alternatives analysis of disinfectants and · pdf filealternatives analysis of disinfectants...

Alternatives Analysis of

Disinfectants and Sanitizers

WSPPN Webinar, September 24, 2012

Chris Geiger, Ph.D.

Toxics Reduction Program

San Francisco Department of the Environment

Topics

The problem

Definitions

Methods

Findings &

recommendations

Regulatory issues

Take-home messages

Problems with disinfectants

Definitions

Food contact surface sanitizers

99.999% in 1 minute

Chlorine & iodine (halides)

Efficacy against Salmonella typhi

99.999% in 1 minute

Other compounds (quats, non-halides)

Efficacy against Staphylococcus aureus and E. coli

99.999% in 30 seconds

Definitions

Non food contact

surface sanitizers

Staph

AND

Klebsiella pneumoniae OR Enterobacter aerogenes

99.9% efficacy in 5 minutes

Definitions

Disinfectants

Hospital or Medical Environment Efficacy

Staph, Salmonella AND Pseudomonas

99.999% in 10 minutes

General (or Broad-Spectrum) Efficacy

Staph AND Salmonella

99.999% kill in 10 minutes

Limited Efficacy

Salmonella OR Staph

99.999% kill in 10 minutes.

Methods

Comparison of active ingredients (AIs)

Review of REDs, other sources of info on AI

Review of sample CA-registered product labels/MSDSs

Factors considered:

Environmental and health factors

Efficacy

Dwell time (and need to rinse off)

Cost

Material compatibility

Potential for exposure/package and dilution equipment

Influenza

Athletes Foot

E. coli

Tuberculosis

Norovirus

Hard to kill

Easy to kill

Source: McDonnell & Russell, 1999

Active ingredients considered

Chlorine “bleach”

(sodium hypochlorite)

Hydrogen peroxide

(regular and AHP)

Organic acids

(citric/lactic/caprylic)

Ortho-phenylphenol

Pine oil

“Quats”

Silver + citric acid

Thymol

Other Cleaners

Electrolyzed water

Microfiber

Soap and water

Steam

Option #1: Soap and water

Sodium hypochlorite

(chlorine bleach)

PROS CONS

CHEAP, widely available pH 11.5 = severe eye damage

Kills wide variety of microbes, some

products kill Tb and/or Norovirus

Sodium hypochlorite = respiratory

sensitizer asthmagen (AOEC)

Leaves no residue (does not always

need to be rinsed off)

Reacts with organic molecules in

water –> environmental hazards

Versatile (can be diluted differently

for different applications)

Typically available in open container,

which can increase worker exposure

and prevent accurate dilution

Not stable – loses potency

Reacts with other chemicals to form

toxic (chloramine) gas

Corrodes metals and floor polish

$1.79 (60 oz) $2.00 (10.1 oz)

Quaternary ammonium

compounds

PROS CONS

Widely available, inexpensive Respiratory sensitizer asthmagens

More stable than bleach More effective in high pH

products; concentrates corrosive

Broader efficacy claims than most

other products

Found in sewage outfalls; High

aquatic toxicity, “persistent*

Not as sensitive to organics Forms toxic chloramine gas when

mixed with bleach

Surfactant – cleans also Developmental & reproductive tox

observed (but not on Prop 65 list)

Available in neutral pH

formulations (but still corrosive)

Residues toxic and cause sticky

build-up (needs rinsing)

Silver ion compounds

PROS CONS

Low acute toxicity; not a skin or

respiratory sensitizer

Very high aquatic toxicity

Food contact surface sanitizer and

disinfectant – 1 minute dwell time

Persistent, cumulative in

herbivores and bivalves

Residual antimicrobial action (24

hours; good candidate for

“outbreaks”)

Usually formulated with citric acid:

Low pH (1.9) – eye hazard

Effective against MRSA, Athletes

Foot, Norovirus, E.coli

Not registered for TB

Not flammable; low scent Always RTU – Expensive!

Pine oil compounds

PROS CONS

Relatively inexpensive and

widely available

Limited efficacy (only gram-neg bacteria,

No TB, Norovirus, Hepatitis or HIV

registrations)

Not highly reactive Eye damage – DANGER label; corrosive

Some like (fresh) smell Often includes quats, alcohols

Reacts with ozone, forms formaldehyde

Some aquatic toxicity

Strong smell, flammable

10-minute dwell time

Skin sensitizing; possible asthmagen

Absorbs through skin

Neurotoxicity/Kidney effects

Peroxide compounds

PROS CONS

Low human toxicity (not

respiratory or dermal sensitizer)

Eye hazard from concentrates -

corrosive

Low environmental hazard Irritating vapors from concentrates

Rapidly decomposes to

O2 + H2O

Animal carcinogen & mutagen,

(but not on Prop 65 list)

