|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs
dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
Dave wrote:
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave What's 'Screen'? Whatever it is, it doesn't kill 100% of bacteria - it might come close to it, under lab tests, like all the others making the claim of 99.99%, but as I said, this is under lab conditions - in the home, you would be lucky to achieve 60-80%, but it's all ******** anyway, your food is covered in bacteria, unless you soak it in domestos first, and there are more bacteria in the body than there are human cells, so you could say we are just a collection of bacteria that has managed to walk upright and tell jokes. -- Phil L RSRL Tipster Of The Year 2008 |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 24/12/2010 16:44, Dave wrote:
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave It means that they're a waste of time - 'cos it's the remaining 0.1% which are the virulent ones which kill *you*! g -- Cheers, Roger ____________ Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom checked. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 24, 5:19 pm, Halmyre wrote:
In article , says... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? I think it's because the manufacturer has no way of proving 100% killed, or something like that. more cynically, I reckon it's so no one can sue the b@stards when they've relied on any "100% kill" claim. Merry Xmas Jim K |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 24/12/2010 18:29, Roger Mills wrote:
On 24/12/2010 16:44, Dave wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave It means that they're a waste of time - 'cos it's the remaining 0.1% which are the virulent ones which kill *you*! g Hee hee. You've got a point. The ones that survive are the ones that are most resistant to the glog. They pass that on to the next generation etc. Just like anti-biotics. Then 'We're doomed, Captain Mainwaring, we're doomed!'. Peter Scott |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
"Dave" wrote in message ... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave IIRC it is (or at least used to be) 99.9% of KNOWN germs. So it was always the unknown germs that used to worry me. Merry festive season of choice to you all Dave R |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
"David WE Roberts" wrote in message ... "Dave" wrote in message ... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave IIRC it is (or at least used to be) 99.9% of KNOWN germs. So it was always the unknown germs that used to worry me. Merry festive season of choice to you all Oh, and does it kill the other 0.1% undead, so your kitchen surfaces are haunted by the living dead? I feel a B movie script coming on... |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember John Rumm saying something like: More to the point, is there a way of killing them other than dead? I expect these are the same people who say "foot-pedal". and "for free" Those would be the same ****s in ad agencies who invite people to pre-register. Shooting's too good for 'em. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 12/24/2010 7:17 PM, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember John Rumm saying something like: More to the point, is there a way of killing them other than dead? I expect these are the same people who say "foot-pedal". and "for free" Those would be the same ****s in ad agencies who invite people to pre-register. Shooting's too good for 'em. And the people who 'pre-prepare' food. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 24, 11:00*pm, "David WE Roberts"
wrote: "David WE Roberts" wrote in ... "Dave" wrote in message ... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave IIRC it is (or at least used to be) 99.9% of KNOWN germs. So it was always the unknown germs that used to worry me. Merry festive season of choice to you all Oh, and does it kill the other 0.1% undead, so your kitchen surfaces are haunted by the living dead? I feel a B movie script coming on... Actually, it's the ad campaign that's come back from the dead. The "Kills 99% of household germs" advert for product "A" appeared on TV at least 20-30 years ago. a few weeks later, product "B" started advertising "Kills ALL known germs". I thought the story was told to trainee advertising executives as a lesson in not underselling your product (or being too honest), but maybe training isn't what it used to be. Chris |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember saying something like: Actually, it's the ad campaign that's come back from the dead. The "Kills 99% of household germs" advert for product "A" appeared on TV at least 20-30 years ago. a few weeks later, product "B" started advertising "Kills ALL known germs". I thought the story was told to trainee advertising executives as a lesson in not underselling your product (or being too honest), but maybe training isn't what it used to be. Doesn't matter what it's called, it still tastes like bleach. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 24/12/2010 17:07, Phil L wrote:
