Jump to content

Electric Hand Dryers vs. Paper Towels


kwhitney

Recommended Posts

At Dino, we spend approximately $25 a week on paper hand towels.  That is at least a 33 gallon trashbag a day of trash.  So for the Grotto, I made a commitment that we would have electric dryers.... the XLcelerator dryer is green listed and earns you leed points.  It really deliverers the best combination of price, speed and energy use {especially compared to the Dyson Airblades}  Unfortunately, they run about 400 to 540 depending on finish.  And, it is insanely hard to find anything on eBay at less than full price.  But perseverance led to a pair of new white plastic models at $570 plus shipping.  The white ones look dorky IMO, but hey, $1160 for chrome vs 570 is a big difference (in fact, it paid for a door)!

Just as I was about to hit buy now, I did one last search and behold"¦ a pair of chrome babies, used but in pretty great condition.  I had to zoom on the labels to check the voltage and amperage, and they matched what the bathrooms are wired for already. 

I am sure you are aware that the general public (me) hates those electric hand dryers. They take too long, and just plain don't work.  The Dyson thing is no better than the conventional.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure you are aware that the general public (me) hates those electric hand dryers. They take too long, and just plain don't work.  The Dyson thing is no better than the conventional.

Indeed, but paper towels are such an all around bad idea that I think Dean's move makes sense. In addition to the cost and the waste, there is the very real problem of plumbing. At SK when we opened, we had paper towels, and the first summer, our sewer system backed up every week--every week! Thankfully, it was contained in the basement away from anywhere that could be contaminated. It still meant a plumber and anxiety. Turns out customers, female customers especially, really like putting paper towels in the toilet and flushing. They are built to absorb water, they pile up, and boom. This summer for Eventide, we will probably make the switch as well. More green, less heart attacks for management. It is a lot cheaper to move to the dryers than to widen your main line, and my guess is that the lines in Dean's new place are old; which means small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I find the modern electric dryers work pretty well for hand drying.  Unfortunately, no towels means there's no way to dry off the bathroom vanity which frequently has water puddled on it.  Tough if there's no place to put a purse while you're washing your hands.  An under-mount sink and a slightly pitched vanity can help a lot with the problem of standing water on the vanity.  So can an inexpensive shelf or hook in the wall near the vanity.  Food for thought... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure you are aware that the general public (me) hates those electric hand dryers. They take too long, and just plain don't work.  The Dyson thing is no better than the conventional.

Count me as an initial skeptic, but a late convert - assuming they don't take too much electricity, I like them, especially in high-volume, noisy restaurants. (Disclaimer: I'm a conservation maggot.)

I think the Dysons (and other similar turbo-blasters) work well - I also don't care if my hands are 100% dry; just close enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I`ve seen many people using paper towels after using the hand dryers; to open the door, blow their nose or re-dry their hands. For some reason there is, still, a wet feeling after using a hand dryer. 

 - I also don't care if my hands are 100% dry; just close enough.

That's my beef with electric dryers.  I want really dry hands, with all the moisture gone from between the fingers and so on.  Electrics just don't do it.  They also aren't really more sanitary -- my sister, who is a food service sanitation professional, comments that all they to is "blow the germs around."  I understand the owners point of view -- paper is expensive and a hassle.  But I mentally downgrade places that only have electrics.  Too much like rest stops and fast food places.  In fact, when I'm in a fast food place or a gas station on the interstate, I'm in the habit of taking some napkins from the self-serve food service island into the rest room with me to be sure I have paper to dry with.  Better than grabbing toilet paper, the other option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For another datapoint, I like the XL and the Dyson, much more than paper towels. If you can't get your hands dry on those things, you're doing it wrong.

I agree. While I did not like the older versions of hand dryers, the new generation is light years better. They dry your hands in seconds. My only complaint would be that they're so powerful that it can feel like the skin is being blown right off your hand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I`ve seen many people using paper towels after using the hand dryers; to open the door, blow their nose or re-dry their hands. For some reason there is, still, a wet feeling after using a hand dryer. 

A wet hand when returning from the bathroom speaks volumes to others at the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. While I did not like the older versions of hand dryers, the new generation is light years better. They dry your hands in seconds. My only complaint would be that they're so powerful that it can feel like the skin is being blown right off your hand!

Yes, & your children (assuming they are the same sex & accompanying you in the restroom) love to point out how gross your hands look - ah, loss of youth & skin elasticity, it'll hit them someday.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A wet hand when returning from the bathroom speaks volumes to others at the table.

