On Sep 19, 10:47*am, E Z Peaces wrote:
stan wrote:

Try top of Everest. About 28,000 feet hence reduced pressure.

149F, ouch! *Before deciding whether to climb Everest, I'll experiment
with 149F tea.

So water (pure water?) changes state (to steam/vapour) at certain
temps. and pressures, which are related. Right?

Water and ice change to vapor at all temperatures. *In some
circumstances, they don't change to vapor as fast as vapor changes to
water or ice.

Yep. Ice will go direct to vapor not passign through the 'water'
stage. Been over 50 years since my last chemisstry/physics classes.
'sublimation' sounds like the right term.

Harry K

harry k wrote:
On Sep 19, 10:47 am, E Z Peaces wrote:
stan wrote:

Try top of Everest. About 28,000 feet hence reduced pressure.

149F, ouch! Before deciding whether to climb Everest, I'll experiment
with 149F tea.

So water (pure water?) changes state (to steam/vapour) at certain
temps. and pressures, which are related. Right?

Water and ice change to vapor at all temperatures. In some
circumstances, they don't change to vapor as fast as vapor changes to
water or ice.

Yep. Ice will go direct to vapor not passign through the 'water'
stage. Been over 50 years since my last chemisstry/physics classes.
'sublimation' sounds like the right term.

Now you've got me going. In my case over 40 years so I should know better
but I cannot recall. There was a standard demonstration of this in the
chemistry class in senior school: ammonium something, I think.

Help!

"stan" wrote in message
...
On Sep 17, 8:02 pm, "Hustlin' Hank" wrote:
On Sep 17, 3:19 pm, harry k wrote:





On Sep 17, 3:34 am, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:33:48 -0700 (PDT), harry k

wrote:
On Sep 16, 5:59 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:39:11 GMT,

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:34:37 -0400, in alt.home.repair,
wrote:

That's why you need 212 degrees for a minimum of 20 minutes. You
won't
find any bacteria in a shower head that will survive that. Lower
temps
for shorter periods won't kill all of them.

Do you live right on the seacoast? At my inland altitude, water
boils at a
scant 204 degrees.

You can still heat it to 212 degrees, dopey.

Only in a sealed container dopey. You can't do it in an open pan.

Harry K

You are wrong. Water can be heated past the boiling point.

You could also, of course, heat oil to 500 degrees. That would kill
bacteria, too.

For that matter, if you think you can do it only using water by using
a pressure cooker, you still have a way of heating water to 212
degrees, don't you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My point (add it to the one on your head) is that you CANNOT, no
matter how you try heat water to 212 degrees in an open pan except at
sea-level...even then perhaps not depending on the barometer reading.

I would explain why to you but it would not sink in.

Harry K-

So, if water boils at 212 degrees (what I learned in elementary school
and relatively speaking), what temp is the steam that is produced?
211? 213? .....LOL

Hank- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Still puzzled by the "Boil your dishes at 212deg F for 20 minutes in
order to sanitize them"!
I'm heading towards 76 (at the moment) and the other night as we
washed the after supper dishes with my friends, medical couple; who
are respectively a) A medical doctor b) A registered nurse, we used
'hot' water, too hot to put hand under, for rinsing for some items and
had other dishes running through the dishwasher. But the hand dish
washing was certainly NOT at 212 deg or for 20 minutes.

Several days later now, I'm not sick nor have I ever been after dining
with them! I'd not like to be that sensitive as to have to boil my
dishes. But, based on the 21 for 20 mins; maybe it's wonder we are
still all alive?

That requirement sounds more like 'sterilization' than practical
domestic sanitation. The sort of standard that I hope a surgeon or
proctologist will insist upon if he's going inside me!

But also when I go to the dentist, these days one does not see the
tray of boiling dental tools/utensil that one once did!

Maybe it's all chemicals and UV lamps these days?????????

Hey maybe should install UV lamps (on timers) in our dish cupboards?

PS. Still not sick from our shower even though our boil water order
still in effect. (Something about a broken connection at the
chlorinator/pump house. I figured that for the first few days we were
still using previously chlorinated water anyway; you know 'exposure
times' etc.

reply: Holy crapola! Mine are lucky if they get 100 degrees for twenty
seconds. Food safety is more about leaving food at room temperature, and
other things, than washing. Yes, it does take some "sanitizing" or
"sterilizing" if your dinnerware gets infected with some botulism or
salmonella or e coli or any of the good stuff. But, unless one is a total
slob, normal food prep, watching highly dangerous foods (chicken, sushi, and
others you can Google), and prompt cleaning do more than needed for the
average germobliviousophobic person.

