[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
news

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 16684)
Message
File  []
close
sei_41649267-81f9.jpg
166841668416684
>> No. 16684 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 3:24 pm
16684 Poo found on every McDonald’s touchscreen tested
https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/28/poo-found-on-every-mcdonalds-touchscreen-tested-8178486/

>Traces of faeces have been found on every single McDonald’s touchscreen swabbed in an investigation by metro.co.uk.

>Samples were taken from the new machines that have been rolled out at restaurants across the country – every one of them had coliforms.

>Senior lecturer in microbiology at London Metropolitan University Dr Paul Matewele said: ‘We were all surprised how much gut and faecal bacteria there was on the touchscreen machines. These cause the kind of infections that people pick up in hospitals.
Expand all images.
>> No. 16685 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 3:46 pm
16685 spacer
>>16684
So, the story here is that people don't wash their hands properly? What a shocker.
>> No. 16687 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:00 pm
16687 spacer
>>16685

The more important story is that it seems McDonalds don't clean the screens properly. You wouldn't expect to see this much on, say, public facing menus or door handles in a normal restaurant. They don't seem to give a specific amount in the article, but if the number truly is 'surprising' that means they go a long time without cleaning. Touch screens with computers shoved behind them are nice and warm, so it's easy for bacteria to thrive.

To be devils advocate though, I know you have to prod a touch screen more than a menu, so until they compare it with other touch screens out in the world, like train station ticket machines, to see if this is a touch screen issue or a McDonald's issue. It could also be a specific design issue, like there being small gaps that are hard to clean in the sides of the screen, that this article fails to mention.

From what I understand Maccy D's is just as tight on cleanliness as you'd expect a multinational corporation with disposable employees to be, certainly they do internal audits and such and I've never seen a McDonalds rated less than the full 5 on Scores on the Doors, so this actually does surprise me. I'd be equally surprised if they aren't cleaned at least twice a day, but if that's true, the cleaning is obviously not effective.
>> No. 16688 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:01 pm
16688 spacer
>>16685

well yes that's the 'real' story but the surface narative is 'don't eat at McDonalds it is filthy'.
>> No. 16689 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:05 pm
16689 spacer
>>16687

So why not just spray some Dettol on the screens a few times a day.
>> No. 16691 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:17 pm
16691 spacer
>>16689


It's not a good idea to use skin irritants in the public facing side of your restaurant, though there's no law against it, so they possibly do. More likely they'd use sanitiser which is usually milder, but still effective. There's many reasons that even coating the thing in bleach five times a day might not tackle the root problem, as I say, if there's a bezel or gap somewhere that can trap dirt and bacteria in it, then you've had it - it's the reason that in kitchens everything needs to be smooth. If there's a place for bacteria to 'hide' in those machines, then you're fighting a losing battle.

There's a couple of other possibilities, that they do clean it but not very well. Whatever cleaning solution they use will have a contact time where you're supposed to spray it on and leave it for x amount of time for it to be considered effective. Sometimes this is 30 seconds, or a minute, but I can certainly imagine a McD's bod just spraying and immediately wiping it off because they're in a rush/can't be arsed.

The other possibility is that they're just using glass/surface cleaner on it instead of sanitiser, which won't do much to kill anything other than unsightly smears. I have to imagine that McD's head office, who will produce a 'what spray to use where' datasheet, wouldn't have missed that one, though, but stranger things have happened.

It's entirely possible it's just neglect from employees, but like I say, they do seem genuinely good at cleanliness, though maybe it only extents to the kitchen where they stand to lose the most public face. These fast food chains have a huge amount invested in making sure they never get articles like this written about them, so it's very surprising that the biggest one of all got one.
>> No. 16692 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:40 pm
16692 spacer
>>16687
>From what I understand Maccy D's is just as tight on cleanliness as you'd expect a multinational corporation with disposable employees to be
As a former drone, this is correct. They put a lot of effort into devising a system that's easy to follow. When I was there, everything for cleaning the kitchen was red, and everything for cleaning front of house was blue. Cloths for wiping down your bench were lined red, and those for wiping down tables were lined blue. There was even a red mop and a blue mop, each with their own bucket. Senior managers had responsibility for the details, but ultimately all the ground troops had to know was that red is red and blue is blue and never the twain shall meet.
>> No. 16693 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 4:47 pm
16693 spacer
You'll find the same results if you swab anything that is regularly touched - door handles, handrails, tables and countertops etc. The ordering screens in a busy branch of McDonalds will be touched by hundreds of people a day, so there's only so much you can achieve by regular cleaning. The screen will be contaminated with bacteria every time someone touches the screen, because nobody has sterile hands.

The article doesn't give bacteria counts, which renders it almost completely meaningless. A culture test will detect tiny numbers of bacteria that are vanishingly unlikely to make anyone ill.

I'd be willing to wager that these screens are actually remarkably clean, relatively speaking. Glass with an oleophobic coating is far easier to clean and stays clean for longer than most of the surfaces we touch. The obvious point of comparison would be with restaurant menus - they're frequently handled, they're often made of porous materials and aren't routinely cleaned.
>> No. 16694 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 5:33 pm
16694 spacer
>>16693

Bacteria counts? That's not how it works lad. You swab something and then culture onto a medium which allows the organisms to multiply and thus be identified.

