Tag Archives: WHO

Dead Mosquitoes and Live Lice, Part 2

Continued from “Dead Mosquitoes and Live Lice, Part 1

So what about the live lice? When I went into the US Public Health Service in 1957, it was to fulfill my draft obligation after student deferments. Recall that the Korean War was from 1950 to 1953. Also that during WW II, DDT dusting powder was widely used to kill lice, especially in conquered civilian populations, to prevent the spread of typhus. But by the Korean War some lice had sneer at DDT and so something else was needed. Enter Dr. Wayland J Hayes and yours truly. Dr Hayes arranged for prisoner volunteers at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, FL to be recruited to test the toxicity of malathion formulated as a dusting powder substitute for DDT. Malathion is an organophosphorus compound unrelated to DDT and was thought to have similar effectiveness and human toxicity.

Dr Hayes was the lead researcher and I was the lackey who did the cholinesterase analyses, etc. in the prison. (I have always enjoyed watching the expressions on people’s faces when I say I was in prison once.) The prisoners were told the possible adverse effects of the program and were given “good time” (reduced sentences) for participation. (After this one prisoner opted out but was later found to be consuming his own brew made with a smuggled, homemade still. Was that less toxic?)

The results were published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, (1960, vol 22, page 503-514) and on review I was impressed by one observation: “Although one of us (J.G.S.) had received, without injury, a 30-hour application of 10% malathion powder in preparation for the study of volunteers, . . . .” My small contribution to the advancement of science. Well, in retrospect I have to say that it was safer than dodging bullets in the Vietnam War, which was waging at that time.

Human infestation with lice is uncommon in this country and typhus is really rare. We have a lot to be thankful for in this country in spite of the vicissitudes of politics and the stock market. But there are still enough problems with antibiotic resistance and the lack of proper hand hygiene, etc. Maybe our watchwords should be Thankfulness, Vigilance, and Diligence. “May the Force be with you!”


Visit Brevis.com

Handwashing Steps: How Many Steps?

In talking about handwashing steps, we often refer to guidelines from both the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO). The recommendations from each organization are similar, but not identical. Is there a best method?

CDC instructions are, essentially, to soap up, scrub, and rinse, a process which takes around 35 seconds. To remember how long it should take, you can sing the alphabet song twice (how loudly you sing is completely up to you).

Handwashing Steps: How Many Steps to Good Hand Washing?

Image compliments of WHO

WHO recommendations are more involved, with specific steps, totaling about 42.5 seconds.

Researchers at the Glasgow Caledonian University in Scotland studied 42 doctors and 78 nurses who used either the CDC or WHO techniques. Results of this study indicate the WHO method to have a slight edge when it comes to reducing average bacterial count on the hands of medical workers. Even so, it’s important to note that BOTH methods work very well and are effective at reducing the spread of germs.

Whether you’re a health worker, a food handler, a teacher, or someone reading this on a handheld device, it’s important to know you should wash your hands to help keep yourself and those around you healthy. Always get your hands wet first (don’t put soap on dry hands), and wash often.

You can conduct your own study on how effectively you and those around you are washing your hands with products like our GlitterBug Potion.

Products to Teach Handwashing

Sources:

World Hand Hygiene Day 2017

 

May 5 is World Hand Hygiene Day. Today the World Health Organization (WHO) reminds the world to “Fight antibiotic resistance—it’s in your hands.”

 

Hand hygiene is at the core of effective infection prevention and control programs, and actions today serve as a reminder to continue, as well as improve, best practices in this area.

 

WHO is calling for health workers to clean their hands at the right times, building on hand hygiene improvement efforts made up to now. CEOs, administrators, and managers should support hand hygiene campaigns, and infection prevention and control programs.

 

If you work in the healthcare field, we want to hear from you. What improvements have you seen in your workplace in regards to hand hygiene? What more could be done? Please let us know on our Facebook page. And join the online conversation with WHO by using #handhygiene and #antibiotic resistance.

 

Sources:

http://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/en/

http://www.who.int/infection-prevention/campaigns/clean-hands/2017/en/

Antibiotics in the foods we eat: Why the drugs are losing their power

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have called for an end to the nontherapeutic use of drugs in animals that are used to treat human disease. Why? The short answer is giving healthy livestock these drugs breeds superbugs that can infect people.

Here’s a great explanation from the Union of Concerned Scientists: “Bacteria become resistant to antibiotics through overexposure to them. Hardy strains of the bacteria survive the exposure and pass on that resistance trait to successive generations. And they also pass the trait across to other bacteria that are unrelated, including some that cause human disease. Eventually the antibiotic wipes out all the vulnerable bacteria, and only resistant bacteria remain. Then the drug is no longer effective.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) started testing retail meat and poultry for antibiotic-resistant bacteria in 1996. It was not until 2008, however, that Congress required companies to report the quantity of antibiotics they sold for use in agriculture to the FDA. Why is that so important? According to a report from the New York Times, “In 2011, drugmakers sold nearly 30 million pounds of antibiotics for livestock — the largest amount yet recorded and about 80 percent of all reported antibiotic sales that year. The rest was for human health care.”

That’s right, 80 percent of antibiotics are being used for livestock! That means the meat and poultry we humans eat give resistant bacteria a direct route to us — right through the grocery store and into our kitchens. But combating resistance requires monitoring both the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in our food, as well as the use of antibiotics on livestock.

In March of this year, McDonald’s announced a plan to require chicken suppliers to stop using antibiotics important to human medicine within two years. Chicken supplier Tyson Inc. reported they’ll also stop giving chickens the same antibiotics used by humans; Tyson noted it has reduced the use of antibiotics effective in humans by more than 84 percent since 2011. The National Chicken Council also released a statement that says chicken producers have been working to phase out the use of antibiotics important in human medicine to promote growth in animals.

Restaurant chains Chipotle and Panera already say they serve chicken raised without antibiotics, but the announcement by McDonald’s is notable because of its size. McDonald’s has more than than 35,000 locations on Earth, and the U.S. has the highest concentration of them — about one for every 20,000 residents according to The Guardian’s Datablog. Compare that to Chipotle’s nearly 1,800 U.S. locations and Panera’s almost 1,900 U.S. locations.

There is more than enough scientific evidence to justify curbing the rampant use of antibiotics for livestock, yet the food and drug industries are fighting proposed legislation to reduce these practices. What do you think about antibiotic use in agriculture and livestock? Should they all move to using drugs that are not considered medically important for humans? Share your insights now in the comments section.