Páginas
▼
miércoles, 17 de diciembre de 2014
Cleaning Electronics Does Not Have to be Shocking!
Cleaning Electronics Does Not Have to be Shocking!: The importance of detergent selection and its role in process optimization will be reviewed as it applies to critical cleaning. Cleaning validation in the electronics industry will also be reviewed.
martes, 19 de agosto de 2014
viernes, 1 de agosto de 2014
SALMONELLA and DISINFECTANTS
Study: Salmonella Biofilms Resistant To Powerful Disinfectants
A National University of Ireland - Galway researcher has discovered the difficulties of removing salmonella after it was adhered to a surface for about a week, the university reports. The study was published in the Journal of Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
Microbiologist, Mary Corcoran, attempted to kill salmonella biofilms on various hard surfaces with three different types of disinfectants — even soaking the bacteria in disinfectant for 1.5 hours — but found the germs' viability unaffected by the chemical. Corocoran looked at the habits of salmonella biofilm on glass, stainless steel, glazed tile, concrete and plastic. It showed the biofilm of salmonella grows over time, and more firmly attaches to surfaces.
The study is considered a warning to food processing plants and other food services, who can not detect the bacteria before it has an opportunity to form biofilm on a surface.
"Food processing facilities must take strict care to keep salmonella out fo the clean areas where cooked foods get further processing and packaged, and ask whether disinfectants that are promoted as killing various types of bacteria are really as effective as claimed," Corcoran said. She added that good cleaning and appropriate food handling practices (such as regular hand washing) remained the best preventative measure to salmonella-induced illnesses.
The three disinfectants used against salmonella included sodium hypochorite (household bleach), sodium hydroxide, and benzalkonium chloride.
- See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/news/article.asp?id=16742&email=emalaguti@chemtron.com#sthash.6sJl2wJR.dpuf
The three disinfectants used against salmonella included sodium hypochorite (household bleach), sodium hydroxide, and benzalkonium chloride.
NEW BACTERICIDAL SURFACE
Next Generation: Bactericidal Surface
A synthetic material covered in nano-spikes resembling those found on insect wings is an effective killer of diverse microbes.
By Jef Akst | November 26, 2013
“If it’s manufacturable, if it’s transferable to other surfaces and fabrics, it could be a major breakthrough,” said Stephen Kelly, a nanoparticle researcher at the U.K.’s University of Hull who was not involved in the research. “It’s interesting in itself in that it clarifies that you can have mechanical effects to kill bacteria, but more importantly, it offers the potential for antibacterial surfaces which will kill a whole range of different kinds of bugs.”
What’s new: Nanoparticles with antimicrobial effects have long been used to coat materials in clinical settings. “Bedding in hospitals, nurses uniforms, or bandages, you can make them antibacterial, soaking them in silver nitrate,” Kelly explained. But it was unclear whether the nanoparticles worked by some sort of chemical effect, with ions diffusing from the nanoparticles to the bacteria, or by physically distorting the cell wall and breaking open the cell. “The actual mode of antibacterial action of nanoparticles has been disputed for a long time,” Kelly said.
Now, microbiologist Elena Ivanova of Swinburne University of Technology in Australia and her colleagues have shown that certain nanostructures can indeed kill based on texture alone. The group had previously demonstrated that cicada wings (Psaltoda claripennis), which are covered in dense nanopillar structures, were highly lethal to the opportunistic human pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and provided evidence to suggest that the wings’ biochemical properties were not responsible. “We showed that bactericidal nature of the wing is due to the mechanical rapture of bacterial cells,” Ivanova told The Scientist in an e-mail.
“This [study] seems to state clearly that this is a mechanical effect and that you can have a very efficient antibacterial effect of a surface, which is just based on deformation of the cell wall, just stressing the cell well,” Kelly said. “It’s really novel.”
Importance: In the face of ever-evolving multidrug-resistant microbes, and with an insufficient antibiotic pipeline, an antibacterial surface could be just what the doctor ordered. “This opens the avenue of developing surfaces which have very strong antibacterial effects to kill of bacteria which are becoming resistant to all the known antibacterial agents,” said Kelly, who suspects it would be difficult for bacteria to evolve structural resistance to black silicon. “They would have to develop much thicker cell walls, which are flexible and permeable. That would be a real challenge.”
Furthermore, Kelly added, a synthetic surface has the advantage over antimicrobial nanoparticles in that it will not result in the release of nanoparticles into the environment. “Because you’re changing the surface, then it’s not getting into the ecosystem in any way.”
Needs improvement: The critical limitation to black silicon’s bacteria-fighting power is cost. The ion-beam technology used to make the material is “fairly expensive,” Kelly said, “and not generally applicable to common, cheap surfaces.” In contrast, the demand for new antimicrobial products “is a fairly low-cost, high-volume market,” he noted. “So I think manufacturability and scalability [are] the key questions.”
In the meantime, Ivanova and her colleagues “plan to explore a range of other materials [whose] surfaces maybe suitable for fabrication similar structural nano-patterns to create surfaces free from bacteria,” she said.
E.P. Ivanova et al., “Bactericidal activity of black silicon,” Nature Communications, 10.1038/ncomms3838, 2013.
DRUG TEST
Portable Lab Quickly Spots Cocaine in Urine
Tue, 07/08/2014 - 7:00am
ACS
Aaron Wheeler and colleagues explain that the current two-stage system of testing urine for drugs of abuse is expensive and time-consuming. The samples also could get lost or compromised while in transport. The ideal solution, they say, is to skip the prescreening step and instead bring the lab to the site — but in an easy-to-use, portable package. Currently, when samples arrive at labs for confirmation testing, trained technicians use a “gold-standard” method, relying on sample processing, liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry to analyze them. Small versions of instruments that implement these techniques can provide results at or near lab-quality, but they haven’t been optimized and tested together as a single, portable instrument. Wheeler’s team set out to do just that.
They put together a compact system that can do all the steps — extracting drugs of abuse from urine with a microfluidic device coupled to a small mass spectrometer that can identify the substances. The backpack-sized instrument could analyze cocaine, benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) and codeine in four samples in less than 15 minutes. The amount of cocaine they could detect was compatible with limits set by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The researchers say the device could be used for many different kinds of tests in which laboratory-quality results are needed quickly.
The authors acknowledge funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada and the U.S.National Science Foundation.
martes, 22 de julio de 2014
How Waterless Urinals Work
How Waterless Urina
- 3
- inShare
A standard urinal uses water to flush the urine into a pipe known as a “P-trap.” The shape of this pipe, which is not unlike the ones installed under most sinks in restrooms and kitchens, creates a water seal that prevents sewer gases from escaping into the restroom.
“Plumbing code states you can have a certain amount of liquid between people in the bathroom and sewer gases,” Schneringer explains.
Unlike standard urinals, however, waterless urinal pipes are installed on a downward pitch to allow the urine to flow naturally to a central discharge pipe or into the main sewer line. If there are urine puddles in the urinal, then the pipe may be installed incorrectly. To prevent sewer gases and urine odors from entering the restroom, waterless urinals require a cartridge to be securely inserted into the urinal drain.
When urine flows into the cartridge, it acts as a funnel using gravity to pull the urine into the drain opening and into the facility’s plumbing system. The cartridge further contains a liquid sealant — a buoyant fluid that floats to the top of the cartridge as urine enters and overflows the contraption — that serves as a barrier between urine, sewer lines and the restroom. Ultimately, this sealant helps to prevent urine malodors.
The common “ammonia” smell that is often found in commercial restrooms is the result of a chemical reaction between urine and water. To make matters worse, the water that is left behind after flushing remains on the surface of the urinal, and becomes a breeding ground for germs and bacteria. With waterless urinals, the only fluid to hit the surface of the unit is urine — generally a sterile substance — which drains and evaporates from the surface leaving it dry shortly after use.
“The longevity of the sealant liquid depends on traffic of the facility. In an airport or mall the sealant would need to be changed on a more frequent basis,” Schneringer says. “If the sealant depletes or accidently gets flushed down the drain too fast, or if the sealant is not present, the sewer gas comes up through the pipes. This is what causes the unpleasant fragrance.”
