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

does CLR kill it?

[yincrash]

they keep dipping the shower heads in that stuff and it's magically shiny! maybe it'll kill bugs too?

Re:does CLR kill it?

[Red Flayer]

Why bother with CLR? That's a lot of effort to keep your showerheads clean and safe.

What I've done to protect myself against this terrifying bacteria is to actively encourage the growth of black mold in my shower, which suppresses bacteria growth.

This has a lot of benefits:

1. Chinks in the grout between tiles are filled automagically with an attractive black growth.
2. I never have to clean hard-to-reach areas, since this is where the mold grows best.
3. My shower is now cute and cuddly due to the "furry" coating on exposed surfaces. It's like a panda bear, except without the bamboo and pointy teeth!

Re:does CLR kill it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Friends don't let friends use the CLR, excessive usage can leave you infected with Mono!

Re:does CLR kill it?

[furby076]

See you simply don't care to keep yourself or your family healthy. I change my shower heads, shower pipes, tile, grout, and wetboard once/week. The bathroom manufacturers who came out with this study....err who have HEARD of this study think it is a good idea.

Re:does CLR kill it?

[93 Escort Wagon]

Back in the day I had to choose between my friends in the shower or my ability to keep getting laid. It wasn't a hard decision ;)

So, enough suspense already! Which one did you pick?

Re:does CLR kill it?

[nomadic]

So, enough suspense already! Which one did you pick?

I think it's obvious; he's on slashdot, after all.

Re:does CLR kill it?

[TheLink]

Yeah with the same toothbrush he uses to clean the toilets.

Or is that the Army approach?

Re:does CLR kill it?

[timeOday]

Jerry: Hey, you're not giving it to me, man. What's wrong?

Kramer: I just took a bath, Jerry. A bath?

Jerry: No good?

Kramer: It's disgusting. I'm sitting there in a tepid pool of my own filth.

All kinds of microscopic parasites and organisms having sex all around me.

http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheShowerhead.htm

Re:does CLR kill it?

[icebike]

And when you DO unscrew the shower head you will find......

NOTHING!

Because this story is largely BULL. You can stick a swab just about anywhere and find SOMETHING to sensationalize.

But having done more than my share of plumbing I can tell you shower heads are as clean on the inside the day you replace them as they were the day you installed them.

You might find calcium deposits. But then thats also in your tap where you get water to drink or cook.

Could you possibly find some bacteria? Probably, especially if you live where water is not chlorinated.

But is there enough to make you sick?

Well lets think about that for a second: If this bacteria could be washed out of the shower head onto you, then simply running the shower for a minute before you step in would solve the problem.
And, don't we all do this anyway?

Tempest. Teapot.

Re:does CLR kill it?

[whitelabrat]

No doubt. Forget how dirty the shower head is. Try swabbing a human. Yucky people.

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.

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

[MrNemesis]

As the wonderful Daily Mash points out;

"Nevertheless it is better to carry the heady stench of the Gaul than expose yourself to the sort of tiny risks that generate gigantic headlines."

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:Sensationalism

[lorenlal]

I seriously don't think there's any amount of filth and nasty that can ever approach my keyboard... except maybe my mouse.

Who would have guessed?

[Moraelin]

I guess a couple of co-workers are actually just taking good care of their health. I'm pretty sure one of them doesn't come anywhere near this bacterium more than twice a year.

Re:Who would have guessed?

[idontgno]

And if the bacterium accidentally finds itself on the aforementioned co-workers' skin, they wouldn't be able to establish a beachhead against the aggressive pre-existing community already there.

We're all microbiomes; some of us are just more... lush.

oh great

[sxedog]

now there will be more smelly IT nerds walking around. Wait.... nevermind

Ahh sweet vindication

[oldspewey]

Finally the medical community is backing my position on showers ... and I know it's just a matter of time before some new study proves I'm right about the Doritos and climbing the basement stairs.

hmmm

[Rip Dick]

I know most people, myself included, run the water for a minute or two before stepping into the shower. (Due to the time it takes for the water to heat up, etc.) Would this help avoid getting sprayed with a build up of bacteria or is the stream of germs constant? Also, hot water + soap + friction can kill a lot of germs, wouldn't the fact that you're already showering help the situation?

