Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Submit your paper to J Biol Methods today!
Photo

Best method for sterilizing plastics


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#16 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 31 August 2013 - 06:05 AM

I think most workers use no more than 2 or 3 a day.  You also must address the safety of other persons entering the manufacturing area - persons who do not normally work there.  It's such a small expense and worker safety is so important that there really isn't that much of a question in my mind.  Just in economics, costs associated with just one worker injury will wipe out the paltry savings of reuse - and these are your coworkers and friends at risk.  Don't think workers aren't aware of this either - even tho' the risk is minor, they'll know the inconvenience that tempts them occasionally to go without this PPE is based on savings in the pennies.   



#17 hobglobin

hobglobin

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional...

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,548 posts
104
Excellent

Posted 31 August 2013 - 07:21 AM

Ethanol does not and will not sterilize.

 

Sure it will not sterilise but disinfect the plastics (as the other chemicals too). I'm quite sure that the topic starter meant this as sterilisation and disinfection is often mixed up in colloquial language. Perhaps we should have mentioned that before. Anyway for sterilising usually you e.g. autoclave stuff which would be here like "using a sledgehammer to crack a nut". wink.png


One must presume that long and short arguments contribute to the same end. - Epicurus
...except casandra's that belong to the funniest, most interesting and imaginative (or over-imaginative?) ones, I suppose.

That is....if she posts at all.


#18 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 31 August 2013 - 07:29 AM

These are flexible porous or bladed devices that will be soiled with ear wax.  Ethanol can not be relied on to disinfect or sterilize, esp. vs some viruses.  



#19 hobglobin

hobglobin

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional...

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,548 posts
104
Excellent

Posted 31 August 2013 - 08:59 AM

These are flexible porous or bladed devices that will be soiled with ear wax.  Ethanol can not be relied on to disinfect or sterilize, esp. vs some viruses.  

As far as I remember the storage boxes and not the ear plugs itself should be disinfected or sterilized. If the ears and then the boxes are that dirty add a drop of detergent.

Anyway even a stronger detergent such as SDS should be good enough to avoid cross-contamination as it is a microbicide too. It's a small company not a S2 or S3 laboratory.

Only if someone has an ear infection I'd be careful and heavily disinfect the boxes with a stronger agent (or give the person a separate one).


Edited by hobglobin, 31 August 2013 - 09:03 AM.

One must presume that long and short arguments contribute to the same end. - Epicurus
...except casandra's that belong to the funniest, most interesting and imaginative (or over-imaginative?) ones, I suppose.

That is....if she posts at all.


#20 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:24 AM

Still not sure of the dynamics - whose ear plugs go in what box(es) and when, when they're removed, when the attempt at disinfection is made and who is responsible to do that repeatedly and adequately, how you'll assure being alerted to ear infection - presuming the person knows - and what will be done then, etc.  Please recall this is a matter of employee health, employer liability and savings pennies.  Placing a person in charge of this negates the paltry savings and deferring to employees themselves to do it will mean it's not going to be done. The greater issue is anything that inconveniences employee use of PPE. As I said, I don't think too many have practical experience in these matters. 

 

I've worked in industry for decades and now consult - I've seen only disposable ear plugs and safety glasses

 

Appreciate the best guesses of ethanol and now surfactants.  they sound reasonable but will likely not sustain efficacy in practice.  SDS in controlled application does have some microbicidal effect, in repeated and dilute applications in soiled context, it will probably have bugs adapted in a biofilm.



#21 koan616

koan616

    member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
0
Neutral

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:49 AM

Thanks for your input. We have decided it is too dangerous and have reverted back to discarding the ear plugs and boxes. Worth a try though.

#22 hobglobin

hobglobin

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional...

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,548 posts
104
Excellent

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:18 AM

this dude seems not really interested in our nitpicking discussion laugh.png , therefore it's time to stop it...


One must presume that long and short arguments contribute to the same end. - Epicurus
...except casandra's that belong to the funniest, most interesting and imaginative (or over-imaginative?) ones, I suppose.

That is....if she posts at all.


#23 pito

pito

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
82
Excellent

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:57 PM

Still not sure of the dynamics - whose ear plugs go in what box(es) and when, when they're removed, when the attempt at disinfection is made and who is responsible to do that repeatedly and adequately, how you'll assure being alerted to ear infection - presuming the person knows - and what will be done then, etc.  Please recall this is a matter of employee health, employer liability and savings pennies.  Placing a person in charge of this negates the paltry savings and deferring to employees themselves to do it will mean it's not going to be done. The greater issue is anything that inconveniences employee use of PPE. As I said, I don't think too many have practical experience in these matters. 

 

I've worked in industry for decades and now consult - I've seen only disposable ear plugs and safety glasses

 

Appreciate the best guesses of ethanol and now surfactants.  they sound reasonable but will likely not sustain efficacy in practice.  SDS in controlled application does have some microbicidal effect, in repeated and dilute applications in soiled context, it will probably have bugs adapted in a biofilm.

Are you speaking of disposable safety glasses too?


If you don't know it, then ask it! Better to ask and look foolish to some than not ask and stay stupid.


