Why?  Because, when applied per instructions, the ethyl alcohol contained in the vast majority of alcohol-based hand sanitizer products removes the body’s natural oils from the surface of the skin and, within only a few hours, fosters an environment within which bacteria actually returns in quantities larger than originally present.  With repeated use, it actually damages the skin.  So who wants to apply it to babies and other small children?

Most people — including mothers of young children — appear not to realize is that the leading brands of alcohol-based hand sanitizer (i.e., Purell®, Germ-X® et al) contain a minimum of 62 percent and as much as 95 percent ethyl alcohol. I use the caveat, “appear not to realize”, due to the fact two facts:

(1) Manufacturers of those products combine to sell tens of millions of dollars worth of product every year after more than 20 years on the market, and

(2) Many of those products are sold to mothers of young children.

One would think government agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control would pursue aggressively — or, at a minimum, promote — the development of alcohol-free hand sanitizer solutions.  But, alas, they do not.  Instead, they recommend alcohol-based hand sanitizer products be used when washing with soap and water is not possible.

Their confusion is evident in the e-mail below which came in response to my questions about the CDC’s apparent love affair with alcohol:

The FDA in their Tentative Final Monograph (TFM) judged there were adequate clinical trials data to prove alcohol-based (hand sanitizers) are effective in interrupting the transmission of bacteria in healthcare settings.

The FDA judged there were inadequate clinical trials data to prove AB-HS are effective in interrupting transmission of viruses  (note: it is not that there are any clinical data to suggest AB-HS won’t be effective, just a lack of data).

However, there are laboratory data that show AB-HS are effective in killing viruses, especially enveloped viruses such as influenza, to a degree similar to which they kill bacteria.  It is on the basis of such laboratory data that CDC recommends AB-HS for controlling transmission of viruses as well as bacteria in healthcare settings.

According to the FDA in their TFM, the available clinical and laboratory data were inadequate to prove non-alcohol based HS are effective in interrupting transmission of bacteria or viruses.

The CDC guidance recommending AB-HS is focused on the needs of healthcare workers.  The benefits of AB-HS in community settings have been extrapolated from this guidance.

L. Clifford McDonald, MD, FACP
Chief, Prevention and Response Branch
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Most manufacturers of alcohol-based hand sanitizer products boast that their products offer Log 4 efficacy, a standard represented 99.99 percent effective against germs.  Some claim their products meet only Log 3 efficacy (99.9 percent).  Still others tout Log 6 efficacy (99.9999 percent) and higher, though I suspect many of the latter claims are exaggerated.

Are better, safer alternatives available?  Indeed they are.

A simple Google Search of the phrase, “alcohol-free hand sanitizer”, yielded nearly 2.5 million results this afternoon.  Among those results, at least a handful — perhaps hundreds — must hold some promise.

If only the “experts” at the CDC and FDA would exercise a bit more due diligence.  Instead, it appears they promote hand washing and alcohol as “solutions” to promote hand hygiene.  In turn, members of the mainstream news media parrot their guidance when reporting on efforts to combat bacteria, germs and viruses, including the much-feared H1N1 virus (a.k.a., “Swine Flu”), Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Norovirus.  Then the public buys products based upon what they see, hear and read in the news media.

Stories like this one show up as “bogies” on my follow-the-money radar screen.  In other words, they make me wonder whether or not much the big manufacturers of alcohol-based hand sanitizers are funneling to policy makers in Washington, D.C., to ensure government agencies continue to recommend only their products.  Hmmm?

Hat tip:  Today’s Big Thing

“In other words, stop thinking of the Democratic Party as merely a political party, because it’s much more than that. We’re not just the party of slavery, segregation, secularism, and sedition. Not just the party of Aaron Burr, Boss Tweed, Richard J. Croker, Bull Connor, Chris Dodd, Richard Daley, Bill Ayers, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and Emperor Barack Hussein Obama II. Not just the party of Kendall “Agent 202” Myers, the State Department official recruited as a Cuban spy along with his wife during the Carter administration. Rather, think of the Democratic Party as what it really is: a criminal organization masquerading as a political party.”

