That people like the author of the article proudly don't wash their hands after being in a bathroom is a huge argument for washing your hands whenever you've been in public and trying to avoid touching your face if you haven't washed your hands.

I don't think this has anything to do with being "proud" when it's part of a study summary that said the water you'd wash with commonly contains e.coli and advises a different cleaning method instead -- misguided as that conclusion may be when considering other types of viruses (I'm not an expert and cannot judge either argument's merit). Seems strange/unfair to lump them in with people that "proudly" (do you know anyone like that??) don't clean their hands

To quote George Carlin (careful, swearwords ahead):

  When I was a little boy in New York City in the 1940s, we swam in the Hudson River and it was filled with raw sewage okay? We swam in raw sewage! You know... to cool off! And at that time, the big fear was polio; thousands of kids died from polio every year but you know something? In my neighbourhood, no one ever got polio! No one! Ever! You know why? Cause we swam in raw sewage! It strengthened our immune systems! The polio never had a prayer; we were tempered in raw shit! So personally, I never take any special precautions against germs. I don't shy away from people that sneeze and cough, I don't wipe off the telephone, I don't cover the toilet seat, and if I drop food on the floor, I pick it up and eat it! Yes I do. Even if I'm at a sidewalk café! In Calcutta! The poor section! On New Year's morning during a soccer riot! And you know something? In spite of all that so-called risky behaviour, I never get infections, I don't get them, I don't get colds, I don't get flu, I don't get headaches, I don't get upset stomach, you know why? Cause I got a good strong immune system and it gets a lot of practice.

I do not advise taking comedic medical advice.

Oh, it gets a lot better, I just don't want to quote the entire thing. It's very worthwhile to watch this skit in its entirety.

It's the first piece I ever read/saw of G.C., it made a lasting impression...

Quoting from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Carlin#Death

Carlin had a history of heart problems,[82][83] including heart attacks in 1978, 1982, and 1991.[52] He also had an arrhythmia requiring an ablation procedure in 2003, a significant episode of heart failure in 2005, and two angioplasties on undisclosed dates.[84] In the 2022 documentary George Carlin's American Dream, Jerry Hamza—Carlin's manager from 1980 until his death—said Carlin underwent many heart surgeries in a short period toward the end of his life. Carlin's publicist Jeff Abraham said that he once lifted his shirt after coming to a gig from the hospital to show Abraham his torso, whereupon Abraham said it looked like a science project.

Dude had his first heart attack at the age of 41, and lived four years less than today's median life expectancy in the United States.

Unfortunately there are people out there (a non-trivial number) who actually believe that kind of macho BS. Knowing that, Carlin's jokes don't hit the same.

I don't think that's a good argument. If I went this route, I would have to forgo Monty Python, Key & Peele, Mitchell and Webb, and god knows who else. There are always people believing this hyperbole, that's why it's funny in the first place.

But the good jokes either go extremely over the top, or actually have a joke part. The quoted one just repeats a thing that people believe. Reading it, I can't tell if it's supposed to be mocking the position, or is he a genuine grumpy guy complaining about kids these days and their cleaning.

I'm sure you can find the whole sketch on Youtube. I can only recommend watching it, unless you are allergic to swearwords - there are lots of those. Look for [George Carlin Germs]. But I guess the audience on HN generally knows how to figure it out by themselves.

You're welcome ;)

Sanitizer also does not remove dirt and grime from your hands.

At least the dirt and grime will have fewer pathogens

Unfortunately the reason you need mechanical cleaning is that dirt and grime prevent disinfectants from reaching pathogens or being effective once they do reach them.

Not when the "dirt" in question may be literal feces.

And then touch the knob to open the door... the same knob half the other lavatory users touched with completely unwashed hands.

You should push the knob with a paper towel instead. I do this at all small public restrooms.

Good job the Brits are asleep as they’d be cracking up at these comments.

Or, rather than trying to keep your hands sterile which is a futile exercise, doing what the military teaches - keep your hands away from your face (eyes, nose, mouth) and don't scratch your skin.

The reason you care about germs on your hands is because they make you sick when you stick them in your body orifaces. Otherwise, those germs don't matter.

Wash hands before meals otherwise.

> Wash hands before meals otherwise.

considering the topic is about airlines and flights, you would presumably be eating a meal after this and not be able to easily wash your hands again.

That makes sense, but the idea of no touching things after becomes an impossible process considering fecal coliform contamination is everywhere.

Related rant: The widespread stupidity around bathroom doors calls the intelligence of humans into (even more) question.

Airplane-bathroom doors open out because they must. But the number of public-bathroom doors that inexplicably open INWARD is mind-boggling. Instead of simply having doors open outward, millions of bathrooms create mountains of paper waste by having them open inward and encouraging users to waste a paper towel to grab its handle.