#24 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 01 September 2013 - 03:45 AM

Yes Pito.  Unless workers require prescription eyewear, practice in my experience is to supply individually wrapped disposable safety glasses. These are supplied in bulk at points of entry to manufacturing plants. 



#25 pito

pito

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
82
Excellent

Posted 01 September 2013 - 04:08 AM

Yes Pito.  Unless workers require prescription eyewear, practice in my experience is to supply individually wrapped disposable safety glasses. These are supplied in bulk at points of entry to manufacturing plants. 

Really?

 

I never heard of this! Trow away safety glasses???

 

This is, in my opinion, really bad....

 

I think people should become a bit more aware of their personal material...

I can understand the trow away ear plugs... but trow away glasses....


If you don't know it, then ask it! Better to ask and look foolish to some than not ask and stay stupid.


#26 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 01 September 2013 - 04:17 AM

Again Pito, you have to be familiar with work in that context to understand.  I know it seems wasteful and excuses what you might see as worker responsibility.   Studies have definitely confirmed that compliance is substantially improved by this practice.  The simpler you make it, the more workers can concentrate on their work.  Eye injury is a higher risk concern in those industries.



#27 pito

pito

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
82
Excellent

Posted 01 September 2013 - 04:29 AM

Again Pito, you have to be familiar with work in that context to understand.  I know it seems wasteful and excuses what you might see as worker responsibility.   Studies have definitely confirmed that compliance is substantially improved by this practice.  The simpler you make it, the more workers can concentrate on their work.  Eye injury is a higher risk concern in those industries.

I am not stating that they should neglect their protection. I just think that safety glasses can be re-used many times.

 

In what kind of companies do they have this kind of trow away goggles than? I wonder...

 

 

When it comes to compliance, do you mean that workes are more inclined to use the safety glasses and earprotection if they can take them out of boxes standing in the factory at certain spaces?

(meaning that if they had to take care of their own protective stuff they would take more risks and for example enter the factory without the protective gear because they "lost" it or misplaced it?)

 

I can understand it, however, I still find it a waste and pretty stupid.
Where would you draw the line btw? What with head gear? A helmet? Persnonal or helmets everywhere to take? Same with lab coats? Protective shoes etc...


If you don't know it, then ask it! Better to ask and look foolish to some than not ask and stay stupid.


#28 Phil Geis

Phil Geis

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
15
Good

Posted 01 September 2013 - 05:02 AM

Workers are free to reuse the disposable glasses - and are supplied with prescription or more substantial nonprescription protection if they desire.  Yes, that's what I mean by compliance.   I understand your thinking but considering the personal and corporate impact of single incident (esp. of eye damage), industry has adopted this as an effective measure. The concept is to facilitate use of PPE at relevant junctures.  A lot of folks appoint a worker in each unit as the safety leader whose responsibility it is to make sure all are wearing appropriate PPE.

 

You can get a pretty good idea of options by looking at Grainger for some of these.

Head protection is supplied as well - just not disposable.  workers typically keep their units and, if forgotten or visitors, units are in lockers at entry points. 

Lab coats - some use a service like Cintas that washes soiled garments and keeps an on-site closet stocked with clean ones.  Some use disposable lab coats.

Steel-toed shoes are provided on an individual basis.  Visitor wear protective units (not shoes, toe covers) from lockers.   



#29 hobglobin

hobglobin

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional...

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,548 posts
104
Excellent

Posted 01 September 2013 - 08:09 AM

 

I can understand it, however, I still find it a waste and pretty stupid.

Where would you draw the line btw? What with head gear? A helmet? Persnonal or helmets everywhere to take? Same with lab coats? Protective shoes etc...

 

BTW in 3D cinemas it's the same (at least here), you always get new glasses (if you want or not) and can return after watching the film the used ones. I hope they clean and reuse them or at least recycle them somehow, but not sure. Anyway for such large enterprises this seems cheaper than anything else.


One must presume that long and short arguments contribute to the same end. - Epicurus
...except casandra's that belong to the funniest, most interesting and imaginative (or over-imaginative?) ones, I suppose.

That is....if she posts at all.


#30 pito

pito

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
82
Excellent

Posted 01 September 2013 - 10:05 AM

 

 

I can understand it, however, I still find it a waste and pretty stupid.

Where would you draw the line btw? What with head gear? A helmet? Persnonal or helmets everywhere to take? Same with lab coats? Protective shoes etc...

 

BTW in 3D cinemas it's the same (at least here), you always get new glasses (if you want or not) and can return after watching the film the used ones. I hope they clean and reuse them or at least recycle them somehow, but not sure. Anyway for such large enterprises this seems cheaper than anything else.

 

To be honest: never been to a 3D movie, are you talking about the "paper" kind of glasses or?

 

Same on airplanes, often on international flights they give you trow away earphones... Its a shame how much is trown away in the end.

 


If you don't know it, then ask it! Better to ask and look foolish to some than not ask and stay stupid.





Home - About - Terms of Service - Privacy - Contact Us

©1999-2013 Protocol Online, All rights reserved.