system do it's job, I say. But rather than arguing I just acted like it was a good idea and went about my day.

Today, though, it struck me. Usually this stuff is "antibacterial". This is labeled as "Sanitizer", but if you read the back label it says something like "Kills 99.9% of all bacteria that can spread disease!" Okay, great.

. . . but isn't H1N1 a virus, and thus not affected by antibacterial agents? Is this stuff even effective against it? I mean, washing your hands is good, sure. But this isn't really washing your hands. It's just slathering them with ethyl alcohol. And since it's "waterless", you're not rinsing anything off.

Ironically enough, the manager that's so gun-ho about using this stuff is now out with a double sinus infection. Okay, so the medical entry I read on sinus infections said it can be caused by a bacteria, fungal infection, or virus, but I *think* bacterial is most common.

With no medical anything to back it up with, I maintain that the 0.1% of bacteria that sneaks by the soaps and sanitizers is more potent when your immune system hasn't been "exercising" on the other 99.9%.

[jokergirl]

Isn't most of that stuff transferred through the air anyway? Walking down a street or taking the subway will expose you to a lot more germs than shaking hands. And even so, just wash your hands before eating or touching food.

We have those sprays too now. I had a fun time cleaning all my desk equipment with the spray instead. Computer mice and keyboards are notoriously dirty.

[Neverfly]

I take after my Natural instincts and lick everything clean.


You dadgummed humans are just so finicky.

[Swift]

I take after my Natural instincts and lick everything clean.


You dadgummed humans are just so finicky.

Reminds me of the Steve Martin bit about giving his cat a bath. Sure, the fur would stick to his tongue, but the cat really liked it.

[PetersCreek]

I don't really subscribed to the antibacterial this or that marketing but having worked in the health care field, I do practice hand washing with good old soap and water. It's one of the most effective means of preventing/reducing nosocomial infections in the health care setting so I figure the benefit extends to social contacts as well.

But then, I also grew up in the "Oh, just rub some dirt in it" days. I don't think pampering our immune systems is a healthy approach, either.

[Gillianren]

You're right, Fazor--hand sanitizer makes a big fuss about being antibacterial. Influenza is a viral infection. Hand sanitizer doesn't do a thing. And, yes, there's speculation that all the stuff will do is create hardier bacteria. I avoid the stuff. Most of the time, your immune system can handle the job. It does so every day.

[Fazor]

I just thought it was funny that there's people, like my manager, freaking out about swine flu so they by all this antibacterial soap. The obsessive washing of their hands might help. Me? I typically only wash after trips to the "washroom", and if they feel dirty, before I eat.

Okay, so I'm probably on the "gross" side of hand washing. But whatever. I'm not sticking my hands in other people's mouths anyway, so they can get over it.

I get sick much less than just about anyone I know. Can't say that's for any particular reason, but if I'm rarely sick, then I don't feel a huge need to change the way I do things.


. . . of course you know, this whole thread is just one big lead in for me to get sicker than I've ever been. Just 'caus that's the way those things work. :-P

[sarongsong]

...but isn't H1N1 a virus, and thus not affected by antibacterial agents?...

Yes, but other "nasties" are:

...Pneumonia is a lung infection that can be caused by different types of microorganisms, including bacteria, viruses, and fungi...
medicinenet.com

[Celestial Mechanic]

I see that I am not alone in viewing this as some kind of hysteria. H1N1 is a virus, even plain water will remove a lot of it from your hands. What worries me is that increased use of anti-bacterial hand sanitizers will result in a bactericide-resistant mutation of some bacterium such as the one that causes pneumonia, and that the pandemic that results from that will clobber us worse than H1N1.

[01101001]

NIH: Efficacy of soap and water and alcohol-based hand-rub preparations against live H1N1 influenza virus [...] (Abstract)

CONCLUSIONS: HH [hand hygiene] with SW [soap & water] or alcohol-based hand rub is highly effective in reducing influenza A virus on human hands, although SW is the most effective intervention.

[Tuckerfan]

I read some of the labels on bottles of hand sanitizer (they've been cropping up at work, but I haven't noticed stores putting them out for their customers to use like I did when swine flu first made the rounds earlier in the year) and a few of them do claim to be effective against viruses as well as bacteria.

[mugaliens]

Betweeen the Academy hospital and dozens of other on-base sources, including to close friends who's kids have come down with it, I've been exposed repeatedly! Stay away, should you get it! (though I've kept my distance from my elderly parents).

Still no symptoms. I'll let you know how it goes.

[sarongsong]

...bottles of hand sanitizer (they've been cropping up at work, but I haven't noticed stores putting them out for their customers to use like I did when swine flu first made the rounds earlier in the year)...

Just returned from my bank and each of their counters feature a bottle of same.

[chrissy]

I have it and recovering slowly, I have felt like I just wanted to curl up in a ball and die, they wanted to send me to hospital yesterday because I couldn't breath properly. I thought I just had a cold. My poor daughter has it now, she is blaming me for it, on the positive note I should have the antibodies in my system and also my daughter.
Not that I would want it again..