What speaks even more is water all over your pants. This means you dribbled, and tried to conceal it by "accidentally" leaning against the sink while washing your hands.

50% of our readers (the women) are now recoiling in horror; the other 50% are laughing their asses off.

I speak in such simple truths.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you dress casually (jeans) & prewipe on the back of your pants, you can usually dry off w/ paper towels or the electric dryer, & make it back to your table without anyone noticing the dampness on your pants (unless you're a supermodel & everyone's checking out your rear view). Why am I even thinking about this?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am planning to install a commercial size dryer, a mini iron, blowdryer, a make-up set, and wet shaving service in my bathrooms. for additional $2.00 you get to have your butt wiped with silk. 

What could I get for $3.00?

(You can just kind of "sense" that my previous post is going to be the turning point in this conversation.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suppose a restaurant does 100 covers.  I would guess that would average about 75 trips to the restroom.  If you use an XLerator for 30 seconds each trip, that amounts to 37.5 minutes at 1800 watts or about 1/125 kilowatt hours or under $0.20 worth of electricity.  More like .17.  In my experience, a trip to the bathroom averages about 3 paper towels.  So the 75 trips would use about 225 towels which cost about $2.00.

So aside from the incredibly lower marginal cost of the electrics, just think of the resources involved in the production of the paper vs the electric.  And we don't properly price the cost of waste disposal in our economy, so the cost of paper is actually much higher.  If we don't start thinking about he effects we ahve on the environment from our small decisions, then we will have to make more drastic cuts in the larger ones.

Plastic bags generally are a better choice due to the lower shipping cost per pound of good packed.  Electric driers are superior to paper.  Don't eat Blusfin Tuna ever until the populations rebound.

Small stuff that we can really do with just a little thought.  So slightly damp fingers are a small price to pay.

And as to the germs issue, as the head of sanitation for Whole Foods in two different regions, we did a lot of testing for bacterial contamination.  Bathrooms, even filthy ones were rarely contaminated the way "clean" food preparation surfaces were on a regular basis.

The vast majority of food born illness comes from industrial practices.

No one had ever died from raw milk cheese and there are few cases of any food born illness involving raw milk cheeses where other factors were not implicated.  Yet every year hundreds and thousands are sickened from pasteurized fresh Latino cheeses (usually sold as Queso Fresco} which, for the reason that these traditional styles of fresh cheeses in those cultures are a fertile growing ground for Lysteriosis.

No one ever caught a STD from a dirty toilet seat.

And when a hospital tried really cleaning their surfaces vs getting all practitioners to wash their hands before touching a patient, the latter cut infection rates by something like 85% while the former did nothing.

Last ask Don about his paper entitled 50 ways to have fun with an electric hand drier, but I suggest you don't get the illustrated version!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last ask Don about his paper entitled 50 ways to have fun with an electric hand drier, but I suggest you don't get the illustrated version!  

You know what's really scary?

That we've actually come close to discussing this very issue.

And closer still.

I could also swear that I've written about this exact, and I mean exact, thing, but I don't remember where the post is. (Please do society a grand favor, and scroll up to Dean's previous post - it has a bit more substance than this one.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the cost savings but I hate touching door handles.  Unless the bathroom door opens out, I end up going back into a stall and getting TP to open the door.  Then, there is the question of where to throw it away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the cost savings but I hate touching door handles.  Unless the bathroom door opens out, I end up going back into a stall and getting TP to open the door.  Then, there is the question of where to throw it away...

Have you ever had to pull open the door, make a lightning-quick maneuver to throw the paper into a bin, and then jump back over before the door closes? If so, have you ever failed to make it in time, and were forced to repeat the sequence?

If the answer to either of the above questions is "yes," was anyone else in the restroom at the time?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever had to pull open the door, make a lightning-quick maneuver to throw the paper into a bin, and then jump back over before the door closes? If so, have you ever failed to make it in time, and were forced to repeat the sequence?

If the answer to either of the above questions is "yes," was anyone else in the restroom at the time?

Yes and yes.

When there is someone else in the room, I linger at the mirror and wait for them to open the door.  I know I am werid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and yes.

When there is someone else in the room, I linger at the mirror and wait for them to open the door.  I know I am werid.

When I can afford it i want to get a paddle fixture for the bathroom doors so you can use any body part you can get tot he door to open it.  But unfortunately, only commercial hardware, which is way out of my budget right now, has that feature.  At least you can use the lever handle with your elbow.

But again, studies show this to be a not really important source of cross contamination.  Sick employees, use of gloves {as is mandated by the health code} and plastic cutting boards {as is mandated by the health code} are all orders of magnitude more of a threat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Sick employees, use of gloves {as is mandated by the health code} and plastic cutting boards {as is mandated by the health code} are all orders of magnitude more of a threat.

What if you routinely wash your plastic boards in the DW? I believe commercial ones are rated as commercial dishwasher safe.  You can't do that with a wooden board.  (At home, I keep several small plastic boards and simply put them in the DW immediately after any use that might be questionable, eg cutting raw eat, and everything that's been used for  anything goes in at the end of the day -- no muss, no fuss, and yes I use the sterilization cycle on my NSF rated DW).

Agree about plastic gloves.  Worse, often in the dentist office I see them put on the gloves then grab things (e.g. the handle for the light) that have no obvious protection from the last patient (admittedly nowadays they often have a little plastic bag over those handles -- one can only hope it was changed from the last patient).  Full disclosure -- I got the worst sore throat of my life from a visit to a dirty dental office.

I also try never ever to touch a public restroom door handle with bare hands. YMMV.

I wouldn't be too trusting of the results of those "studies."  As I mentioned upthread, my sister used to do those studies for a living.  The problem is that 99.5% of the time there is no problem with, e.g. the door handle; it's the other .5%, that the study didn't happen to pick up, where the problem lurks.  Some things in life I'd rather not take the risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if you routinely wash your plastic boards in the DW? I believe commercial ones are rated as commercial dishwasher safe.  You can't do that with a wooden board.  (At home, I keep several small plastic boards and simply put them in the DW immediately after any use that might be questionable, eg cutting raw eat, and everything that's been used for  anything goes in at the end of the day -- no muss, no fuss, and yes I use the sterilization cycle on my NSF rated DW).  

The problem is that plastic cutting board are more suseptible to bacteria as they have more cuts in them.  Wood boards, outlawed by healt codes, actually ahve natural anti bacterial properties and are far safer.  And in the real world, no one is going to run a cutting board thry the dishwasher 20 times a day.

Agree about plastic gloves.  Worse, often in the dentist office I see them put on the gloves then grab things (e.g. the handle for the light) that have no obvious protection from the last patient (admittedly nowadays they often have a little plastic bag over those handles -- one can only hope it was changed from the last patient).  Full disclosure -- I got the worst sore throat of my life from a visit to a dirty dental office.

Study after study done in the real world shows that the worst solution is gloves where the employees are not trained.  Next is gloves where the employees get proper training.  Better still, by a wide margin, is bare hand with no handwashing training.  Best is tell your employees how often and how to wash.  Real world results minitored unobtrusively done in Massachusetts and Britian.  

I also try never ever to touch a public restroom door handle with bare hands. YMMV.

Again, thee is no evidence that this is any sort of an issue from real world, epidemiological data.  If there are germs on a door, they are being spread by droplet int he restaurant.  Outbreaks are almost always due to industrail batch size product being used or sigk employees or hygene issues way beyond hand wshing and bathroom use.

I wouldn't be too trusting of the results of those "studies."  As I mentioned upthread, my sister used to do those studies for a living.  The problem is that 99.5% of the time there is no problem with, e.g. the door handle; it's the other .5%, that the study didn't happen to pick up, where the problem lurks.  Some things in life I'd rather not take the risk. 

So we should reject evidence?  

Most studies are paid for by people with a financial interest and guess what, they almost always favor the asshole who paid for the study.  We ahve gone away from funding independent research by universities and centers of excellence in favor of the fox paying to test of the henhouse door works, payuing the fox to install and maintain the henhouse door, and making it illegal for anyone to see for themselves if the door works.  Then we bemoan the door not keeping out the foxes and all the dead chickens!

The hospital hand washing study was sone at hospitals sequentially {ie intervention studies} and the results were followed after years.  I have training in statistical analysis and experimental design testing {I was a pretty shitty practical econometrician, but I was a sonsofagun in workshop destroying papers on statistics grounds... especially when I didn't read the paper and only went ot the workshop to hit on the cute girl i was in love with who attended.}

If we reject well designed science in favor of trusting big corporations that make money off of our using their crappy, dangerous products {plastic gloves and cutting boards are big business} we will just become a dumb country.  And we wouldn't want that to happen.  I mean it couldnt... right?  I mean the asshat whores who pass the laws in Congress* and state legislators couldn't be so stupid to reject settled science like evolution, tha age of the earth as more than 6,000 to 10,000, reject that there is any evidence for global warming/climate change etc etc etc.

