Nothing but net: wiping one's butt and keeping fingers only on toilet paper--bacteria and handwash

I poop, wipe, and proudly, as usual when it happens, note the snappy and sanitary efficiency when a solid clean (by feel) and toilet paper release into the bowl goes by with professional aplomb, and fingers are completely as dry and unpooped as before I sat down. (People who have a pet dog know the feeling when they neatly bag the doggie doo, sometimes without missing a step or pausing in their own conversation.)

So how much bacteria and other nasties have got onto my hand relative to that earlier hygienic-enough state? I thought about this OP while washing my hands with soap after that sterling effort, and wondered at the habit in this case.

That habit is well earned, and no matter what I don’t plan to start questioning orders, preferring not to have to do a post-game analysis each time.

But did the washing of my hand do anything? By “anything” how much was the factor is the airborne bacteria my (shielded) hand was in?

Even if you don’t touch the poop, you touch other dirty things like the toilet lid and the handle.

If you touched your underwear, you have detectable levels of fecal bacteria on your hands.

A benefit of washing your hands every time you’re in a bathroom is that you’re getting rid of germs you picked up outside of the bathroom.

If you lowered the toilet seat to sit down, you need to wash your hands.

Maybe you’re neat and tidy when sitting on the toilet, but let’s face it. Some people are pigs.

I would surmise, under those exact conditions, not much.

I haven’t seen comparisons of toilet seat–underwear or toilet seat–“other things”–which were suggested in two different posts upthread as arguments, generally speaking, for a net gain of bacteria over my OP general, pre-poop “hygienic-enough” state.

I bring this up because I have seen the widely passed-on information something to the effect of “your desk at the office is [dirtier/“more bacteria”==OP “hygienic enough”]” than the toilet lid.

How does that bit of misunderstood information go with the drift of the thread? Seems to me if true, than it’s a wash (heh), certainly at “the office.”

What most people think: Bathroom dirty (lots of germs), must wash hands

Closer to reality: Everything dirty (same number of germs as bathroom, or more), bathroom is a good place to use to wash hands on a semi-regular basis

I’ve sometimes wondered how much bacteria penetrate the toilet paper in the process. I’m assuming more for those (ahem) less-solid stools.

Ahh, the things the king contemplates while he’s on the throne…

If the poop doesn’t get on your hand, I don’t think there are any bacteria that are fast enough (if even capable) of penetrating through the paper and getting on your hands for any reasonable time spent holding the paper post-wipe. A quick Google says the average bacteria moves at 50 µm/s - I have no idea how that relates to thickness of paper, but I’m certain some here will figure it out.

The Perfect Master Speaks

Tangential thought - what about wet wipes? Does bacteria “move through” the damp medium of a wet wipe faster than dry toilet paper?

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.” – George Orwell, Animal Farm

As others have said, even if you don’t get fecal matter on your hands, there are bacteria which will migrate through the entire nether region and onto clothing, et cetera. However, I think the consistently most dirt place in many bathrooms is the door handle on the way out, soiled by people who have not washed their hands and accumulating progressively more and varied bacteria.

Stranger