Dave wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave What's 'Screen'? It is an acidic cleaner used in hospitals and the school I used to work at. It claims to kill MRSA and another hospital bug I can't bring to my alcohol washed brain at the moment. I can see why you asked the question about what is it. I can't pick the product up on google. Dave |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 24/12/2010 18:29, Roger Mills wrote:
On 24/12/2010 16:44, Dave wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave It means that they're a waste of time - 'cos it's the remaining 0.1% which are the virulent ones which kill *you*! g We have been here before in the old super bug thread, when it was decided to let the normal bugs compete with the super bugs and kill off their supply of food. Dave |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 25, 5:44 am, Dave wrote:
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? You can kill all germs with Aqua Regia. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
"Matty F" wrote in message
... On Dec 25, 5:44 am, Dave wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? You can kill all germs with Aqua Regia. Talking of Domestos - why are there different coloured bottles? The gloop seems to come out the same colour. Perhaps it bleaches itself. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 26/12/2010 09:38, Matty F wrote:
On Dec 25, 5:44 am, wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? You can kill all germs with Aqua Regia. Jeez I wouldn't like to be in the same room as that, let alone use it on a work top Dave |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 24, 4:44*pm, Dave wrote:
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave IRL you wont get a continuous film of product, and germ kill rates will be far lower. NT |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On 26/12/2010 20:12, Skipweasel wrote:
In , says... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? The approvals standard with which bleaches and such things have to comply requires that 99% of the sample population of bugs be dead after certain time at a certain concentration. Of course, in most cases this is exceeded, but the rules state 99% minimum, and that's what they're rated at. Understood Thanks Dave |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
"Dave" wrote in message ... On 26/12/2010 09:38, Matty F wrote: On Dec 25, 5:44 am, wrote: I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? You can kill all germs with Aqua Regia. Jeez I wouldn't like to be in the same room as that, let alone use it on a work top Dave IIRC Aqua Regia is just a combination of acids which dissolves the noble metals such as gold and silver. Wikipedia says Nitric and Hydrochloric. which sounds right. Mind you, Wikipedia says 'fuming' and "concentrated" so that could be a bit dodgy to be near. Oh, and it rapidly decomposes and loses its effectiveness. So probably not good on a work top. Did I mention the guy who invented a universal solvent then couldn't find anything to keep it in? |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 24, 4:44*pm, Dave wrote:
I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave Nothing kills all Germs. Germs is an inexact term, means nothing. Bacteria can be killed by chemicals or heat or radiation. Some bacteria, when life becomes difficult, turn into a spore (almost like hibernating) and are then very hard to kill. Tetanus and gangrene for example which is why they are so serious. Disinfecting kills non-sporing organisms. Sterilising kills, theoretically, all life. Pasteurising kills targeted organisms. However with all forms of streilisation there is a "death curve" (time versus the process) which never reaches zero. ie some will always escape. Household disinfectants are pretty ineffective and what effect they have lasts only a short time. Phenol based ones can be dangerous as they oxidise to something that supports some bacteria. They should be washed off after use. Chlorine base dones cease to be effective when they have evaporated. They are totally ineffective on dirty surfaces. Most are a complete waste of money, better effects can be achieved by cleaning with normal household cleaners. There are no short cuts. But there's plenty of ******** out there. The very idea that you can kill all bacteria is ridiculous. We need some to live. 20% of garden soil is bacteria. 10% of your wieght is bacteria. You are covered in them inside and out. Your house is full of them. The air is filled with them. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 24, 10:54*pm, "David WE Roberts"
wrote: "Dave" wrote in message ... I keep seeing adverts that state that the product kills 99.9% of germs dead. What can't we have a product that kills them all, like Screen? Dave IIRC it is (or at least used to be) 99.9% of KNOWN germs. So it was always the unknown germs that used to worry me. Merry festive season of choice to you all Dave R 99.999% of "germs" are unknown. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In article
