an investigation of domestic laundry in europe - habits ... - SIFO
an investigation of domestic laundry in europe - habits ... - SIFO an investigation of domestic laundry in europe - habits ... - SIFO
74An investigation into the domestic laundry habits in EuropeTable 4-3 ContinuedSpainThe NetherlandsCode E-3 E-4 NL-3 NL-4Temperature (°C) 15 40 40 60Programme delicate cotton cotton cottonDetergent Ariël Alpine Ariël Alpine Ariël Color AriëlType of detergenttraditionalpowdertraditionalpowdercompactpowdercompact powderBleaching agents 1 yes yes no yesDosage (g) 120 120 65 65Load (kg) 3 3 3.3 kg 3.3 kgWater hardness (°dH) 9 9 9 9All cycles are run in a Miele W362 household washing machine.4.3 Selection of Microorganisms and laundry items4.3.1 LiteratureThere are only a handful of experts on this subject, and their scope is oftenconsiderably broader than the objective of this research. In most studies a relationshipbetween kitchen hygiene and food poisoning is established. Literatureon the hygiene effects of domestic laundry processes has not been found.In a bacteriological survey of the domestic environment, Finch [1] sampledvarious surfaces in the kitchen, bathroom, living room and hall of 21 homes.In more than half of the dishcloth, towel and teacloth samples, coagulasenegative Micrococcaceae and Bacillus spp. were present. Various bacteriawere found on the dishcloth, and Staphylococcus aureus was present on halfof the towel and teacloth samples. Later Speirs [2] did a similar study in 46homes. Speirs found different Enterobacteria, Pseudomonas, Bacillus andStaphylococcus aureus. More than 90% of the sampled tea and hand towelsand more than 94% of the sampled dishcloths had counts of >450 CFUs perarea (approximately 25cm 2 ). This represents a contamination hazard.Scott [3] showed that Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Klebsiella aerogenesand Staphylococcus aureus survive on clean and soiled cloth and that they areeasily transferred via cloths, hands and utensils. The survival rate on cleancloth was less than on soiled cloth, but in both cases regrowth was shown.Drying the cloth increased the number of bacteria. In a laboratory wash test
Hygiene effects of laundry processes in Europe 75using different kinds of disinfectants, Scott [4] also showed that the initialcounts of a three-day-old used dishcloth varied from 1.7*10 2 to 2.5*10 6CFU/cm 2 . The Total Plate Count increased after washing or disinfecting thesamples. Regrowth after storage was observed.Block [5] demonstrated that detergents containing a TAED-activated bleachwill not disinfect clothes when they are washed at 20°C or 30°C. This mightbe due to the pH differences in the suds, as Betz [7] discovered while investigatingthe anti-microbicidal effects of different bleaching agents at low washingtemperatures. Betz added different bleaching agents to a buffered bacteriaculture at 30°C and 40°C. Reductions of Enterococcus feacium of log 2 to log7 were found, depending on the bleaching agents that were used.The washing temperature seems to be even more important. Walter [6] conducteda study with used hospital and student bed linens. These linens wereinoculated with Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae andwashed at different temperatures. Klebsiella pneumoniae was easily washedout, but only after washing for 13 minutes at 60°C was Staphylococcus aureusno longer detectable. A wash heat exposure time of 8 minutes or a temperatureof 54°C was not sufficient to remove all the Staphylococcus aureus.4.3.2 Selection of Micro-organismsSeveral micro-organisms were selected for the test (based on the literaturestudy) consisting of a mixture of different groups of micro-organisms and onespecific one. The selected micro-organisms are known to be found on laundry.They are pathogenic or members in their group are pathogenic. Last but notleast, the detection of these micro-organisms must be practical and feasible.EnterobacteriaceaeEnterobacteriaceae are a very common family of bacteria with a few harmfulmembers such as the Salmonella group. Salmonella is reported as one of themost common causes of food poisoning. Enterobacteriaceae are found everywhereand are easy to culture. They are often used as an indicator of hygieneconditions. Finch [1] and Speirs [2] found Enterobacteriaceae on soiled dishcloth,tea towels and hand towels. Scott [3] and Block [5] also did researchwith cultures of this group of micro- organisms.