According to manufacturers, cartridges need only to be changed out three to four times a year, or after roughly 1,500 uses. And since regular irrigation isn’t required for these urinals, there is no water “turbulence,” aka the plummage of water and microbes sent into the air following flushing.
These devices also hold urine sentiment — otherwise known as urinal scale, sludge or calcification — the buildup of which can be a main source of restroom piping issues leading to expensive sewer maintenance costs.
- See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/cp/article/How-Waterless-Urinals-Work--17238?source=focuson7/22/2014#sthash.NHgyQPpz.dpuf
“Plumbing code states you can have a certain amount of liquid between people in the bathroom and sewer gases,” Schneringer explains.
Unlike standard urinals, however, waterless urinal pipes are installed on a downward pitch to allow the urine to flow naturally to a central discharge pipe or into the main sewer line. If there are urine puddles in the urinal, then the pipe may be installed incorrectly. To prevent sewer gases and urine odors from entering the restroom, waterless urinals require a cartridge to be securely inserted into the urinal drain.
When urine flows into the cartridge, it acts as a funnel using gravity to pull the urine into the drain opening and into the facility’s plumbing system. The cartridge further contains a liquid sealant — a buoyant fluid that floats to the top of the cartridge as urine enters and overflows the contraption — that serves as a barrier between urine, sewer lines and the restroom. Ultimately, this sealant helps to prevent urine malodors.
The common “ammonia” smell that is often found in commercial restrooms is the result of a chemical reaction between urine and water. To make matters worse, the water that is left behind after flushing remains on the surface of the urinal, and becomes a breeding ground for germs and bacteria. With waterless urinals, the only fluid to hit the surface of the unit is urine — generally a sterile substance — which drains and evaporates from the surface leaving it dry shortly after use.
“The longevity of the sealant liquid depends on traffic of the facility. In an airport or mall the sealant would need to be changed on a more frequent basis,” Schneringer says. “If the sealant depletes or accidently gets flushed down the drain too fast, or if the sealant is not present, the sewer gas comes up through the pipes. This is what causes the unpleasant fragrance.”
According to manufacturers, cartridges need only to be changed out three to four times a year, or after roughly 1,500 uses. And since regular irrigation isn’t required for these urinals, there is no water “turbulence,” aka the plummage of water and microbes sent into the air following flushing.
These devices also hold urine sentiment — otherwise known as urinal scale, sludge or calcification — the buildup of which can be a main source of restroom piping issues leading to expensive sewer maintenance costs.
martes, 8 de julio de 2014
QUICK DRUG TEST
Portable Lab Quickly Spots Cocaine in Urine
Tue, 07/08/2014 - 7:00am
ACS
Aaron Wheeler and colleagues explain that the current two-stage system of testing urine for drugs of abuse is expensive and time-consuming. The samples also could get lost or compromised while in transport. The ideal solution, they say, is to skip the prescreening step and instead bring the lab to the site — but in an easy-to-use, portable package. Currently, when samples arrive at labs for confirmation testing, trained technicians use a “gold-standard” method, relying on sample processing, liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry to analyze them. Small versions of instruments that implement these techniques can provide results at or near lab-quality, but they haven’t been optimized and tested together as a single, portable instrument. Wheeler’s team set out to do just that.
They put together a compact system that can do all the steps — extracting drugs of abuse from urine with a microfluidic device coupled to a small mass spectrometer that can identify the substances. The backpack-sized instrument could analyze cocaine, benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) and codeine in four samples in less than 15 minutes. The amount of cocaine they could detect was compatible with limits set by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The researchers say the device could be used for many different kinds of tests in which laboratory-quality results are needed quickly.
The authors acknowledge funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada and the U.S.National Science Foundation.
TYPES OF DISINFECTANTS TO USE FOR HEALTH
Types of Disinfectants Used in Healthcare Facilities
By Lisa Ridgely
In order for a product to be labeled a disinfectant, it needs to be approved by and registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The EPA has recently published a list of hospital-grade disinfectants that have been tested or are pending testing, says Hicks. The Antimicrobial Testing Program list includes those whose efficacy has been confirmed, as well as products that are under EPA deliberation.
The EPA breaks disinfectants into the following categories: bleach, phenols, quats, accelerated hydrogen peroxide, botanicals and silver dihydrogen citrate.
Disinfectant wipes can also be a good solution, especially for areas that need to be cleaned quickly, or by non-environmental services personnel.
A number of facilities are incorporating accelerated hydrogen peroxides into cleaning programs, which not only work very effectively as a disinfectant and tuberculocidal, but are also gentle on surfaces and on people. The drawback is most of them are ready-to-use (RTU) only, adding a significant price increase per use of the product.
“For large areas, like floors, the RTU accelerated hydrogen peroxides don’t make sense. But if you’re cleaning up blood or urine or other bodily fluids, you want to use a tuberculocidal hydrogen peroxide product for specific things like that,” says Beatrix Babcock of HGI Consulting in Denver.
Most sophisticated cleaning operations use a dilution control system for disinfection, Thomas says — and the price difference between concentrated chemicals and RTU chemicals is tremendous.
“Using a concentrate might cost you 20 cents a quart in diluted form whereas an RTU disinfectant might cost $5 a quart — but in a healthcare environment where accreditation is at stake and compliance is required, the cost may be justified,” Thomas says. “Most of these products with quicker dwell times are ready-to-use, so you’re weighing cost against time, and when time is money, it can make sense to use the product that allows you to work more efficiently.”
The benefits of hydrogen peroxide technology are four-fold, says Attman: disinfecting a wider range of microorganisms, faster, safer, and greener.
“When you use it on a surface, you’re really going to get the necessary penetration in that one minute kill claim — versus the alcohol-based quat products that have a two-minute dwell time which also may require a cleaning of the surface,” Attman says.
Clostridium difficile (C. diff) is the most difficult infection to kill and currently a huge priority and problem in healthcare facilities. The only disinfectants that work against this threat are accelerated hydrogen peroxide and bleach-based products.
The EPA has recently published a list of hospital-grade disinfectants that have been tested or are pending testing, says Hicks. The Antimicrobial Testing Program list includes those whose efficacy has been confirmed, as well as products that are under EPA deliberation.
The EPA breaks disinfectants into the following categories: bleach, phenols, quats, accelerated hydrogen peroxide, botanicals and silver dihydrogen citrate.
Disinfectant wipes can also be a good solution, especially for areas that need to be cleaned quickly, or by non-environmental services personnel.
A number of facilities are incorporating accelerated hydrogen peroxides into cleaning programs, which not only work very effectively as a disinfectant and tuberculocidal, but are also gentle on surfaces and on people. The drawback is most of them are ready-to-use (RTU) only, adding a significant price increase per use of the product.
“For large areas, like floors, the RTU accelerated hydrogen peroxides don’t make sense. But if you’re cleaning up blood or urine or other bodily fluids, you want to use a tuberculocidal hydrogen peroxide product for specific things like that,” says Beatrix Babcock of HGI Consulting in Denver.
Most sophisticated cleaning operations use a dilution control system for disinfection, Thomas says — and the price difference between concentrated chemicals and RTU chemicals is tremendous.
“Using a concentrate might cost you 20 cents a quart in diluted form whereas an RTU disinfectant might cost $5 a quart — but in a healthcare environment where accreditation is at stake and compliance is required, the cost may be justified,” Thomas says. “Most of these products with quicker dwell times are ready-to-use, so you’re weighing cost against time, and when time is money, it can make sense to use the product that allows you to work more efficiently.”
The benefits of hydrogen peroxide technology are four-fold, says Attman: disinfecting a wider range of microorganisms, faster, safer, and greener.
“When you use it on a surface, you’re really going to get the necessary penetration in that one minute kill claim — versus the alcohol-based quat products that have a two-minute dwell time which also may require a cleaning of the surface,” Attman says.
Clostridium difficile (C. diff) is the most difficult infection to kill and currently a huge priority and problem in healthcare facilities. The only disinfectants that work against this threat are accelerated hydrogen peroxide and bleach-based products.
Faster Dwell Times Here To Stay
Any time a manufacturer releases a new disinfectant, the goal will be to get as short a dwell time as possible, Thomas says. But 30 seconds may be the limit as to how fast disinfectants achieve efficacy.
“Typically, dry time for any liquid product that is sprayed on a surface is two to three minutes, so I would think that would be the goal for most products that currently have longer dwell times,” he says.
Some facilities will continue to use products with a 10-minute dwell time, however; those types of disinfectants are tried and true, and aren’t going away.
“There will still be a place for the 10-minute dwell time. If a public or private office building has a presentable restroom and the janitorial services are using a disinfectant with a 10-minute dwell time, nobody’s going to question that. Building managers aren’t going to want to pay more for a different, more expensive product,” Thomas says.
- See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/sm/article/Types-of-Disinfectants-Used-in-Healthcare-Facilities--17220?source=focuson07/08/2014#sthash.RYD0nxOY.dpuf
“Typically, dry time for any liquid product that is sprayed on a surface is two to three minutes, so I would think that would be the goal for most products that currently have longer dwell times,” he says.
Some facilities will continue to use products with a 10-minute dwell time, however; those types of disinfectants are tried and true, and aren’t going away.
“There will still be a place for the 10-minute dwell time. If a public or private office building has a presentable restroom and the janitorial services are using a disinfectant with a 10-minute dwell time, nobody’s going to question that. Building managers aren’t going to want to pay more for a different, more expensive product,” Thomas says.
martes, 24 de junio de 2014
CLEANING ADVISE
Understanding The Differences Between Cleaning Chemicals
By Lisa Ridgely
Cleaning, sanitizing and disinfecting surfaces are daily tasks for custodial workers — but how likely is it that front-line workers know the uses for each chemical and understand the differences between them?
Product manufacturers and jan/san distributors agree that knowing the difference between cleaning, sanitizing and disinfecting as applied to chemicals can be confusing. For that reason, custodial managers are encouraged to offer refresher training regularly.
Clean To Remove Soil
“Cleaning” as a noun encompasses all sorts of tasks; in fact, it is used to describe the entire industry, as well as the chores most Americans perform in their homes. But by examining the true meaning of the word as it applies to the chemical science of soil and germ removal, it becomes clear how important cleaning is to public health.One chemical manufacturer in Illinois commented that, cleaning chemicals are designed to remove soil. Any impact they have on the population of microorganisms is generally the result of the removal of that soil. The bottom line function to using cleaners is to remove visible debris, dirt and dust from a surface — an essential first step in any cleaning program. Of course, there are different types of cleaners for different types of soil. Some cleaners — those of which are on the alkaline end of the pH scale — remove greases and oils. Then there are acid-based cleaners, which are used to remove water scales and minerals. Between those two extremes are neutral cleaners used for lighter soils.From degreasers and descalers to all-purpose and glass cleaners, these chemicals are commonly used on surfaces such as counters, desks, tables, walls and floors. Thorough cleaning, spray bottles and laundered or disposable towels or mops and diluted cleaning solutions in buckets, may be the only step in a cleaning application — or it may be just the first step.
Managers should stress to their staff that cleaning is an essential step in the removal of substances from surfaces. Only after cleaning chemicals have been used — and only in certain applications — sanitizing and disinfecting should follow.
Sanitizing and disinfecting are recommended for surfaces that are touched frequently by hands or skin or that come into contact with bacteria, urine, fecal matter or bloodborne pathogens. Common applications for sanitizers and disinfectants include food service, healthcare, educational, fitness and other public facilities such as airports and shopping malls. Specifically, these chemicals are typically used in restrooms, kitchen/break rooms and on touch points.
Sanitizers are designed to reduce or kill 99.9 to 99.999 percent of listed bacterial micro-organisms on — and this is important — pre-cleaned surfaces. For surfaces where sanitizers are needed, managers can choose between two general products: food contact sanitizers and non-food contact options.
According to product manufacturers, food-contact sanitizers are part of a three step process. First, staff cleans the surface, it is rinsed and then the sanitizer is applied. These chemicals are most commonly used in food service areas on meat slicers, cutting boards and food prep tables — surfaces that come into contact with food.
“Sanitizers are generally associated with food service, where workers must reduce the micro-organisms to a level that is safe,” says Glenn Rothstein, president of Bio-Shine Inc. in Spotswood, N.J.
To accomplish this, managers train staff on chemical dwell times, which vary between sanitizers and disinfectants.
Although product advancements are entering the marketplace regularly, traditionally, sanitizer dwell times are considerably shorter than those for disinfectants, which can be up to 10 minutes. Rothstein says that workers using sanitizers can accomplish safe levels of surface micro-organisms in 30 seconds to one minute, although some products take 5 minutes.
Non-food contact sanitizers are used in two steps. First, the surface needs to be cleaned, then it is sanitized. These sanitizers are available but not widely used, say manufacturers, mainly because sanitizers have no anti-viral claims, offering no confidence of killing the flu or other viruses found on surfaces.
“When you sanitize, you are killing/reducing the bacteria on that surface, but doing nothing about viruses and fungus,” says one Wis.-based chemical manufacturer. “Sanitizing is better than cleaning alone, but the reduction of pathogen populations on surfaces is exponentially better when you use disinfectants.” - See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/hs/article/When-Is-It-Important-To-Sanitize--16774#sthash.ZkkrsJ14.dpuf
For applications in which there are heavy soil loads, cleaning is an essential first step before disinfecting against bacteria. But in facilities where budget cuts loom and time matters, unless heavy soils are present, Rothstein suggests forgoing the cleaning step and skipping right to disinfection.
Manufacturers stress that not all disinfectants are created equal and it is important for custodial managers to do their research before purchasing. Choose a disinfectant that is most appropriate for the application. The product label should specify areas where the product is most effective, as well as appropriate dwell times to meet kill claims.
This makes label-reading crucial to choosing the right product. Disinfectants will list the types of microorganisms they are effective against, including:
• Bacteria such as E. Coli, listeria, salmonella, MRSA and, in some cases, C. diff
• Viruses such as norovirus, influenza strains, HIV and Hepatitis B and C
• Mold and mildew
• Fungi such as Athlete’s Foot
“Disinfection works by destroying the cell wall of microbes or interfering with the metabolism,” Rothstein says. “There are several types: phenolics, quats and silvers. The phenolics are the oldest form of disinfectants, but are harsh and rarely used today. Quats are the mainstream disinfectants that everyone is using these days, and kill times can vary.”
On a pre-cleaned surface, most quat disinfectants have a 10-minute kill claim. But as products evolve and demand for more efficient cleaning times grow, manufacturers have developed disinfectants with kill claims as little as one minute.
Silver disinfectants are the newest types, featuring extended kill times as a result of a residual film left behind. Those extended kill times can reach 24 hours — though Rothstein says he’s seen a claim of nearly a month on one silver.
No matter which disinfectant is used, it is important to focus on high-touch surfaces to prevent the spread of bacteria. Touch points will vary by facility, but traditionally include door handles, phones, light switches, elevator buttons, vending machines, refrigerator doors, microwave buttons and handles, and faucets and flush handles.
Disinfectant can be applied using a spray bottle, left to dwell and then wiped off with a cloth. Disinfecting wipes can be used. They can make the job more convenient because the cloths are already pre-soaked in disinfectant chemical, but these wipes often have different dwell times, so it is important that managers train staff accordingly.
- See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/hs/article/Disinfecting-Fights-Bacteria-And-Infections--16775#sthash.oaDo3KtU.dpuf
Disinfecting best practices include proper dilution, appropriate tool use and safety considerations. That means managers should not only be educating staff about the differences between cleaners, sanitizers and disinfectants, but they should also be making sure protocol is being followed.
Manufacturers recommend departments use dilution control systems. These wall-mounted systems are one of the easiest ways to ensure the proper ratio of chemical to water is being used every time.
Workers should know how ratios work, and the differences in dilution between the containers they use. For instance, custodial staffs should be trained to understand that not as much chemical will go into a spray bottle as will be put into a mop bucket. Managers can guarantee this by training workers on the dilution control system, how it works and how to change the dials on the device to reflect the cleaning needs.
In departments where dilution systems are not being used, distributors recommend custodial managers supply staff with ready-to-use or pre-packaged chemical products.
“Ready-to-use products are great on high-touch surfaces,” says Rothstein. “The ready-to-use chemical is a very effective way to guarantee workers are using the proper dilution to clean and disinfect. Plus, these products can be very convenient and can save on worker productivity.”
Using the proper tools — such as personal protective equipment and color-coded cloths or disposable paper towels — for the job is also very important, because it not only improves efficacy but it reduces the chances of cross-contamination.
Manufacturers recommend departments use dilution control systems. These wall-mounted systems are one of the easiest ways to ensure the proper ratio of chemical to water is being used every time.
Workers should know how ratios work, and the differences in dilution between the containers they use. For instance, custodial staffs should be trained to understand that not as much chemical will go into a spray bottle as will be put into a mop bucket. Managers can guarantee this by training workers on the dilution control system, how it works and how to change the dials on the device to reflect the cleaning needs.
In departments where dilution systems are not being used, distributors recommend custodial managers supply staff with ready-to-use or pre-packaged chemical products.
“Ready-to-use products are great on high-touch surfaces,” says Rothstein. “The ready-to-use chemical is a very effective way to guarantee workers are using the proper dilution to clean and disinfect. Plus, these products can be very convenient and can save on worker productivity.”
Using the proper tools — such as personal protective equipment and color-coded cloths or disposable paper towels — for the job is also very important, because it not only improves efficacy but it reduces the chances of cross-contamination.
Know Your Occupants
With so many chemicals on the market, the decision-making process involves knowledge of the type of surfaces that need to be cleaned, as well as the type of occupants in a facility.
“It’s important to understand what the product will and won’t kill and what the efficacy is. Managers should choose products based on the application,” says Rothstein. “For example, a hospital will use one type of disinfectant and a vet clinic will most likely use a different one — one that combats dangerous and contagious viral infections such as parvovirus.”
Also, managers should be aware that some infection threats may not be communicated. In a hospital, for example, HIPAA laws might prevent facilities from releasing information about the types of illnesses or viruses occupants are suffering. Custodial departments should anticipate that certain viruses and bacteria may be present, and clean accordingly.
The rules can vary drastically, depending on what type of facility is being serviced, Rothstein says. Some facilities, like schools and government institutions, are subject to strict government regulations that dictate the types of cleaning, sanitizing and disinfecting products to be used.
“When you evaluate your cleaning program, you need to understand all the variables in the equation,” he says.
- See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/hs/article/Training-On-Proper-Use-Of-Chemicals--16776#sthash.01Kky2cc.dpuf
“It’s important to understand what the product will and won’t kill and what the efficacy is. Managers should choose products based on the application,” says Rothstein. “For example, a hospital will use one type of disinfectant and a vet clinic will most likely use a different one — one that combats dangerous and contagious viral infections such as parvovirus.”
Also, managers should be aware that some infection threats may not be communicated. In a hospital, for example, HIPAA laws might prevent facilities from releasing information about the types of illnesses or viruses occupants are suffering. Custodial departments should anticipate that certain viruses and bacteria may be present, and clean accordingly.
The rules can vary drastically, depending on what type of facility is being serviced, Rothstein says. Some facilities, like schools and government institutions, are subject to strict government regulations that dictate the types of cleaning, sanitizing and disinfecting products to be used.
“When you evaluate your cleaning program, you need to understand all the variables in the equation,” he says.
martes, 10 de junio de 2014
Anatomy of a glove: Knit, dip and fibers
Gloves are one of the most important safety gear to wear in our job.
The correct choice is what makes it very helpful.
Knit gloves are made on knitting machines with a limited range of needle density. Thick gloves made from large yarns are generally knit on machines of 8-10 gauge (8-10 needles per inch). These yarns are the same size you find in winter coats. Larger yarns require larger needle spacing. Many high cut level gloves (level 4-5) use these large yarns and 8-10 gauge knits. For finer and thinner knit gloves, the most common knitting style is 13 needles per inch. The 13-gauge knits often use small yarns such as 210 denier nylon. This is about the size of the yarn used in an oxford shirt.
For comfortable gloves with good dexterity, the coating and the knit must be thin, no more than 2-4 mm thickness in total. For this type of thin coating layer to be durable, it must be well supported by the textile. The rubber in the coating does not have good tear strength. The yarn in the glove provides the reinforcement to prevent premature failure of the coating layer.
When the knit works with the dip you can build a thin, comfortable, durable glove.
Polyester is perhaps the most widely used synthetic fiber. It is low in cost and available in many sizes and types. Moderate tensile strength and low cut performance limit the protection from this material used alone. Polyester yarn in its textured form has good abrasion for its price point. Chemical resistance is broad, however polyester is a moderate temperature fiber with a burn and drip risk. This material is useful as a blending fiber for controlling the cost of a composite yarn.
Nylon is the second most widely used synthetic fiber. Nylon has moderate tensile strength and low cut. Nylon has really standout abrasion resistance, which makes it very useful in gloves. The military has used nylon in combination with cotton for Battle Dress Uniforms (BDUs) and other garments for many years. Like polyester, nylon is an excellent choice for glove components. It is slightly more expensive than polyester but higher in durability. Nylon has moderate temperature resistance and a burn and drip risk if used by itself. Chemical resistance is lower than polyester.
Para-Aramid fiber is aromatic nylon. The fiber is strong but small filament size limits its performance for light knit gloves. High tensile strength with small filaments make this a better puncture material than a cut product. Cut level 4 and 5 gloves need a high density knit fiber cover. These high cover knits are bulky and not very comfortable. Para-aramids are high temp materials and have excellent flame performance. But they have iffy chemical performance; acids and chlorine bleach are big trouble for these materials. One last caution, Para-Aramid fibers are not good for abrasion. Gloves made from these fibers should have a coating or a cover glove.
Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) is significantly stronger than the Para-Aramids. They offer good cut performance and excellent chemical resistance to most common compounds. These materials can only handle about 220ºF and start to fail at just slightly higher temperatures. Because UHMWPE is polyethylene, it is very low friction. This makes UHMWPE a poor choice for puncture resistance. Also, UHMWPE will burn and has a bad melt drip issue.
Liquid Crystal Polyester (LCP) material has tensile strength between UHMWPE and Para-Aramid. LCP is a large denier per filament fiber and has very good cut. Because LCP is Aromatic Polyester it is also a high temp fiber. LCP fiber is resistant to most industrial chemistry and has some flame resistance. LCP is better all around in abrasion than either Para-Aramid or UHMWPE. Bear in mind that abrasion and durability in gloves is a complex topic and this review is a summary. The combination of large filament, tensile, chemical resistance, high temp and abrasion make LCP a strong competitor. It provides great combination performance in cut and puncture applications.
Fiberglass is just glass, and it is fragile. Fiberglass does not do well in abrasion or in flex. The damaged surface of fiberglass yarn has sharp ends of broken filament exposed, and this filament can cause skin irritation. However fiberglass is very hard when compared to all the organic fibers we have talked about. Fiberglass is harder than most cutting tools. The glass fiber breaks down the cutting edge of the threat and gives good cut resistance. As long as the fiberglass has a protective cover of one of the other fibers on the list, it is a tough, high-cut fiber. Fiberglass has great thermal resistance and will not burn. Chemical resistance is uneven.
Stainless steel fiber, like fiberglass, is a specialty item used in combination with one of the other fibers. This fiber has all the properties of steel: hardness, toughness and stiffness. It also has good thermal and chemical resistance. However, as this material is used in a blend, these properties are only as useful as the total performance of the blended yarn. To address the stiffness of steel, these fibers are a low denier per filament and this limits the performance to some degree.
The correct choice is what makes it very helpful.
Knit gloves are made on knitting machines with a limited range of needle density. Thick gloves made from large yarns are generally knit on machines of 8-10 gauge (8-10 needles per inch). These yarns are the same size you find in winter coats. Larger yarns require larger needle spacing. Many high cut level gloves (level 4-5) use these large yarns and 8-10 gauge knits. For finer and thinner knit gloves, the most common knitting style is 13 needles per inch. The 13-gauge knits often use small yarns such as 210 denier nylon. This is about the size of the yarn used in an oxford shirt.
Openness in knit fabric
Knitting machine gauge and yarn size control how open the glove textile will be. For 13-gauge knits, for example, using a 210 denier yarn, there is perhaps a 30-40 percent open area in the textile. The percentage of openness in the knit affects how the glove feels and how much stretch it has. Most users would agree that more open knits result in cooler, more comfortable and dexterous gloves. The downside of more open knits is that it is much harder to create high cut level gloves with small yarns with open space.The knit needs to work with the dip
Most users like the grip and durability that palm-coated knit gloves offer. Knit gloves with high levels of openness have an additional benefit for dipping and coating. With high open area, the dip coating can penetrate the textile and encapsulate the yarn on the palm of the glove. The dip can be nitrile, polyurethane or NR latex. When the dip can penetrate the knit, the coating has the best possible attachment to the textile.For comfortable gloves with good dexterity, the coating and the knit must be thin, no more than 2-4 mm thickness in total. For this type of thin coating layer to be durable, it must be well supported by the textile. The rubber in the coating does not have good tear strength. The yarn in the glove provides the reinforcement to prevent premature failure of the coating layer.
When the knit works with the dip you can build a thin, comfortable, durable glove.
Fibers
A common mistake in glove selection is picking the wrong fiber type. As you will find from the descriptions below, fibers are not all created equal.Polyester is perhaps the most widely used synthetic fiber. It is low in cost and available in many sizes and types. Moderate tensile strength and low cut performance limit the protection from this material used alone. Polyester yarn in its textured form has good abrasion for its price point. Chemical resistance is broad, however polyester is a moderate temperature fiber with a burn and drip risk. This material is useful as a blending fiber for controlling the cost of a composite yarn.
Nylon is the second most widely used synthetic fiber. Nylon has moderate tensile strength and low cut. Nylon has really standout abrasion resistance, which makes it very useful in gloves. The military has used nylon in combination with cotton for Battle Dress Uniforms (BDUs) and other garments for many years. Like polyester, nylon is an excellent choice for glove components. It is slightly more expensive than polyester but higher in durability. Nylon has moderate temperature resistance and a burn and drip risk if used by itself. Chemical resistance is lower than polyester.
Para-Aramid fiber is aromatic nylon. The fiber is strong but small filament size limits its performance for light knit gloves. High tensile strength with small filaments make this a better puncture material than a cut product. Cut level 4 and 5 gloves need a high density knit fiber cover. These high cover knits are bulky and not very comfortable. Para-aramids are high temp materials and have excellent flame performance. But they have iffy chemical performance; acids and chlorine bleach are big trouble for these materials. One last caution, Para-Aramid fibers are not good for abrasion. Gloves made from these fibers should have a coating or a cover glove.
Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) is significantly stronger than the Para-Aramids. They offer good cut performance and excellent chemical resistance to most common compounds. These materials can only handle about 220ºF and start to fail at just slightly higher temperatures. Because UHMWPE is polyethylene, it is very low friction. This makes UHMWPE a poor choice for puncture resistance. Also, UHMWPE will burn and has a bad melt drip issue.
Liquid Crystal Polyester (LCP) material has tensile strength between UHMWPE and Para-Aramid. LCP is a large denier per filament fiber and has very good cut. Because LCP is Aromatic Polyester it is also a high temp fiber. LCP fiber is resistant to most industrial chemistry and has some flame resistance. LCP is better all around in abrasion than either Para-Aramid or UHMWPE. Bear in mind that abrasion and durability in gloves is a complex topic and this review is a summary. The combination of large filament, tensile, chemical resistance, high temp and abrasion make LCP a strong competitor. It provides great combination performance in cut and puncture applications.
Fiberglass is just glass, and it is fragile. Fiberglass does not do well in abrasion or in flex. The damaged surface of fiberglass yarn has sharp ends of broken filament exposed, and this filament can cause skin irritation. However fiberglass is very hard when compared to all the organic fibers we have talked about. Fiberglass is harder than most cutting tools. The glass fiber breaks down the cutting edge of the threat and gives good cut resistance. As long as the fiberglass has a protective cover of one of the other fibers on the list, it is a tough, high-cut fiber. Fiberglass has great thermal resistance and will not burn. Chemical resistance is uneven.
Stainless steel fiber, like fiberglass, is a specialty item used in combination with one of the other fibers. This fiber has all the properties of steel: hardness, toughness and stiffness. It also has good thermal and chemical resistance. However, as this material is used in a blend, these properties are only as useful as the total performance of the blended yarn. To address the stiffness of steel, these fibers are a low denier per filament and this limits the performance to some degree.
miércoles, 7 de mayo de 2014
Carpet Care and Protection Hints
Fabric
protection: How does it really work?
|
|
Most cleaners have done it: Purchase a fabric protector
product, clean a carpet and then apply the protector, hoping for the best.
Sometime it works great; other times, it doesn''t.
Why? What is behind the science of fabric protection today?
Types of protectors
There are several varieties of protectors you can choose
from today.
There are silicone-based fabric protectors, but these repel
only water… good for tents, umbrellas and your outdoor work boots, but not the
best choice for carpets that receive all types of soils.
Fluorochemicals are the dominant force in the fabric
protection field, as it relates to carpet and upholstery.
Fluorochemicals repel both water and oil, and when used
according to manufacturer directions, provide vital protection to the fiber.
And that''s the key to success: Apply it according to
directions, even if you think you are overwetting the carpet. If you don''t
apply the proper amount, it won''t work properly and you have wasted your time
and your customers/facilities money.
Remember, too: There is a big difference between stain
resistance (stain blockers) and fabric protection… stain blocker technology
fills the "dye sites" of the fiber (typically added at the mill
only), while fabric protection (added at the mill and by most carpet cleaners)
lowers the surface energy of the fiber, making it difficult for soils and
spills to penetrate that barrier.
In essence, this means that soils, spot and stain materials
don''t even penetrate to the fiber itself, keeping the carpet or furniture
clean.
The carrier and drying ability
Fabric protectors are carried by either water or solvent
(typically odorless mineral spirits).
It''s your choice as to which one to use. Remember the water
sensitivity of the fiber you are cleaning.
You should use solvent protectors on many sensitive
upholstery fabrics.
Many claim that solvent-carried protectors actually dry the
carpet or furniture faster because the solvent displaces the moisture built up
during cleaning.
Surface tension and protection
Fluorochemical protectors work by lowering the surface
energy of the carpet or furniture. What does this mean?
Materials, such as fibers in textiles, liquids, such as
water, detergents, coffee, tea, etc. are measured by what is called a
"dyne" rating.
One dictionary definition of "dyne" says this:
"…the dyne is a unit of force specified in the centimetre-gram-second
(cgs) system of units, symbol "dyn". One dyne is equal to exactly
10-5 newtons. Further, the dyne can be defined as "the force required to
accelerate a mass of one gram at a rate of one centimetre per second
squared." — (Wikipedia)
Confusing, yes, but to the cleaning industry, it''s simply a
measurement of potential surface energy, or wetting ability.
Normal water has a dynes rating of approximately 73 dynes.
Ammonia has approximately 24 dynes.
Quality cleaning detergents generally have dynes rating
between 25 and 55… it depends on the formulator… and these detergents have to
make water "wetter" so that it can penetrate any barrier on the fiber
and so that cleaning can take place.
But if a detergent has "too much" wetting ability,
the chance of overwetting the carpet and backing/pad are greatly increased.
Dry solvents, mainly for spot removal, have a low dynes
rating. That''s why they penetrate so easily.
