The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom • Hacker News Board

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#71

Post by ianai » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 4:57 PM UTC

Krssst wrote: post #67

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow I guess I never found those comfortable and effective masks. Maybe people are different? What fits one doesn't fit another? It's fun to earn internet points by claiming to be astonished at how dumb others are, and how much we have figured things out. Maybe after several years of this, the game is growing old. Tolerance, understanding, consideration used to be virtues. But not internet virtues I guess.

I tried two kind of N95. One (actually KF94) uses the ears or the neck for support but ends up either hurting my ears or my nose. The second (3m aura) has two elastics that go around the head, splitting the load, and some padding around the nose. I find those very comfortable although I guess the airtightness could be an issue for some people. Just in case you never tried it and the pandemic situation starts warranti…

Maybe I’m just lucky. Or maybe I’m just used to being uncomfortable from the decades of fighting migraines sans modern medicine. But I pretty easily wore N95s at work for entire shifts at times. Yes there are annoyances but I’ll take it over even getting the common cold or flu.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#72

Post by burnished » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 4:57 PM UTC

14 wrote: post #62

loeg wrote: post #3

Tl;dr: ArtNaturals made hand sanitizer with very high levels of benzene (a carcinogen) and after a fire and runoff into the Dominguez Channel, produced a bunch of hydrogen sulfide (the "rotten eggs" smelling gas). When the FDA reimposed pre-pandemic sanitizer rules, companies were forced to dispose of the crap they produced under the lax rules. Some tried to do so by giving it away to schools or illegally dumping it…

Now I am a little uneasy about the sanitizer I bought. I walked into Walmart one day and they had these giant bottles of liquid hand sanitizer with a 80% alcohol content and it works great and doesn’t leave a residue. It was on for 25cents a bottle when normally something that size would sell for about $8. I couldn’t believe they were getting rid of it for so cheap so bout about 100 bottles and have been using it for…

Looks like there are kits in the 60-100$ range, a local college chemistry lab might also be able to do it, there may also be a simple test you can apply - sounds like much more effort than what you put in acquiring, might be worthwhile to just cut it at a loss if you think it is a risk at all

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#73

Post by slily » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 4:58 PM UTC

rtsil wrote: post #37

globular-toast wrote: post #11

Interesting that everyone is talking in past tense in this thread. Where I live hand sanitiser is still everywhere and people still use it all the time. I don't recall ever seeing it outside of hospitals prior to the pandemic.

I still use them (and masks). I haven't had a cold, the flu or any of the usual seasonal sicknesses in 3 years, and this spring my pollen allergy was nowhere to be seen. My quality of life is significantly better ever since I started using them. Washing my hands for 30 seconds at least also helps.

Neither have I, outside of COVID-19-delta, and I haven't followed any recommendation (outside of wearing a cloth mask indoors when required). How do you know it's not a coincidence?

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#74

Post by pcurve » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 4:58 PM UTC

simonbutt wrote: post #65

That first photo has to be Midjourney. Have we hit the turning point where AI art is suddenly embedded in everything?

Doesn't look like she's using MJ yet? https://www.instagram.com/saharrrana/?hl=en

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#75

Post by ianai » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 4:59 PM UTC

fredsmith219 wrote: post #63

local_crmdgeon wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Not the poster, but I am immunocompromised. So I mask.

I just plum read too much about immunology and pathogens during the pandemic. Plus being able to opt out of pollen and flu season is just a duh, why not. Yes our bodies are good at fighting off stuff. Doesn’t mean I need to roll the dice with everything all the time.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#76

Post by sargun » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 5:00 PM UTC

loeg wrote: post #3

Tl;dr: ArtNaturals made hand sanitizer with very high levels of benzene (a carcinogen) and after a fire and runoff into the Dominguez Channel, produced a bunch of hydrogen sulfide (the "rotten eggs" smelling gas). When the FDA reimposed pre-pandemic sanitizer rules, companies were forced to dispose of the crap they produced under the lax rules. Some tried to do so by giving it away to schools or illegally dumping it…

I'm curious, where does the benzene come from? Isn't hand sanitizer just ethanol with scents added, and maybe a gelling agent?

