To my thinking, this would rule out both chlorine and bromine allergy.
Since chlorine is a poor sanitizer at high temperatures (i.e., hot tub
temperatures), and chlorine is the most commonly used sanitizer in
commercial hot tubs, again, this argues for a hot tub folliculitis --
an inflammatory rash caused by organisms in haphazardly maintained hot
tubs (typically Pseudomonas).

Jo Ann

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Eigenvector wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
Rash from hotel hot tubs is likely from tubs that are cleaned and
sanitized improperly or infrequently. Google "hot tub rash" and you
will find lots of information, including warnings from the CDC, about
problems with poorly maintained public hot tubs.

It's not hard to maintain a hot tub properly, but most hotels use
chlorine, since they have it on hand for pool maintenance, and
chlorine
does not maintain its sanitizing properties well at high temperatures.
It has to be carefully monitored -- more carefully than the average
hotel maintenance staff usually does.

Jo Ann



Why is it so implausable that the guy is allergic to something in the
bromine sanitation system? He says he's had a rash 30 times from
hotel/public hot tubs. I've never had one from a hotel, yet I've been
in them a lot over the years. Yet, you think this is a problem with
incorrect sanitation as opposed to being allergic?

You believe it to be plausible that someone is allergic to Bromine rather
than making the assumption that a hot tub or pool with a large amount of
different people in it has inadequate sanitization?

There's nothing radically different about bromine to suggest allergies.


Nothing radically different? Do you even understand allergies? Some
people have allergies to a wide variety of chemicals and foods that
others can tolerate with no problems at all. A simple peanut can kill
some people. Is a peanut a "radically" different food? Latex is
widely used, yet some people are allergic to it. The chemicals used
in bromine treated spas are different that chlorine systems, that's the
whole point of them being used. It's perfectly reasonable to think
that someone who reports having a rash 30 times from hotel/public hot
tubs is sensitive to some chemical being used and isn't some nut case.
And if it were a rash caused by bacteria due to improper treatment,
why is it that this person has had it happen 30 times, while others,
like myself, have never had it happen? Geez...


All sensible, except I can swim all day long in OUTDOOR pools treated with
either bromine or chlorine, with no effect at all. Two dermatologists have
scratched their heads and said "I really don't know".