Good Lifestyle

Hand disinfectant is a daily staple for parents on the layer layer,commuters Who held these handle bars rarely cleaned on buses and metros and many other people between the two. In fact, according to the global information societyNdSales of hand disinfectants in the United States recorded 37% of 2017 to 2018 only. And although it is perfectly well to turn to this product in a last resort, you should not opt ​​for hand disinfecting onwash one's hands In the sink if there is clean water and soap at your disposal.

Upon arrival, there is a reason why most hand disinfecting companies do not claim killing 100% of germs and bacteria: because they do not do it. Keep reading to discover some of the viruses and germs that you leave on your hands every time you opt for hand disinfecting instead of soap and water.

According toDisease and Prevention Control Centers (CDC)Norovirus is a "very contagious virus" that can be spread by direct contact, food or contaminated drinks and contaminated surfaces. And while caring for your hands carefully (and your product) is a good way to make sure that your safety, the use of an alcohol-based hand disinfectant is not as effective.

In a 2011 study published in theAmerican newspaper for infection controlResearchers analyzed data from health departments in three states and found that facilities that rely on the hand detainee were more likely to undergo an epidemic of norovirus than those that favored handwashing.

Although HPV is mainly considered a sexually transmitted infection, individuals can always contract the non-sexual disease, including by childbirth, kissing, layer changes and other forms of narrow contact, according to a study 2017 published inThe Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Research. And unfortunately, it is a disinfectant of the viral hand simply can not touch.

In fact, according to a 2014 study published in theAntimicrobial Chemotherapy Journal, disinfectants used in hand disinfecting "do nothing to prevent the spread of human papillomavirus", as study authorCraig Meyers noted in aPress release.

Giardia is a microscopic parasite that causes poor diarrheal disease called giardiosis. Although people most often get a giardiasis of a contaminated water supply or a source of food, it is equally possible to contract the contact disease in person to person if someone has microscopic quantities of material fecal on their hands. And do not think that the use of the hand disinfectant will erase your hands of this parasite; according toMAYO Clinic, alcohol-based disinfectants are an inefficientprecautionary measure Against the cysts responsible for the transmission of Giardia.

If you want to avoid dealing with thePainful symptoms and Diseases associated with Clostridium difficult (C. Difficult) -A type of bacterium capable of causing diarrhea to the colitis, then you will want to wash your hands rather than relying on the disinfectant. A 2009 study published in the journalControl of hospital infections and epidemiologyTested the effectiveness of several different hand washing methods to eliminate C. difficile particles. The researchers found that the use of alcohol-based rubbish friction was as inefficient as nothing at all. Conversely, lukewarm water with ordinary soap has proved to be the most effective method for eliminating bacteria.

Ara H1 is one of the most common allergens found in peanuts, which means that people with a peanutallergy need to avoid it at all costs. Unfortunately, when people use a hand disinfectant instead of soap to wash after touching peanut products, Ara H1 is frequently on their skin. It is according to a 2004 study published in theAllergy and Clinical Immunology Journal, who found that about 50% of the subjects that used a disinfectant of the hands after touching peanut butter still had traces of Ara H1 on their palms.

As a study authorRobert A. Wood, M.D., explained in aPress releaseThese vitinations do not eliminate the allergen, but "spread" instead.

Cryptosporidium Parvum (C. Parvum) is a parasite type that causes cryptosporidiosis, a disease inducing diarrhea, in the intestinal tract. And using a hand disinfectant will not rid your dirty palms of this infectious agent.

In a historical study of 1999 published in the journalGastrointestinal endoscopyOnly two of the newest tested disinfectants were able to inactivate the parasite. "Most high-level disinfectants ... have limited effectiveness against C. Parvum," concluded the authors of the study.

Even ifYour doctor Use all hand disinfectants in the world, they could still be around bacteria as Enterococcus Faecium (E. faecium) carriers, which can affect the health of everything from your bladder to yourheart. Although the disinfectants for the hands of alcohol we thought to guard against many germs, it is, they are not a match for Enterococcus Faecium.

A 2018 study published in the journalTranslational Science Medicine Tested the tolerance of several E. faecium strains against hand disinfectant and found that samples taken between 2010 and 2015 have been 10 times more resistant to the product its so-called-disinfecting effects than those collected between 1997 and 2010.

As recently as the early 1950s, before the generalization of the vaccine, the poliovirus was responsible for the paralysis of more than 15,000 people each year in the United States, according to theCDC. And with the polio back to the countries where it had already been eradicated (includingWorld Health OrganizationPapua-News-reported epidemic Guinea Police in 2018), people are desperate ways to reduce the spread of the virus. Unfortunately, it is a disease that disinfectants for alcohol-based hands do not protect against. Since poliovirus is a type of unveloped virus that can last longer in the environment, so it is very contagious.

So, how do we know that disinfectants for typical hands do not work against poliovirus? Well, when researchersDental College of Georgia compared the effectiveness of their disinfectant for the hands of green tea against that of alcohol-based disinfectants in 2016, they found thattheir green tea product was 100 times more effective in immobilizing-1 antipoliomyelitis than is currently mandatory. In addition to this, two disinfectants for frequently used hands tested have been less effective in reducing the potential of the virus to infect others.

MRSM or Staphylococcus Aureus Resistant to Methicillin, is a type of bacteria that can cause potentially fatal infections. And, as its name suggests, these infections do not respond to methicillin. However, this is not the only reason you have to fear the SARM. Although some disinfectants for hands claim to protect against bacteria, theUS Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned against back in 2011 that "these statements are not proven. »

"Consumers are misleading if they think these products you can buy in a drug store or other locations will protect them from potentially fatal infection," notedDeborah Author, Director of Compliance with the FDA Medicines Assessment and Research Center.

Pseudomonas Aeruginosa (P. Aeruginosa) is a rod-shaped bacterium that can cause all ear infections to pneumonia. Although we have proven effective against, others are much less powerful brands a hand. In a study published in the 2018Clinical Case Reports Journal, For example, disinfectant for the hands-a hand disinfectant that the claims of killing 99.9 percent of the germs was considered insufficient a line of defense against P. aeruginosa. As for this type of bacteria, hand disinfecting a total Toss-up, so it's better just to wash your hands so and when you come into contact with it.

Do not hand in hand for sanitizer protecting you against Staphylococcus (S. Epidermidis). In the same 2018 study of theClinical Case Reports JournalThe researchers found that, of the five alcohol-based disinfectants, they tested, only three were able to inhibit the growth of S. epidermidis. In other words, if you had to go to the store right now and buy a random bottle of hand disinfectant in hand without looking at the name of the brand, you would have a 40 percent chance to buy one that does not protect Not against this bacterium.

If you are all familiar with the E. coli bacterium, that theCDC Linked to five deaths in the United States at an epidemic 2018, then you already know that you want to avoid at all costs. However, the use of the hand is disinfectant for the hands is not enough to rid the hands of this germ, especially if you work in an environment where you are in regular contact with raw food.

By a 2016 meta-analysis published in theJournal of Food Protection, The reduction of E. coli obtained by disinfectant for the hands is "always lower than that obtained with water and soap. In addition, when researchers fromProcter & GambleSingle soap tested, disinfecting hands and a combination of the two people who had just manipulated the raw chicken and beef, they found that clear soap was more effective in eliminating the threat of E. coli. And for more useful health tips, check Exactly how far you have to get up from someone from sick to avoid getting the flu .

To discover more incredible secrets about the life of your best life, Click here To follow you on Instagram!