For all those others who need to do 212 for 20 minutes, I'm sure they're not
telling quite all the story. I've eaten in some of the worst places in the
world, eaten some stuff I wouldn't give my dog, and eaten some suspicious
stuff out of my own fridge, and I can only think of one time I think, but do
not know, I got food poisoning.

And if one does get a messed up stomach, the best cure I have found is
bananas and yogurt, and then a CHEESEBURGER!

YMM(and probably does)V

Steve

"stan" wrote in message
...
On Sep 17, 8:02 pm, "Hustlin' Hank" wrote:
On Sep 17, 3:19 pm, harry k wrote:





On Sep 17, 3:34 am, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:33:48 -0700 (PDT), harry k

wrote:
On Sep 16, 5:59 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:39:11 GMT,

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:34:37 -0400, in alt.home.repair,
wrote:

That's why you need 212 degrees for a minimum of 20 minutes. You
won't
find any bacteria in a shower head that will survive that. Lower
temps
for shorter periods won't kill all of them.

Do you live right on the seacoast? At my inland altitude, water
boils at a
scant 204 degrees.

You can still heat it to 212 degrees, dopey.

Only in a sealed container dopey. You can't do it in an open pan.

Harry K

You are wrong. Water can be heated past the boiling point.

You could also, of course, heat oil to 500 degrees. That would kill
bacteria, too.

For that matter, if you think you can do it only using water by using
a pressure cooker, you still have a way of heating water to 212
degrees, don't you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My point (add it to the one on your head) is that you CANNOT, no
matter how you try heat water to 212 degrees in an open pan except at
sealevel...even then perhaps not depending on the barometer reading.

I would explain why to you but it would not sink in.

Harry K-

So, if water boils at 212 degrees (what I learned in elementary school
and relatively speaking), what temp is the steam that is produced?
211? 213? .....LOL

Hank- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try top of Everest. About 28,000 feet hence reduced pressure.
And btw guess it's impossible to get a 'good cup of tea' at the ISS
(International space station)!
So water (pure water?) changes state (to steam/vapour) at certain
temps. and pressures, which are related. Right?

reply: PSSSSSSSSST! STAN! You are arguing with two of the most prolific
trolls on Usenet, Harry K and saltydog, two denizens of my killfile. Go
into your back yard and lecture a stump. You will get better results, and
soon realize you are wasting your time.

HTH

Like your posts.

Steve

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Tony wrote:


Not only are they creating antibiotic resistant bacteria, they are
weakening their immune system each time they use an antibiotic when not
really needed. I haven't taken an antibiotic in over 10-15 years. I
didn't need it. I let my body naturally build up antibodies to fight
the infection/illness... Each time I get sick and let my body cure
itself, my immune system gets stronger. Each time an antibiotic is used
your body misses another opportunity to strengthen it's immune system.

That is another theory as to the rise of autoimmune diseases. We
aggressively medicate with antibiotics, the immune system isn't needed
as much and goes out looking for something to do, attacking various
parts of us.

Could be. I'd like the law to target Dr's. who prescribe antibiotics
just to make the patient think he/she is getting the proper treatment.
It's partially the publics fault, if their dr. doesn't give them
antibiotics, they end up thinking he doesn't know his stuff and they
find a new Dr. It is amazing that people still think an antibiotic will
help cure the common cold.

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:29:27 -0400, aemeijers
wrote:

Phisherman wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:18:51 -0700 (PDT), terry
wrote:

Every week or so there is something 'in the news' that's unhealthy or
causes a risk to one's well-being! These items sometimes even get 15
seconds of coverage on some TV news spot! Musta been a slow news
night?

These 'studies' or findings are often presaged by such wording as 'A
recent study of 56,000 suburban families finds that ....... yada,
yada, .... "!

This week; it's bacteria contaminated shower heads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also with news "That some of these bacteria can 'resist' the
administration of household bleach!". Oh what a calamity! Cos I
occasionally bleach counter-tops and other areas and put wooden
cutting boards etc. into the dishwasher at high temps, immediately
after use!