Some (AHP) formulations effective

on full range of microbes

Some high efficacy products are

expensive or only in RTU

No residues/rinsing needed;

Whitens grout; removes stains

No H202 only products registered

for food contact surface sanitizing

(only with PAA)

Shorter dwell time than quats,

pine oil (some 1-5 minutes)

Some products have “hidden”

quats (on MSDS only)

Some concentrates versatile

cleaner/sanitizer/disinfectant

AHP contains phosphorus

Thymol

PROS CONS

Becoming more widely available Strong smell

Low environmental hazard Eye hazard for concentrates

Rapidly breaks down Skin sensitizer

Long shelf life Some aquatic toxicity

Not a respiratory sensitizer or

carcinogen

Possible reproductive effects

(but not on Prop 65 list)

Some products registered as food

contact surface sanitizer

10 minute dwell time typical

Limited efficacy

Electrolyzed water devices

Food Contact Surface Sanitizers Active Ingredient Dwell Efficacy Health Envir

Thymol

H2O2 + PAA RTU

H2O2 + PAA Conc

Silver + Citric Acid

Quats

Chlorine Bleach

M B M60

H B

B L

B

B L

H BBB M60

B L 30 L

60

60 M

H BBB 60 L

AHP -----------------

H2O2 only---------

CAPRYLIC ACID ---

CITRIC ACID -------

SILVER/CITACID --

LACTIC ACID ------

THYMOL -----------

QUATS -------------

CHLORINE ---------

PINE OIL -----------

H2O2 + PAA [ ] ---

OPP -----------------

Disinfectants Active Ing. Dwell Efficacy (Bact, Virus, Fungi) Health Env

H BBB L FF 10

BB VVV L FF

BB L 0 10 V L

BBB VVV FF

BB V V L L

BB L F 10

BBB VVV FFF 10

BBB VVV L L F 10

BBB VVV F H H 10

BBB VVV F L

BBB VVV FFF H 1-10

BB F 10 M

M M

M

1

0

10 0

1 H

H M

H

H

1

V

V

V V H

Recommendations Food contact surface sanitizer

Sanidate RTU (H202 + PAA)

Seventh Generation RTU (Thymol)

Limited: Pure Hard Surface RTU (Silver + Citric Acid)

Non food contact surface sanitizer

Alpha HP @ 1:128 dilution (Accelerated H202)

H2Orange 118 @ 1:12 dilution (H202)

Comet Disinfecting Bathroom Cleaner @ 1:4 dilution (Citric acid)

Windex Multi-Surface Antibacterial RTU; 10 second dwell (Lactic acid)

Disinfectant

Oxivir Five 16 @ 1:16 dilution (Accelerated H202)

Blondie RTU (H202)

Oxivir Tb RTU (Accelerated H202)

Limited: Pure Hard Surface RTU (Silver + Citric Acid)

Recommendations (specialized)

Bloodborne pathogens HIV + HBV

RTU

30 sec: Clorox Blondie (1.4% H202)

1 min: Oxivir Tb (0.5% AHP)

10 min: Clean-Cide (0.6% Citric acid)

10 min: Quantum Tb (0.138% Caprylic acid)

Limited: 1 min: Pure Hard Surface (Silver + Citric Acid)

Concentrate

5 min: Oxivir Five 16 (4.25% AHP; 1:16)


Locker Rooms (Athletes Foot Fungus)

RTU 5 min: H2Orange 120 One (1% H202)

3 min: Blondie Clorox (1.4% H202)

10 min: Oxivir Tb (0.5% AHP)


10 min: Quantum Tb (0.138% Caprylic acid)

5 min: Limited: Pure Hard Surface (Silver + Citric acid)

Concentrate 5 min: Oxivir Five 16 (4.25% AHP; 1:16) 5 min.

10 min: Thymo-cide (13% Thymol) 10 min.


Norovirus

RTU 1 min: Oxivir Tb (0.5% AHP)

1 min: Clorox Blondie (1.4% H202)


LIMITED: 1 min: Pure Hard Surface

(Silver + Citric Acid) 24-hr residual efficacy

Concentrate

5 min: Oxivir Five 16 (4.25% AHP @1:16)

10 min: Ecolab 65 Disinfecting Heavy Duty

Bathroom Cleaner @ 1:10 (Caprylic acid)

Microfiber (an important part of an effective disinfection

program)

Regulatory confusion – an example

Registered as a food contact sanitizer – by definition,

99.999% kill of E. coli and Staph in 30 seconds.

Label language: “Kills 99.9% of bacteria that cause food-

borne illness.”

For more info:

www.sfapproved.org

alternatives analysis of disinfectants and · pdf filealternatives analysis of disinfectants...

Documents