At least you had the decency to use a blended Scotch. If you had wasted a good single-malt on this experiment, no matter how noble it was, there would be words spoken.
Careful, a stressed groin can be painful.
(and yes, that statement also applies to the correct meaning of “groin”)
Hello forum, here is a documented case of medical use of store-bought liquor.
The report is slightly deficient as what was actually used was Scotch, some Jameson’s Whisky, a bottle of Bacardi and some Vodka - all sourced from the doctor’s home liquor cabinet or the local bottle-shop.
The Straight Dope page at the Washington City Paper usually runs the column by noon on Thursdays - check the following link then:
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/columns/straightdope/
I’d tell you more, but I’m limited in discussing columns before they officially run.
It was Grant’s Standfast, which [sub]I like better than any single-malt I’ve ever tasted, sorry.[/sub]
Thanks again- my calendar is marked!
DB Cooper, while that is a “case of medical use of store-bought liquor”, it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, which is use of liquor as an antiseptic.
Your case was using it as an antidote to block the enzyme that metabolizes the ethylene glycol, so that it can be extracted by dialysis instead of converted into toxic metabolites.
Wow! Nice psych experiment.
Freud: Tell me what you see happening in this picture?
Three drinks an hour for three days? No way! The guy would not
have gotten out of the hospital alive. I only hope hospital staff
was not pulling off some kind of cover-up of their own presumably
illegal on-the-job indulgence.
(I say “presumably” because of the Australian byline, because
of Australians’ notorious love of drink, and because as Cecil has
noted elswhere, it is unwise to dismiss out of hand any alleged
crazed event in the peculiar nation of Australia)
Clorox is the brand name for 1% chlorine bleach.
Regarding skin contact, in a waterborne epidemic situation, such as cholera, we’d typically use 0.05% concentration as a hand washing solution for use in and around treatment centers and food prep. You’d step up concentration levels for differing usage (foot baths, mortuary/body disposal, vehicle rinse, etc) but chlorine solutions are your general go to for just about any form of mass pathogen control.
I don’t understand this question. High enough concentrations in various forms will kill just about anything. IOW, you open up a canister of HTH in the field without following proper procedures and something goes wrong, your day is going to really suck.
Wine results - Uhm… Duh? Wine is not sterile.
submitted for your approval, bolding added, 80 is the DUI line around here
The thing that makes me go:dubious: is using store booze, when I 've given it, it was a pharmacutical grade IV.
I know. I’ve only been using the stuff since about 1970. But thanks
for making sure I was cued in.
In any case, I am quite sure my sister used the word “Chlorox”.
I guess I should warn her that some people might disapprove.
Now you are relating interesting and useful information.
Now you have reverted to the less enlightening form you began
your post with.
Did you read the original Stait Dope article? Carefully?
It related that some deadly species of microbes, including
botulism, gas gangrene, and tetanus were resistant to
ethanol, with gas gangrene being hardly affected by 60 minutes
exposure, and tetanus able to survive 18 hours exposure.
The article also said that high concentrations of alcohol were
not necessarily the most effective.
Do you understand a bit better now?
So: you are questioning the scientific methodology used by Una
and Fierra.
Well, I will put my money on them as being more likely than
you to know the requirments of correct procedure.
It seems to me that in a study of the antiseptic effects of alcohol
it would make sense to include test soultions of zero, low, medium,
and high alcohol content.
Thanks for the link.
The issue hinges on what a “standard” drink is. I have always heard
that the standard contains the equivalent of 3-4oz likker, and that
one such drink per hour is metabolized, so three per hour consumption
would lead to an ever-increasing amount present in the body.
This sounds like something Cecil, Una and Fierra ought to follow up on.
If they need volunteers I am definitely available!
If you read the Wiki link Irishman gave in a previous post, under “Treatment”, you will see that the dialysis portion of the treatment removes the antidote from the bloodstream, too, so more has to be given to maintain therapeutic levels. It probably took that much extra just to maintain “totally trashed”, and did not reach “dead” levels.
I had not read that link.
Dialysis might provide the explanation I have been wondering about.
signal11 said:
I think the salient point is the concentration level of Clorox bleach. Typically, bleach is a solution of 3 to 6% sodium hypoclorite.
I am not sure how much chlorine that translates to. signal11 then refers to “HTH”, which is “high test hypochlorite”.
http://www.hth.co.uk/glossary.shtml
(That appears to be an Arch Chemicals site, so judge accordingly.)