But; not being paranoid or anything I unscrewed our shower head a few
minutes ago to NOT find any goopy green or black gelatinous mess of
creepy crawly bacteria (finding only one or two minute black stones at
the inlet). Perched it on the spout of the water kettle and boiled
steam (212 deg F) through it for two minutes (hoping the shower
insides haven't melted!).

Incidentally we are currently under a municipal 'Boil water' advisory
because a pipe broke at the local pumping and chlorination site. (Oh;
btw there's another substance, chlorine, that apparently was/is the
cause of asthma in many children ............... maybe that will be
next week's concern?

So reckon we are safe; eh? Now I have to clean the kettle!

Cheers


Not all bacteria is unsafe. In fact, eating yogurt regularly will
help keep the good bacteria in your body and can eliminate bad breath.
Not sure who dosn't turn on the shower before entering the shower, a
quart of water should flush out most of the creapy crawlers. Also
keep your water heater temperature no lower than 120 degrees F, else
you might get bad bacteria growth in your water tank.

Don't know about shower heads, but when I bought this place it had been
empty 6-8 months, and the bathroom sink spit out nasty-smelling black
water for a few minutes when first used. 2-3 minutes of full hot seemed
to clear it up.

I ain't losing any sleep over it. And I'm sure not replacing shower
heads quarterly, like one of the newspaper articles around here
suggested. I might soak it in CLR or something if it teakettles up on
me, in spite of the water softener. (My well water sucks, mineral-load wise)


Put your showerhead in a ziplock bag, fill with cheap vinegar, tie off
and soak overnight. Kills most bacteria and dissolves scale buildup.
The vinegar is a little more friendly (and less expensive) than CLR,
although it takes a few hours to work.

Phisherman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:29:27 -0400, aemeijers
wrote:

Phisherman wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:18:51 -0700 (PDT), terry
wrote:

Every week or so there is something 'in the news' that's unhealthy or
causes a risk to one's well-being! These items sometimes even get 15
seconds of coverage on some TV news spot! Musta been a slow news
night?

These 'studies' or findings are often presaged by such wording as 'A
recent study of 56,000 suburban families finds that ....... yada,
yada, .... "!

This week; it's bacteria contaminated shower heads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also with news "That some of these bacteria can 'resist' the
administration of household bleach!". Oh what a calamity! Cos I
occasionally bleach counter-tops and other areas and put wooden
cutting boards etc. into the dishwasher at high temps, immediately
after use!

But; not being paranoid or anything I unscrewed our shower head a few
minutes ago to NOT find any goopy green or black gelatinous mess of
creepy crawly bacteria (finding only one or two minute black stones at
the inlet). Perched it on the spout of the water kettle and boiled
steam (212 deg F) through it for two minutes (hoping the shower
insides haven't melted!).

Incidentally we are currently under a municipal 'Boil water' advisory
because a pipe broke at the local pumping and chlorination site. (Oh;
btw there's another substance, chlorine, that apparently was/is the
cause of asthma in many children ............... maybe that will be
next week's concern?

So reckon we are safe; eh? Now I have to clean the kettle!

Cheers

Not all bacteria is unsafe. In fact, eating yogurt regularly will
help keep the good bacteria in your body and can eliminate bad breath.
Not sure who dosn't turn on the shower before entering the shower, a
quart of water should flush out most of the creapy crawlers. Also
keep your water heater temperature no lower than 120 degrees F, else
you might get bad bacteria growth in your water tank.
Don't know about shower heads, but when I bought this place it had been
empty 6-8 months, and the bathroom sink spit out nasty-smelling black
water for a few minutes when first used. 2-3 minutes of full hot seemed
to clear it up.

I ain't losing any sleep over it. And I'm sure not replacing shower
heads quarterly, like one of the newspaper articles around here
suggested. I might soak it in CLR or something if it teakettles up on
me, in spite of the water softener. (My well water sucks, mineral-load wise)


Put your showerhead in a ziplock bag, fill with cheap vinegar, tie off
and soak overnight. Kills most bacteria and dissolves scale buildup.
The vinegar is a little more friendly (and less expensive) than CLR,
although it takes a few hours to work.

Besides, the vinegar will make your hair smell like a
salad and hot vegetarian chicks will be all over you.

TDD

On Sep 19, 2:50*pm, "SteveB" wrote:
"stan" wrote in message

...
On Sep 17, 8:02 pm, "Hustlin' Hank" wrote:





On Sep 17, 3:19 pm, harry k wrote:

On Sep 17, 3:34 am, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:33:48 -0700 (PDT), harry k

wrote:
On Sep 16, 5:59 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:39:11 GMT,

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:34:37 -0400, in alt.home.repair,
wrote:

That's why you need 212 degrees for a minimum of 20 minutes. You
won't
find any bacteria in a shower head that will survive that. Lower
temps
for shorter periods won't kill all of them.

