The list of hand sanitizers on the “do-not-use” list keeps growing. The FDA continues to warn consumers not to use 176 hand sanitizer products due to potential methanol contamination. The FDA says the recalled hand sanitizer products are considered unsafe due to methanol contamination or because they contain low levels of ethyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol, which are active ingredients in hand sanitizer products. CDC reported adverse events associated with the listed hand sanitizer products, including adults and children who ingested products contaminated with methanol that led to blindness, hospitalizations, and death. New products are added to the list very frequently. The investigation by the FDA into the use of methanol in hand sanitizers is ongoing. @ https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2020/09/11/176-hand-sanitizers-recalled-after-reports-of-blindness-and-hospitalizations-fda-reports/?outputType=amp
ruth
The list of recalled hand sanitizer products that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to use due to potential methanol contamination has grown to nearly 150.
ruth
A new COVID-19 rapid test was developed by Graphene Leaders Canada (GLC) Inc. (Alberta, Canada) together with its subsidiary GLC Medical (GLCM) Inc. The device is claimed to deliver accurate and reliable results in seconds using a graphene-enhanced sensor that produces a signal when exposed to COVID-19 viral antigens. The GLCM’s test directly detects the virus, ensuring no false positive/negative results, unlike other tests that detect only the byproducts of infection and are therefore unreliable. The device produces a signal when exposed to COVID-19 viral antigens. The GLCM’s test has been developed to indicate a positive result only when the COVID-19 virus is present, allowing for direct and clear interpretation by the user. GLCM’s rapid test is an “at the door” technology, which is perfect before boarding a plane, entering a venue for a concert or sporting event, as it delivers instant results, regaining the confidence to bring us back to our “normal” before the pandemic. @ http://news.rapidmicromethods.com/2020/09/rapid-covid-19-test-uses-graphene.html
A new COVID-19 rapid test delivers accurate and reliable results in seconds using a graphene-enhanced sensor that produces a signal when exp…
ruth
MAPAQ (ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation du Québec), in collaboration with the company Les Jardins Picoudi, in Saint-Robert , warned not to consume Coriander microgreens they are likely to be contaminated with Salmonella. The product was sold At several locations in Quebec. It was packaged in rectangular transparent plastic boxes and sold refrigerated. No case of illness associated with the consumption of this food has been reported to MAPAQ to date. @ https://www.mapaq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/Consommation/rappelsaliments/2020/09/Pages/4189.aspx
ruth
Scientists from Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, in Atlanta, published in Applied and Environmental Microbiology (https://aem.asm.org/content/86/18/e00780-20) about hand hygiene interventions and its criticality for reducing farmworker hand contamination and preventing the spread of produce-associated illness. The study determined if produce commodity influences the ability of handwashing with soap and water or two-step alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) interventions to reduce soil and bacteria on farmworker hands. Farmworkers (n = 326) harvested produce (cantaloupe, jalapeño, and tomato) for 30 to 90 minutes before engaging in handwashing, two-step ABHS (jalapeño and cantaloupe), or no hand hygiene. Handwashing with soap and water, when tested in three agricultural environments, does not always reduce bacterial loads. Without hand hygiene, bacterial concentrations (0.88 to 5.1 log10 CFU/hand) on hands significantly differed by the produce commodity harvested. There were significant produce-commodity-specific differences in the ability of handwashing and two-step ABHS interventions to reduce soil (P < 0.0001), coliforms (P = 0.002), and Enterococcus sp. (P = 0.003), but not the Bacteroidales markers AllBac (P = 0.4) or BFD (P = 0.3). Contamination on the hands of farmworkers who harvested cantaloupe was more challenging to remove. The study found that a two-step ABHS intervention was similar to handwashing with soap and water at reducing bacteria on hands. @ https://aem.asm.org/content/86/18/e00780-20
Hand hygiene interventions are critical for reducing farmworker hand contamination and preventing the spread of produce-associated illness. Hand hygiene effectiveness may be produce-commodity specific, which could influence implementation strategies. This study’s goal was to determine if produce commodity influences the ability of handwashing with soap and water or two-step alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) interventions to reduce soil and bacteria on farmworker hands. Farmworkers ( n = 326) harvested produce (cantaloupe, jalapeño, and tomato) for 30 to 90 minutes before engaging in handwashing, two-step ABHS (jalapeño and cantaloupe), or no hand hygiene. Hands were rinsed to measure amounts of soil (absorbance at 600 nm) and indicator bacteria (coliforms, Enterococcus sp., generic Escherichia coli, and Bacteroidales universal [AllBac] and human-specific [BFD] 16S rRNA gene markers). Without hand hygiene, bacterial concentrations (0.88 to 5.1 log10 CFU/hand) on hands significantly differed by the produce commodity harvested. Moderate significant correlations (ρ = −0.41 to 0.56) between soil load and bacterial concentrations were observed. There were significant produce-commodity-specific differences in the ability of handwashing and two-step ABHS interventions to reduce soil ( P < 0.0001), coliforms ( P = 0.002), and Enterococcus sp. ( P = 0.003), but not the Bacteroidales markers AllBac ( P = 0.4) or BFD ( P = 0.3). Contamination on hands of farmworkers who harvested cantaloupe was more difficult to remove. Overall, we found that a two-step ABHS intervention was similar to handwashing with soap and water at reducing bacteria on farmworker hands. In summary, produce commodity type should be considered when developing hand hygiene interventions on farms.
IMPORTANCE This study demonstrated that the type of produce commodity handled influences the ability of handwashing with soap and water or a two-step alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) intervention to reduce soil and bacterial hand contamination. Handwashing with soap and water, as recommended by the FDA’s Produce Safety Rule, when tested in three agricultural environments, does not always reduce bacterial loads. Consistent with past results, we found that the two-step ABHS method performed similarly to handwashing with soap and water but also does not always reduce bacterial loads in these contexts. Given the ease of use of the two-step ABHS method, which may increase compliance, the two-step ABHS method should be further evaluated and possibly considered for implementation in the agricultural environment. Taken together, these results provide important information on hand hygiene effectiveness in three agricultural contexts.