, harry wrote: [snip sensible comments] The very idea that you can kill all bacteria is ridiculous. We need some to live. The main reason MRSA is a modern hospital problem is because anti-biotics have killed off other bugs that would normally keep MRSA under control 20% of garden soil is bacteria. 10% of your wieght is bacteria. You are covered in them inside and out. Your house is full of them. The air is filled with them. .. . .and many of them are responsible for keeping you healthy without having to buy them in yoghurt drinks -- John Mulrooney NOTE Email address IS correct but might not be checked for a while. A person who is not forgotten is not dead |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Dec 27, 12:52*pm, JTM wrote:
In article , * *harry wrote: [snip sensible comments] The very idea that you can kill all bacteria is ridiculous. We need some to live. The main reason MRSA is a modern hospital problem is because anti-biotics have killed off other bugs that *would normally keep MRSA under control 20% of garden soil is bacteria. 10% of your wieght is bacteria. You are covered in them inside and out. Your house is full of them. The air is filled with them. . . .and many of them are responsible for keeping you healthy without having to buy them in yoghurt drinks -- *John Mulrooney NOTE Email address IS correct but might not be checked for a while. A person who is not forgotten is not dead The main reason for the likes of MRSA and Cdifficul is the indiscriminate use of antibiotics in the past. Also th failure of people to complete their antibiotic courses, so leaving behind the survivor bacteria which thus gradually built up their resistance. However we are/were discussing household "disinfectants". |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In article 50f59d24-0640-46da-9493-
, says... The main reason for the likes of MRSA and Cdifficul is the indiscriminate use of antibiotics in the past. Past? We're still feeding antibiotics to farm animals on a regular basis - i.e. not as part of a treatment for a current ailment. -- Skipweasel - never knowingly understood. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In message , Skipweasel
writes In article 50f59d24-0640-46da-9493- , says... The main reason for the likes of MRSA and Cdifficul is the indiscriminate use of antibiotics in the past. Past? We're still feeding antibiotics to farm animals on a regular basis - i.e. not as part of a treatment for a current ailment. Continual feeding is one thing, not taking a complete course to totally wipe out an infection is another -- geoff |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In message , Skipweasel
writes In article , says... Past? We're still feeding antibiotics to farm animals on a regular basis - i.e. not as part of a treatment for a current ailment. Continual feeding is one thing, not taking a complete course to totally wipe out an infection is another Ah - that may actually be rather misleading. Not when there's a dish of them on the table and you just pop one when you feel unwell - seen it many times in Asia -- geoff |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In message , Skipweasel
writes In article , says... [antibiotics] Not when there's a dish of them on the table and you just pop one when you feel unwell - seen it many times in Asia Now that's jsut plain wrong. Lived there, have you? -- geoff |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 20:10:03 +0000, geoff wrote:
In message , Skipweasel writes In article , says... Past? We're still feeding antibiotics to farm animals on a regular basis - i.e. not as part of a treatment for a current ailment. Continual feeding is one thing, not taking a complete course to totally wipe out an infection is another Ah - that may actually be rather misleading. Not when there's a dish of them on the table and you just pop one when you feel unwell - seen it many times in Asia I read that as Asda. -- Frank Erskine |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
|
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
In message , Skipweasel
writes In article , says... Not when there's a dish of them on the table and you just pop one when you feel unwell - seen it many times in Asia Now that's jsut plain wrong. Lived there, have you? Sorry, just re-read that. I mean wrong as in "They shouldn't be doing that", not "You're mistaken, no such thing happens." Yes, well, it's a bit like having a tub of sweeties in the middle of the table, as you say, totally wrong, but there's nothing better to build up yer average bacterium's resistance -- geoff |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
Dave wrote:
What's 'Screen'? It is an acidic cleaner used in hospitals and the school I used to work at. It claims to kill MRSA and another hospital bug I can't bring to my alcohol washed brain at the moment. That doesn't mean that it kills all germs. It's not even a particularly effective biocide. It is, however, yet another product trading on ignorance and fear. |
why only 99.9% of germs dead?
Phil L wrote:
but it's all ******** anyway, your food is covered in bacteria, unless you soak it in domestos first, and there are more bacteria in the body than there are human cells, so you could say we are just a collection of bacteria that has managed to walk upright and tell jokes. The reasons for stating the last is because it's more or less an accurate portrayal of any eukaryote. The more one studies eukaryotic cells the more they look like a bunch of bacteria that have struck a truce and agreed to work together. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter