A 22 step guide to how to write a story to stir up germophobia.

Another day.  Another excessively germophobic news story. Today it is:

What's the dirtiest surface on an airplane? The result may surprise you | CBC News

In reading this article I realized, as others have before me, that these tend to follow a simple script.  Swab. Report on how dirty things are.  But I decided to dig in a little more.  And I have come up with  a foolproof way to write such stories. Just follow these 13 steps. These do not have to be done in the order below.

1. Swab something
2. Send swabs off for testing with a microbiologist or testing company to make it seem like there is some serious science going on. 
3. Bonus points for showing microscopes or bacterial plates or other science things.
4. Don't report the full methods or data. Just make it seem like you know what you are doing.  Be vague some of the time.  And use really big #s other times.
5. Report on the results that make things seem way dirtier than people might have expected.  Say things like "Dirtier than a toilet seat". 
6. Mention feces.  Or fecal matter.  Pretend or just flat out lie about how the testing you did shows that feces was in the samples.
7. Mention something else that is gross. Condoms.  Bodily fluids.  Vomit.  Disease.  Vermin.
8. Repeatedly use synonyms of "dirty" or "gross". 
9. Mention human illness.  Often. 
10. Bonus points for telling people they "could" or better yet - "likely will" - get specific diseases from touching these sites even when there is likely absolutely no evidence regarding likelihood of transmission.  
11. Bonus points for mentioning nasty symptoms of human illness like diarrhea or vomiting or things involving bleeding.
12. Mention specific microbes but only ones that make people sick and don't mention all the other microbes in samples.
13. Definitely do not mention that some microbes you are calling dangerous also frequently come in non dangerous forms.
14. Get a known fear mongering germophobe to comment about the results. 
15. Bonus points if the person you get to comment has a nickname involving microbiology.
16. Bonus points if the person you get to comment runs a company involved in infection prevention.
17. Tell people to use hand sanitizer.
18. Discuss how nobody cleans the surfaces swabbed in the story as often as you would have thought.  
19. Bonus points for misleadingly saying that you can say something about how often or how well people clean the sites being studies from a limited amount of indirect swab data.
20. Link to other germaphobic stories or videos.
21. Ask the people responsible for the sites that were swabbed to comment without really providing them with enough details to be able to know what exactly was done or whether it means anything.
22. Ask employees or other personnel to comment about other gross things they have seen associated with the sites being sampled.

And today's article has most / all of these.  I will leave it to you, dear readers, to figure out how to map these 22 things onto this and other stories.

Crosspost from #microBEnet: More scary than Halloween: this month in germophobia microbophobia

Crossposting this from the microBEnet blog where I originally posted it 10/31/14:

It seems that any time a holiday comes around in the US, the press starts to ramp up the writing of stories about evil microbes that are lurking all around us. And Halloween appears to be no exception. I am now planning on referring to this attitude as "microbophobia" rather than "germophobia" because to some "germ" implies pathogen and many of these stories fan the flames of fear about any kind of microbe not just pathogens. I note - the term microbophobia comes from some searches I did recently of Google books.

I was thinking of writing up yet another post trying to counter this excessive microbophobia but decided instead to just provide a collection of links to stories over the last month that have a distinctive microbophobia flavor.  Mind you - there are real reasons to be afraid of some of the microbes circulating around these days.  But the links below seem to me to be serious overkill.

• KFOX 10/31/14: Special Assignment: How dirty is your cellphone?
• KENS 10/31/14: The most germ-laden thing in your home
• KFVS 10/30/14: Dirty candy: Trick-or-treating for candy or germs?
• KCCI Des Moines 10/30/14 Grinnell Regional Medical Center is using a robot to help fight infectious diseases like Ebola.
• Headlines and Global News 10/29/14: Germ-Free Homes: It's Possible, Even in the Wintertime 
• Fox17 10/29/14 What part of your home is crawling with the most germs? 
• Your Houston News 10/29/14: HAPPY HANDYMAN: Killing germs, bacteria much faster with Quick Clean Disinfectant
• Fox2Now 10/28/14: Blues bacterial infections, Halloween germs
• Cars.Com 10/28/14: With Flu Season Nearing Keep Germs at Bay in Car
• The Daily Telegraph: 10/28/14 Our filthy hospitals
• Bellingham Herald 10/27/14 Q&A: There are germs among us, and you can't be too safe 
• Dothan Eagle 10/26/114 Scrubs will combat spread of germs
• Lifehacker 10/25/14: The Most Germ-Infested Item in the Office Might Be the Coffee Pot 
• Shape Magazine 10/24/14: Confessions of A Germophobe
• Huffington Post: 10/17/14: This Terrifying Video Shows How Quickly Toilet Germs Spread To Your Mouth
• Daily Mail 10/14/14:  How to Stay as Germ Free as Possible in the Toilets
• KLTV 10/10/14: Halloween Costume Shopping Brings Concern for Germs
• PSFK: Protective Transit Jacket for Germ-Free Commuting
• Wall Street Journal 10/1/14 Germs at the Office Are Often Found on Keyboards and at Coffee Stations

These are but a few of the many examples of microbophobia being pushed by the press. Again, there are certainly things to worry about in terms of pathogens in our immediate environment.  Flu season is coming.  Enterovirus might be on the upswing.  Antibiotic resistance is a massive and troubling problem.  And so on.  But please let us not go completely over the top because the more we promote the idea that we should be killing all microbes, the more trouble we are likely to cause, rather than prevent.