Surface tension, fabric protection, and spot/stain removal
is like golf: The lower score (dynes rating) wins the game.
For example: Let''s say you apply a fabric protector to a
carpet and you lower the dynes rating of the fiber to approximately 15.
If coffee is spilled on the carpet, and the coffee has a
dynes rating significantly higher, it should not penetrate through the barrier.
It should "bead up" on the carpet.
Of course, foot traffic, the coffee being very hot (heat
affects dyne ratings as higher heat lowers the rating, making the substance
penetrate), and other factors can weigh in on whether the fabric is really
protected… but all things being equal, the dynes rating indicates that the
lower score wins.
"Wetter?" What does that mean?
One good analogy you can make to explain "wetter"
would be with ink pens.
Most ink has a dynes rating between 30 and 50.
If the dynes rating of ink goes
above 50, the ink may not move from the pen onto the paper.
On the other hand, if the dynes rating is less than 30, and
too "wet", the ink will run out of the pen and make a huge mess.
Detergency does that to water. Wetter water (lower dynes)
penetrates better for cleaning purposes.
Applying a quality fluorochemical provides an invisible
shield on the fiber, and lowers the surface energy, the tension, of the fiber
and thus repels soils, spots and stains. And then when the fiber needs cleaned,
you must choose a detergent that will break through that barrier.
For all fibers?
Most fibers benefit from fluorochemical protection.
Nylon, as the most popular carpet fiber, has an inherent
dynes rating of approximately 45… it also has open dye sites. Lowering the
surface tension to less than 20 makes for a more protected carpet.
Although olefin, as the second most popular synthetic and
the one known for excellent stain resistancy, has a dynes rating of
approximately 30, it still benefits from protection because fluorochemicals
will help the fiber repel dry and oily soils.
Polyester is also inherently stain resistant, but has a
dynes rating close to 40. Lowering the rating (surface tension) means it stays
clean longer.
Upholstery fibers —
such as cotton, rayon and typically other natural materials — need protection
especially from oily soils, such as from skin contact.
As an example of lower dynes and durability (barrier), look
at a product such as Tyvek®, the well-known protective fabric. It has a dynes
rating of 30, very similar to olefin.
Practical points
Like all cleaning applications, there is the practical side
of things.
- Follow directions
- Make sure the surface
you are protecting is as clean as possible
- As you apply the
product, work it into the fiber with a brush or groom
- Speed dry when possible
- Keep traffic to a
minimum for at least 24 hours after application. Remember that like most
chemicals, protectors need time to set up and "cure"
- Don''t tell your
customers/facilities that this will make their fabrics bullet-proof — if
you do, they will test your statemen
martes, 8 de abril de 2014
BIOCIDES FOR FOOD
Work Continues on Antimicrobial Solutions for Food Safety By The National Provisioner |
Antimicrobial solutions are used to reduce contaminants on raw foods such as meats, vegetables and fruits. This is analogous to washing food prior to using it in one’s own kitchen, although these compounds enhance the washing action, says Martha Ewing, director of technical services at Sanderson Farms Inc. of Laurel, MS.
Antimicrobial solutions have proven to be very good at treating certain contaminants on animal carcasses and on primal and subprimal cuts, says Jim Dickson, professor in the Department of Animal Science, Inter-Departmental Program in Microbiology at Iowa State University in Ames.
“It’s one of the more significant introductions … in meat and poultry in the last 25 years,” he says. The statistics support that fact as well: Antimicrobial solutions are working.
According to U.S. Department of Agriculture data for poultry, the Salmonella incidence rate has been reduced 26 percent from the beginning of 2013 and 55 percent compared to five years ago. Further, data indicate that the number expressed as a Most Probable Number of Salmonella is very low – fewer than 10 microorganisms when a positive result is enumerated, Ewing says.
One of the biggest challenges for processors of ready-to-eat (RTE) products that are exposed to the environment at packaging is the potential for Listeria monocytogenes contamination, explains Lynn Knipe, extension processed meats specialist and associate professor in Food Science and Technology, and Animal Sciences at Ohio State University in Columbus.
“For intact fresh cuts and for ready-to-eat products, surface contamination has been the greatest concern for processors, and I don’t see that changing in the near future,” Knipe says. “Since this is a surface contamination, sprays and dips can have the greatest impact on the surface contamination.”
Gaining ground
Newer compounds and application strategies are being developed for antimicrobial solutions. Lauric arginate, for example, was introduced in the United States a few years ago as an effective antimicrobial spray against Listeria.
“Lauric arginate may be sprayed directly on to RTE meat products prior to packaging, or sprayed inside the pouch before the meat product is inserted into the package,” Knipe says. “The latter option relies on the vacuum to distribute the lauric arginate uniformly around the packaged product. More recently, it has been shown to be effective as a surface treatment to eliminate Salmonella on chicken.”
Peroxyacetic acid is a new chemical that’s been widely used, especially in the beef industry, Dickson says. In the poultry industry, carcass washers apply sprays to both the inside and outside of the body cavity, as well as to the external surfaces, he says. One of the newest advancements in some poultry plants has been the use of a wash after the carcasses come out of the chiller.
“If you spray an organic acid on a poultry carcass and then you put it into a chiller, then it pretty much washes all of that off,” Dickson says. “There have been some that are using a wash or spray cabinet after carcasses come out of the chiller, and that seems to be pretty effective.”
The compounds commonly used today are considered processing aides and do not have a residual effect. If a residual effect was present, the compound would be considered an ingredient and would have to be included on the label.
Nevertheless, some clean-label products, which involve vinegar and lime juice, have been developed that are effective in eliminating surface contamination of both Listeria monocytogenes and Clostridium perfringens on RTE meat products, Knipe says.
“With the consumer pressure for clean labels, these products provide the product safety needed [for processors and consumers], without chemical names that concern consumers,” he says.
Additionally, much work is being done in spices, botanicals, phyto-antimicrobials and phyto-chemicals to see if compounds can be isolated from various plants and/or seeds to have great antimicrobial effects, says Robert Gravani, a professor of food science in the Department of Food Science at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY.
“Certainly one of the areas that is being actively researched is the synergies that may develop between antimicrobials that are used in concert with each other,” he says. Research also needs to continue on antimicrobials to make sure they are still effective against the organisms to which they are targeted, he adds.
“Clearly one of the things in people’s minds is, ‘Will there be new compounds coming in the future that will be even more efficacious than what we have now?’” Gravani says. “We’ve got to be constantly prospecting toward new compounds that will work that are as effective or more effective than the ones we have today.”
In addition, Ewing says, multiple points in each process are being evaluated for application effectiveness.
“The majority of these revolve around a water-based application, but other technologies are also being evaluated, such as UV light and high-pressure pasteurization,” she says. Antimicrobial solutions are being applied in more points during processing as well.
For example, when organic acids first came out for beef carcass washes, they were only applied at the end of the process after the final carcass wash, Dickson says. Then some companies started applying them pre-evisceration, which is now pretty standard in the industry, he says. Now, companies are spraying carcasses when they come out of the coolers.
“In some cases, they are getting treated as many as three times with some of these antimicrobial solutions,” Dickson says. “It’s all with the idea of reducing the potential of contamination on the surface of the animal.”
However, the cost of some of these antimicrobial products may be keeping some processors from using them on their products, Knipe adds. Still, the industry continues to look for new compounds and methods of antimicrobial wash application. As technology improves, so will the ability of these compounds to reduce microbial contamination.
However, Ewing reminds that, while antimicrobial compounds can help reduce the level of microbes to almost undetectable levels, the product is not sterile. Safe food-handling techniques must be employed at all times when handling raw food.
(“Work Continues on Antimicrobial Solutions” by Elizabeth Fuhrman first appeared in The National Provisioner on December 6, 2013. Courtesy of The National Provisioner.)
“It’s one of the more significant introductions … in meat and poultry in the last 25 years,” he says. The statistics support that fact as well: Antimicrobial solutions are working.