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#77

Post by burnished » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 5:02 PM UTC

perardi wrote: post #61

pierat wrote: post #53

Wow, this article really makes me feel like I dodged the bullet for our household when I realized that 95% (190 proof) Everclear was available for $35/1.75l I did the chemistry math and figured 3 parts Everclear:1 part water equalled 71.25% ethyl alcohol, within the recommended of the WHO. I even tried adding in food grade aloe to help not be as damaging on the skin (instead of water). Worked really well too. We didn…

Yeah, repurposing Everclear got me through the pandemic. I cut it with Diet Coke, and a splash of lime, and drank it to help sanitize my system of coronavirus particles. Kept me COVID-free. I think. I don’t really remember much of the past 3 years for some reason, drinking that every day…but no nagging cough!

Yes, for me it turned out that I had already been practicing social distancing for some time and had gotten quite good at it. Cheap beer and video games helped me be a model citizen

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#78

Post by bourgoin » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 5:03 PM UTC

sithadmin wrote: post #22

commandlinefan wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worry about overuse of hand sanitizer creating antibiotic resistant "superbugs" as we've been told for decades... but I sure as hell can't go to a gas station or a grocery store without washing my hands with hand sanitizer any more. I feel like I can see the germs now.

I've never encountered a hand sanitizer with antibiotics in it. They're alcohol-based, and kill bacteria by destroying their cellular membrane and screwing up proteins inside organisms that absorb it. They're not going to cause antibiotic resistance.

There have existed hand sanitizer formulations containing Triclosan or BZK instead of alcohol, although those compounds are more commonly used in anti-bacterial soaps. Triclosan was particularly controversial because of its potential to cause antibiotic resistance and also for being an endocrine disruptor. During the second half of the last decade, its usage was widely restricted by regulatory agencies and it was phased out of a ton of consumer products.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#79

Post by burnished » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 5:03 PM UTC

neoflame wrote: post #69

danmaz74 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Couldn't be real" is a complete misinterpretation of the paper. The "medical establishment" asserts that many diseases are transmitted by aerosol (ie very small droplets), but many more - and especially those similar to covid-19 - are transmitted by larger droplets, which travel less far. This isn't anything trivial as your comment makes it look like.

Citation 3 of the linked paper is https://twitter.com/who/status/1243972193169616898 . I don't see how a tweet by the WHO beginning with "FACT: #COVID19 is NOT airborne" can be construed as anything but a denial that COVID-19 is airborne.

They were referencing this

>the medical establishment's position that airborne transmission couldn't be real because it reminded everyone too much of miasma theory

In the post they were responding to

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#80

Post by neilv » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 5:05 PM UTC

14 wrote: post #62

loeg wrote: post #3

Tl;dr: ArtNaturals made hand sanitizer with very high levels of benzene (a carcinogen) and after a fire and runoff into the Dominguez Channel, produced a bunch of hydrogen sulfide (the "rotten eggs" smelling gas). When the FDA reimposed pre-pandemic sanitizer rules, companies were forced to dispose of the crap they produced under the lax rules. Some tried to do so by giving it away to schools or illegally dumping it…

Now I am a little uneasy about the sanitizer I bought. I walked into Walmart one day and they had these giant bottles of liquid hand sanitizer with a 80% alcohol content and it works great and doesn’t leave a residue. It was on for 25cents a bottle when normally something that size would sell for about $8. I couldn’t believe they were getting rid of it for so cheap so bout about 100 bottles and have been using it for…

> an independent lab in Connecticut called Valisure announced that it had found benzene in the company’s sanitizer. [...] Not long after, a horrified nurse in Arizona captured a photograph of ArtNaturals bottles on sale at her local Walmart for 50 cents, with a sign nearby saying that they used to be $2.97.

Your heirs might have a viable lawsuit.