The evil germy pacifier story is getting out of hand - w/ Dr. Glass misleading the charge

From Wikipedia

Oh for crying out loud.  This is getting out of control.  Two weeks ago I wrote about an over the top story in US News and World Report about pacifiers and microbes: The Tree of Life: Germophobia 101: there are microbes on pacifiers ....  The culprit in this story was a Dr. - Dr. Tom Glass - who was the lead presenter of some study at a meeting.  His study involved counting the number of colony forming units on used vs. new pacifiers.  And low and behold used ones were covered in germs.  Amazingly, this led Glass to say ridiculous things like

In the long run, it may be that what you do now [using a pacifier] may have a lot to do with whether a child ends up developing atherosclerosis or type 2 diabetes.

Completely misleading and deceptive and dangerous I would say.  And alas, the story has been crawling it's way around the web picking up speed.  Now it is at Time.Com with another story about Glass' work: Bacteria on Binkies: A Recipe for Crankiness | TIME.com.  Glass apparently is now blaming biofilms of pacifiers for all the problems.  And again Dr. Glass is (mis)leading the charge against pacifiers.

A lot of times when a child is cranky, the first thing a parent does is reach for a pacifier,” says Dr. R. Tom Glass, the study’s principal investigator and a professor of forensic sciences, pathology and dental medicine at Oklahoma State University. “But what are you using to treat the crankiness? It’s a vicious cycle.

and

"biofilms can potentially increase the likelihood of colic or ear infections and could possibly heighten the risk of allergies or asthma, says Glass."

The reporter does present some skepticism from parents and from the literature.  But come one - why even report this crap from Glass.  I mean - I am all for keeping babies from getting sick and pacifiers very well may be a source of some nasties.  But let's think about the big picture here.  Parents buy pacifier.  Parents open package.  Parents give to baby.  Baby puts in mouth.  Baby drops pacifier and it gets dirt on it as well as some germs.  Baby puts back in mouth.  Pacifier gets left on counter.  Things from babies mouth grow on pacifier.  Baby puts pacifier back in mouth.  And so on.  Tell me again where the pacifier introduces bad germs to this system?

UPDATE: some reading material

• Pacifiers: a microbial reservoir
• Should pacifiers be recommended to prevent sudden infant death syndrome?
• BabycareAdvice.com Articles: Pacifiers - pros & cons

Germophobia 101: there are microbes on pacifiers; therefore pacifiers cause atherosclerosis & diabetes

Oh my God.  I hope upon hope that the quote in this story was unintended.  The story is from US News and World Report: Dirty Pacifiers May Make Infants Sick: Study - US News and World Report

It is excruciatingly painful to read.  First, the headline is misleading and way out of line.  US News should be reprimanded for this.  There is no evidence presented that pacifiers are making anyone sick.

What is the story about?  At a conference someone(s) presented results of taking used and new pacifiers and chopping them up and seeing what grew on different parts.  And they found - get ready - microbes on them.  And more microbes on the used ones than the new ones.  And they even found some microbes that were apparently resistant to antibiotics.

Scared yet?  You shouldn't be because of course  Fortunately the story does quote on sane person

Dr. Ben Hoffman, medical director of the Children's Safety Center at Oregon Health and Science University's Doernbecher Children's Hospital, said he can't think of an infection a child has had that he would attribute to a pacifier. 

"The majority of things you're going to find on a pacifier are things we'll find on our clothes, normal human flora," said Hoffman. "It's not a reason to demonize pacifiers if people find them useful."

But alas it also quotes the lead author of the study.

Glass doesn't recommend that parents use pacifiers to calm their babies and toddlers. "After doing the study, I say why take a risk? The key is to recognize that pacifiers can cause illness," he said. "In the long run, it may be that what you do now [using a pacifier] may have a lot to do with whether a child ends up developing atherosclerosis or type 2 diabetes."

What? The? Fu$*#? Pacifiers have microbes on them.  Therefore they cause atherosclerosis and diabetes?   Completely, unbelievably insane and irresponsible.  And I think US News should have made it clearer that this is just completely out of line.

Germs germs germs. They are everywhere. Get rid of them w/ hexochlorophene.

Now that many people consider germs to be a blessing, not a curse, it is useful to remind ourselves where we were a few years ago.  Today's episode of "bad germs" is brought to you by Tact soap.  Hat top to Liza Gross.





Or see this newspaper ad:


So what if Tact soap from that era had hexachlorophene (the active ingredient in phisohex and something that probably is not so good for you). It killed microbes. And that has to be a good thing right? Right?

