Fecal threat to Global Warming

Bisco, it's not just the phone. That crap is also on your hands.

What I love is when the nurse comes into the room wearing gloves and I have to ask her (or him) to remove them, properly wash their hands and put on new gloves for MY protection.

 

not on my hands (after washing) anyways, i would never take my phone into the bathroom. i heard a guy in a public stall today, so weird.

 

Talking sh*t, huh? LOL. Wish I new how to make those little faces, like you do.

You would be surprised how few people wash their hands, even the practice of medicine. In California, monitors from the Office of the Inspector General personally observe hand washing in the state's prison clinics and hospitals. The mission of the monitors is published months ahead of time, and their identity is well-known by each and every staff member. And yet, without fail, medical personnel are caught dry-handed at nearly every one of the over 40 of the state's institutions. And not just nurses. It's doctors too! Just look up OIG Medical Inspections.

 

i don't doubt it. around here, i suspect they use purell between patients, if anything.

you made a smiley in post #21

 

Not intentionally. Thanks, Clippy!

 

I could see this discussion moving towards bidets. I remember Dr. Dean Edell (on radio) saying that if you got poop on your hand, wiping it off with paper would seem ... incomplete.

Personal experiences with bidets might enrich this discussion.

I'm not enough in love with Sandra B. to leave it in her hands. Or her seashells.

 

So much intestinalia, from fecal implants, to E. coli, cholera and big daddy norovirus.

Don't make me go downstairs

 

I'm remembering a handwashing study of other places a couple decades ago, that used two different observation methods which produced quite different results.

One method was a live human observer in the bathroom. The other was a hidden camera to monitor what happens when no other human is in the room. Nor surprisingly, the presence of another human greatly increased the handwashing rate. When the room was otherwise empty, there were a lot more cheaters.

One surprise was the difference between sexes. 'Everyone knows' that women are better at hand washing then men, and the human observer method confirmed that. But when measured by hidden camera, the results flipped: while men dropped their washing rate significantly, women did so even more sharply, to a rate less than men. Most of the men who washed, did so even when no one else was present. Most of the women who washed, did so only when peer pressure might catch them.

My fading memory is the women washed about 80% of the time observed, 30% unobserved, while men rated at 60% and 40%. But I haven't seen this item again since the WorldWideWeb debuted.

But every handwashing study I've seen since used only the human observer method, not hidden cameras. Perhaps the later method is now illegal or considered unethical, so we can no longer gauge this aspect of the Heisenberg effect.

 

You have to print out a virtual one and then hang the pages on a nail.

 

lay off the mexican, 'nuff said.