FDA Approves Self-Sanitizing Keyboard

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FDA Approves Self-Sanitizing Keyboard

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday January 4, 2012 @05:28PM from the clean-zone dept.

jfruhlinger writes "Deep down, most people know that the germiest thing they touch all day is the thing they're touching all day: their keyboard. But what, if anything, can be done about it? A couple of former Microsoft hardware guys have launched a keyboard that sterilizes itself via ultraviolet light. While the FDA has signed off on it, tests show that the UV only kills about two-thirds of the germs living in it, and that it still needs to be cleaned by hand."

144 of 185 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Can't wait to see... by doug141 · 2012-01-04 17:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

the UV tolerant bugs evolving on this thing.
1. Re:Can't wait to see... by Jake73 · 2012-01-04 17:41 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Why use UV? Why not build a waterproof keyboard that gets sprayed with a disinfectant each time it is retracted? It could be quickly dried and the disinfectant recycled.
  For a lower-cost keyboard, I could see UV being an advantage. But for $900, you could do much better.
2. Re:Can't wait to see... by plover · 2012-01-04 17:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That which doesn't kill me makes me stronger. Of course, that which doesn't kill the bugs makes them stronger, too. So will the stronger bugs will make me ever more disease resistant, or just kill me?
  
  --
  John
3. Re:Can't wait to see... by SEWilco · 2012-01-04 17:45 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  That which doesn't kill me makes me stronger. Of course, that which doesn't kill the bugs makes them stronger, too. So will the stronger bugs will make me ever more disease resistant, or just kill me?
  They'll first have to get through your tanned and leathery hands.
4. Re:Can't wait to see... by SpazmodeusG · 2012-01-04 17:47 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Just make it with the same antibacterial metal that door handles in hospitals are made from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_copper-alloy_touch_surfaces
  Seems to be a tried and testing technology that works well.
5. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-04 17:55 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure we don't have to worry about our meager human-produced sources of UV light providing the evolutionary niche for UV resistant super bugs. There's this thing called the sun that puts out a lot of UV light of its own.
6. Re:Can't wait to see... by skine · 2012-01-04 18:00 · Score: 1
  
  Why not build a waterproof keyboard [...]
  If they made a waterproof keyboard, then they would lose the majority of their business.
7. Re:Can't wait to see... by milkmage · 2012-01-04 18:11 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  waterproof, sealed, dishwasher safe, antimicrobial keyboards.
  http://www.sealshield.com/
  $149 with a touchpad vs. $900 because it comes with lights?
8. Re:Can't wait to see... by aaronb1138 · 2012-01-04 18:11 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  That is exactly what I was thinking. All metals have significant antibacterial properties in pure form due to electron freedom. Stainless steel is similarly naturally antimicrobial.
  Since they are using UV, I hope they had the good sense to use a titanium dioxide finish on it as well, since that massively boosts UV efficacy. Actually titanium dioxide has the ability to actually clean small quantities of finger grease and dirt from the surface as well.
  The best approach would use a micro spattering of TiO2 (think polka dots smaller than most bacteria) on stainless steel or copper alloys with waterproof keys and construction. Once a month, throw it in the commissary dishwasher to remove dirt and grease which give the little germs homes.
  As others have pointed out, the price for this model is ridiculous as well.
9. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-04 18:17 · Score: 1
  
  It looks like the critical thing in those alloys to make them anti-microbial is copper. So, in other words, copper keyboards. I'd complain that, if it's actually that effective against microbes, it might slowly poison humans as well, except that the water pipes in my home are made of copper, so I doubt that it would contribute very much to any copper poisoning I might be experiencing. As far as it being a tried and tested technology that works well, the article you linked to seems to indicate that the jury is still out.
  I think what we really need is some sort of reasonably standardized detachable membrane keyboard mat that can easily be taken out of laptops, keyboards, etc. Something that sits over the actual electronics, but can be taken off (without detaching a hundred or so keys and fiddly plastic clips), then washed, maybe even in a dishwasher. The problem is, that's probably pretty hard to implement for very little benefit. You'd probably have residue from soap or calcium buildup, etc. on the contacts in short order. Plus, no-one would ever get around to cleaning it anyway. Still, it would be nice if someone started making keyboards so that it didn't seem like they're actually _designed_ to catch crumbs and trap them forever.
  The keyboard from this article seems to be just a gimmick made to appeal to well to do germophobes. The same people who buy ionic air purifiers. Note that this doesn't mean that I don't think ionic air purifiers work. They kinda sorta do, just like these keyboards kinda-sorta sanitize themselves. It's just that the net health benefits of either are going to be practically nil for your average person.
10. Re:Can't wait to see... by johnny+cashed · 2012-01-04 18:49 · Score: 2
  