Do you live right on the seacoast? At my inland altitude, water
boils at a
scant 204 degrees.

You can still heat it to 212 degrees, dopey.

Only in a sealed container dopey. You can't do it in an open pan.

Harry K

You are wrong. Water can be heated past the boiling point.

You could also, of course, heat oil to 500 degrees. That would kill
bacteria, too.

For that matter, if you think you can do it only using water by using
a pressure cooker, you still have a way of heating water to 212
degrees, don't you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My point (add it to the one on your head) is that you CANNOT, no
matter how you try heat water to 212 degrees in an open pan except at
sealevel...even then perhaps not depending on the barometer reading.

I would explain why to you but it would not sink in.

Harry K-

So, if water boils at 212 degrees (what I learned in elementary school
and relatively speaking), what temp is the steam that is produced?
211? 213? .....LOL

Hank- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try top of Everest. About 28,000 feet hence reduced pressure.
And btw guess it's impossible to get a 'good cup of tea' at the ISS
(International space station)!
So water (pure water?) changes state (to steam/vapour) at certain
temps. and pressures, which are related. Right?

reply: *PSSSSSSSSST! *STAN! *You are arguing with two of the most prolific
trolls on Usenet, Harry K and saltydog, two denizens of my killfile. *Go
into your back yard and lecture a stump. *You will get better results, and
soon realize you are wasting your time.

HTH

Like your posts.

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A troll? For pointing out known facts? Step on your toes did I?

Harry K

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:02:39 -0700 (PDT), "Hustlin' Hank"
wrote:

On Sep 17, 3:19?pm, harry k wrote:
On Sep 17, 3:34?am, wrote:





On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:33:48 -0700 (PDT), harry k

wrote:
On Sep 16, 5:59?pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:39:11 GMT,

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:34:37 -0400, in alt.home.repair, wrote:

That's why you need 212 degrees for a minimum of 20 minutes. You won't
find any bacteria in a shower head that will survive that. Lower temps
for shorter periods won't kill all of them.

Do you live right on the seacoast? ?At my inland altitude, water boils at a
scant 204 degrees.

You can still heat it to 212 degrees, dopey.

Only in a sealed container dopey. ?You can't do it in an open pan.

Harry K

You are wrong. Water can be heated past the boiling point.

You could also, of course, heat oil to 500 degrees. That would kill
bacteria, too.

For that matter, if you think you can do it only using water by using
a pressure cooker, you still have a way of heating water to 212
degrees, don't you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My point (add it to the one on your head) is that you CANNOT, no
matter how you try heat water to 212 degrees in an open pan except at
sealevel...even then perhaps not depending on the barometer reading.

I would explain why to you but it would not sink in.

Harry K-

So, if water boils at 212 degrees (what I learned in elementary school
and relatively speaking), what temp is the steam that is produced?
211? 213? .....LOL

Hank


At atmospheric pressure water boils at 212 F. Also, water freezes at
32. You can use these facts to check a thermometer for accuracy.

Check the phase diagram at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_transition

to see the various pressures in which water boils. There are
exceptions though. For example, superheated water can exist at
atmospheric pressure, well above 212 F. This can be a safety hazard,
especially clean water heated in a clean vessel may suddenly bump.
There is a lot to learn about water.

In article
,
harry k wrote:

On Sep 17, 10:23*pm, Smitty Two

Salty Dog knows, adding salt to water increases the boiling temperature.
Not too esoteric.

So would adding numerous other substances. That does not equal
boiling WATER.

Harry K

So if it isn't distilled water, it isn't water? Nuts.

On Sep 20, 6:27*am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article
,
*harry k wrote:

On Sep 17, 10:23*pm, Smitty Two

Salty Dog knows, adding salt to water increases the boiling temperature.
Not too esoteric.

So would adding numerous other substances. *That does not equal
boiling WATER.

Harry K

So if it isn't distilled water, it isn't water? Nuts.

Okay, rewrite all the physics and chemistry books then.

