Hand Sanitizer -- yea or nay?

[TestifyToLove]

Don't worry, I strongly stress handwashing to my children as well. But, it did blow me away when M informed me he did not make himself sick and research bore that reality out. You can't make yourself sick by not washing your hands and getting feces on it.

You can make everyone around you sick though. And, since M has a history of C.dif and has confirmed smal bowel bacterial overgrowth, we're super careful when we have to clean up after him!

[hopeforchange]

well i checked the (non-antibacterial) hs that i bought at target for $1 and it's 62% alcohol. so i guess if i'm gonna use it, at least i have stuff that will actually work.

[Soliloquy]

Originally Posted by SamRose

I saw one of those shows where they do science experiments to test thigns out, and they tested wrapping toilet paper vs wadding it to wipe, and see if one kept more berms off. They found that the more paper U use, the less likely the germs get thru to yer hands, obviously. But that even w/ wut seemed like more than avg amt of TP, germs still got thru the paper.

Yes, and the human race has survived having bowel movements w/o sanitizing their hands for thousands of years. Hand sanitizer is a new thing. When I worked in daycare in the 90s, we didn't have it there--I'm sure they have it now. We didn't have kids coming down w/ all kinds of horrible illnesses due to lack of hand sanitizer. Children in daycare are more likely to be sick simply from being around other children (and possibly because they are less likely to be breastfed) but there has not been this wonderful decrease in contagious illness since the availability of hand sanitizer--or anti-bac soap. In fact, I do think we will see more chronic disease from all the exposure to triclosan.

If you use anti-bac soap, you should read this http://www.ewg.org/node/26701

[SamRose]

Originally Posted by LisaM

Yes, and the human race has survived having bowel movements w/o sanitizing their hands for thousands of years. Hand sanitizer is a new thing. When I worked in daycare in the 90s, we didn't have it there--I'm sure they have it now. We didn't have kids coming down w/ all kinds of horrible illnesses due to lack of hand sanitizer. Children in daycare are more likely to be sick simply from being around other children (and possibly because they are less likely to be breastfed) but there has not been this wonderful decrease in contagious illness since the availability of hand sanitizer--or anti-bac soap. In fact, I do think we will see more chronic disease from all the exposure to triclosan.

If you use anti-bac soap, you should read this http://www.ewg.org/node/26701

I know, I was just pointing out that everyone touches poop germs, technically.
Not sure if you meant "you" in general or me in yer last sentence, but I dont use anti-bac soap

Originally Posted by LisaM

Yes, and the human race has survived having bowel movements w/o sanitizing their hands for thousands of years. Hand sanitizer is a new thing.

H/S is a new thing, but the thread took a bit of a shift when it got to not washing hands at all. Soap and water is a pretty old thing. A good, old thing.

[Serafine]

Originally Posted by Love Bears All

I would approve of that! Do you have a brand name for that? Can the lay person who would like a hand sanitizer purchase that?

The one that DH uses at work is left over from my lab days...when I could order gallons of straight ethanol.

Now...when we run out, I will be buying the highest proof clear liquor I can find (you already mentioned everclear 191 ) and mixing that with distilled water.

Again, though...I don't use it around the house...only for DH and the filth that he comes into contact with.

[JavaMama]

Originally Posted by Love Bears All

I would approve of that! Do you have a brand name for that? Can the lay person who would like a hand sanitizer purchase that?

I see many that say "With Aloe and Vitamin E" and list the active ingredient as 62% Ethyl Alcohol but what they don't want to show you is the inactive ingredients... often isopropyl alcohol, fragrance, aminomethyl propanol, propylene glycol, isopropyl myristate, acrylates/C10-30 alkyl acrylate crosspolymer, methylparaben , cocamidopropyl PG-Dimonium chloride phosphate , acetamidopropyl trimonium chloride , C12-15 alkyl benzoate, etc.

And worst of all... dihydrogen monoxide. (just kidding, haha!)

I doubled checked the EO brand I've been using and it has dimethicone in it, so I probably won't buy that brand again.

I'm keen on making my own like firefighterswife's described...

[domesticzookeeper]

Originally Posted by Mama Calidad

H/S is a new thing, but the thread took a bit of a shift when it got to not washing hands at all. Soap and water is a pretty old thing. A good, old thing.

Basic sanitation has saved lives for thousands of years. I'm not sure that going all the way back to not washing is a move in the right direction

[klpmommy]

could you use rubbing alcohol to make your own?

[Serafine]

Originally Posted by Love Bears All

Rubbing Alcohol (isopropyl alcohol) is toxic to the body, you would want to use a grain alcohol (ethyl alcohol or ethanol) like Vodka. Everclear 190 is the strongest I know of. It is 95% alcohol. I believe FireFighterWife said it must be over 62% ethanol to be effective, so a 151 proof which is 75.5% would work but I guess you can't really dilute that much before you'd lose potency so I guess just add a few drops of lavender and you've got a homemade hand sanitizer! Most rums and vodkas contain 40% to 60% (80-120 proof) so it must be stronger than that to be truly effective.

And, isopropyl alcohol is also pretty ineffective at lysing the lipid layer of bacteria and enveloped viruses...so another reason you wouldn't want to make it yourself out of rubbing alcohol.

[Soliloquy]

Originally Posted by SamRose

I know, I was just pointing out that everyone touches poop germs, technically.
Not sure if you meant "you" in general or me in yer last sentence, but I dont use anti-bac soap

I know, I was just joking in the general light of the thread. And I meant a "general" you.

[Serafine]

Originally Posted by Love Bears All

This might be a whole other thread entirely but if isopropyl is so ineffective at lysing the lipid layer of bacteria and enveloped viruses... why is it a common ingredient in hand sanitizers? And why do people use it for wound care?

My guess (read: completely just coming up with something here with no links, data, or other research to back it up):

cheap (as to why it is in the hand sanitizers) and
lack of knowledge/availability of ethanol (why people use it for wound care).

[Heather Micaela]

I have read through this thread and not seen what I end up doing in lieu of being able to use soap and water:

We all "Wash" our hands with a baby wipe which are kept in my purse. Then at the car a water bottle is poured over the hands of each person.

No overdone antibacterials, but still cleansing.

Oh - and my friend's solution is thieves' oil

[SamRose]

Originally Posted by Love Bears All

Rubbing Alcohol (isopropyl alcohol) is toxic to the body, you would want to use a grain alcohol (ethyl alcohol or ethanol) like Vodka. Everclear 190 is the strongest I know of. It is 95% alcohol. I believe FireFighterWife said it must be over 62% ethanol to be effective, so a 151 proof which is 75.5% would work but I guess you can't really dilute that much before you'd lose potency so I guess just add a few drops of lavender and you've got a homemade hand sanitizer! Most rums and vodkas contain 40% to 60% (80-120 proof) so it must be stronger than that to be truly effective.

So rubbing alcohol is bad to use for anything? Ive dunked tooth brushes in it after they hit the bathroom floor, thinking that killed the germs.

[bluedotsmom]

What an informative thread! I have a question for those in the know, how is hydrogen peroxide at sanitizing? Curious if it would be a reasonable alternative in a pinch?

TIA