* this would exclude Henry Waxman, Bernie Sanders, Al Franken and the many, few, some,  ... well how about hopefully at least one, congressmen where con isnt just tehri occupation.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that plastic cutting board are more suseptible to bacteria as they have more cuts in them.  Wood boards, outlawed by healt codes, actually ahve natural anti bacterial properties and are far safer.  And in the real world, no one is going to run a cutting board thry the dishwasher 20 times a day.

So we should reject evidence?

I mean the asshat whores who pass the laws in Congress* and state legislators couldn't be so stupid to reject settled science like evolution, tha age of the earth as more than 6,000 to 10,000, reject that there is any evidence for global warming/climate change etc etc etc.

I thought you were keeping the cutting boards segregated (by color).  I believe that's also in the regs.  It shouldn't be necessary to run them through every half hour.

I don't reject the science.  I know door handles are cleaner than lots of other things.  BUT, if I touch those other things I'm going to wash my hands anyway before I leave the rest room.  Unfortunately that by definition is not possible with regard to the the handle on the exit door.  Thus I'd rather not touch it.  The studies don't note this simple fact.

With regard to settled science, I totally agree with you.  That said, I note that you, coming at this from a progressive perspective, have pointed out certain issues where conservatives go wrong.  But you haven't noted certain points where progressives, including you, also reject science.  For example, like it or not there has never been a statistically valid study done that found that anyone could detect the presence of MSG in foods, including persons who totally believe it has dire effects on them.  The MSG thing amounts to mass hysteria.  On a more significant issue, the overwhelming scientific evidence shows there are no dangers associated directly with GMO's.  I agree that some corporations have used GMO's in ways that may be economically repugnant to some, and/or there may be health effects derived not from the GMO's themselves but other matters (e.g. pesticide use), but that doesn't alter the scientific fact, whether you yourself accept it or not, that gene-splicing itself is not harmful.  It just flat isn't, as numerous recognized independent, non-corporate-funded scientific associations and groups have unequivocally pointed out. But you and many others continue to believe and say it does.  So is this accepting of the valid scientific evidence?  Note -- I agree you have every right to not eat GMO's if you choose not to, but you have no scientific basis or right to tell anyone they will be harmed if they do.  Maybe you shouldn't make so much fun of the flat-earthers.  People who live in glass houses.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either option will make you mental if you think about it too much. The dryers are sucking in the bathroom air and blowing it at your hands and everywhere else. Often the paper towels are in one of those metal fixtures that are directly above the garbage can-- wtf?

My approach is to not go until I return to the parking lot.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either option will make you mental if you think about it too much. The dryers are sucking in the bathroom air and blowing it at your hands and everywhere else. Often the paper towels are in one of those metal fixtures that are directly above the garbage can-- wtf?

My approach is to not go until I return to the parking lot.

You obviously eat out in Old Town a lot, the entrance to my parking garage for work constantly smells like...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought you were keeping the cutting boards segregated (by color).  I believe that's also in the regs.  It shouldn't be necessary to run them through every half hour.

I don't reject the science.  I know door handles are cleaner than lots of other things.  BUT, if I touch those other things I'm going to wash my hands anyway before I leave the rest room.  Unfortunately that by definition is not possible with regard to the the handle on the exit door.  Thus I'd rather not touch it.  The studies don't note this simple fact.

With regard to settled science, I totally agree with you.  That said, I note that you, coming at this from a progressive perspective, have pointed out certain issues where conservatives go wrong.  But you haven't noted certain points where progressives, including you, also reject science.  For example, like it or not there has never been a statistically valid study done that found that anyone could detect the presence of MSG in foods, including persons who totally believe it has dire effects on them.  The MSG thing amounts to mass hysteria.  On a more significant issue, the overwhelming scientific evidence shows there are no dangers associated directly with GMO's.  I agree that some corporations have used GMO's in ways that may be economically repugnant to some, and/or there may be health effects derived not from the GMO's themselves but other matters (e.g. pesticide use), but that doesn't alter the scientific fact, whether you yourself accept it or not, that gene-splicing itself is not harmful.  It just flat isn't, as numerous recognized independent, non-corporate-funded scientific associations and groups have unequivocally pointed out. But you and many others continue to believe and say it does.  So is this accepting of the valid scientific evidence?  Note -- I agree you have every right to not eat GMO's if you choose not to, but you have no scientific basis or right to tell anyone they will be harmed if they do.  Maybe you shouldn't make so much fun of the flat-earthers.  People who live in glass houses.......

