h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

So, watching TV last night and an advert came on the telly for a household cleaner (can't remember which one). Nothing too unusual in that, except at the end they claimed it killed bacteria in the home 'including MRSA'.

So should the hospitals be stocking up on household cleaner? Do we have lots of MRSA in homes? Is it a good idea giving to use this if it does work? Is it all cobblers?

I must admit that flogging something to the average home owner on the basis that it'll kill any mrsa in your home seems to be a bit of scare mongering to me!

Or, as I may suspect, is it that it uses some chemical to kill the bacteria that can;t be used in medicine? (presumably cos it'd kill you, too!)

All detergents (including soap) kill bacteria. Mentioning MRSA is pure scaremongering.

The best way for hospitals to combat MRSA would indeed be to keep the places as clean as possible - as pretty basic thing for a hospital you'd think.

Ste

Ste is correct, it is fairly easy to kill MRSA, the real trick (or problem caused by MRSA) is to kill it without killing the person infected - and I would not recommend the detergent for that Until later...
BCNU - Crescent

Cept it is Icto asking so he prolly already knows, and again I did not read the first post correctly (bloody work, giving me no time here ) Until later....
BCNU - Crescent

MRSA at home is perfectly plausible as apparently a significant number of the people who start displaying symptoms when in hospital were already infected when they were admitted.

MRSA is just Antibiotic-beginning-with-M Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus. Staph Aureus is one of the most common food poisoning bacteria around. It's the resistance that's the problem.

Staph Aureus is controlled within our catering establishments by scrupulous hand-washing and associated measures, and this also works with MRSA. Unfortunately, any MRSA bacteria that get past these precautions are damned difficult to kill, hence the problem.

Just my

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

another ... the resistance is thanks to inappropriate and over use of the antibiotics in the first place. Surely household cleaning needs no more than hot water, detergent, sensible hygiene and elbow grease... otherwise these happy little buggies are going to develop resistance to Cillit Bang 'n' all (stoopid name)
Wilma

I am against the use of anti-bacterial soaps unless there is an actual contagen which needs to be killed, as in the case of cleaning up after someone who has a contagious illness.

My feeling is that the constant used of anti-bacterials in the home for basic hand and dish-washing only serves to weaken our ablity to fight off colds and minor illnesses on our own and is a direct contributing factor to the emergence of resistent strains of bacterias we normally fought off on our own.

When I look at families where the use of anti-bacterials for normal household cleaning is the norm, I see people getting sick more often and more sick from minor flu, cold, and stomach complaints.

These same people are usually the ones who run to the doctor for anti-biotics at the first sign of a sniffle.

In homes where you couldn't eat off the floor (but aren't filthy) and where regular soaps and dish detergents are used and enhanced by careful cleaning of cutting services with normal soaps, people are less sick when they get colds and flu, and spend less time repeatedly sick from passing the same bug around and around the family.

I used to have to take anti-biotics regularly, in large doses, when they thought I had a specific heart condition. Any time I went to get my teeth looked at or the have any minor invasive procedure, I had to have anti-biotics in large doses. I was constantly getting sick. Since they discovered I DON'T have the heart condition and have not had to take the anti-biotics, I still get sick but I am either sick for less time or less sick over-all than other people I know.

I don't use anti-bacterials except at work where we roatate desks and computers. I am careful about cleaning my keyboard and mouse and have had fewer problems picking up whatever is going around the office.

Currently, I have a cold but aside from taking a day and a half off when I first got sick, I have been at work while others around me have been dragging themselves in with dreadful symptoms. The only medication I take is Tylenol and Riccolla throat lozenges. Meanwhile, my friends have all been to the doctor for anti-biotics.

While I'm unsure about your examples, on the basis that big doses anti-biotics would generally make you sick not because your immune system isn't getting the full chance to react, but because they're poisonous. Similarly, its very easy to observe things to go the way we expect to fit our model.

For example, I've heard people saying very similar things about farm kids having better immune systems than those in the city because of having been in the much their whole life. But hold on, people in cities live in close proximity to each other by definition. They get bombarded by infectious diseases from all over the world. We can track plagues spreading using the cities as their hubs, often losing momentum or even stopping as they get to the countryside. The allergy suffering and permanent colds of certain city dwellers are probably due to air pollution (which AFAIK you can't develop a resistance to without evolving) and that sheer bombardment of new varieties of diseases every so often.

But, after all that, I'm basically supportive of your initial point (just doubtful about the evidence). Antibiotics (and most medicines) are normally there to be taken as a regular course or as a big overwhelming smash, to have weak versions in your cleaner is just asking for trouble. If you're that bothered then use diluted bleach. Be sure to rinsce.

anti-biotic/anti-septic soaps are kind of a scam, since soaps are lethal to most bacteria anyway. So it's really just a new advertising scheme. I wouldn't believe that a soap is doing something really special until I'd read that an independent group had verified that it was doing more than generic soaps.

My offering

My fave entry: A309665

(yes, I am a sad git )

W

Ben Goldacre on You & Yours discussing MRSA with the bloke that takes tabloid money to test swabs in a garden shed:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/items/01/2005_46_mon.shtml

ah yes, been following Mr. Goldacre on the Guardians Bad Science site for a while now.

Glad it was as I thought it might be. Another bit of scare mongering for us.

Purely out of interest, does soap kill viruses?

Are viruses alive in the first place? I would imagine that soap can destroy any virus that uses a lipid coat to house its payload...
BCNU - Crescent

"Are viruses alive in the first place?"
I was asking for that I suppose

Hi All

MRSA - Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus.

Staph. Aureus - one of a number of normal skin flora found on the skins of the vast majority of humans.

Methicillin - One of the penicillins and a reference antibiotic in microbiology.

MRSA exists because of the over-use of antibiotics. Society's current paranoia about cleanliness compounds the problem by weakening the immune system, particularly of children who are not exposed to a wide range of pathogens.

In Yorkshire they have a saying - tha's got t' eat a speck o' muck afore tha dies - Someone should complain about the advert mentioned at the top of this thread for being irresponsible in the claims.

turvy

And here is some info. (shameless plug for employer)

http://www.rcn.org.uk/resources/mrsa/downloads/Wipe_it_out-MRSA-guidance_for_nursing_staff.pdf

t.