[Tinaa]

At my school we've had many cases of the H1n1 flu. I do wash my hands fairly often; even have some hand sanitizer on my desk. I try not to touch my eyes, nose, or mouth. The school nurse and I have most of the contact with the sick kids and neither she nor I (knock on wood) have yet been the least bit sick. Though from what I have read, people under twenty-five are the hardest hit.

I don't ever remember having the flu - ever. I do get a flu shot some years. I have had the live virus nose spray before. Maybe I'm just lucky?

[TheHalcyonYear]

The H1n1 flu, I have never seen such media hype in my life. In the end, some people get sick, some don't. A few die and most don't.

It's flu season! I seem to remember this sort of thing happening waaaay back during my childhood in the mid '80's.

[HenrikOlsen]

The H1n1 flu, I have never seen such media hype in my life.

For the international health organizations, this is the live-fire exercise before the next really big really deadly pandemic. Basically the chance to get the bugs out of the new system before it actually has to really work.

Initially the mortality rate was vastly overestimated, likely because of massive underreporting of the number of infected Mexicans and it looked likely to be even deadlier than the Spanish Flu of 1918, which worldwide killed somewhere between 2% and 5% of the people, i.e. more that the total killed in all the wars of the 20th century.

That the mortality rate now looks to be on the order of regular seasonal flu has been underreported by the media as that don't sell news, that hand sanitizers are less effecting that soap and water at removing flu virus is underreported because hand sanitizers buy advertisements and every death that last year wouldn't have been the news, because - ho, hum it was the flu - is reported as a confirmation of the lethality and blown up as news instead of statistics.

[mugaliens]

I keep hearing comments that hand sanitizers will cause resistance, and that they're not effective against viruses.

Wrong on both counts:

1. Resistance Issue: "Nowadays there is no resistance to alcohol; resistance in bacteria has not been demonstrated at all, in contrast to resistance to medicated soaps that have been used for handwashing. There is no mechanism for resistance to alcohol that has been described in bacteria." Source: Dix, Kathy (December 1, 2002). "CDC's Endorsement of Alcohol Hand Rubs Launches New Era in Hand Hygiene". Infection Control Today.

2. Virus Issue: "Alcohol rubs kill many different kinds of bacteria, including antibiotic resistant bacteria and TB bacteria. It also has high viricidal activity against many different kinds of viruses, including enveloped viruses such as the flu virus, the common cold virus, and HIV, though is notably ineffective against the rabies virus." Source: Sandora, Thomas J TJ Reducing absenteeism from gastrointestinal and respiratory illness in elementary school students: a randomized, controlled trial of an infection-control intervention Journal: Pediatrics (Evanston) ISSN: 0031-4005 Date: 06/2008 Volume: 121 Issue: 6 Page: e1555 PMID: 18519460 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2007-2597

And here.

And here.

You want to avoid antibacterial soaps, such as those containing triclosan, however, as they do tend to result in more resistant bacteria.

[TheHalcyonYear]

For the international health organizations, this is the live-fire exercise before the next really big really deadly pandemic. Basically the chance to get the bugs out of the new system before it actually has to really work.

Interesting idea. I just hope that the real one comes along someday people aren't going to disregard warnings because because there have been too many false alarms.

[Tuckerfan]

For the international health organizations, this is the live-fire exercise before the next really big really deadly pandemic. Basically the chance to get the bugs out of the new system before it actually has to really work.

"Get the bugs out." Heh, deliberate or not, a good pun. The SARS epidemic was the wake up call. Had the Chinese been more open about what was going on, the illness could have been contained much better than it was, and while it was relatively limited in the number of people it infected, those stricken with the disease often required heroic measures to stay alive. (The doctor who first identified the disease later died from it, BTW.)

Initially the mortality rate was vastly overestimated, likely because of massive underreporting of the number of infected Mexicans and it looked likely to be even deadlier than the Spanish Flu of 1918, which worldwide killed somewhere between 2% and 5% of the people, i.e. more that the total killed in all the wars of the 20th century.

It also turns out that there's an environmental factor involved. People who've been exposed to arsenic (often through drinking water in places like Mexico) are more likely to become seriously ill and die from the disease. This was only discovered after the media had hyped the dangers of the disease.

That the mortality rate now looks to be on the order of regular seasonal flu has been underreported by the media as that don't sell news, that hand sanitizers are less effecting that soap and water at removing flu virus is underreported because hand sanitizers buy advertisements and every death that last year wouldn't have been the news, because - ho, hum it was the flu - is reported as a confirmation of the lethality and blown up as news instead of statistics.

