If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by E Z Peaces on September 18, 2009, 12:53 pm
Roger Shoaf wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>> Roger Shoaf wrote:
>>>> Also with news "That some of these bacteria can 'resist' the
>>>> administration of household bleach!". Oh what a calamity! Cos I
>>>> occasionally bleach counter-tops and other areas and put wooden
>>>> cutting boards etc. into the dishwasher at high temps, immediately
>>>> after use!
>>> On cutting boards you can forget about the dish washer. For one thing
> you
>>> can kill the wood and for another you are lucky you have wood cutting
> boards
>>> as the wood tends to kill off the pathogens due to the mechanical
>>> difficulties of the woods surface.
>>> All you need to do is to use soap or detergent to break the fats or oils
> on
>>> the surface and rinse really well, then dry. Surprisingly the plastic
>>> cutting boards are the problem as the bugs thrive in the depths of the
>>> little slices making them virtually imposable to kill.
>> The FDA outlawed wood because it couldn't be run through a washer.
>> Scientists who may have been partial to wood found that if they made
>> cuts on a wooden board and cleaned it with a sponge and dishwashing
>> liquid, they couldn't find bacteria on the surface. Bacteria below the
>> surface were found days later, though.
>> If they cut on dry boards, swelling would have trapped the bacteria that
>> didn't wash off. With the old, wet boards I've used, the results might
>> not have been so good.
>> Some cut on counters or plates, not boards. Statistically, people with
>> wooden boards have half the risk of food poisoning, and those with
>> plastic or glass have twice the risk. Glass? Glass doesn't have slices
>> to trap bacteria, does it?
>> Statistically, washing a cutting board between uses does not affect a
>> person's risk of food poisoning. Whatever board you use, washing should
>> get rid of most of the bacteria. If it doesn't reduce the risk of
>> food poisoning, it sounds as if cutting boards are not a significant
> danger.
>> The risk is 23 times higher for people who undercook chicken. I think
>> that's why glass is statistically more dangerous than wood. A person
>> who undercooks chicken sounds careless. Isn't a careless person likely
>> to choose whatever board looks easiest to care for? That would be
>> plastic or glass.
>
> Here is a copy of the article from the UC Davis PhD:
> http://www.naturalhandyman.com/iip/infxtra/infcuttingboard.html
>
>
Thank you. So the USDA recommended plastic but didn't outlaw wood.
I'd like to find out the difference between this research, which picked
up bacteria on plastic but not wood, and the research with different
results.
At the end, the article mentions the statistical research I mentioned.
Those statistics indicate that people who regularly clean their cutting
boards after cutting meat are more likely to contract sporadic
salmonellosis. That and the statistical finding that people with glass
cutting boards are more likely to contract the sickness lead me to
believe the relationship with cutting boards is not cause and effect.
Perhaps people who don't methodically clean their cutting boards are
more likely to cook only what they can eat in one sitting, and that
makes food poisoning less likely.
|
|
Posted by Roger Shoaf on September 18, 2009, 4:45 pm
show/hide quoted text
> At the end, the article mentions the statistical research I mentioned.
> Those statistics indicate that people who regularly clean their cutting
> boards after cutting meat are more likely to contract sporadic
> salmonellosis.
"...It revealed that those using wooden cutting boards in their home
kitchens were less than half as likely as average to contract salmonellosis
(odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.81), those using synthetic
(plastic or glass) cutting boards were about twice as likely as average to
contract salmonellosis (O.R. 1.99, C.I. 1.03-3.85); and the effect of
cleaning the board regularly after preparing meat on it was not
statistically significant (O.R. 1.20, C.I. 0.54-2.68).
I think you are reading this wrong. I read that the folks using wood boards
are half as likely to have contacted the disease
That and the statistical finding that people with glass
show/hide quoted text
> cutting boards are more likely to contract the sickness lead me to
> believe the relationship with cutting boards is not cause and effect.
> Perhaps people who don't methodically clean their cutting boards are
> more likely to cook only what they can eat in one sitting, and that
> makes food poisoning less likely.
Here I think you are attempting to get the data to support your assumptions.
If I understand the statistical study, they looked at folks that had
contacted food poisoning and then went looking for a cause. I read that
they suspect plastic and glass boards are the culprits more often than the
wood boards.
The study by UC Davis concludes that wood boards are safe to use:
"We believe, on the basis of our published and to-be-published research,
that food can be prepared safely on wooden cutting surfaces and that plastic
cutting surfaces present some disadvantages that had been overlooked until
we found them. "
And that plastic boards may be making folks sick:
"...we regard it as the best epidemiological evidence available to date that
wooden cutting boards are not a hazard to human health, but plastic cutting
boards may be."