HTH has a much higher concentration of hypochlorite, and corresponding higher concentration of chlorine. The 68% chlorine of this brand tells the story, compared to Chlorox household bleach.
I fail to see the source of your apparent bile. signal11 is discussing High Test Hypochlorite, which is commercially available chemical sources used for disinfection of things like pool systems. He is pointing out that these chemicals are highly reactive and come in strong concentrations that get diluted upon application to a pool, for instance, but poor handling in the undiluted form is dangerous.
bolding added for emphasis
I fail to see what relevance that is to your bringing up Cecil’s discussion of alcohol concentrations. Yes, after a certain level, more will not necessarily be better. Doesn’t mean it won’t be more dangerous.
It would also seem to me that if you are trying to test the antiseptic properties of a substance, you would consider that the substance you are using is not sterile, so it has already failed to be antiseptic. If the alcohol content in wine is not sufficient to sterilize the wine, then how can it sterilize a surface?
I asked a reasonable question:
[QUOTE=NCDane]
I would be curious to know whether anyone here can provide
comparative stats in re Chlorox as a disinfectant. For that matter,
how about Iodine?
[/QUOTE]
And got a snarky answer:
“I don’t understand this question. High enough concentrations in various forms will kill just about anything.”
IOW the answer is obvious so the question was dumb.
The relevance lies in the fact that different alcohol levels
have varying degrees of effectiveness depending on the
target, including little to no effectiveness at 90% against
the tetanus microbe. I was wondering if Chlorox and iodine
displayed similar variation depending on the concentration
and on the target.
Your question really should be directed at the specialists
who conducted the test.
However, here is my two cents: I think the idea is that you
want to test a full range of conditions in any experiment for
control purposes, and also because Mother Nature has a
record of suprising us with with unexpected, counterintuitive
and even bizzare results.
I was trying to inform you that “Clorox” is a trademarked term for chlorine. It’s a common misspelling.
Knee jerk snark - a common reaction here on the Straight Dope boards.
At this point, I should inform you that my medical specialty is infectious disease epidemiology. My civ/env engineering specialty is in water, hygiene and sanitation. I have an MPH in control of communicable diseases.
Now, back to your question. Your original question “I would be curious to know whether anyone here can provide comparative stats in re Chlorox as a disinfectant. For that matter, how about Iodine?” is too broad and covers too many topics to answer in any meaningful way on a generalized discussion board. In fact, there are a half dozen ways to read the question, all of which could be answered with a textbook sized answer.
Your follow-up snark defines your question a little - contact times for specific concentrations chlorine and iodine, but again, this is a very broad question to which there is no simple answer. What pathogen, in what environment, under what circumstances, with what chlorine products, with what delivery systems, etc. For example, there are entire field manuals devoted to chlorine usage for cholera alone.
Even given that amount of literature, there’s much we don’t know. In one particular recent hep E outbreak, I was the lead epi and watsan for the lead agency and pretty much wrote the procedure that everyone other NGO in the WHO/UN cluster followed, only to turn out months in that a lot of what we thought we knew about hep E control procedures were wrong and ineffective.
Right now, I just rolled off an job in Haiti.
So… NCDane. Would you like to rephrase your questions and comments?
Jeeeez.
Well in that case let me tip my hat to you for the important correction.
No doubt you are a highly decorated veteran of the snark wars.
OK.
Sorry, I do not believe you when you claim no meaningful answer
can be given.
For example, someone, maybe not you, but someone ought to be
able to tell us whether Clorox and iodine are effective against all
microbes, or if there are important exceptions as there are with alcohol.
And as for the environment and circumstances, this thread originated
in reponse to routine USA medical SOP, so why not reply in regard to
routine USA medical SOP, which should not differ so much (I hope)
accoring to location.
Honestly I wish you had had a better outcome.
Honesty is well and good but I would not be bashful about
drawing attention to your successes, and for the sake of
promoting your credibility that is a course you should take.
A medical error of months-long duration is not going to inspire
any confidence.
Not any more than I have above.
It’s up now. Dopetoberfest here we come!
Very interesting column but for lack of any groin swabbing it doesn’t capture my attention the way this one did.
Home-brewed beer stored in clear bottles might make a better antiseptic than that stored in green or brown. Any leftovers Una? 