The mortality rate is the roughly the same, or a little lower, but the fatalities tend not to match those of seasonal flu. Seasonal flu tends to kill the very old and the very young, while H1N1/swine flu tends to kill people in their "prime." (BTW, lab tests indicate that folks who were exposed to the 1918 flu have a high degree of immunity to H1N1/swine flu.) That's cause for concern, since those folks would be the ones manning the hospitals, ERs, police stations, etc., if there were to be a 1918-type outbreak of the disease.

[NEOWatcher]

Interesting idea. I just hope that the real one comes along someday people aren't going to disregard warnings because because there have been too many false alarms.

But if any alarm is effective against the "real" one, then how do you know it wasn't a false alarm?

[NorthernBoy]

Isn't most of that stuff transferred through the air anyway?

No, the majority of infections are from touching an infected surface and then rubbing your face.

[NorthernBoy]

You're right, Fazor--hand sanitizer ... And, yes, there's speculation that all the stuff will do is create hardier bacteria.

Not from any informed sources, though.

If we wanted to look at a rational source, we'd hopefully hear something like the following,

""If I had a choice , I'd always go for the antibacterial hand gel", says Professor John Oxford , a virologist at Queen Mary's School of Medicine in London and leading expert on swine flu.

"A gel is effective because they contain alcohol," explains Professor Ron Eccles of the Common Cold Centre at Cardiff University. "It damages the shell of the virus, inactivates it and prevents the illness from developing. Studies show gels are effective against regular flu, so they are almost certain to be successful against the swine flu virus too" he says. "

Where did you get the opposite idea from?

[TheHalcyonYear]

But if any alarm is effective against the "real" one, then how do you know it wasn't a false alarm?

It seems to me that since this alarm made the flu seem like the end of the world as we know it, that next time people are going to ignore getting flu shots. After all, getting or not getting the shot won't seem to matter. Just like it didn't really matter this time.

[Gillianren]

Where did you get the opposite idea from?

Bacteriologists?

In all serious, I've read various books about crackpot medicine which have suggested it. They're probably out of date now, or at least some of them, but honestly, I'd trust a bacteriologist over a virologist on this one--and anyone working in a common cold center would be a virologist, surely.

[NEOWatcher]

No, the majority of infections are from touching an infected surface and then rubbing your face.

No. Change "the majority" to "sometimes" and I'll agree with you.

Per the cdc. (my bold)

This is thought to occur in the same way as seasonal flu occurs in people, which is mainly person-to-person transmission through coughing or sneezing of people infected with the influenza virus. People may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose.

It seems to me that since this alarm made the flu seem like the end of the world as we know it, that next time people are going to ignore getting flu shots. After all, getting or not getting the shot won't seem to matter. Just like it didn't really matter this time.

Are you saying this alarm is un-warranted?
We have schools around here closing, not because of the scare, but because of the volume of sickness.
I heard yesterday one school had 700 kids sick out of about 1800.


Even our pro athletes...
Flu Hammers Browns

BEREA, Ohio -- The Cleveland Browns have been sacked by the flu.

Coach Eric Mangini said 12 players, including several starters, are home with flu-like symptoms and he plans to adjust his practice on Wednesday as the team prepares to face the Green Bay Packers on Sunday.

Although, in this case, it's "alleged". They might be setting up an alibi for Sunday.

[Fazor]

Although, in this case, it's "alleged". They might be setting up an alibi for Sunday.

Alibi for what? I mean, by this point, they'd have some explaining to do if they won. A loss is just another day at the office.

The Buckeyes were hit bad with the flu a few weeks back (the week they played . . . Illinois?). Unfortunately, they didn't have that problem last week. They just failed to beat an unranked opponent. Yay...

[NickW]

I heard yesterday one school had 700 kids sick out of about 1800.

The schools around my town are having a big problem with sickness as well, but aren't shutting the school down for it. I went to the schools office yesterday to let them know my son would be out, and the list they had for sick kids in just his class were 12 names.....out of 25 students. It is really hitting my town hard.

ETA: My kids school is scheduled to be given the free H1N1 vaccine, the one they put up your nose. I signed up right away, but I know quite a few "anti-vax" parents that are saying its dangerous.....You just can't win.

Also, there is another kid in town that is having serious issues, and has been tested and diagniosed with H1N1, and she is barely holding on. Hope she makes it.

[TheHalcyonYear]

Are you saying this alarm is un-warranted?
We have schools around here closing, not because of the scare, but because of the volume of sickness.
I heard yesterday one school had 700 kids sick out of about 1800.

Yeah, I am. Kids get the flu during the flu season. Some flu seasons are are worse than others. I am not saying that a flu vaccine isn't a good thing, I am just saying that I don't see anything about the most recent flu season that is much different about past flu seasons in the last 30 years. Flu happens, none of them have been 1918 since 1918.

[NickW]

Flu happens, none of them have been 1918 since 1918.

Well there, you have it. We should just stop worrying because there has been no significant flu since 1918. Everyone back inside there is nothing to see here.....

Except when there is one that is worse, then we might have a problem if we all shared your opinion.