- Page 25 and 26: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 27 and 28: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 29 and 30: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 31 and 32: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 33 and 34: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 35 and 36: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 37 and 38: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 39 and 40: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 41 and 42: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 43 and 44: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 45 and 46: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 47 and 48: Assessment of the consumer laundry
- Page 49 and 50: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 51 and 52: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 53 and 54: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 55 and 56: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 57: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 65 and 66: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 67 and 68: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 69 and 70: Assessment of the functional perfor
- Page 71 and 72: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 73 and 74: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 75: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 79 and 80: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 81 and 82: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 83 and 84: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 85 and 86: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 87 and 88: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 89 and 90: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 91 and 92: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 93 and 94: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 95 and 96: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 97 and 98: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 99 and 100: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 101 and 102: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 103: Hygiene effects of laundry processe
- Page 106 and 107: 104An investigation into the domest
- Page 108 and 109: 106An investigation into the domest
- Page 110 and 111: 108An investigation into the domest
- Page 112 and 113: 110An investigation into the domest
- Page 114 and 115: 112An investigation into the domest
- Page 116 and 117: 114An investigation into the domest
- Page 119 and 120: Appendix ASurvey of domestic laundr
- Page 121 and 122: Appendix A 1199. Which temperature
- Page 123 and 124: Appendix A 1211.Working, in private
- Page 125 and 126: Appendix BDeclaration detergentsGre
74An <strong><strong>in</strong>vestigation</strong> <strong>in</strong>to the <strong>domestic</strong> <strong>laundry</strong> <strong>habits</strong> <strong>in</strong> EuropeTable 4-3 Cont<strong>in</strong>uedSpa<strong>in</strong>The Netherl<strong>an</strong>dsCode E-3 E-4 NL-3 NL-4Temperature (°C) 15 40 40 60Programme delicate cotton cotton cottonDetergent Ariël Alp<strong>in</strong>e Ariël Alp<strong>in</strong>e Ariël Color AriëlType <strong>of</strong> detergenttraditionalpowdertraditionalpowdercompactpowdercompact powderBleach<strong>in</strong>g agents 1 yes yes no yesDosage (g) 120 120 65 65Load (kg) 3 3 3.3 kg 3.3 kgWater hardness (°dH) 9 9 9 9All cycles are run <strong>in</strong> a Miele W362 household wash<strong>in</strong>g mach<strong>in</strong>e.4.3 Selection <strong>of</strong> Microorg<strong>an</strong>isms <strong>an</strong>d <strong>laundry</strong> items4.3.1 LiteratureThere are only a h<strong>an</strong>dful <strong>of</strong> experts on this subject, <strong>an</strong>d their scope is <strong>of</strong>tenconsiderably broader th<strong>an</strong> the objective <strong>of</strong> this research. In most studies a relationshipbetween kitchen hygiene <strong>an</strong>d food poison<strong>in</strong>g is established. Literatureon the hygiene effects <strong>of</strong> <strong>domestic</strong> <strong>laundry</strong> processes has not been found.In a bacteriological survey <strong>of</strong> the <strong>domestic</strong> environment, F<strong>in</strong>ch [1] sampledvarious surfaces <strong>in</strong> the kitchen, bathroom, liv<strong>in</strong>g room <strong>an</strong>d hall <strong>of</strong> 21 homes.In more th<strong>an</strong> half <strong>of</strong> the dishcloth, towel <strong>an</strong>d teacloth samples, coagulasenegative Micrococcaceae <strong>an</strong>d Bacillus spp. were present. Various bacteriawere found on the dishcloth, <strong>an</strong>d Staphylococcus aureus was present on half<strong>of</strong> the towel <strong>an</strong>d teacloth samples. Later Speirs [2] did a similar study <strong>in</strong> 46homes. Speirs found different Enterobacteria, Pseudomonas, Bacillus <strong>an</strong>dStaphylococcus aureus. More th<strong>an</strong> 90% <strong>of</strong> the sampled tea <strong>an</strong>d h<strong>an</strong>d towels<strong>an</strong>d more th<strong>an</strong> 94% <strong>of</strong> the sampled dishcloths had counts <strong>of</strong> >450 CFUs perarea (approximately 25cm 2 ). This represents a contam<strong>in</strong>ation hazard.Scott [3] showed that Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Klebsiella aerogenes<strong>an</strong>d Staphylococcus aureus survive on cle<strong>an</strong> <strong>an</strong>d soiled cloth <strong>an</strong>d that they areeasily tr<strong>an</strong>sferred via cloths, h<strong>an</strong>ds <strong>an</strong>d utensils. The survival rate on cle<strong>an</strong>cloth was less th<strong>an</strong> on soiled cloth, but <strong>in</strong> both cases regrowth was shown.Dry<strong>in</strong>g the cloth <strong>in</strong>creased the number <strong>of</strong> bacteria. In a laboratory wash test
Change language