You can chop anything on one cutting board adn the groves in the board are a perfect hideaway for bacteria growth.  Not a matter of cross contamination.

Your opinion is your opinion and you are entitled to it.  But an ick factor should not be the basis for public policy.  And with electric vs paper, the choice as far as our resources in incredibly clear.  At Dino, I was out of Amperage or I would have done it long ago.

MSG is hype.  I use plenty of ingredients that add umammi in a  natural, layered approach that I feel is better than shaking in the MSG.  I would like to control how much I have in my food.

On GMO, my position is very clear.  I am against GMO's for several reasons, not the one you cite.  I have never said that someone would be harmed by eating GMSs.  However to say that GMO food safety is settled science is a huge over statement.   I know of no study that has more than a three year time horizon.  We know from epidemiological studies of many risks that cannot be identified at the three year mark of study that later prove to be deadly indeed.  I am sure you have heard of cigarettes and second hand smoke?

But there is a lot of be said against GMOs that has been scientifically supported:

Genetic Drift ~ we now have roundup ready weeds because of the genetic drift of the roundup ready gene.  We now have frost resistant weeds from the original GMO frost resistant strawberries.  The result is an increase in herbicide use.  This is not a side issue, but part and parcel of GMO use.  I know that the supporters of GMO point to the reduced use of insecticides, but we are losing Monarchs and other insects in areas that are using a lot of GMO crop with insect resistance built in.  Both effects are a big looser as far as I am concerned.

Crop Failure.  100,000s of farmers in India have committed suicide when they experience crop failure and are in debt to big ag.  A study of this was done showing that over half of the instances {spread over 18 different areas in India, about half studied} were directly due to GMO crop failure.  In areas where GMO use has been around the longest, we are starting to see massive crop failure.

Roundup buildup Round up ready seeds led to a huge increase inthe use of roundup.  This has led to a buildup of dangerous compounds inthe soil.  The scientists who reported these finding for the USDA {or was it FDA} got fired.

Lying Why do big ag companies want to prevent ingredient labeling of GMO?  Let people know, educate them and let the market decide.  But we should have the truth.  If a devout hindu vegetarian of many years wants to be a vegetarian, why should he or she not know that there is a halibut gene in their tomato.

Genetic Modified Salmon When they escape their pens, they disrupt the breeding cycle of wild salmon.  So GMO salon raised in ocean water leads to a lesseningof genetic diversity.

So once again, you have not directly adressed the issues with findings.  And again, you have misrepresented my views.  John, I love the smell of strawmen napalmed in the morning!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a consumer/hand washer, I love the XLerator, although I think they are very loud. I hope you have solid, noise-blocking doors. When I checked the Google machine for the spelling of XLerator, I see that Amazon has them for $400 or so (I didn't research the details) and there's a model with noise reduction nozzle. Maybe yours are quieter than the older models I've seen. I look forward to finding out when I'm there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind electric hand dryers, as long as they are the XL or the Dyson. However, I do notice how you end up with puddles underneath them...

I do also appreciate it when there's also paper towels in there in case I need to blow my nose. :D

(And Don, your mention of pants is my constant fear at work since I wear khakis there. On the other hand, with this cold weather, I'm also wearing long underwear, which helps with that. :D )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can chop anything on one cutting board adn the groves in the board are a perfect hideaway for bacteria growth.  Not a matter of cross contamination.

Your opinion is your opinion and you are entitled to it.  But an ick factor should not be the basis for public policy.  And with electric vs paper, the choice as far as our resources in incredibly clear.  At Dino, I was out of Amperage or I would have done it long ago.

MSG is hype.  I use plenty of ingredients that add umammi in a  natural, layered approach that I feel is better than shaking in the MSG.  I would like to control how much I have in my food.

On GMO, my position is very clear.  I am against GMO's for several reasons, not the one you cite.  I have never said that someone would be harmed by eating GMSs.  However to say that GMO food safety is settled science is a huge over statement.   I know of no study that has more than a three year time horizon.  We know from epidemiological studies of many risks that cannot be identified at the three year mark of study that later prove to be deadly indeed.  I am sure you have heard of cigarettes and second hand smoke?

