If disinfectants can only kill 99.9% of germs, what would it take to kill the remaining .01%?

Personally I am frightened to go into the hospital setting because of germs, and I am afraid of one in particular Clostridium Difficile. This is a gram-positive anaerobic bacterium that forms spores which are particularly difficult to eradicate. Spores are particularly bad because they become airborne, and then can settle on surfaces, only to be come airborne again.

Now try to clean that up! It is one of "the most common hospital (nosocomial) infections around the world. In the United States alone, it causes approximately three million cases of diarrhea and colitis per year."

Yikes! This is basically an epidemic, and the CDC is very concerned about it. Especially because this bacteria is becoming antibiotic resistant.

I would be worried about what is going on in the hospitals, because later on, it becomes a problem within the community, and then maybe your home. According to the CDC: "Because alcohol does not kill C. Difficile spores, use of soap and water is more efficacious than alcohol-based hand rubs.

However, early experimental data suggest that, even using soap and water, the removal of C. Diffile spores is more challenging than the removal or inactivation of other common pathogens" They recommend: "Use an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-registered hypochlorite-based disinfectant for environmental surface disinfection after cleaning in accordance with label instructions; generic sources of hypochlorite (e.g. , household chlorine bleach) also may be appropriately diluted and used." I've included a link to the CDC guidelines for hospital infection control.

Duenhsiyen.

This is a good question. I don't think that if you did a scientific study on how much bacteria is killed from cleaning it would come out to 99.9%. It seems that this is just a clever way of saying it kills most of the bacteria.

If they said it killed 100% of all germs they would be accused of lying when the product inevitably did not kill every last germ. It would depend on what bacteria is concentrated in the area you are cleaning. I'm sure there are more resilient germs out there that would only be 50-60% disinfected while using the same cleaning product.

Cleaning chemicals do not selectively kill germs, just like pesticides do not selectively kill bugs. They just get rid of as much as possible. Bugs that are good for crops are killed when applying pesticides.So no, the 0.01% is not good bacteria, (although I am sure Lysol would want you to believe that) also we should not be worried about that last 0.01%.

These germs have been around for far longer than Lysol has been. Its not that we cannot kill 100% of these germs, it is very possible. The problem is, 1.

The chemicals can be very dangerous to humans, and 2. They can be very expensive, if you really want to kill all these bacteria you can buy concentrated Sporicidin. This chemical is found in a lot of other dis infecting wipes.

It claims to kill 100% of bacteria, but I do not know if it kills bacteria spores, which most cleaning chemicals don't. enhance-it.com/sporicidin.htm Also if said bacteria was not killed the first time, going over it again would not help because the germ is most likely immune to whatever chemical you are applying. The article in my source gives pretty detailed explanations on different ways that cleaning chemicals work, you should give it a read.

I think there are a few important things to note here. 1. The percentage of germs it quotes to kill will be the percentage of germs the chemical they use will kill.

The true proportion of germs killed will relate to the method of application (wipes, liquid, spray, etc. ) and the surface itself. What this really means is that 99.9% of germs this product makes contact with will die.2. The number 99.9% is a rounding down, while the true number is likely very close to 100% it would be inaccurate to round this number up to 100%.

What 100% says is that it is flawless, their have never and will never be any microbes that can survive this product.3. You can pretty much assume that the real number of germs killed is 100% of those making contact with the product. A microbe surviving direct contact with a chemical like this is a similar to a person surviving direct contact with a lava flow.

Germs don't generally build much of a resistance to chemicals like this because there usually aren't any survivors, and those that do usually just survive because they were protected somehow by external factors. 4. Disinfectants will kill all helpful and harmful germs.

Generally though germs are only considered helpful once they are inside your body. And as long as you aren't on antibiotics they should be able to sustain themselves. Otherwise a large source of helpful bacteria is in our food, so unless you are disinfecting the food directly this shouldn't be a problem.

Also these kinds of 99.9% products are not consumed, these are powerful chemicals and generally should never be consumed. 5. Cleaning thoroughly will always improve the level of disinfection.

