Taking Showers Can Be Harmful To Your Health

TheClockworkSoul writes "According to both the BBC and NewScientist, showering may be bad for your health. Apparently, dirty shower heads can be an ideal breeding ground for Mycobacterium avium, a bug responsible for a type of pulmonary disease more prevalent than tuberculosis in developed countries, cases of which have risen in parallel with the rise in showering. Tests revealed nearly a third of devices harbor significant levels of the critter."

Comments

Sensationalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Taking showers 'can make you ill'
Showering may be bad for your health, say US scientists

OMG! OMG! Wait, the article goes on to say:

"These bacteria [â¦] rarely cause disease in healthy people. Further work will need to look at whether finding these organisms is associated with any increased risk of infection."

Thanks, BBC.

Re:Sensationalism

[Quothz]

and the article glosses over that MOST water supplies in the USA are so heavily chlorinated, that the chance of this happening are nearly ZERO.

Au contraire. Truth is not arrived at by listening to the voices in your head,* but by rigorous scientific study. For example, let's have a look at Chlorine Susceptibility of Mycobacterium avium and Effect of Growth in Biofilms on Chlorine Susceptibility of Mycobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare, two entirely independent studies.

It would appear that those published, peer-reviewed studies disagree with you. In particular, a quote from the former:

. . . M. avium has been isolated from a variety of sources, including municipal drinking water systems . . .

Whether M. avium is worth any worry is up for debate. Whether it exists in our water supplies is not. It probably isn't a great cause for concern, although it's nice to know that it's being looked into with more thoroughness than someone waving vaguely and going "naaaaah".

* Which I assume also whisper to you that the best way to denote emphasis is by capitalizing words in their entirety. They're wrong about that, too.

Re:Sensationalism

[TheLink]

Uh no. Chlorine is not as effective on that bacteria, and actually that's why it and not other bacteria that tends to be there :).

See: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/health/15shower.html

"M. avium tends to be a particular problem in municipal water supplies, Dr. Pace said. The reason is that cities treat their water with chlorine, a poison that kills most bacteria but gives avium a selective advantage."

Re:hmmm

[Red Flayer]

Also, hot water + soap + friction can kill a lot of germs, wouldn't the fact that you're already showering help the situation?

That doesn't kill germs. It just helps remove them from your skin.

Besides the concern for pulmonary disease is that you inhale water droplets with these germs inside them. I highly doubt that you use soap + hot water + friction inside your lungs (but if you do, you're more of a man than I).

Re:Nothing to see here, move along...

[MozeeToby]

Arguably people get staph infections in hospitals because hospitals put so much effort into sterilizing every little thing. It leaves the hardiest, and fastest spreading bacteria and viruses to fill the vacuum rather than the millions of common germs that our body knows how to deal with. They've done studies which show a less rigorous sterilization regiment can actually reduce the rate of infections but the whole 'germs are evil' mindset prevents hospitals from actually changing their behavior.

Re:Nothing to see here, move along...

[level_headed_midwest]

Not true. You're thinking of antibiotic resistance. Disinfectants usually physically break apart the bacteria and the common methods of antibiotic resistance don't protect against this. The main cause of staph infections is by people not washing their hands.

Oligodynamic effect

[emil]

Metal shower heads are most likely safer due to the Oligodynamic effect.

Re:Nothing to see here, move along...

[CodeBuster]

If and when vancomycin resistant Staph. becomes prevalent (I'm aware of 3 documented cases so far), we're in deep shit.

Note quite. There is still Linezolid and when that becomes less effective there are several other Oxazolidones in the drug pipeline. Of course Linezolid is crazy expensive right now, being as it is under patent protection, but that is actually a good thing because it discourages frivolous uses such as anti-bacterial hand soap or animal feed. A few thousand dollars is worthwhile if it saves a life, but not for non-life threatening uses.

Re:does CLR kill it?

[DJRumpy]

The second link indicates the risk is greatly reduced if you just let the water run for 60 seconds before getting in. I would think that practice is actually more common than not as most folks don't jump into a cold shower. I do often step into the shower stall itself and wait while the water gets warm, but the article also warns against that as well. The reason being the atomized water with high concentrations of bacteria are easily breathed in during that initial blast of water and air even if you are not directly under the flow of water.

In any case, a simple change of habit to simply turn the water on and wait outside of the shower stall for 60 seconds.