--
Roger Shoaf
About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube, then
they come up with this striped stuff.
|
|
Posted by norminn@earthlink.net on September 18, 2009, 5:58 pm
clipped
show/hide quoted text
>
> And that plastic boards may be making folks sick:
>
> "...we regard it as the best epidemiological evidence available to date that
> wooden cutting boards are not a hazard to human health, but plastic cutting
> boards may be."
>
>
Not a scientific study by the sound of it. Not controlled lab
conditions. I suspect that if there is less contamination of food from
wood cutting boards it is because those who use wood are very likely to
be more skilled and knowledgeable cooks. Primary is rinsing meat and
poultry from the package before continuing with preparation because
contamination, esp. e coli, comes from gut fluids of animal during
butchering. The article mentioned people who don't cook chicken
thoroughly, which adds strength to the argument. Yuck! Rare chicken!
|
|
Posted by E Z Peaces on September 18, 2009, 7:12 pm
Roger Shoaf wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>> At the end, the article mentions the statistical research I mentioned.
>> Those statistics indicate that people who regularly clean their cutting
>> boards after cutting meat are more likely to contract sporadic
>> salmonellosis.
>
> "...It revealed that those using wooden cutting boards in their home
> kitchens were less than half as likely as average to contract salmonellosis
> (odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.81), those using synthetic
> (plastic or glass) cutting boards were about twice as likely as average to
> contract salmonellosis (O.R. 1.99, C.I. 1.03-3.85); and the effect of
> cleaning the board regularly after preparing meat on it was not
> statistically significant (O.R. 1.20, C.I. 0.54-2.68).
>
> I think you are reading this wrong. I read that the folks using wood boards
> are half as likely to have contacted the disease
"The effect of cleaning the board regularly after preparing meat on it
was not statistically significant." The likelihood of getting sick
depends on how many salmonella you eat at once. If you cut contaminated
chicken on a plastic board, the bacteria on the board before washing
must be 10,000 times more than those in the slits after washing. So if
boards are a health hazard, the odds ratio ought to be 1000 or so.
show/hide quoted text
>
>
> That and the statistical finding that people with glass
>> cutting boards are more likely to contract the sickness lead me to
>> believe the relationship with cutting boards is not cause and effect.
>> Perhaps people who don't methodically clean their cutting boards are
>> more likely to cook only what they can eat in one sitting, and that
>> makes food poisoning less likely.
>
> Here I think you are attempting to get the data to support your assumptions.
The data saying glass and plastic are equally dangerous came from
another report of the same study. If ever there was a cutting board
that would wash clean, wouldn't it be glass? If people with glass
boards are twice as likely to get sick and it doesn't matter if they
clean their glass boards, they must be getting salmonellosis some other way.
show/hide quoted text
>
> If I understand the statistical study, they looked at folks that had
> contacted food poisoning and then went looking for a cause. I read that
> they suspect plastic and glass boards are the culprits more often than the
> wood boards.
Here's an abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1342320 The study included 120 patients and 265 control subjects. It noted that
because the patients were self-selected, there may be alternative
explanations of the statistics. I see another problem. Experts
estimate that 35 cases are unreported for every one reported. So the
study is about the 3% of cases who went to a doctor; of those, it's
about the ones who chose to participate.
Cutting boards aren't even mentioned in the abstract. The study found
an odds ratio of 24 for those who had eaten undercooked chicken, 10 for
those who had recently been abroad, 6 for diabetics, 4 for those on
hormone replacement therapy, and 2 for those who had recently received
antibiotics.
show/hide quoted text
>
> The study by UC Davis concludes that wood boards are safe to use:
>
> "We believe, on the basis of our published and to-be-published research,
> that food can be prepared safely on wooden cutting surfaces and that plastic
> cutting surfaces present some disadvantages that had been overlooked until
> we found them. "
>
> And that plastic boards may be making folks sick:
>
> "...we regard it as the best epidemiological evidence available to date that
> wooden cutting boards are not a hazard to human health, but plastic cutting
> boards may be."
>
>
I assume the epidemiological study they mean is the Kass study, which my
link abstracts. If the study did not find that those who cleaned their
boards were less likely to get sick, I don't see much significance in
the finding that a certain group of patients were somewhat more likely
than the control group to use boards of glass or plastic.
Undercooked chicken, foreign travel, and diabetes would probably include
almost all the 120 patients.
I imagine a dinner where a housewife wants to impress guests would be
risky. She may be trying a new recipe. She's trying to have a lot of
tasks come out on schedule. She may not test the chicken to be sure
it's cooked through, and it may then sit at an ideal temperature for
salmonella to multiply.
Several guests may see their doctor afterward, and they may want to
participate in the study because they want to know what made them sick.