It all depends on what you are cleaning and with what. Smooth surfaces are easy to clean as there aren't many places for germs to hide, whereas on rough surfaces liquids can be better as it can penetrate the cracks.

The problem is that bacteria are organisms that are evolving and coming up with ways to resist their elimination (I suspect if you were bacteria you would try to do the same). In fact, there is decent evidence that anti-bacterial soaps and hand sanitizers are just creating organisms that are resistant to the antimicrobial chemicals in these products (though not exactly the same, it’s like the weeds that developed a resistance to Roundup because of its increasing use) and on top of that may also kill some of the good bacteria. On top of all that, the claims of 99.99% or 99% are often based on ideal lab conditions.

Real world conditions can significantly decrease their effectiveness (online.wsj.com/article/SB126092257189692...). So, while nothing is 100% certain, washing your hands frequently and correctly is considered the best option to stay healthy. Note: According to the CDC that means, washing with soap, warm water and long enough to sing happy birthday two times – about 25-30 seconds.

Washing or sanitizing twice would likely eliminate more germs, but the law of diminishing returns applies here – especially if you do things right the first time. If you really want to up the ante – scrub your hands (get under your nails, etc. ) instead of just washing them – that will get at germs you might not get by just simply washing. Really bored?

Here's 56 pages on hand hygiene from the CDC: cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr5116.pdf.

Microbiology teaches us that germs out populate us by exponential amounts. There are more bacteria cells in your body then there are human cells. When faced with those kinds of numbers evolution acts fast and outlier germs that are resistant to most disinfectants show up.

These outlier microbs are is such few numbers that we don't really need to worry about them. We get the vast bulk of them with our modern disinfectants and our immune systems take care of the rest if we com in contact with them. Extremophiles are germs that live in extreme environments.

Any disinfectant can't hope to eliminate these kinds of germs. But it is not likely that these sort of things are in your house anyways. The disinfectant can't advertize 100 % because that would lend people to expect precisely that when it is not entirely true.

For the most part you can think of 99.9% and being as close as we can get to 100% as you would want considering the damaging affects of the chemicals needed to achieve 100%.

They can't say 100%. It might not kill 100%, so they have to cover thier asses. Simple.It usually does kill 100%.

Some germs are stronger and some germs mutate to build even STRONGER resistances. It's like many slogans, many being medications with side effects."1/1000 had a rash".............

I think to kill 100% of the germs you would have to wash it down with something that would be toxic to humans also. A low level laser may also do the trick. But I don't think any kind of wipe can kill all germs in all situations.

This probably has something to do with the Lawyers.

The only way I know to completely sterilize something from all life is to use nuclear radiation. This is used commonly for medical instruments used in medical procedures. NOTE: These isotopes can be used from spent nuclear "waste" for all your nuclear haters out there.

I also saw a similar process a mythbusters experiment for "double dipping. " They needed to ensure that the chips, dip and salsa were completely microbe free, so they took it to some facility that blasted the contents with radiation. Somehow the products were still edible, but flavorless.

It's possible that the last .01% is actually already dead. UNdead. The only option.

99.99 is misleading. Disinfectant claims of 99.99% are based on lab trials under perfect conditions (which are rarely met in real-life usage), the companies are allowed to retest in order to meet the claimed percentage, and they don't have to kill 99.99 percent of all types of bacteria, just 99.99% of a "representative sample" of bacteria. What could do it?

If designed correctly, low-temperature plasma could possibly kill all bacteria. This technology is currently used to sterilization of medical instruments. During sterilization, the plasma can touch all surfaces (a failing of most over-the-counter disinfectants).

A low-temperature plasma device has already undergone trials for use on human skin. FYI - Radiation: An over-the-top suggestion. For those that suggest radiation, don't.

Radiation does not kill all cells. Deinococcus radiodurans is an example of radiation resistant bacteria that can repair it's own DNA after being blasted with 1.5 million rads of gamma radiation (3,000 times a deadly dose for humans).

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.