As a microbiologist I find the study entirely unsurprising and next to pointless, though. So I'm not in disagreement with you.
>> No. 16696 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 5:51 pm
16696 spacer
>>16694

I'm very much not a microbiologist, but I was under the impression that swabbing a measured area and taking an aerobic plate count was standard practice for measuring bacterial contamination levels on surfaces, giving a quantitative result in CFU per cm². What have I got wrong?
>> No. 16697 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 5:58 pm
16697 spacer
>>16691

One of my relatives worked in elderly care at an old people's home, and she sometimes nicked a bottle or two of their disinfectant. It was some sort of professional surface disinfectant, can't remember the brand name, but it stated on the back that it was capable of killing just about any kind of bug known to man. It did give specific contact times for various pathogens. I think one minute for common bacteria and two minutes for viruses, including HIV. Or something like that.

If I remember correctly, it was ethanol based, not IPA like many such cleaners. Chlorine bleach actually isn't used much in elderly care, because its vapours can be highly irritant and toxic, especially for the elderly.
>> No. 16698 Anonymous
29th November 2018
Thursday 7:44 pm
16698 spacer
>>16694

>As a microbiologist I find the study entirely unsurprising and next to pointless, though

I'm just working from the assumption that Dr Paul Matewele from the article is telling the truth when he said ‘We were all surprised how much gut and faecal bacteria there was on the touchscreen machines.' He might well be lying or exaggerating and I'd love to see the results, which >>16696 describes correctly. I've had a great many similar reports cross my desk in my time.
>> No. 16714 Anonymous
1st December 2018
Saturday 12:26 am
16714 spacer
>>16684
Unless they worked in the food industry or (I assume, no personal experience) medical industry, no one learns how to properly wash their hands.

Wet your hands. Cover in soap. Rub palms, back of hands, interlace your fingers to rub between fingers, use your left thumb to rub between your right thumb/forefinger and vice versa. Use your right hand, palm down, to rub each finger on your left individually. Flip your left, scrub the other side of left. Repeat with your right hand. Get someone to show you the bits I missed.

If you want your hands actually clean-ish, that's how. But unless you're a toddler or a frail elderly person it's overkill.
>> No. 16748 Anonymous
2nd December 2018
Sunday 10:12 am
16748 spacer
>>16714

When I worked in a food factory in Evesham we were instructed on proper cleaning and everyone got random swabs on their hands to check for bacteria. The quality department was quite anal about procedures, I've seen more than one person fired on the spot. I can assure you that the packaged food is pretty safe. I would not vouch for a takeaway prepared by a minimum wage employee. Sage for irrelevant post.
>> No. 16754 Anonymous
2nd December 2018
Sunday 12:52 pm
16754 spacer
>>16748

>I can assure you that the packaged food is pretty safe.

Conversely, I've stopped buying packaged chicken breast from my local Asda here, because more often than not, their chicken breast has kind of a gamey smell and taste to it, to the point that I have had to bin chicken breasts that were already fried on my plate, because the "off taste" was just too noticeable. And those chicken breasts there normally aren't even close to their sell-by date, where you'd begin to expect that you'll take chances on that kind of thing.

I've meant to tell the staff there, but I keep forgetting everytime I go there. But I am sure other people have noticed as well. I just hope nobody ends up with food poisoning one day.
>> No. 16773 Anonymous
3rd December 2018
Monday 4:27 pm
16773 spacer
>>16754

I had a similar but far more distressing experience with an extra large whole chicken from Iceland. It was well within its sell by date so I assume the slightly odd smell was just my imagination. I finally stopped shitting myself about a week later.
>> No. 16774 Anonymous
3rd December 2018
Monday 7:08 pm
16774 spacer
>>16773>>16754

I don't doubt either of you, but I've never seen that happen before and I practically live off chicken (and also used to order 60 packs every other day at work) I must have been rather lucky. The problems I always encounter are with fish, for obvious reasons.

I wonder why it happens. Even the reduced section chicken still seems alright when I've gotten that. I have to assume that the pack got pierced or the atmospheric packing failed at the factory or something.

I've always avoided buying marinated meat, especially pork, as I don't think there'd be much chance for you to tell it's off even if you ate it. I think my mother used to tell me that's what the dodgy local butchers did with their 'chinese chicken' flavoured stuff and it's stuck.
>> No. 16777 Anonymous
3rd December 2018
Monday 9:32 pm
16777 spacer
>>16774

>I've always avoided buying marinated meat

Lidl have frozen laminated lamb off an on as part of their Deluxe range. It's decent quality lamb as it goes, going by what you can expect from frozen laminated meat anyway, but they marinade the hell out of it with kind of a very strong herb marinade. The overall taste is alright, don't get me wrong, but it sort of overpowers the natural flavour of the lamb as such. Not sure that's a good thing.
>> No. 16778 Anonymous
3rd December 2018
Monday 9:46 pm
16778 spacer
>>16777

>laminated

Is this the weirdest wordfilter yet, or does your phone have a sarcastic autocorrect?
>> No. 16780 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 1:06 am
16780 spacer
>>16778

Laminated, as in, vacuum packed.