  Or, for added bling, silver plating. Perfect for Apple products!
11. Re:Can't wait to see... by amRadioHed · 2012-01-04 19:20 · Score: 2
  
  The sun puts out of lot of UV, but the UVC which is used as a germicide is almost entirely blocked by the atmosphere.
  
  --
  We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
12. Re:Can't wait to see... by Yev000 · 2012-01-04 19:38 · Score: 2
  
  And only UV-A reaches earth and gives you sun burn.
  The Earth's ozone layer blocks 99% UV. Of that, 99% is UVA.
  Its the UV-B (0.001% of UV that hits earth and reaches the surface) that causes damage on a molecular level. This is bad for big molecules like DNA.
  Cells already evolved a repair mechanism for dealing with UV-B to deal with the meagre levels that does reach the surface.
  UV-C is even more nasty than UV-B and none of that reaches the Earth's surface at all
  These lamps are pumping out UV-C and UV-B to disinfect. So the cells ability to repair is completely overwhelmed... A bit like having a fire extinguisher to fight a pyroclastic flow...
  So, no we don't have to worry about cells evolving, but not because the human-produced lamps are 'meager'.
13. Re:Can't wait to see... by SuricouRaven · 2012-01-04 20:01 · Score: 1
  
  Copper alloys. Copper alone is prone to corrosion... though I suppose manufacturers might like a keyboard that rusts after a few years. You could use silver instead, which is also an effective antimicrobial, and less corrodeable, but pricier.
  
  We have laptops with easy-swap keyboards at my workplace. Said workplace is a school, and the amount of keys pulled off by vandals accounts for a significent part of the IT team's workload. Easy-swap keyboards are a requirement, just due to how often someone utterly destroys a keyboard.
14. Re:Can't wait to see... by Yev000 · 2012-01-04 20:12 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Not fit for purpose.
  The application here is designed to kill MRSA type bugs within 90 seconds and be ready for use.
  The lights it comes with will make you blind very quickly, hence the enclosure.
15. Re:Can't wait to see... by msobkow · 2012-01-04 20:38 · Score: 1
  
  Try to track down and check out one of the '80s-'90s era HP industrial keyboards. The tactile feedback sucked, but they were sealed units that could even be spray-washed. You needed sealed units to survive the shop-floor environment for any length of time.
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
16. Re:Can't wait to see... by msobkow · 2012-01-04 20:43 · Score: 1
  
  Of course you'll have to do some serious adaptation to get the proprietary TTY and workstation cables to interface with a PC. The point is, there have been designs that were easier to keep clean in dirty environments.
  HP used to make great industrial-grade hardware before they focused on the commercial market. Maybe they still do -- I haven't seen their latest industrial equipment, and a lot of industry just seems to shrug and replace keyboards often instead.
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
17. Re:Can't wait to see... by ThatsMyNick · 2012-01-04 20:53 · Score: 1
  
  But is it FDA approved? Thought so!
18. Re:Can't wait to see... by lc_overlord · 2012-01-04 21:51 · Score: 1
  
  Or better yet, make one that would allow me to put it in my dishwasher once a week, that would both clean it really well and keep the germs away.
  
  --
  - "There is nothing quite like an ineffective solution to an nonexistant problem"
19. Re:Can't wait to see... by mrchaotica · 2012-01-04 21:54 · Score: 1
  
  Copper alone is prone to corrosion... though I suppose manufacturers might like a keyboard that rusts after a few years.
  But with copper it isn't a problem like it is with iron. When iron rusts, the rusted part expands and flakes off, exposing the next layer so that it can then rust too. The process continues until the whole thing disintegrates. With copper, on the other hand, the corroded outer layer turns green but remains intact, so the item doesn't actually deteriorate.
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
20. Re:Can't wait to see... by Joce640k · 2012-01-04 22:11 · Score: 2
  
  Anybody know can I get stainless steel keycaps for my model M?
  