But there is a lot of be said against GMOs that has been scientifically supported:

Genetic Drift ~ we now have roundup ready weeds because of the genetic drift of the roundup ready gene.  We now have frost resistant weeds from the original GMO frost resistant strawberries.  The result is an increase in herbicide use.  This is not a side issue, but part and parcel of GMO use.  I know that the supporters of GMO point to the reduced use of insecticides, but we are losing Monarchs and other insects in areas that are using a lot of GMO crop with insect resistance built in.  Both effects are a big looser as far as I am concerned.

Crop Failure.  100,000s of farmers in India have committed suicide when they experience crop failure and are in debt to big ag.  A study of this was done showing that over half of the instances {spread over 18 different areas in India, about half studied} were directly due to GMO crop failure.  In areas where GMO use has been around the longest, we are starting to see massive crop failure.

Roundup buildup Round up ready seeds led to a huge increase inthe use of roundup.  This has led to a buildup of dangerous compounds inthe soil.  The scientists who reported these finding for the USDA {or was it FDA} got fired.

Lying Why do big ag companies want to prevent ingredient labeling of GMO?  Let people know, educate them and let the market decide.  But we should have the truth.  If a devout hindu vegetarian of many years wants to be a vegetarian, why should he or she not know that there is a halibut gene in their tomato.

Genetic Modified Salmon When they escape their pens, they disrupt the breeding cycle of wild salmon.  So GMO salon raised in ocean water leads to a lesseningof genetic diversity.

So once again, you have not directly adressed the issues with findings.  And again, you have misrepresented my views.  John, I love the smell of strawmen napalmed in the morning!

Not sure what you're saying about cutting boards.  But even if you cut a groove a mile deep in a plastic board but wash it in the sanitizing DW at the end of the day as one should,  bacterial growth is going to be zapped.  You can't do that with a wood board. So as far as I'm concerned plastic wins.

Glad we agree on MSG.  Personally I don't use it either (that has nothing to do with my point).  I'm a big fish sauce man myself -- use it in just about everything.

Now then, GMO's.  I'm familiar with all the arguments you raised.  Frankly I have neither the time nor the inclination to run down each, but I did take a quick closer look at a couple of them.  Regarding Indian farmers, not only is there little if any scientific support for that one, it was debunked by International Food Policy Research Institute which BTW is not meaningfully funded by industry.  If you don't believe them, just take a look at the annual number of suicides by farmers in India; you will find the number was about 11,000 in 1995 rising to about 17,000 in 2002, which as you must know was the year Monsanto introduced GM cotton seeds in India.  The annual number of suicides stabilized about then and remains at that level.  Given that, how can the introduction of GMO's that year be the cause of all those suicides?. To the contrary, the numbers suggest there is no cause and effect at all.  

Regarding butterflies, the scientific evidence is that GMO's have no direct effect.  They have been in decline for a very long time, and the main problem recently is the loss of their food source, milkweed, and the best evidence is that that in turn was caused not by GMO's but by the fact that farmer's have been planting corn fence to fence because of ethanol, and turned all the fields where it used to grow into (marginally) productive land to grow still more corn. 

So your "scientific" support basically is somewhere between weak and non-existent.  My original point stands, namely that you too are basing your policy prescriptions fundamentally on ideology not science.  Your napalm was a dud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, this topic i started has turned out pretty well.

Dino, I appreciate the analysis you have done on the subject.

I started this by just ranting that I just didn't like the electric hand dryers. I still prefer a towel. My real preference is for my hands to be lovingly hand dried by a beautiful large breasted woman or two.  If your are going for the Grotto theme, you should consider other grottos. How would Heff have handled it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding butterflies, the scientific evidence is that GMO's have no direct effect.  They have been in decline for a very long time, and the main problem recently is the loss of their food source, milkweed, and the best evidence is that that in turn was caused not by GMO's but by the fact that farmer's have been planting corn fence to fence because of ethanol, and turned all the fields where it used to grow into (marginally) productive land to grow still more corn. 

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/1999/04/toxic-pollen-bt-corn-can-kill-monarch-butterflies

http://www.pnas.org/content/98/21/11937.long

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v399/n6733/abs/399214a0.html

Nature, COrnell University and Proceeding of the National Academy of Science are hardly no evidence.  I think they speak or themselves and your lack of either Google skills or truthfullness.  I have no evidence one way or the other but my own opinion so the jury is out.

