Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

independent.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 161 posts

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#61

Post by WiseWeasel »

In a past life as a lab tech for sterile environments, we used Spor-klenz, mostly a diluted combination of glacial acetic acid (pure distilled vinegar) and sodium hypochlorite (concentrated bleach), to kill statistically approaching anything on a surface you need sterilized. Upon application, they form chlorine gas, notorious as a chemical warfare agent in WWI. It must be used in a ventilated area, and with a respirator for any kind of prolonged exposure. Use of this combination of chemicals in an unventilated area without protective gear is sternly cautioned, as it will quickly cause lasting injury to your lungs.

It's not uncommon for commercial cleaning products to contain these ingredients, as well as other potentially hazardous combinations of chemicals, and there isn't enough awareness of the very serious consequences to their misuse.

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#62

Post by GavinMcG »

tarp wrote: post #52
smaili wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to point to Amazon(or other sites) product pages? May be useful for some of us looking to buy.

My friend started a company that sells high pH water for cleaning/disinfecting. https://phurwater.com/science/

What on earth is high pH water? Water has a pH. If something has a high pH it's not water.

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#63

Post by mirkules »

GavinMcG wrote: post #62
tarp wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friend started a company that sells high pH water for cleaning/disinfecting. https://phurwater.com/science/

What on earth is high pH water? Water has a pH. If something has a high pH it's not water.

According to the company's documentation it is basically (hah!) a pH 11-12.5 solution of sodium hydroxide, aka lye: http://phurwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/MSDS-Cleaner...

You can call this water insomuch that it contains water (kind of like wine)

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#64

Post by bitwize »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #40
bitwize wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windex sells lactic acid cleaner readily available in stores. It's the yellow stuff, it looks like pee but it does the job.

Is that the same as windex vinegar? That’s what we use as our low-level cleaning agent.

Nah, the vinegar is the clear stuff. The yellow stuff is labeled "Windex Multisurface" I think (no "with Vinegar") and is clear yellow, not perfectly clear.

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#65

Post by kerkeslager »

mirkules wrote: post #63
GavinMcG wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What on earth is high pH water? Water has a pH. If something has a high pH it's not water.

According to the company's documentation it is basically (hah!) a pH 11-12.5 solution of sodium hydroxide, aka lye: http://phurwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/MSDS-Cleaner... You can call this water insomuch that it contains water (kind of like wine)

So basically, you can pay $22 to have them mix an unknown amount of NaOH into 32oz of water, or you can buy 5 lbs of NaOH off Amazon for $19[1] and mix it into water yourself. A lifetime supply of "phurwater" for less than the price of a single bottle, without even shopping around--this was the first search result on DuckDuckGo.

What incredible crap.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Grade-Sodium-Hydroxide-Micro-Beads/dp...

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#67

Post by refurb »

sizzle wrote: post #55
refurb wrote: post #23

As a former chemist, call me suspicious of these findings. Can cleaners be an irritant to the lungs? Of course. Inhaling a lot of things can be an irritant. Most cleaners that consumers use are surfactants sometimes mixed with alkylbenzonium disinfectants (in very low concentration). Even cleaners that are ammonia based aren't harmful. Now on the professional side, I could believe there is risk. Some of those chemica…

Why do you believe ammonia/chemical based cleaners are not harmful when inhaled from normal day to day use? I say that as someone who majored in human bio and can only imagine that inhaling these chemicals will have adverse effects on your health.

Ammonia is such a strong irritant you'd never be able to inhale enough (willingly) to cause systemic toxicity.

We also have a lot of info around the effects of ammonia. The body is very good at eliminating it. Heck, doctor's use ammonium chloride to acidify a patients urine.

Could you inhale enough to irritate your lungs? Sure. But it's not going to cancer or something.

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#68

Post by txcwpalpha »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #47
txcwpalpha wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In case someone reads your comment and takes it to heart: isopropyl alcohol is not as magic as you're making it sound. It is a disinfectant but isopropyl alcohol does not sterilize. Some bacteria and spores are not killed by isopropyl alcohol, and depending on the surface you are cleaning, it can be ineffective at even disinfecting. >Alcohols are not recommended for sterilizing medical and surgical materials principa…

Alcohol kills most things very well. I'm a scientist that handles lots of nasty things like MRSA and gram negative organisms that have killed their human hosts and we spray our gloves with 70% ethanol and spray down our biosafety hoods with it as do almost all labs in the world. This is all moot probably because homes don't need disinfection (hygiene hypothesis implies you probably need the opposite) but alcohol will…

As you're a scientist, I'd defer to your expertise, but I will mention that the situations where alcohol falls short are with spores and when cleaning certain materials. AFAIK, MRSA does not form spores, and so alcohol would work well for disinfecting it. Your gloves and hoods are also probably made of a material that is effectively cleaned by alcohol.

On the other hand, C. difficile (a bacteria responsible for diahrea/stomach flu) does produce spores which are not killed by alcohol cleaners. Similarly, viruses like norovirus (also responsible for "stomach flu") are not effectively disinfected by alcohol, which is why I mentioned that if you're trying to clean up after a bout of stomach flu, you might want to reach for something stronger (like a bleach based cleaner).

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#69

Post by outlace »

nextos wrote: post #12

I 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…

Per the hygiene hypothesis, I wonder if your allergies got better because you’re exposing yourself to more (generally harmless) microorganisms and hence challenging your immune system more. Since I’m sure lactic acid doesn’t sterilize as well as some strong bleach or other chemical.

Re: Cleaning sprays have an impact on lung health comparable to cigarettes

#70

Post by jopsen »

nck4222 wrote: post #11

For anyone else looking for mentions of specific products, the original paper doesn't mention any. It just categorized people in to non-cleaners, cleaners at home, and professional cleaners. Both the professional cleaners and at home cleaners were impacted.

I got the impression that they concluded correlation, not causation.

Could be that less dust decrease lung capacity... Unlikely, but who knows?

Post reply on HN