  --
  No sig today...
21. Re:Can't wait to see... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-01-05 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  The real trick(and the likely determinant of whether there is actually a problem or not) will be whether or not UV tolerant bugs that are otherwise competitive with their non-tolerant peers and the human immune system crop up.
  
  There are some downright alarming extremophiles, that can shrug their teeny bacterial shoulders at gamma radiation, hard vacuums, heat, dessication, and sometimes several of the above at the same time; but those tend to be virtually irrelevant to human health because so much of their biology is geared toward surviving extreme conditions. Under normal conditions, it's the swarms of relative weaklings that carry the day and probably kill you.(the same thing crops up with antibiotic resistance: most of the time, antibiotic resistant bugs are uncompetitive against their nonresistant except in antibiotic laced environments, which has led to interest in various dosing strategies designed to exploit nonresistant bugs to outcompete resistant bugs and then chemically kill the now-vulnerable remaining population.)
  
  If the keyboard merely becomes host to a swarm of bacterial curiosities with neat DNA repair mechanisms, it'll probably be a fun project for some bio researcher to investigate; but it won't be a major threat to human health. If we get unlucky, and some exciting pathogen hits upon a cheap way to resist UV, we could have a problem... We could also have a problem, regardless of bacterial evolution, if people start treating the keyboards as some sort of magic bullet: Normal keyboard + paranoid hand washing may well be better than special antibacterial keyboard + 'eh, the keyboard is antibacterially magical, no problem' hand washi8ng...
22. Re:Can't wait to see... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-01-05 01:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know of any premade options; but if you have one of the Model M's with removable keycaps, there are probably enough Model M enthusiasts around that you could CAD up and have printed in laser-sintered, bronze impregnated, stainless steel(not real stainless steel; but similar, and the copper in the bronze probably helps the antibacterial value. If you could get the quantity up, fully stainless steel parts punched out of sheetstock would probably be doable; but that wouldn't be a 'quantity 1' thing...)
23. Re:Can't wait to see... by TheLink · 2012-01-05 01:12 · Score: 1
  
  $900 buys you 150 $6 keyboards. Instead of sterilizing perhaps they should look into making the top bit cheaply disposable, or come up with a more effective way of sterilizing keyboards than this UV crap. 66% seems pointless to me.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
24. Re:Can't wait to see... by drinkypoo · 2012-01-05 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  If you could get the quantity up, fully stainless steel parts punched out of sheetstock would probably be doable; but that wouldn't be a 'quantity 1' thing...)
  I bet there is actually a sufficient market. The keys would need to be two-piece to be feasibly inexpensive to construct even on a commercial basis. However, the inner piece could be plastic, which I believe could actually make the price quite reasonable.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
25. Re:Can't wait to see... by Hitokiri+Battousai · 2012-01-05 01:14 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Stainless steel is similarly naturally antimicrobial.
  No, it's not. Which you'd have known if you'd clicked on the GP's link. From Wikipedia:
  
  Unlike copper alloys, stainless steel (S30400) does not exhibit any degree of bactericidal properties. This material, which is one of the most common touch surface materials in the healthcare industry, allows toxic E. coli O157:H7 to remain viable for weeks.
  The GP is also inaccurate in implying that copper alloys are used in all hospitals; this seems to be a relatively recent realization and is only slowly being rolled out.
  