Now then, GMO's.  I'm familiar with all the arguments you raised.  Frankly I have neither the time nor the inclination to run down each, but I did take a quick closer look at a couple of them.  Regarding Indian farmers, not only is there little if any scientific support for that one, it was debunked by International Food Policy Research Institute which BTW is not meaningfully funded by industry.  If you don't believe them, just take a look at the annual number of suicides by farmers in India; you will find the number was about 11,000 in 1995 rising to about 17,000 in 2002, which as you must know was the year Monsanto introduced GM cotton seeds in India.  The annual number of suicides stabilized about then and remains at that level.  Given that, how can the introduction of GMO's that year be the cause of all those suicides?. To the contrary, the numbers suggest there is no cause and effect at all.  

I cannot find the cites... I will look further.

But here is a report from Hindustan Times

http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/ministry-blames-bt-cotton-for-farmer-suicides/article1-830798.aspx

Bt cotton's success, it appears, lasted merely five years. Since then, yields have been falling and pest attacks going up. India's only GM crop has been genetically altered to destroy cotton-eating pests.

For farmers, rising costs "”in the form of pesticides "” have not matched returns, pushing many to the brink, financially and otherwise. Simply put, Bt cotton is no more as profitable as it used to be.

"In fact cost of cotton cultivation has jumped"¦due to rising costs of pesticides. Total Bt cotton production in the last five years has reduced," says the advisory

Here is a study that shows that yields are up but nowhere near the costs, making cotton farming riskier.  It is clearly possible that some of the risk factors stated int he study you quote are exacerbated by this risk reward relationship.

An example would suffice. A study by Singh and Asokan (2006) on returns from cultivation

for Gherkin (Trellised) and Gherkin indicates that net return per acre was greater in the
former by 46 per cent (Rs.5,720/- over Rs.3,930/-) but the total costs was also greater by 106
per cent (Rs.27,600/- over Rs.13,410/-). In case of crop failure, there should be risk
mitigation strategies that compensates for net returns over and above the costs. This would be
difficult, as costs are 4.8 times that of net returns in the former case and 3.4 that of net returns
in the later case.

The Economic Times of India published a report reccommending a 10 year moritorium on bT corn

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-10-19/news/34584274_1_trials-of-gm-crops-aruna-rodrigues-field-trials

So in the light of a lot of conflicting evidence, maybe the question is not as settled as I said, but it is certainly not of negligible proof like you maintain.

Not sure what you're saying about cutting boards.  But even if you cut a groove a mile deep in a plastic board but wash it in the sanitizing DW at the end of the day as one should,  bacterial growth is going to be zapped.  You can't do that with a wood board. So as far as I'm concerned plastic wins. 

Again, there are studies of wood which has natural antibacteria properties and plastic which doesn't.  Not a throretical argument, but testing.  At Whole Foods, meat departments has cleaner test results when they could use wood cutting boards.  The newest stores often had the worst swab results.

But not opinion... here is a cite from 1993

http://culinaryarts.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=culinaryarts&cdn=food&tm=32&f=00&su=p284.13.342.ip_p830.11.342.ip_&tt=2&bt=8&bts=8&zu=http%3A//www.rhtubs.com/wood-bacteria.htm

Here is UC Davis

http://faculty.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/faculty/docliver/Research/cuttingboard.htm

Their cutting board study concludes "We know of no similar research that has been done anywhere, so 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."

Again, a few seconds on Google give us two very prestigeous university studies which trash plastic.  Just learn to use Google or admit your stating opinion that flies in the face of fact.

So your "scientific" support basically is somewhere between weak and non-existent.  My original point stands, namely that you too are basing your policy prescriptions fundamentally on ideology not science.  Your napalm was a dud.
 

Now you have cites in scientific and economic sourced that are either original research or cite original research.  You cites one study.  SO either you don't know science when you see it, or your pro agribusiness bias blinds you to the multitude of scientific papers that disagree with your positions.  So in closing, intellectual dishonesty in misrepresenting my [positions, straw-manning, stating opinion without cites and the use of one study should speak for themselves.

And lets not even get started about the precautionary principle vs statistical significance.  In Epidsmiological studies of health risks, by the time the risks rise to statistically significant levels on a type 1 type 2 error matrix, the results are catastrophic.  Big business hides behind this every day.  If the Surgeon General's original anti smoking advice was taken, and the BS of the cogarette industry which flew in the trends of the evidence, millions would be alive today.

I suggest you actually research something before you call someone out and say "you too are basing your policy prescriptions fundamentally on ideology not science."  I was not.  You can argue the weight of the evidence I present, but to say it was opinion is simply not true.  But your refusal to do so while impugning me leaves me wondering.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has to stop.