According to U.S. Department of Agriculture data for poultry, the Salmonella incidence rate has been reduced 26 percent from the beginning of 2013 and 55 percent compared to five years ago. Further, data indicate that the number expressed as a Most Probable Number of Salmonella is very low – fewer than 10 microorganisms when a positive result is enumerated, Ewing says.
One of the biggest challenges for processors of ready-to-eat (RTE) products that are exposed to the environment at packaging is the potential for Listeria monocytogenes contamination, explains Lynn Knipe, extension processed meats specialist and associate professor in Food Science and Technology, and Animal Sciences at Ohio State University in Columbus.
“For intact fresh cuts and for ready-to-eat products, surface contamination has been the greatest concern for processors, and I don’t see that changing in the near future,” Knipe says. “Since this is a surface contamination, sprays and dips can have the greatest impact on the surface contamination.”
Gaining ground
Newer compounds and application strategies are being developed for antimicrobial solutions. Lauric arginate, for example, was introduced in the United States a few years ago as an effective antimicrobial spray against Listeria.
“Lauric arginate may be sprayed directly on to RTE meat products prior to packaging, or sprayed inside the pouch before the meat product is inserted into the package,” Knipe says. “The latter option relies on the vacuum to distribute the lauric arginate uniformly around the packaged product. More recently, it has been shown to be effective as a surface treatment to eliminate Salmonella on chicken.”
Peroxyacetic acid is a new chemical that’s been widely used, especially in the beef industry, Dickson says. In the poultry industry, carcass washers apply sprays to both the inside and outside of the body cavity, as well as to the external surfaces, he says. One of the newest advancements in some poultry plants has been the use of a wash after the carcasses come out of the chiller.
“If you spray an organic acid on a poultry carcass and then you put it into a chiller, then it pretty much washes all of that off,” Dickson says. “There have been some that are using a wash or spray cabinet after carcasses come out of the chiller, and that seems to be pretty effective.”
The compounds commonly used today are considered processing aides and do not have a residual effect. If a residual effect was present, the compound would be considered an ingredient and would have to be included on the label.
Nevertheless, some clean-label products, which involve vinegar and lime juice, have been developed that are effective in eliminating surface contamination of both Listeria monocytogenes and Clostridium perfringens on RTE meat products, Knipe says.
“With the consumer pressure for clean labels, these products provide the product safety needed [for processors and consumers], without chemical names that concern consumers,” he says.
Additionally, much work is being done in spices, botanicals, phyto-antimicrobials and phyto-chemicals to see if compounds can be isolated from various plants and/or seeds to have great antimicrobial effects, says Robert Gravani, a professor of food science in the Department of Food Science at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY.
“Certainly one of the areas that is being actively researched is the synergies that may develop between antimicrobials that are used in concert with each other,” he says. Research also needs to continue on antimicrobials to make sure they are still effective against the organisms to which they are targeted, he adds.
“Clearly one of the things in people’s minds is, ‘Will there be new compounds coming in the future that will be even more efficacious than what we have now?’” Gravani says. “We’ve got to be constantly prospecting toward new compounds that will work that are as effective or more effective than the ones we have today.”
In addition, Ewing says, multiple points in each process are being evaluated for application effectiveness.
“The majority of these revolve around a water-based application, but other technologies are also being evaluated, such as UV light and high-pressure pasteurization,” she says. Antimicrobial solutions are being applied in more points during processing as well.
For example, when organic acids first came out for beef carcass washes, they were only applied at the end of the process after the final carcass wash, Dickson says. Then some companies started applying them pre-evisceration, which is now pretty standard in the industry, he says. Now, companies are spraying carcasses when they come out of the coolers.
“In some cases, they are getting treated as many as three times with some of these antimicrobial solutions,” Dickson says. “It’s all with the idea of reducing the potential of contamination on the surface of the animal.”
However, the cost of some of these antimicrobial products may be keeping some processors from using them on their products, Knipe adds. Still, the industry continues to look for new compounds and methods of antimicrobial wash application. As technology improves, so will the ability of these compounds to reduce microbial contamination.
However, Ewing reminds that, while antimicrobial compounds can help reduce the level of microbes to almost undetectable levels, the product is not sterile. Safe food-handling techniques must be employed at all times when handling raw food.
(“Work Continues on Antimicrobial Solutions” by Elizabeth Fuhrman first appeared in The National Provisioner on December 6, 2013. Courtesy of The National Provisioner.)
jueves, 20 de febrero de 2014
DISINFECTION
Are there any misconceptions about cleaners and disinfectants?
Disinfecting is more important than cleaning – Ultimately, infection control comes down to efficient cleaning practices and not simply applying a disinfectant. The physical removal of a "germ" is much more important than the chemical destruction of it. A good example of this is: You are at a picnic...you drop part of a sandwich on the ground...before you know it you are being invaded by ants. Now, if you want to take the "disinfectant" approach you can simply spray insect spray on the ants. The ants will die, but you will find that more ants will return from another angle.
Now if you do the right thing by picking up the sandwich and placing it in the trash, or "cleaning” it from the area, you will have eliminated the food source and thus ultimately stopping and preventing the problem.
• Hospital Grade disinfectants require a TB claim – A “Hospital Grade” Disinfectant only requires 2 organisms to be tested: Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus.
In fact, tuberculocidal disinfectants are not used to control the spread of TB; the TB claim is only used as an indicator of strength. TB is transmitted only by the airborne route, meaning that the only way this disease is spread is by infected people coughing and sneezing tiny infected droplets into the air and others breathing those droplets into their lungs. Therefore, surface cleaners and disinfectants will have no impact on the spread of this pathogen.
• Bleach is the ultimate disinfectant. In order for bleach to function properly as a disinfectant or sanitizer the surface MUST be precleaned prior to the application of bleach. (NO if, ands, or buts about it.) Disinfecting and sanitizing with bleach is a two-step process.
Bleach's shelf life is unstable. Depending on the age and storage conditions, the actual amount of active chlorine will vary. Sodium hypochlorite a.k.a. bleach will break down into salt and water. Never store bleach in warm areas. Because of this the following are true:
o A fresh solution of bleach must be made prior to disinfection or sanitation. (Water ions or hardness and soil contaminants from a dirty container can adversely affect available chlorine ppms)
o Only an E.P.A. registered bleach product can be used for disinfection or sanitation.
• Microorganisms are becoming resistant to disinfectants or disinfectants are promoting antibiotic resistance in microorganisms - The mode of action for a disinfectant is different than the mode of action of an antibiotic. For example – if antibiotics are like poison to a bacteria, then disinfectants would be like a shotgun. The same thing that protects you from poison would not protect you from a shotgun.
This same scenario applies to antibiotic resistant bacteria (think MRSA or CRE). Antibiotic resistant bacteria have developed a resistance to a type of antibiotic; the ability of a bacteria to be resistant to an antibiotic has no direct indication of the efficacy of a disinfectant for that same bacteria.
There are many misconceptions associated with cleaners and disinfectants in healthcare settings, some include:
• Kill time is the same as wet time. This is untrue—the time it takes a product to eliminate microorganisms is not necessarily the same as the time it is able to keep a surface wet.
• Fast “overall” kill times are best. While fast kill times are important, what the product kills is more important. Some manufacturers may leave off tough-to-kill organisms in order to achieve a fast overall kill time. For example, if it takes a certain product 5 minutes to kill Norovirus, but the manufacturer wants to keep the overall product kill time to 3 minutes, they may leave Norovirus off the label all together.
• All products will react the same on surfaces. Different ingredients and different formulas will react differently with different surfaces. And just because two products may have the same active ingredient doesn’t mean they will necessarily have the same interactions with surfaces. For example, some products contain special corrosion inhibitors in their formulas to provide enhanced surface compatibility.
• Residue is bad. Usually residue left behind on a surface by a product is due to dissolved ingredients in the formula that dry on the surface as solids. These are often important ingredients, such as detergents for more powerful cleaning, corrosion inhibitors for protecting surfaces, or stabilizing agents to maintain product shelf life. To protect surfaces, avoid residue buildup by periodically removing it with a clean, damp cloth.
