Re: [Harp-L] wooden cutting boards,,I'm sorry,,can't help myself

["Bob Laughlin" <rlaughlin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Aren't "sponges", as the stated and default "cleaning" tool, NOTORIOUS for
harboring bacteria, "germs", etc., once having been used, irregardless of
the "rinsing and squeezing" done after usage? What kind of rigor does this
afford in the "cleaning" process?

The results state:

"We soon found that disease bacteria such as these were not recoverable from
wooden surfaces in a short time after they were applied, unless very large
numbers were used."

This statement says nothing about the "numbers" used in testing the plastic
boards. Not having said that the "numbers" of bacteria were a part of the
control, one could assume that perhaps the numbers of bacteria used in the
wooden boards could have been lesser than the numbers used in the case of
plastic, save for these "large numbers".

"New plastic surfaces allowed the bacteria to persist, but were easily
cleaned and disinfected. However, wooden boards that had been used and had
many knife cuts acted almost the same as new wood, whereas plastic surfaces
that were knife-scarred were impossible to clean and disinfect manually,,"

"knife cuts",,"knife scarred",,it would seem even the description of the
effects of a knife on the boards of differing materials could indicate that
a different pressure and severity of knife cut was used in comparing wood to
plastic. What is the standard? "Cuts" or "scarring"?

"Scanning electron micrographs revealed highly significant damage to plastic
surfaces from knife cuts."

No mention made here of the observed effects of knife cuts made to wooden
surfaces, in comparison. Perhaps they are assuming "No significant damage."?

It just seems that this result synopsis is leaving out too many things, in
my opinion.

Again, I'd have to read the actual research papers.

Bob


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Laughlin" <rlaughlin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "fjm" <mktspot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "h-l" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Harp-L] wooden cutting boards was Personality Test


> On first, and especially second, and more careful inspection of this
> allegedly "scientific" document, there comes to mind the following:
>
> 1)the parameters are flawed.
>
> a)for instance, why, in this modern era, are they only using a "sponge",
> "hot tapwater", and "liquid dishwashing detergent" to perform "manual
> cleaning"? Why not use a BRUSH? A sponge could not possibly get into the
> cracks of a scored plastic surface, as does a brush.
>
>  b)only in passing, briefly, do they mention that "Work surfaces that have
> been cleaned can be disinfected with bleach (sodium hypochlorite)
solutions;
> this disinfection is reliable only if cleaning has been done
successfully."
>
>  c) One would assume that the above, "successfully", would require the use
> of a brush, rather than merely a "sponge", as the bristles of a brush are
> much more effective in getting into the knife scores of a used surface
than
> a mere "sponge".
>
>   d) Due to the above lack of oversight, one could also assume that the
> study has been "dumbed down" in order to reflect, perhaps, a less
> intelligent control group,,e.g.,,"housewives"??!
>
>  e)Upon first inspection it occurs to me that the digital background for
> this result has been graphically modified to appear as an aged document,
> "prettied up", one might say. In what other professionally done,
> scientifically scrutinized studies would this have been necessary, or
found
> to have been used? Isn't the standard a plain white background? Who are
they
> trying to influence, "sell" this study to, and WHY?
>
> f) It also occurs to me that there is a sector of the retail merchandising
> world that may have an intimate and lucrative interest in the outcome of
> this study, in favor of wood, over plastic. What controls have been put
into
> place as well as watched in oversight by a third, uninterested party, in
> order that this possibility may not affect the outcome of the results? How
> are we to know that these alleged "scientists" have not been given
> renumeration by those interested in the market, on the side of wood, and
> AGAINST plastic?
>
> Too many questions still exist in my own mind, though I haven't yet read
the
> source material, but only this "prettied up" and, to my own estimation,
> awkwardly, unscientifically worded and formatted result. I'm going to have
> to do more research of my own. I know that when I forward this result to
my
> wife, she is also going to want a more stringent inspection, lest she
think
> me a pure "sap".
>
> Lastly, I doubt whether this study affects the issues before us, as
> harmonica players. What comb materials are subjected to the same scarring
as
> a used cutting board? Personally, the minute I even DROP one of my harps,
if
> it hits the floor, it gets at least an adequate rinsing.
>
> Bob
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "fjm" <mktspot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "h-l" <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 6:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [Harp-L] wooden cutting boards was Personality Test
>
>
> > Try this,
> >
>
http://faculty.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/faculty/docliver/Research/cuttingboard.htm
> >
> > a synopsis of the UC Davis study that is being cited indirectly.  We've
> > had this discussion on harp-l previously.  The wooden surface pulls the
> > cell structure of the bacteria apart.  Where's Bill Grogan when you need
> > him?  fjm
> > _______________________________________________
> > Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
> > Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
> > http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.5.6/770 - Release Date: 4/20/2007
> 6:43 PM
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
> Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.5.6/770 - Release Date: 4/20/2007
6:43 PM
>
>