Use screenwash or risk Legionnaires

Coveredinbees!!!!

rev_henry wrote: »

NOO don't do that! Its not good for the paintwork! Use proper screenwash. Asda were doing 2.5l for £1 last time I got some.

I don't care about the paint it's not my van :rotfl:

somech

i must be immune then i've been in contact with washer bottles everyday for the last 20years

colino

There is bad science and there is poor science, but this is under-graduate rubbish. Out of a tiny sample of 75 people they decided 2 cases could have been attributed (amongst other things) to car useage. Using their broken calculators, they then extrapolated this figure to "20%". Little wonder that the public have little faith in scientific musings.

rev_henry

colino wrote: »

There is bad science and there is poor science, but this is under-graduate rubbish. Out of a tiny sample of 75 people they decided 2 cases could have been attributed (amongst other things) to car useage. Using their broken calculators, they then extrapolated this figure to "20%". Little wonder that the public have little faith in scientific musings.

Shamefully I neglected to read the actual HPA page. That doesn't prove anything whatsoever!

cyclonebri1

rev_henry wrote: »

Shamefully I neglected to read the actual HPA page. That doesn't prove anything whatsoever!

Exactly where I was coming from as an engineer that has had to deal with premises with heating/cooling and ventilation systems that are prone to legenella. Scaremongering/2nd form physics or whatever, the issue probably does not exist, but I bet the undergraduate has bought up all available shares in halfrauds/screenywash etc,

Bacteria needs 3 things to survive/multiply;

Moisture----Given

Food

---

???

Heat

---

???

Cardelia

colino wrote: »

There is bad science and there is poor science, but this is under-graduate rubbish. Out of a tiny sample of 75 people they decided 2 cases could have been attributed (amongst other things) to car useage. Using their broken calculators, they then extrapolated this figure to "20%". Little wonder that the public have little faith in scientific musings.

It's not quite as simple as that, I'm afraid. When the HPA say "two exposures" they don't mean "two cases of Legionnaire's". They mean "two situations where the risk of contracting Legionnaire's is relatively high": (i) not using screenwash and (ii) driving through industrial areas. It is an appalling press release and I can see why you got confused - I had to read the original paper twice before I figured out what they meant.

The 9 month study looked at 75 cases of people who contracted Legionnaire's disease (123 cases were reported nationwide but for various reasons, only 75 were included in the study). Of those 75 people, 49 responded to the screenwash question (i.e. do you use it) and 15 of those said no (roughly 30%). For the control subjects (people who are demographically similar to the respondents but who don't have Legionnaire's) only 1 out of 51 said they don't use screenwash (2%). So there does appear to be a strong correlation between spending time in a car which doesn't use screenwash and being exposed to a higher risk of contracting Legionnaire's.

Of course, correlation does not indicate causation - indeed, the paper's authors say much more research is needed before a definite link can be proven. However, studies from Japan, Turkey and the Netherlands all show that professional drivers have a higher risk of contracting Legionnaire's disease than other people - this 'anomaly' has to be explained somehow and this paper provides a good starting point for further investigations.

As for the 20% figure - the HPA did some tests on the windscreen washer reservoir of cars. 1 in 5 cars which did not use screenwash had Legionnaire's bacteria whereas no cars which did use screenwash had Legionnaire's bacteria.

Basically - the science is fine. Yes the sample size is small, but Legionnaire's is a relatively rare disease and this was just an initial study - further work with a much bigger sample size will follow. The problem, as ever, is with the idiot who wrote the press release. Media reporting of science is generally awful and this is no exception - don't blame the scientists, blame the PR guys who messed up.

rev_henry

Cardelia wrote: »

It's not quite as simple as that, I'm afraid. When the HPA say "two exposures" they don't mean "two cases of Legionnaire's". They mean "two situations where the risk of contracting Legionnaire's is relatively high": (i) not using screenwash and (ii) driving through industrial areas. It is an appalling press release and I can see why you got confused - I had to read the original paper twice before I figured out what they meant.

The 9 month study looked at 75 cases of people who contracted Legionnaire's disease (123 cases were reported nationwide but for various reasons, only 75 were included in the study). Of those 75 people, 49 responded to the screenwash question (i.e. do you use it) and 15 of those said no (roughly 30%). For the control subjects (people who are demographically similar to the respondents but who don't have Legionnaire's) only 1 out of 51 said they don't use screenwash (2%). So there does appear to be a strong correlation between spending time in a car which doesn't use screenwash and being exposed to a higher risk of contracting Legionnaire's.

Of course, correlation does not indicate causation - indeed, the paper's authors say much more research is needed before a definite link can be proven. However, studies from Japan, Turkey and the Netherlands all show that professional drivers have a higher risk of contracting Legionnaire's disease than other people - this 'anomaly' has to be explained somehow and this paper provides a good starting point for further investigations.

As for the 20% figure - the HPA did some tests on the windscreen washer reservoir of cars. 1 in 5 cars which did not use screenwash had Legionnaire's bacteria whereas no cars which did use screenwash had Legionnaire's bacteria.

Basically - the science is fine. Yes the sample size is small, but Legionnaire's is a relatively rare disease and this was just an initial study - further work with a much bigger sample size will follow. The problem, as ever, is with the idiot who wrote the press release. Media reporting of science is generally awful and this is no exception - don't blame the scientists, blame the PR guys who messed up.

Ah I see. That's alright then. It really irritates me when science in the media is reported upon by a blatant non scientist who seems to understand nothing. Ahem, Daily Fail, as we see in the link. Well it doesn't matter what the actual sample size is, what matters is its size proportional to the total population it represents. Now we just need to do a chi squared test to see if the difference between 30% and 2% is significant! Then do a proper study, not just a pilot as this is.

DaveF327

bartman wrote: »

sucked into the following car's ventilation intake.

Now, if that's the case, that makes my usual tactic against tailgaters much more interesting............

Haha.. biological warfare against bad drivers! I like it! *searches eBay for Anthrax*

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Surely the water would not be warm enough for a long enough period, ie cool nights, to enable the bacteria to grow.

My car is garaged overnight where the sun heats the black garage door and black roof mercilessly in a heatwave. Inside, it's like an oven and the car engine heat after parking there heats it further. Next morning, it's still very warm in the height of summer during those unbroken days of non-stop sunshine.

Coveredinbees!!!! wrote: »

I normally squirt washing up liquid in this time of year, does that make any difference, I haven't died yet?

Don't do that.. it can seriously clog your filter / pump system as the stuff turns to sludge over time. Ok, it'll kill some bacteria and leave your dishes sparking clean if you wash them on your windscreen, but it'll cost you a packet when your washers won't work anymore...

photome

I havent used screen wash for years (apart from occasionally in the winter). I drive 35000 miles a year and have done for past 25 years, not caught anything yet.

Yet another NON scare

VoucherMan

Well overdue for a bit of scaremongering by the tabloids.
Not much in the news in the way of global pandemics / death,despair & destruction at the moment so they had to find something to entertain themselves with.