Both the professional cleaners and at home cleaners were impacted.
Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
11–20 of 161 posts
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#12The only "chemicals" I use are an extremely mild lactic acid based cleaner and a pre/probiotic on toilets and kitchen tops. And I don't use any fragrances anywhere.
My allergy problems have disappeared. I really recommend this approach. Cheap chemicals are a disaster for ones health.
Microfibres are cool, but I've seen inconclusive evidence they might shed asbesto-like particles. So I'm waiting for better testing.
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#13I clean with a steamer. It doesn't project particles, and it's extremely good at disinfecting. I also use a vacuum cleaner with exceptionally low dust re-emission. And an air purifier. The only "chemicals" I use are an extremely mild lactic acid based cleaner and a pre/probiotic on toilets and kitchen tops. And I don't use any fragrances anywhere. My allergy problems have disappeared. I really recommend this approach…
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#14Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#15That is, if I wore a dust mask while I cleaned—or if I sprayed the cleaner directly into a cloth pressed against the bottle, then rubbed the cloth against the surface—would that help? It'd reduce cleanser vaporization, I'd think, but not do much to help with avoiding evaporated cleanser gas.
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#16I use vinegar for light cleaning and dusting, and rubbing alcohol for almost all other household cleaning now. Isopropyl alcohol is basically magic — it sterilizes and completely evaporates with no lingering residue or fragrances. And a steam mop for the floor.
>Alcohols are not recommended for sterilizing medical and surgical materials principally because they lack sporicidal action and they cannot penetrate protein-rich materials. Fatal postoperative wound infections with Clostridium have occurred when alcohols were used to sterilize surgical instruments contaminated with bacterial spores. [1]
It's probably fine for most household uses, but it does not sterilize like you said it does, and if you're trying to clean something that you know is contaminated by disease-causing bacteria (eg cleaning the bathroom after someone has had the stomach flu) or someone immuno-suppressed lives in your house, you probably should reach for something stronger.
Isopropyl alcohol also, like you mentioned, evaporates quickly. You mention this as a benefit, but fast evaporation also means that you are likely inhaling a lot of alcohol particles as you clean, which is not good for your lung health either.
1: https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/guidelines/disinfection...
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#17But there's nothing about lung cancer, which makes the impact on lung health not remotely similar to a pack a day cigarette habit.
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#18I switched to vinegar-based cleaning solution. High dose inhalation of acetic acid seems to induce an acute reaction in mice without long-term effect, so I'm hoping that chronic low dose inhalation won't have an effect in humans either.
Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes
#19I use vinegar for light cleaning and dusting, and rubbing alcohol for almost all other household cleaning now. Isopropyl alcohol is basically magic — it sterilizes and completely evaporates with no lingering residue or fragrances. And a steam mop for the floor.