  St. Francis Private Hospital ... decided to become the first hospital in the world to fully specify hygienic copper door handles throughout its facility as part of its infection control program. A full upgrade of all door furniture ... commenced in January 2010.
26. Re:Can't wait to see... by drinkypoo · 2012-01-05 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  Stainless steel is the obvious choice, because as it tarnishes it merely becomes slightly less pretty.
  There are also shiny coatings that can be simply BRUSHED ON to metals, which etch the surface. I have been using some stuff lately (Magic rust and aluminum polish, something like that, got it at a yard sale) to remove rust from iron and steel parts and to remove corrosion from aluminum parts. Where the aluminum is pitted, the pits are filled with hard material since the oxide form is harder than the metal. I go over it with this stuff and then sand it with a green scotch-brite attached to a DA with industrial velcro hooks stuck on the backing pad, and it takes the corrosion right off. Without the etch, the oxide won't come off and I end up removing the metal all around it. If the surface were flat I could use 500 grit on a block, but it isn't. Er, long digression, the point is that the etch goes on with a brush and the excess comes off with water.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
27. Re:Can't wait to see... by drinkypoo · 2012-01-05 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  Of course you'll have to do some serious adaptation to get the proprietary TTY and workstation cables to interface with a PC.
  Yeah, that ought to take an experienced hacker with an arduino all of ten minutes to breadboard. Talk about serious adaptation!
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
28. Re:Can't wait to see... by Marc+Madness · 2012-01-05 01:22 · Score: 1
  
  Disposing of the top bit of your keyboard every 90 seconds seems like a serious impediment to getting any work done, and would exhaust your 150 keyboards rather quickly (in under 4 hours). However, if you're looking to have a sterilized keyboard for the day, you can use two dishwasher safe keyboards and alternate... [disposes of keyboard].
29. Re:Can't wait to see... by Yev000 · 2012-01-05 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  I suppose that 66% is automated, after every user.
  As opposed to the user having to remember to throw the disposable top away after use. You may as well make nurses type in latex gloves that are binned every time you walk away from the computer. That's even cheaper, but few will do it, making it less than 66% effective in the end...
  However I see you point about the expense, but from a different angle. Now that the keyboard is 66% "safer" should they be investing electrical appliance switches that are bathed in UV after every press? Or door handles? Or anything else that a nurse will touch after/before using the computer.... The keyboard is not the only thing different people constantly touch.
  I suppose you have to fight it somehow, but I don't see how you can 'win'.
30. Re:Can't wait to see... by AmiMoJo · 2012-01-05 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  Couldn't you just use disposable paper keyboard overlays? Make them mostly transparent so you can see the key caps, obviously. They use disposable rolls of paper covers for examination trolleys, and the keyboard itself would be very cheap which is important when one split drink or frustrated heavy keypress can break it.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
31. Re:Can't wait to see... by TheLink · 2012-01-05 01:52 · Score: 1
  
  You won't be disposing the top bit every 90 seconds. It takes 90 seconds to sterilize the $900 keyboard, after that you will be contaminating/using it for however long it takes to type what you want/need to type which could be many minutes or even an hour, after that it might be unused for a while. Users aren't going to wait 90 seconds between each keypress.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
32. Re:Can't wait to see... by John+Hasler · 2012-01-05 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  Magic rust and aluminum polish, something like that, got it at a yard sale
  Most likely phosphoric acid, sold in gel form as "naval jelly".
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
33. Re:Can't wait to see... by drinkypoo · 2012-01-05 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds plausible. I've used naval jelly before, it's pretty fantastic stuff. I haven't tried to find a MSDS for this stuff to find out if you're right. Do they add anything to gel it, or does it just happen?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
34. Re:Can't wait to see... by macs4all · 2012-01-05 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  the UV tolerant bugs evolving on this thing.
  UV has been used to sterilize a wide variety of things since that ability was discovered in 1906 (IIRC).
  
  Some bugs are more tolerant than others; but it doesn't seem to have caused a sufficient evolutionary pressure to cause "UV-resistant" germs, molds or viruses.
35. Re:Can't wait to see... by Marc+Madness · 2012-01-05 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  It's an extreme corner case (that comment was meant to be tongue in cheek... that must have been pre-coffee sarcasm), however, the main point is that it would likely be more cost effective to swap low-cost keyboards and sanitize them "off-line".
36. Re:Can't wait to see... by Sebastopol · 2012-01-05 05:54 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think that will happen. UV completely destroys the DNA of micro organisms.
  On a macro scale, it's like suggesting shooting finches with a minigun means eventually finches will become bulletproof.
  While I'd love to see that, it is far too destructive to allow for selection pressure.
  