Galling stupidity: https://www.instagram.com/p/BlO_-jmg4o7/

The reason that interior doors in general open inwards is fire safety. Doors that only open outwards can be obstructed from the outside, preventing evacuation.

More places are adopting bi-directional doors and foot handles now.

> Airplane-bathroom doors open out

It's a mix. There's a number of split doors designs that break in half and fold inwards.

The better advice is to ask the flight attendants for a cup of bottled water and use that instead, especially for brushing teeth.

> especially for brushing teeth

As someone in a dental family and with excellent teeth, you absolutely do not need to brush your teeth on a flight.

Not everyone is the same. My teeth and gums are not that good and I definitely feel much better brushing them after every meal (though I'm aware I should wait after acidic food).

(time-wise, I started increasing brushing after the situation got worse. The root cause for the worsening was not seeing a dentist for two years. Don't do that, definitely see a dentist periodically. And the dentist seems happy with my brushing decision, need to do as much as I can to prevent plaque formation)

For airplanes, I buy three small bottles of water before flight (15hr flight). And I use that for drinking, rinsing and washing my toothbrush. While we cannot bring bottled water from outside the airport to the embarking area, there are usually shops in that area that sell small bottles.

As someone who's never had even a single cavity, when I brush it, it's not because of dental health but for comfort.

Sure, I hate the way my teeth feel if I don't brush. But I also don't care enough to use a gross plane bathroom.

If I'm that concerned, I'd use some mouthwash.

If I'm taking an 8 hour flight after hours at the airport, transit, etc. and am already using the plane bathroom for physiological reasons, I don't mind a quick brush with bottled water...

16 hour flight?

If you have good dental hygiene missing a brushing shouldn’t be a big deal. It can wait until you reach your destination.

It's fine. If you're consistent, you can go a few days and it won't make a difference to your health.

You'll survive.

There's a YouTuber named Stig Shift who chronicles his job as an airline mechanic and he insists the bathroom water is clean enough to drink.

It says right on the bathroom faucet that it isn’t for drinking - anyone brushing their teeth with the sink water is a fool.

Newer planes do not have that sign and even supply paper drinking cups https://i0.wp.com/roomreviews.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06...

I think that's a bit of a harsh take. People will use what they can get, and they may be assuming the signage was placed there for compliance/legal box-ticking reasons rather than because it will actually make them sick.

This is a pretty dumb report overall. What do I do if I'm on a plane with a 3.85 rating, or a "B"? How are these measures supposed to influence my decision making? I'll just follow the spirit of the ridiculous recommendations:

NEVER drink any water onboard; only drink alcohol-based hand sanitizer containing at least 60% alcohol instead

Also it doesn’t kill c diff bacteria

isnt most of the advantage of soap is that it gets the germs off your skin and washes them down the drain. the soap does not have to kill them to work.

It's both. But you rinse the soap off, and if that's just bringing more coliform bacteria onto your hands, you then need a way to deal with those.

I thought that soap did something more than just wash the nasties off - something about it interfering with cell walls of viruses/bacteria and therefore killing them

Looked it up

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3037063/

Handwashing is thought to be effective for the prevention of transmission of diarrhoea pathogens. However it is not conclusive that handwashing with soap is more effective at reducing contamination with bacteria associated with diarrhoea than using water only. In this study 20 volunteers contaminated their hands deliberately by touching door handles and railings in public spaces. They were then allocated at random to (1) handwashing with water, (2) handwashing with non-antibacterial soap and (3) no handwashing. Each volunteer underwent this procedure 24 times, yielding 480 samples overall. Bacteria of potential faecal origin (mostly Enterococcus and Enterobacter spp.) were found after no handwashing in 44% of samples. Handwashing with water alone reduced the presence of bacteria to 23% (p < 0.001). Handwashing with plain soap and water reduced the presence of bacteria to 8% (comparison of both handwashing arms: p < 0.001). The effect did not appear to depend on the bacteria species. Handwashing with non-antibacterial soap and water is more effective for the removal of bacteria of potential faecal origin from hands than handwashing with water alone and should therefore be more useful for the prevention of transmission of diarrhoeal diseases.

Why not use antibacterial soap instead of NON-antibacterial soap? Wouldn’t it be even more effective?

The implication of antibacterial soap is that it contains antibiotics, which leads to resistance in bacterial populations. Non-antibacterial soap is a misnomer, it is plenty effective against bacteria, but kills the bacteria mechanically.

Thank you. I didn’t know.

It gets into your gut and kills beneficial bacteria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_microbiota#Effects_of_anti...

Presumably the number they are doing is less than 2 otherwise this is disgusting.