Am I really the only one who also calls it laminating?
>> No. 16781 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 6:00 am
16781 spacer
>>16780
Yes.
>> No. 16783 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 1:39 pm
16783 spacer
>>16780

Yes.
>> No. 16784 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 1:57 pm
16784 spacer
>>16780

Yes. You can only really laminate a flat surface.

I do implore you to keep saying it though as it's pretty funny.
>> No. 16785 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 2:24 pm
16785 spacer
>>16784
I implores you.
>> No. 16786 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 2:25 pm
16786 spacer
In honour of this thread, I want to stick some wafer-thin ham through a laminator, but I don't have any ham. Or a laminator.
>> No. 16787 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 3:52 pm
16787 spacer
>>16786

I could fax you a few slices of Cheddar.
>> No. 16788 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 4:08 pm
16788 spacer

>> No. 16789 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 4:17 pm
16789 spacer
>>16788

I always forget how attractive Will's Mum is.
>> No. 16790 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 4:41 pm
16790 spacer
>>16789

Honestly, I think she's a bit bland looking. Obviously I'd still chew off my left nut just to sniff her farts, but there's nothing particularly interesting about her. I'd be more attracted to her if she had a lazy eye or a tiny hint of a moustache or a weird fringe.
>> No. 16791 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 6:46 pm
16791 spacer
>>16698
>>16696

You're right of course, I was talking out of my arse and realised it the next day. It's been a long time (i.e since formal education) since I have worked on anything where quantifying organisms actually mattered. Sage for being a silly sausage.
>> No. 16794 Anonymous
4th December 2018
Tuesday 9:10 pm
16794 spacer
>>16790
>Obviously I'd still chew off my left nut just to sniff her farts

Doubt.
>> No. 16795 Anonymous
5th December 2018
Wednesday 1:25 am
16795 spacer

autism.jpg
167951679516795
>>16794
>> No. 16816 Anonymous
5th December 2018
Wednesday 5:29 pm
16816 spacer
>>16795

>inappropriate playing with toys

I once set one of my toy cars on fire as a weelad using lighter cubes.

Did that make me autistic?
>> No. 16820 Anonymous
5th December 2018
Wednesday 9:49 pm
16820 spacer
>>16816
Just means you're born squaddie material tbh.
>> No. 16822 Anonymous
6th December 2018
Thursday 1:09 am
16822 spacer
>>16820

Well my parents used to say that I would either be a firefighter or an arsonist when I grew up, because I seemed to have a pretty noticeable fixation on fire and explosions as a little kid.

I even managed to light a Mickey Mouse book on fire in the waste bin in my bedroom. It's been over 30 years, but everytime I go to my parents' house, there's still my old waste basket in my old room, slightly wonky on one side from the heat of the burning paper in it.


Sage for not being relevant to this thread in any conceivable way.
>> No. 16823 Anonymous
6th December 2018
Thursday 2:03 am
16823 spacer
>>16822

So which one did you end up being?
>> No. 16824 Anonymous
6th December 2018
Thursday 3:43 pm
16824 spacer
Pretty much any surface that a number of different people will touch during a day will turn out to be massively unsanitary and crawling with germs if you really examine it.

I try to limit my exposure to other people's pathogens by trying to avoid such surfaces. Or washing my hands after touching them.

For example, one thing I always do is when I've ordered something by post and I have to sign for it, I wash my hands afterwards. That stylus with which you have to sign your name on the screen of that handheld thing the delivery lad carries has to be completely covered in all kinds of muck. And it will literally go through dozens of hands every day, very likely without ever getting a proper clean.

I also avoid eating the peanuts that you always get in a little bowl for everybody at parties or in a bar or what-have-you. I think somebody actually did a petri dish test once on some communal peanuts like that and found all sorts of things from flu viruses to faecal bacteria on them. Which kind of makes it even worse than a poo smeared touchscreen at McD. Well, unless you lick that screen from top to bottom.
>> No. 16826 Anonymous
6th December 2018
Thursday 4:17 pm
16826 spacer
>>16824

I always press the pelican crossing button, and things like that, with my knuckle. I make sure and get door handles halfway down my fingers. I push doors by making a fist first. Then if I need to rub my eye or something, my fingertips haven't been violated. I use antibacterial gel when I get back in.

The last time I got flu coincided with someone thrusting a communal pen into my hand before I could get my own pen out. Now if I expect to have to sign something I have my own pen ready. I only get flu about every five years or so.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/06/how-not-to-catch-the-norovirus
>> No. 16827 Anonymous
6th December 2018
Thursday 4:26 pm
16827 spacer
>>16826

I've thought about just keeping my own stylus ready next to the door so that when I take delivery of a package, I won't have to mess with deliverylad's stylus.

But I guess I'm still a bit more worried I'll look like a cunt because of it than I am worried I'll catch some germs off it.

So I will probably just keep washing my hands thoroughly in the bathroom everytime I've signed for a package.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password