I will say that, with regard to the cutting boards, my point was that plastic is not harmful IF YOU RUN IT THROUGH THE DW AND STERILIZE IT.  You can't run wood boards though the DW.  That's why plastic is cleaner.  Did any of the studies you cite swab plastic boards AFTER THEY WENT THROUGH THE DW and were STERILIZED.

As to my lack of cites, you didn't offer a single cite in your 4:51 post, so I decided two could play that game.  Don't criticize me for doing what you do.

If you can't find the cite for the Indian farmer study I mentioned, your Google skills must be severely lacking.  I found it on the first page when I did my Google.  So don't criticize me for "not having" skill you manifestly  lack yourself.

The Hindustan Times and the Economic Times of India do not constitute scientific anything.

I never commented on the issue of yields.  Only suicides.  The annual total suicide count, juxtaposed with the timing of the intro of GMO, is pretty strong evidence that the claims about suicide are bunk.  You ignored that.

I assure you I  do not have a "pro" agribusiness bias.  To the contrary.  But I am a skeptic.  And the "evidence" that is thrown around in the GMO discussion is wide open to skeptical thinking, and that includes the so-called scientific evidence, which if you looked at it with an open mind rather than a made-up mind as you do you might possibly see as well.  BTW, unlike most everybody, I actually did a little studying of genetics in university, and what I learned there gives me I think pretty firm ground in my non-fear of genetic engineering.  As to my analytical ability and understanding of science, which you have impuned,  I hate to bring this up and seldom do, but it so happens I possess a PhD from a major (Ivy league) university.  I assure you I understand and am quite comfortable with the process of science, and even statistical analysis.  And I know much "science"is actually bunk, and sometimes one can, by approaching with skepticism,  see it.  And to me, a great deal of the "science" that has been used to support anti_GMO claims, of the kind you are citing, is in fact bunk.

But sorry, I just don't have the time to continually research and counter your confirmation-biased postings.  This has got to stop somewhere and that's the last I'll be posting on this.  You can work yourself into a frenzy and flame me all you want.  I'm done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did find your paper.  I did not need to cite it as you brought it up.  I did post cites of scientific studies.  

You are flat out wrong on the cutting board.

Confirmation bias?  Showing the other side is confirmation bias?  Since you post one study, it is given from on high?  And I never said that The Economic Times was scientific.  Singh and Asokan (2006)  is a scientific cite.  So quit your lying by omission about what I have posted.  

Your suicide data is old.  The ET piece says the positive times were 5 years: thru 2007/8, whenyour paper was written.  But the point is that these things take time.  

You have not for the first time misrepresented my position and what I have said.  

 

Yes: Enough.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little surprised not to have found this posted already:

TED talk: Joe Smith on How to Use a Paper Towel

It's worth watching the entire video for the last line alone.

FWIW, especially if I'm dining solo, I no longer use any paper towels. Assuming there's no turbo dryer available, I'll shake my hands a few times, give a quick rub against the side of my pants - front, back - and ... voilí : no paper used. And if my hands are a little damp, then so be it.

As for the styrofoam carryout containers that invariably contain my next day's lunch, that's another issue entirely, and one against which I grapple mightily. I recycle everything I can from them, including napkins (which I save for another day - I haven't bought a pack of napkins since I can remember).

As for the gas used to drive to the restaurant, that's also another issue entirely, and also one against which I grapple mightily.

One of the beauties of my lifestyle is that my recycling bin is put out every week; my trashcan gets pushed to the curb perhaps once a month - I (directly) generate virtually no trash. One of the biggest symptoms that told me I'd healed from the loss of Member Number One: I started caring enough to recycle again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the styrofoam carryout containers that invariably contain my next day's lunch, that's another issue entirely, and one against which I grapple mightily. I recycle everything I can from them, including napkins (which I save for another day - I haven't bought a pack of napkins since I can remember).

I've made it a point to comment on my leftovers containers to the restaurants I frequent. For instance, Cafe Asia in Rosslyn uses plastic containers that I've reused for months before the dishwasher inevitably melts the lid. I've told them "thank you" for the containers and that it is one of the reasons why I return (and sometimes order extra to insure I have leftovers).

The only place I've gotten a styrofoam container recently (Eastern Carryout, which I only hit anymore when very, very drunk) I've asked (when sober enough) to have them put stuff into cardboard instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm proud to say that tonight, on my third visit to Fiola Mare, I finally mastered the combination faucet/hand dryer in the ladies room, managing to wash and then dry my hands in the proper sequence.

I think I should receive a diploma for that. Printed on a paper towel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...