• The more chemical, the better. Cleaning and disinfecting products are formulated for use in specific amounts and concentrations. When mixing or diluting products, it is important to closely follow the manufacturer’s instructions to avoid potentially hazardous situations.
• Bleach contains chlorine gas. This is untrue. Sodium hypochlorite is the active ingredient in bleach disinfectants.
• Bleach odor is harmful. Multiple studies have shown that when exposed to bleach, little or no concern about the odor of bleach was expressed by patients, families or staff. EPA-registered bleach disinfectants are formulated well below the levels recognized to cause potential respiratory irritation or overt health effects. Bleach is not a recognized asthmagen by any regulatory agency.
• Bleach is bad for the Environment. Sodium hypochlorite breaks down rapidly into salt and water in the environment and has no negative impact on the environment. According to the EPA, “currently registered uses of the hypochlorites will not result in unreasonable adverse effects to the environment. –
Disinfecting is more important than cleaning – Ultimately, infection control comes down to efficient cleaning practices and not simply applying a disinfectant. The physical removal of a "germ" is much more important than the chemical destruction of it. A good example of this is: You are at a picnic...you drop part of a sandwich on the ground...before you know it you are being invaded by ants. Now, if you want to take the "disinfectant" approach you can simply spray insect spray on the ants. The ants will die, but you will find that more ants will return from another angle.
Now if you do the right thing by picking up the sandwich and placing it in the trash, or "cleaning” it from the area, you will have eliminated the food source and thus ultimately stopping and preventing the problem.
• Hospital Grade disinfectants require a TB claim – A “Hospital Grade” Disinfectant only requires 2 organisms to be tested: Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus.
In fact, tuberculocidal disinfectants are not used to control the spread of TB; the TB claim is only used as an indicator of strength. TB is transmitted only by the airborne route, meaning that the only way this disease is spread is by infected people coughing and sneezing tiny infected droplets into the air and others breathing those droplets into their lungs. Therefore, surface cleaners and disinfectants will have no impact on the spread of this pathogen.
• Bleach is the ultimate disinfectant. In order for bleach to function properly as a disinfectant or sanitizer the surface MUST be precleaned prior to the application of bleach. (NO if, ands, or buts about it.) Disinfecting and sanitizing with bleach is a two-step process.
Bleach's shelf life is unstable. Depending on the age and storage conditions, the actual amount of active chlorine will vary. Sodium hypochlorite a.k.a. bleach will break down into salt and water. Never store bleach in warm areas. Because of this the following are true:
o A fresh solution of bleach must be made prior to disinfection or sanitation. (Water ions or hardness and soil contaminants from a dirty container can adversely affect available chlorine ppms)
o Only an E.P.A. registered bleach product can be used for disinfection or sanitation.
• Microorganisms are becoming resistant to disinfectants or disinfectants are promoting antibiotic resistance in microorganisms - The mode of action for a disinfectant is different than the mode of action of an antibiotic. For example – if antibiotics are like poison to a bacteria, then disinfectants would be like a shotgun. The same thing that protects you from poison would not protect you from a shotgun.
This same scenario applies to antibiotic resistant bacteria (think MRSA or CRE). Antibiotic resistant bacteria have developed a resistance to a type of antibiotic; the ability of a bacteria to be resistant to an antibiotic has no direct indication of the efficacy of a disinfectant for that same bacteria.
There are many misconceptions associated with cleaners and disinfectants in healthcare settings, some include:
• Kill time is the same as wet time. This is untrue—the time it takes a product to eliminate microorganisms is not necessarily the same as the time it is able to keep a surface wet.
• Fast “overall” kill times are best. While fast kill times are important, what the product kills is more important. Some manufacturers may leave off tough-to-kill organisms in order to achieve a fast overall kill time. For example, if it takes a certain product 5 minutes to kill Norovirus, but the manufacturer wants to keep the overall product kill time to 3 minutes, they may leave Norovirus off the label all together.
• All products will react the same on surfaces. Different ingredients and different formulas will react differently with different surfaces. And just because two products may have the same active ingredient doesn’t mean they will necessarily have the same interactions with surfaces. For example, some products contain special corrosion inhibitors in their formulas to provide enhanced surface compatibility.
• Residue is bad. Usually residue left behind on a surface by a product is due to dissolved ingredients in the formula that dry on the surface as solids. These are often important ingredients, such as detergents for more powerful cleaning, corrosion inhibitors for protecting surfaces, or stabilizing agents to maintain product shelf life. To protect surfaces, avoid residue buildup by periodically removing it with a clean, damp cloth.
• The more chemical, the better. Cleaning and disinfecting products are formulated for use in specific amounts and concentrations. When mixing or diluting products, it is important to closely follow the manufacturer’s instructions to avoid potentially hazardous situations.
• Bleach contains chlorine gas. This is untrue. Sodium hypochlorite is the active ingredient in bleach disinfectants.
• Bleach odor is harmful. Multiple studies have shown that when exposed to bleach, little or no concern about the odor of bleach was expressed by patients, families or staff. EPA-registered bleach disinfectants are formulated well below the levels recognized to cause potential respiratory irritation or overt health effects. Bleach is not a recognized asthmagen by any regulatory agency.
• Bleach is bad for the Environment. Sodium hypochlorite breaks down rapidly into salt and water in the environment and has no negative impact on the environment. According to the EPA, “currently registered uses of the hypochlorites will not result in unreasonable adverse effects to the environment. –
See more at: http://www.cleanlink.com/hs/article/Misconceptions-Of-Cleaners-And-Disinfectants--16324#sthash.wYzfGpOx.dpuf
viernes, 7 de febrero de 2014
The Science Of Odor Control
The Science behind Odor Control.
Odor is a sensation, a cognitive response to a chemical
stimulus of our olfactory sense. The
odor molecules arrive and land into specific receptor sites in our olfactory
nerves and chemically react to produce a specific coded electrical signal that
is transmitted to the brain. Our brain stores,
classifies and remembers thousands of different odors from
different substances.
Since the beginning of times, men have been concerned with
what we perceive as mal odors, bad odors foul or unpleasant and nasty
odors. Staring in Egyptian civilization,
people used to cover themselves with fruit and flower extracts and waxes, and
bathe in aromatic oils or solutions.
Bad odors are originated by many sources, but the fundamental
bad odor molecules originate from bacteria, mold and mildew in humid
environments, and from aromatic
molecules like mercaptans, terpenes, ammonia, sulfides, low amines, carboxylic
acids and many other, present in rotten food, human and animal segregations,
body fluids, spices, and also from burning tobacco, wood and other cellulosic
material.
The true evolution of odor control started round 1880, when fragrant
pastes and oils started to be used to disguise bad human body odors. These way,
odors can be eliminated by using an overpowering fragrance to cover the bad
odor; this method is still being used today, with the disadvantage that the resulting odor is sometimes worst and
wears out lo discover the bad odor behind.
The next generation of odor controlling solutions has been
formulating with active molecules that chemically react with odor molecules to
neutralize them. This requires a one to one match for the kill. Alternatively
some molecules have been created with electrostatic forces, capable of neutralizing
the odor molecules at one to one contact, and rendering them illegible by the
olfactory sense.
At a next level we have some
odor controlling macro-molecules that in addition to be attracted
electrically to bad odor molecules, are capable of trapping, encapsulating ,
bad odor molecules and pull them down to the surface before reaching our
olfactory sense. Not all odor molecules can be disarmed with the same active
ingredient.
Obviously the bad
odor, being originated by bacteria, mold and microorganism, can also be attacked
by these mechanisms of odor control, however we need to assure that bacteria or
mold are reduced to prevent the odor reappearing.
With more than 20 years of odor control research, science
has been able to combine most of the
chemically active and thermodynamically enhanced odor counteractants and
encapsulants, in a formula that also helps prevent the regrowth of
microorganisms on surfaces. Additionally and, due to the volatility and
vapor pressure of its nowadays components, they are able to act in a multilevel mode, being
able to attack bad odors with residual action, in the air, and on hard and soft
surfaces.