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:hmmm

[mea37]

From the (somewhat incomplete) information in TFA, I think you're right that running the water before stepping in helps. Not sure about whether the fact you're taking a shower at the time matters, as the concern is inhaled bacteria.

It also seems that metal shower heads are not as bad as plastic.

Oh, and the bacteria in question are opportunistic - healthy people rarely get sick from them. So maybe it makes sense to give small children more baths than showers (which is what my family always did when I was growing up anyway); to consider taking baths when sick; and to consider what this implies for care of the elderly.

Other than that, this just seems a bit over-hyped. (Not seeing what the comparison to TB adds to the story beyond sensationalism, for example.)

Nothing to see here, move along...

[CmdrPorno]

Germs are EVERYWHERE. Hospitals do all kinds of disinfection that you wouldn't and couldn't do in your own home, and people still get staph infections.

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...

[the_humeister]

It's not because the hospitals are sterilizing. It's because people keep using antibiotics for things that are unnecessary that selects for antibiotic resistant bacteria such as MRSA. If and when vancomycin resistant Staph. becomes prevalent (I'm aware of 3 documented cases so far), we're in deep shit.

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.

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:Nothing to see here, move along...

[couchslug]

"Hospitals do all kinds of disinfection that you wouldn't and couldn't do in your own home, and people still get staph infections."

They also ignore and omit proper precautions, even those as basic as a physician washing his hands between touching patients.

We lose more people to MRSA in the US than we do to murder and the WoT, but it doesn't make much news for some reason...

Re:Now what?

[joaommp]

sponge baths, given by sexy barely legal nurses in underwear, now that's healthy, in more than one sense of the word.

Re:Gentlemen, start your start-ups

[BeardedChimp]

The telcos are way ahead in this field, they've had telephone sanitisers for years.

Dear Slashdotters

[mewsenews]

This article does NOT mean you have an excuse to cease bathing.

This article also does not provide justification for the cessation of: tooth brushing, hair cutting, shaving, fingernail clipping, or deodorant usage.

Regards,
Society

Re:Dear Slashdotters

[kimvette]

In order for many slashdotters to cease bathing, they would first have to start bathing.

Sorry, I saw a nit and had to pick it! ;)

Suprisingly light on details for the BBC

[hellfire]

I have so many questions that this article doesn't answer.

1) Where was the sample taken? UK showers? World wide? Third world countries?
2) Is there an information on different kinds of shower heads? for example, is this more common on massaging heads, low flow/high pressure heads, etc?
3) Does hot water kill this bacteria? Is it more common for people who take colder showers than people who take hot ones?
4) I always start the shower first before getting under it, since it takes about 5+ seconds to warm up... any ideas if this affects infection? (Thats more of a study question than a question from the article).
5) Any real way to prevent the growth? Someone already asked if CLR kills it. If this is so common, mind telling me how I can help myself?

I've never read a BBC article that left me with more questions.

CU Boulder

[pete-classic]

This is all based on a study out of CU Boulder. As a Denver resident, I can attest that the dirty hippies at CU Boulder are on a never-ending quest to justify their poor hygiene. Don't be fooled! Shower every day!

-Peter

Re:Now what?

[CheeseTroll]

sponges are also full of germs. better stick to a good hand-rubbing. ;-)

Re:not to be stereotypical here but...

[TheABomb]

(lifelong acme sufferer)

Ah, but how often do coyotes normally shower?

Oligodynamic effect

[emil]

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

Simple Enough Solution

[severoon]

This problem of the dirty shower head is easily solved by my approach. Instead of hooking up to a city water tap, I just had a giant tank of bactine installed that I use instead. Best part: no soap required, just a wire brush and a brillo pad and you're in and out as fast as you can say, Where'd all my skin go?

Re:not to be stereotypical here but...

[Colonel Korn]

Or suffer from the chronic purchasing of bogus, yet name-brand, gimmicks?

Stop making fun of Macs. That's mean!