To cook for the group, the hostess was likely to use a plastic or
glass board because it's large and easy to clean. The hostess says she
washed the board after each use. Statistically, this sort of thing
could make it appear that glass is more dangerous than wood and washed
boards are no safer than unwashed boards.
|
|
Posted by Frank on September 16, 2009, 2:11 pm
terry wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Every week or so there is something 'in the news' that's unhealthy or
> causes a risk to one's well-being! These items sometimes even get 15
> seconds of coverage on some TV news spot! Musta been a slow news
> night?
>
> These 'studies' or findings are often presaged by such wording as 'A
> recent study of 56,000 suburban families finds that ....... yada,
> yada, .... "!
>
> This week; it's bacteria contaminated shower heads!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Also with news "That some of these bacteria can 'resist' the
> administration of household bleach!". Oh what a calamity! Cos I
> occasionally bleach counter-tops and other areas and put wooden
> cutting boards etc. into the dishwasher at high temps, immediately
> after use!
>
> But; not being paranoid or anything I unscrewed our shower head a few
> minutes ago to NOT find any goopy green or black gelatinous mess of
> creepy crawly bacteria (finding only one or two minute black stones at
> the inlet). Perched it on the spout of the water kettle and boiled
> steam (212 deg F) through it for two minutes (hoping the shower
> insides haven't melted!).
>
> Incidentally we are currently under a municipal 'Boil water' advisory
> because a pipe broke at the local pumping and chlorination site. (Oh;
> btw there's another substance, chlorine, that apparently was/is the
> cause of asthma in many children ............... maybe that will be
> next week's concern?
>
> So reckon we are safe; eh? Now I have to clean the kettle!
>
> Cheers
I think we should all shower in wet suits with scuba breathing apparatus
until solution to this serious health hazard is determined.
|
Page 11 of 16 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Jado multi purpose shower head problem- could apply to all multipurpose shower heads | December 25, 2009, 3:34 pm |
| No water on shower head or tub. | February 9, 2005, 7:09 am |
| Shower Head Clogging | July 29, 2005, 4:39 am |
| Stiff Shower Head | February 18, 2006, 8:51 am |
| removing shower head | March 6, 2009, 8:01 pm |
| Shower Head Flow Rate | February 8, 2005, 2:59 pm |
| Shower head wont rotate | July 9, 2005, 1:47 am |
| recommendation on low flow shower head | December 18, 2005, 2:24 pm |
| Shower-head maker in hot water | January 17, 2006, 8:26 am |
| Replacing a stubborn shower head | August 1, 2007, 7:53 pm |
|
|
>>>> Also with news "That some of these bacteria can 'resist' the
>>>> administration of household bleach!". Oh what a calamity! Cos I
>>>> occasionally bleach counter-tops and other areas and put wooden
>>>> cutting boards etc. into the dishwasher at high temps, immediately
>>>> after use!
>>> On cutting boards you can forget about the dish washer. For one thing
> you
>>> can kill the wood and for another you are lucky you have wood cutting
> boards
>>> as the wood tends to kill off the pathogens due to the mechanical
>>> difficulties of the woods surface.
>>> All you need to do is to use soap or detergent to break the fats or oils
> on
>>> the surface and rinse really well, then dry. Surprisingly the plastic
>>> cutting boards are the problem as the bugs thrive in the depths of the
>>> little slices making them virtually imposable to kill.
>> The FDA outlawed wood because it couldn't be run through a washer.
>> Scientists who may have been partial to wood found that if they made
>> cuts on a wooden board and cleaned it with a sponge and dishwashing
>> liquid, they couldn't find bacteria on the surface. Bacteria below the
>> surface were found days later, though.
>> If they cut on dry boards, swelling would have trapped the bacteria that
>> didn't wash off. With the old, wet boards I've used, the results might
>> not have been so good.
>> Some cut on counters or plates, not boards. Statistically, people with
>> wooden boards have half the risk of food poisoning, and those with
>> plastic or glass have twice the risk. Glass? Glass doesn't have slices
>> to trap bacteria, does it?
>> Statistically, washing a cutting board between uses does not affect a
>> person's risk of food poisoning. Whatever board you use, washing should
>> get rid of most of the bacteria. If it doesn't reduce the risk of
>> food poisoning, it sounds as if cutting boards are not a significant
> danger.
>> The risk is 23 times higher for people who undercook chicken. I think
>> that's why glass is statistically more dangerous than wood. A person
>> who undercooks chicken sounds careless. Isn't a careless person likely
>> to choose whatever board looks easiest to care for? That would be
>> plastic or glass.
>
> Here is a copy of the article from the UC Davis PhD:
> http://www.naturalhandyman.com/iip/infxtra/infcuttingboard.html
>
>