Thanks for sharing, Doug.

Though I haven’t paid much attention to the media circus that has followed the death of Michael Jackson, I couldn’t avoid being exposed to the treatment the story received on the front page of magazines near the checkout at my local supermarket this afternoon.

The photo above offers a glimpse of how four magazines — US Weekly, PEOPLE, iN TOUCH and OK! (shown clockwise from upper left) — exploited the untimely death of the 50-year-old King of Pop on their covers this week.

Trina Bøhnsdalen sits in our kitchen, reviewing one of hundreds of photos she took of the Budweiser Clydesdales during a photo shoot Monday in St. Louis.

With my background in journalism and public affairs, we shared interesting conversation about the old and new media and, along the way, I learned that Trina was already a professional photographer, working to pay her way through school.  In fact, she was en route to Las Vegas where she was going to photograph the Rolex FEI World Cup horse show for a Norwegian online magazine, HEST (”Horse” in Norwegian).

Before the flight was over, we exchanged contact information, and I said, “If you’re ever in St. Louis, drop me a line.”

On Sunday afternoon, I checked my e-mail to find that this globetrotting Norwegian was passing through St. Louis and hoping to photograph the Budweiser Clydesdales while in town — and, oh yeah, she needed a place to stay.

My wife and I decided that, instead of referring her to a hostel in St. Louis, we would just offer her a bed in our home and give our three boys the opportunity to meet their first Norwegian.

I called her, offered the lodging, gave instructions to our home and, a few hours later, she arrived in her beat-up 1984 Subaru wagon with more than 200,000 miles and a bit of rust on it (see photos at right).

During some getting-to-know-you conversation, we learned she had spent a year living on a cattle ranch in the Australian Outback at age 19, had traveled some 3,000 miles so far this summer, had many miles to go before returning to Colorado for the fall semester — and she owns two cats and a dog.  Conversations came to an end around midnight.

Upon waking up this morning, my mission was to help Trina make connections for a short-notice photography session with the Clydesdales, perhaps the world’s most-photographed and popular horses.  A few well-placed phone calls — including one to a church acquaintance who works at Anheuser-Busch InBev — produced the results we were after. She was in!

Almost 10 hours later, Trina returned from her photo shoot with stories to tell and photos that captured her encounters with the 2,300-lb. giants, most of which stand over 20 hands high.

One more overnight stay at the McCarty household and Trina was back on the road, this time headed for Yankton, S.D., to what she called a “colt-starting” operation.  After that, her plans include stops in Wyoming and Montana as long as the Subaru cooperates.

Good luck, Trina!

Hmmm?  The State oppressing a conservative Christian?  Talk about life imitating art.

Watch the video, shown in three parts below, and see if you agree.

Anyway, someone visited Bob McCarty Writes today and, while here, posted a link to Oath Keepers.org in a comment below an NRA-related post.  Normally, I delete comments that consist entirely of a link directing people away from this blog and to another site.  Today, however, I checked out the linked-to site and decided to share a portion of what it offers on this Independence Day Eve.

On the “About” page, I read the following:

Oath Keepers is association of currently serving military, veterans, and peace officers who will fulfill the oath we swore to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God.

As a former Air Force officer, I found myself “qualified” for membership and in agreement with the group’s statement of “ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY”, especially in light of the times in which we find ourselves.  Rather than share the long-winded version of that statement (which appears here), however, I’ve opted instead to share the numbered bullet-point version which appears below instead:

OATH KEEPERS: ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

Click here to read full length version.

Editor’s Note: I rarely join organizations of any sort, so don’t get upset when I tell you I won’t be joining Oath Keepers.  If you’re the type that likes to belong to organizations like this one, check it out and make sure it meets your standards. As for me, please know that I will be upholding the oath I took upon joining the U.S. Air Force and earning a commission as a second lieutenant almost 24 years ago, and I agree with the “We will NOTs” above.

Hat tip:  Offsetting Behaviour