 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / January 2006Is household bleach suitable for sterilising food containers?
Here in the UK, 'Milton' solution is sold for sterilising baby food containers and utensils as well as for general use like sterilising kitchen cloths. Milton seems to be no more than a 2% sodium hypochlorite solution plus 16.5% sodium chloride for thickening. This is then further diluted with water at approx 1:150. On the other hand household bleach is about 5% sodium hypochlorite. But household bleach contains several other ingredients which I have heard it said may make it unusuitable for sterilising food containers for BABIES. Would these additional ingredients in household bleach also cause a problem for ADULTS if it is used as a sterlising solution when diluted with water at approx 1:400 to give the same concentration as working Milton Solution? Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following ingredients: Sodium Hypochlorite Sodium Chloride Cocamine Oxide Sodium Hydroxide Sodium Laurate Parfum Sodium Silicate Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with this? --- xposted to: sci.chem,sci.med food+drink.misc > Here in the UK, 'Milton' solution is sold for sterilising baby > food containers and utensils as well as for general use like [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with > this? Seems OK, although I don't know what Cocamine Oxide is. If in doubt about any compount go a google search using the letters 'MSDS' for the full safety data sheet.  SignatureDirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org |Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following |ingredients: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] |Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with |this? In The UK the order of ingredients indicates the amount in the product. The last five are relatively innocuous and at low concentrations. Yes! bleach is fine for sterilisation. Dilute the bleach 10 to 1 and wash the containers well afterwards. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain Dave Fawthrop a écrit dans le message ... |Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following |ingredients: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] |Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with |this? In The UK the order of ingredients indicates the amount in the product. The last five are relatively innocuous and at low concentrations. Yes! bleach is fine for sterilisation. Dilute the bleach 10 to 1 and wash the containers well afterwards. -- Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> " Best to use the generic bleach solution they generally put in less additives ,read the label. W.H.O. recommends 4 or 5 drops of 5% sodium hypochlorite solution per litre for treating drinking water if it is not already treated. One does not want perfume or detergent in the solution. |Dave Fawthrop a écrit dans le message ... | [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] |Yes! bleach is fine for sterilisation. Dilute the bleach 10 to 1 and wash |the containers well afterwards. I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/SO/sodium_hypochlorite.html |Best to use the generic bleach solution they generally put in less additives |,read the label. W.H.O. recommends 4 or 5 drops of 5% sodium hypochlorite |solution per litre for treating drinking water if it is not already |treated. One does not want perfume or detergent in the solution. But water as it comes out of the tap is perfectly safe at least in the UK and adding bleach in any quantity, increases the risk. I doubt that Generic Bleach containing only Sodium Hypochlorite and possibly salt/Sodium Chloride in the UK. OP was discussing sterilising food containers where a detergent is an advantage and perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed away. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain > I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really > nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. Yeah ... it's bleach. > But water as it comes out of the tap is perfectly safe at least in the UK > and adding bleach in any quantity, increases the risk. I doubt that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > advantage and perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed > away. A large autoclave can work very well. I don't fully understand why babies in the Western world have to live their lives in a sterile field, but it's technically possible to create. SignatureTranspose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |> I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really |> nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] | |A large autoclave can work very well. But nobody has one. | I don't fully understand why |babies in the Western world have to live their lives in a sterile |field ... Because it reduces the death rate of babies. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain Dave Fawthrop surprised us with > Because it reduces the death rate of babies. And increases their vulnerability because they don't build up resistance. Also widely assumed to be the cause of the increase in allergies. SignatureWaldo *** Is This A Dead Parrot I See Before Me *** To respond through email remove removespam > |> I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really > |> nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Because it reduces the death rate of babies. True of babies, probably. However, toddlers need to get out and start playing in the mud (as well as eating it). Otherwise all kinds of immune problems start to show up in later life. SignatureDirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org |> |> I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really |> |> nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] |eating it). |Otherwise all kinds of immune problems start to show up in later life. When I were a lad we did just that and a couple of my friends died. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain > |> |> I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is really > |> |> nasty stuff and should be treated with *great* care. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > When I were a lad we did just that and a couple of my friends died. Well, try not to eat too much. OTOH, letting kids into the garden to make mud pies was commonplace, and allergies such as hay fever were virtually unknown. I had not heard of nut allergy until I was in my 20s. FFF Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org > Because it reduces the death rate of babies. It's cheaper to keep some clean water and electrolyte replacement products on hand. That way, when baby's tummy gets upset from something, you can replace whatever he or she loses from diarrhea or vomiting until he or she gets over it. Trying to keep the environment sterile is much more difficult and expensive and puts no load at all on the immune system, leaving it completely naïve when a germ finally does come along. SignatureTranspose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. Following up to Mxsmanic > Trying to keep the environment >sterile is much more difficult and expensive and puts no load at all >on the immune system, leaving it completely naïve when a germ finally >does come along. Good God Mixi, what are you doing here, and talking sense too! SignatureMike Reid Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap >|> I should have mentioned that the ingredient Sodium Hypochlorite is = >really [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >But nobody has one. OTOH, many still have pressure cookers, which are pretty much the same thing. If you want it clean, put it in a dishwasher. If you want it "sterile", for home use, you really are deluding yourself. As soon as you remove it from .. whatever you used to sterilise it, it is starting to get grubby again. From your hands and the air if nothing else. Remember, killing 99.99% of germs still leaves a lot of germs :) >| I don't fully understand why >|babies in the Western world have to live their lives in a sterile >|field ... > >Because it reduces the death rate of babies. With a few obvious exceptions, that's an unproven assertion at best. OTOH, there is much data suggesting that failure to challenge an immune system early in life will result in lots of allergies/asthma/other difficulties later on. Wash your hands before anything to do with food in usual soap and water. Best thing you can do for yourself and everyone else. Let your kids eat dirt :) Your choice ... but we really need to stop worrying about "bugs". :) Bruce ---------------------------------------- I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides. Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups (if there were any) > OP was discussing sterilising food containers where a detergent is an > advantage and perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed > away. But if you wash the container after sterilising it won't be sterile any more. Owain >> OP was discussing sterilising food containers where a detergent is an >> advantage and perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Owain If that's a problem wash with recently boiled water. SignatureDirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org > >> OP was discussing sterilising food containers where a detergent is an > >> advantage and perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > If that's a problem wash with recently boiled water. How about distilled water? > -- > Dirk > > The Consensus:- > The political party for the new millenium > http://www.theconsensus.org >>>But if you wash the container after sterilising it won't be sterile any >>>more. >>>Owain >>If that's a problem wash with recently boiled water. > How about distilled water? Would only be sterile if it had been distilled and stored in sterile conditions. Owain |>>>But if you wash the container after sterilising it won't be sterile any |>>>more. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] |Would only be sterile if it had been distilled and stored in sterile |conditions. This is a crossposting problem where each newsgroup has completely different objectives and indeed words mean different things. The ordinal poster was asking "Is household bleach suitable for sterilising food containers?" The definition of sterile in a foodie newsgroup is "does not carry any food poisoning organisms". Sci.med will naturally define sterile as will not cause disease in any part of the body. This shows that crossposting to unrelated newsgroups is a very bad idea. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> "Intelligent Design?" my knees say *not*. "Intelligent Design?" my back says *not*. More like "Incompetent design". Sig (C) Copyright Public Domain > OP was discussing sterilising food containers where [ ... ] > perfume would cause no problems, because it will be washed away. Um. Not IME. I've still to get a reply from the vendors of "Mr. Muscle some sort of cleaner which I can't recall, may have been "hard surface" cleaner" about my ruined 'fridge (I used that stuff in it). The shelves have been out in the garden for weeks, and they *still* smell. I may have to just replace them with laminated glass, which will take up time and loot, and is therefore annoying when it *was* perfectly OK. > Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following > ingredients: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with > this? You must be joking. Don't use that stuff, buy a container (a gallon lasts *ages*) of cheap ordinary ("thin") bleach, if you're in the UK a "discount supermarket" is cheapest, and use that. It's thin, possibly yellowish transparent stuff, also used for bleaching clothes. N.B. *no "parfum"*. >> Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach [ ... ] >> Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with this? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > possibly yellowish transparent stuff, also used for bleaching clothes. > N.B. *no "parfum"*. Sorry, I ought to add "make sure you dilute it appropriately, and rinse properly". I use the stuff to sterilise 5L cider containers, as well as sloshing the odd drop down the lavvy. >> Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following >> ingredients: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > possibly yellowish transparent stuff, also used for bleaching clothes. > N.B. *no "parfum"*. Exactly! Why buy Domestos! Nip down to ASDA or TESCO, go for the *cheapest* one - about 25p a litre of their own brand in plain white bottle, it will almost certainly be *just* diluted sodium hypochlorite, with traces of hydroxide (as it loses chlorine) and chloride (as it loses oxygen). "Cheap as Chips" is often best. SignatureRon Jones Process Safety & Development, Alfa Aesar Avocado Lancaster UK Don't repeat history, see unreported near misses in chemical lab/plant at http://www.crhf.org.uk Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein >>>Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach >>>Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > of hydroxide (as it loses chlorine) and chloride (as it loses oxygen). > "Cheap as Chips" is often best. It's fine for lots of things, but the OP wondered about sterilising things with it that are going to be in contact with food - can you imagine the *taste*? Eurgh! Plain bleach, rinse, fill up container with cider - but I digress... [-] > >> Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with > >> this? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > of hydroxide (as it loses chlorine) and chloride (as it loses oxygen). > "Cheap as Chips" is often best. My dentist used Sainsbury's 'thin' bleach to flush out my root canal. He said "I'll just disinfect the cavity before filling" and, as soon as I smelt it, I said "That's bleach. Whose bleach do you use?" I guess that's as safe as you could wish for adults :-) regards sarah SignatureThink of it as evolution in action. >> Proctor and Gamble's Domestos bleach contains the following >> ingredients: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with >> this? > You must be joking. Don't use that stuff, buy a container (a > gallon lasts *ages*) of cheap ordinary ("thin") bleach, if > you're in the UK a "discount supermarket" is cheapest, and use > that. It's thin, possibly yellowish transparent stuff, also used > for bleaching clothes. N.B. *no "parfum"*. Chris, I am the OP. You ask why don't I use the thin bleach rather than the more 'elaborate' bleach. Bleach and I have this strange sort of relationship: If I am not hyper-vigilant then the bleach jumps onto my clothes and I don't notice any damage until I next wash the clothes at which pointthe fabric at the bleach spot starts to weaken. So I try to use thick bleach whenever possible. And I have deliberately avoided the thin bleach because it is harder to handle. And this is what prompts my original question because I want to see if I can use a single type of bleach to clean what I want to (clean sink drains, loos, etc) as well sterilise jars, kitchen sponges, etc. if the thick bleach is a no-no then maybe I will have just have to get a bottle of thin bleach. Maybe I can decant the thin bleach into a much smaller and more user-friendly container. Of course, the decanting operation will most probably splash a litre of thin bleach onto me and my clothes and my kitchen towels! And I wouldn't be surprised if the bleach went onto some nearby food too! > Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with > this? That product contains surfactants, not just bleach. Just use automatic dishwashing detergent. Cleans with caustics *and* sterilizes with chlorine. Sterile doesn't mean clean, and vice versa. Or, just wait. For your second and subsequent children, you won't be so neurotic: http://www.truetex.com/kinch04a.jpg Only the oldest got the warm baths and sterilized containers. They all thrived. >> Can anyone advise me if it ok to sterilise food containers with >> this? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Just use automatic dishwashing detergent. Cleans with caustics > *and* sterilizes with chlorine. I don't want to be awkward (heh!) but do you mean in the automatic dishwasher? > Sterile doesn't mean clean, and vice versa. > > Or, just wait. For your second and subsequent children, you > won't be so neurotic: > > http://www.truetex.com/kinch04a.jpg I do hope that picture is not show one set of parents and their children! :-) > Only the oldest got the warm baths and sterilized containers. > They all thrived. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.