Harry K

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:28:00 -0400, Phisherman
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:02:39 -0700 (PDT), "Hustlin' Hank"
wrote:

On Sep 17, 3:19?pm, harry k wrote:
On Sep 17, 3:34?am, wrote:





On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:33:48 -0700 (PDT), harry k

wrote:
On Sep 16, 5:59?pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:39:11 GMT,

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:34:37 -0400, in alt.home.repair, wrote:

That's why you need 212 degrees for a minimum of 20 minutes. You won't
find any bacteria in a shower head that will survive that. Lower temps
for shorter periods won't kill all of them.

Do you live right on the seacoast? ?At my inland altitude, water boils at a
scant 204 degrees.

You can still heat it to 212 degrees, dopey.

Only in a sealed container dopey. ?You can't do it in an open pan.

Harry K

You are wrong. Water can be heated past the boiling point.

You could also, of course, heat oil to 500 degrees. That would kill
bacteria, too.

For that matter, if you think you can do it only using water by using
a pressure cooker, you still have a way of heating water to 212
degrees, don't you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My point (add it to the one on your head) is that you CANNOT, no
matter how you try heat water to 212 degrees in an open pan except at
sealevel...even then perhaps not depending on the barometer reading.

I would explain why to you but it would not sink in.

Harry K-

So, if water boils at 212 degrees (what I learned in elementary school
and relatively speaking), what temp is the steam that is produced?
211? 213? .....LOL

Hank


At atmospheric pressure water boils at 212 F. Also, water freezes at
32. You can use these facts to check a thermometer for accuracy.

Check the phase diagram at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_transition

to see the various pressures in which water boils. There are
exceptions though. For example, superheated water can exist at
atmospheric pressure, well above 212 F. This can be a safety hazard,
especially clean water heated in a clean vessel may suddenly bump.
There is a lot to learn about water.

A more accurate water phase diagram is he
http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html

As a reference:
101.3 kpa = 760mm = 1atm at see level.
100 C = 212 F = 373 K

In article ,
Yadda wrote:

But what about water pipes?
I would imagine buggers are there too.

I see a new service industry for homeowners popping up here, along the
lines of duct cleaning ...

In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Douglas Johnson wrote:



Now "antibacterial" on soap just means it's soap. ALL soap is
antibacterial.
Pure marketing hype.

-- Doug
Ah, thanks Doug. Goes to show you can't trust women. It was a PhD
microbiologist that told me that. She had a nice ass, so I believed her.

Doug is wrong. Your friend with the nice ass is correct

http://www.anapsid.org/dirtonsoap.html

That's a phenol.

OK, since Doug hasn't come back to the thread, I'm trusting Salty's
link, but I have to ask EZ what the hell phenol is and how it differs
from an antibiotic?

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Douglas Johnson wrote:


Now "antibacterial" on soap just means it's soap. ALL soap is
antibacterial.
Pure marketing hype.

-- Doug
Ah, thanks Doug. Goes to show you can't trust women. It was a PhD
microbiologist that told me that. She had a nice ass, so I believed her.
Doug is wrong. Your friend with the nice ass is correct

http://www.anapsid.org/dirtonsoap.html

That's a phenol.

OK, since Doug hasn't come back to the thread, I'm trusting Salty's
link, but I have to ask EZ what the hell phenol is and how it differs
from an antibiotic?

The term "antibiotic" was coined in 1942. It meant a compound produced
by a microorganism that would work against bacteria when highly diluted.

Phenols are produced chemically and have been around much longer. The
first was carbolic acid, used by Joseph Lister, who was killing germs
nearly a century before antibiotics.

In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Douglas Johnson wrote:


Now "antibacterial" on soap just means it's soap. ALL soap is
antibacterial.
Pure marketing hype.

-- Doug
Ah, thanks Doug. Goes to show you can't trust women. It was a PhD
microbiologist that told me that. She had a nice ass, so I believed her.
Doug is wrong. Your friend with the nice ass is correct

http://www.anapsid.org/dirtonsoap.html

That's a phenol.

OK, since Doug hasn't come back to the thread, I'm trusting Salty's
link, but I have to ask EZ what the hell phenol is and how it differs
from an antibiotic?

The term "antibiotic" was coined in 1942. It meant a compound produced
by a microorganism that would work against bacteria when highly diluted.

Phenols are produced chemically and have been around much longer. The
first was carbolic acid, used by Joseph Lister, who was killing germs
nearly a century before antibiotics.