Kimberly-Clark's deceptive self serving PR regarding germs in the workplace #BadReportingToo

First I saw of this story was here: Study: Bacteria fills office break rooms - Local News - Houston, TX - msnbc.com

Something sounded off with this.  I think it was the fact that it involved "Cleaning products company Kimberly-Clark" that raised some alarm bells.  The involvement of Charles Gerba also left me a bit queasy as I have seen his name associated with a few recent "studies" which are basically germaphobia funded by cleaning product companies.

After looking around a bit I got discouraged at the whole thing and put it out of my head for a few hours.  And then David Coil, a post doc in my lab, sent me a link to the press release behind this story.  And boy is it a doozy.

The PR basically makes the following dubious statements or implications
* All bacteria are bad.  The whole PR references a study that they imply is about detecting bacteria in various locations.  And when they detect high levels they conclude this is bad.  For example in the title "Where the Germs Are: New Study Finds Office Kitchens and Break Rooms are Crawling with Bacteria".  Or in the text: "If you thought the restroom was the epicenter of workplace germs you don't want to know about office break rooms and kitchens" "office germ "hot-spots,"" "Office workers are potentially being exposed to illness-causing bacteria right in their own lunchrooms" and much more.  Uggh.  Not all bacteria are bad.  Gerba and Kimberly-Clark must know this yet they purposefully mislead.

* Presence of ATP means presence of bacteria (and see above - this must imply presence of bad bacteria).  Wow.  Not sure what to say here.  But they use a test for ATP which they say  "ATP is present in all animal, vegetable, bacteria, yeast and mold cells. Detection of ATP indicates the presence of contamination by any of these sources. Everyday objects with an ATP reading of 300 or higher are considered to have a high risk for illness transmission."  No citation given. And sounds highly dubious to go from ATP - > risk for illness.  Sounds completely dubious actually.

* That it is OK to make claims in Press Releases without presenting evidence behind the claims.  The PR tries to make this all seem very scientific.  Well, where is the paper behind this?  They claim "The findings are from a study carried out by Kimberly-Clark Professional* and is believed to be one of the most detailed and comprehensive studies ever conducted on identifying workplace hotspots where germs can lurk."  Where is the actual data?  Where are the methods described?  Yuck.

Alas - despite the fact that the Press Release is at best a self serving piece of dubious scientific quality - the press has run with the story sucking up everything Gerba and Kimberly Clark are saying.  Ugg.  Here are some examples, many of which really do a poor job on the science and the conflicts of interest inherent in an unpublished study from a cleaning products company

• Where the Germs Are: New Study Finds Office Kitchens and Break Rooms are Crawling with Bacteria
• Report: Office break rooms, kitchens worst workplace bacteria ...
• Where do germs flourish in your office?
• Buggy Break Rooms: Study Reveals Office Ick
• The 6 Dirtiest Places in Your Office
• Workplace break room handles full of germs
• A Study Has Found: It's better to eat lunch off a toilet seat than in ...

I am getting sick and tired of crap like this.  Kimberly-Clark may make some useful products.  I don't really know.  But deceptive press releases like this suggest that their dedication to science is, well, low.  They need to clean up their act.

Yes, Virginia, Cell Phones Have Bacteria on Them ... And this means????

A new report is out with a discussion of microbes on cell phones: Study: Cellphones can be more germ-infested than toilet handle | News - Home. Not sure what was done in the study but regardless it seems to be focused on culture based work. And as is usually, the finding of some microbes related to ones known to cause disease leads to the inevitable conclusion that we must kill everything on the phones.

It seems to me that we need a bit more detail on what microbes are found on cell phones before bringing out the cleaners and the irradiation and such.

Also see:

• Keep Germs and Water Off Your iPhone or iPad
• Why your office phone is filthier than the toilet
• 31 Days of Spring Cleaning: Clean Your Cell Phone
• Food Safety: 5 Things in Your Kitchen That Could Make You Sick
• Komando: 7 steps to a flu-free workstation

Germophobia: wanna get people in the mood for "Contagion" movie about killer virus - grow harmless microbes in public #microbialart

Well, this story is pretty cool in many ways. David Coil, who works on my "microBEnet" project posted an entry on our blog: Microbial art in the built environment: bacterial billboard goes viral which called my attention to the story.

Seems that the folks promoting the microbe-focused movie "Contagion" came up with a fun marketing idea. They created a living billboard with microbes on it



It is pretty cool. Just watch how the letters come out and the billboard becomes 3D. It would be fun to do this with some event at UC Davis .. will have to think about it. But overall, I think this idea is really cool and very very well executed.

However, I do want to note some of the reporting on it has gotten a few details a bit off. For example, in the Washington Post: ‘Contagion’ bacteria billboard is exactly what it sounds like (Video) - Celebritology 2.0 - The Washington Post they write

"A YouTube video shows the process in which “two large Petri dishes were inoculated with live bacteria including penicillin, mold and pigmented bacteria.” The result is the most amazing, creepy and literal viral marketing campaign in recent history"