Hmm, interesting. So you're saying that "antibacterial" dish soaps use
phenols rather than antibiotics? Does that make them more benign in
terms of encouraging bacteria to mutate into resistant forms?

wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:58:09 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Douglas Johnson wrote:

Now "antibacterial" on soap just means it's soap. ALL soap is
antibacterial.
Pure marketing hype.

-- Doug
Ah, thanks Doug. Goes to show you can't trust women. It was a PhD
microbiologist that told me that. She had a nice ass, so I believed her.
Doug is wrong. Your friend with the nice ass is correct

http://www.anapsid.org/dirtonsoap.html

That's a phenol.
OK, since Doug hasn't come back to the thread, I'm trusting Salty's
link, but I have to ask EZ what the hell phenol is and how it differs
from an antibiotic?
The term "antibiotic" was coined in 1942. It meant a compound produced
by a microorganism that would work against bacteria when highly diluted.

Phenols are produced chemically and have been around much longer. The
first was carbolic acid, used by Joseph Lister, who was killing germs
nearly a century before antibiotics.
Hmm, interesting. So you're saying that "antibacterial" dish soaps use
phenols rather than antibiotics? Does that make them more benign in
terms of encouraging bacteria to mutate into resistant forms?

It's a nitpick between the term antibiotic and antibacterial. See
also, "Pedant"

Yes, some bacteria have mutated and become resistant to Triclosan
because of it's widespread use in consumer cleaning products.



Know that this reminds me of?

Smitty Two says somebody told him New York muggers have begun wearing
body armor because so man New Yorkers carry guns. Douglas Johnson says
New Yorkers haven't carried guns in years, but their karate is effective
against muggers. You send a link about a New Yorker with a knife. I
point out that knives aren't guns. You call me a pedant.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:21:05 -0400, E Z Peaces
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:58:09 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Douglas Johnson wrote:

Now "antibacterial" on soap just means it's soap. ALL soap is
antibacterial.
Pure marketing hype.

-- Doug
Ah, thanks Doug. Goes to show you can't trust women. It was a PhD
microbiologist that told me that. She had a nice ass, so I believed her.
Doug is wrong. Your friend with the nice ass is correct

http://www.anapsid.org/dirtonsoap.html

That's a phenol.
OK, since Doug hasn't come back to the thread, I'm trusting Salty's
link, but I have to ask EZ what the hell phenol is and how it differs
from an antibiotic?
The term "antibiotic" was coined in 1942. It meant a compound produced
by a microorganism that would work against bacteria when highly diluted.

Phenols are produced chemically and have been around much longer. The
first was carbolic acid, used by Joseph Lister, who was killing germs
nearly a century before antibiotics.
Hmm, interesting. So you're saying that "antibacterial" dish soaps use
phenols rather than antibiotics? Does that make them more benign in
terms of encouraging bacteria to mutate into resistant forms?

It's a nitpick between the term antibiotic and antibacterial. See
also, "Pedant"

Yes, some bacteria have mutated and become resistant to Triclosan
because of it's widespread use in consumer cleaning products.



Know that this reminds me of?

Smitty Two says somebody told him New York muggers have begun wearing
body armor because so man New Yorkers carry guns. Douglas Johnson says
New Yorkers haven't carried guns in years, but their karate is effective
against muggers. You send a link about a New Yorker with a knife. I
point out that knives aren't guns. You call me a pedant.

Q.E.D.

In article ,
E Z Peaces wrote:

Know that this reminds me of?

Smitty Two says somebody

Not just "somebody." It was a chick with a nice ass, remember? That's
gotta be germane.


told him New York muggers have begun wearing
body armor because so man New Yorkers carry guns. Douglas Johnson says
New Yorkers haven't carried guns in years, but their karate is effective
against muggers. You send a link about a New Yorker with a knife. I
point out that knives aren't guns. You call me a pedant.

wrote:

: 212 degrees for 20 minutes. You can call whatever you do, whatever you
: prefer. It doesn't kill all the bacteria. It's usually the tougher
: bacteria you need to kill. Wiping your cutting board with a dry paper
: towel kills/removes some bacteria, too.

Can you point to a single example of someone who's gotten seriously ill from the bacteria in their showerheads?
Or, better, a properly controlled study reaching statistical significance?

The world, including the skin all over your body, is teeming with bacteria.
If you tried to kill them all,

a) you couldn't
b) you shouldn't
c) you might increas the chances of making a favorable environment for a dangerous
bacterium.

-- Andy Barss (also drinks tap water)