  --
  https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
37. Re:Can't wait to see... by geekoid · 2012-01-05 06:28 · Score: 1
  
  Please never talk about evolution or biology again, you clueless clod.
  Same goes for who ever modded you insightful.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
38. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-05 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  Not particularly concerned about being poisoned by copper from water pipes. I was just saying that, if it isn't a problem from water pipes, it's unlikely to be a problem from keyboard keys.
  As for PEX and bacterial binding, I'd like to swing this back around to the UV sterilizing keyboard and point out that one big downside of PEX is that it degrades like crazy under UV exposure. Pity, because it would otherwise be a great way to clean out bacteria from inside the pipes.
39. Re:Can't wait to see... by Squeeonline · 2012-01-05 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  Silver and copper are toxic to most bacteria and fungi. Would be a bit expensive and heavy to be making a keyboard out of, or even coating.
40. Re:Can't wait to see... by pntkl · 2012-01-05 14:33 · Score: 2
  
  Rhinotillexomania should be sufficient. Really what we need are superior genetics. Earth men, send me all of your earth women. I will inseminate free of charge. I offer superior genes from a force that transcends the entire hyper-dimensional multiverse. Please call: 555-7337.
41. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-05 16:11 · Score: 1
  
  If the UV produced by this and other UV sterilizing sources are not meager, and the UV-C and UV-B these lamps put out are as incredibly damaging as you say, why would anyone want a keyboard that, by your account, would be far more dangerous to them than any bacteria living on their keyboard? I mean, if you're going to use something that's damaging to humans anyway - burning their skin and potentially causing deadly melanomas - why not just just use a keyboard with keys with a surface temperature of 80 degrees celcius or so. That way, they would stay sterile, but a fast touch typist could probably avoid burns and not get cancer. Otherwise, I expect that the UV radiation is adulterated to contain little or no UVC and not really all that much UV-B, not unlike a day in the sun.
  In any case, plenty of bacteria exist in Earth's atmosphere, I'm pretty sure I've heard they can even be found in the stratosphere, so no reason for them not to be exposed to UV light above the ozone layer (although they would probably be killed by it). Huh, as a matter of fact, after that last sentence, I did a google search and found this. So it looks like not only are there micro-organisms that make it that high, but they also do have high UV tolerance. Score one for adaptability.
42. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-05 16:13 · Score: 1
  
  Wrote a longer response to the reply below yours. Just in short, it turns out there are bacteria that get their day in the sun, and above the ozone layer, no less.
43. Re:Can't wait to see... by Yev000 · 2012-01-05 19:25 · Score: 1
  
  Did you actually look up the keyboard or do you think its back-lit with UV???
  As per the article you linked, "significantly higher" could just mean x2 or x3 more than a regular cell which is designed to cope with little to no UV at all. The article you mentioned a maximum sample height of 41km, which is still inside the ozone layer (right about at the point UV-C is absorbed) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_layer . I think 2 lamps designed to pump out UV-C is going to beat our sun at that height within the atmosphere (I could be wrong).
  Also, life evolving to survive in such hazardous conditions rarely does anything other than survive. Meaning if it is put in a different environment it dies. These colonies may actually need some ozone within the cells to survive and reproduce (after all, they swim in the stuff), something that does not naturally occur in hospitals.
44. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-06 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  As a matter of fact, I hadn't looked at the keyboard. I'd read the article and, now that I look at it again, it seems the article contains some sort of video, but it's messed up and won't display properly in my browser. So I'd just assumed there was no picture of it. I did a search for the keyboard and found a picture. So, it seems that the keyboard retracts into a big bulky enclosure to be "sterilized". Wow. Considering the horrible job it apparently does, that just makes this even worse. So, obviously I take back what I said about this not being able to use significant amounts of UVC and UVB because of human exposure. On the other hand, this makes me wonder why they didn't just use heat. There's no good reason that you can't make a keyboard that can survive well in excess of 100 degrees celcius. You just move the electronics out into a hermetically sealed box inside the enclosure and the keyboard can be made of metal, heat-resistant plastics, silicone rubber membrane, etc. with a ribbon cable connecting it to the electronics module. You retract it, heat it up instead of using UV, blow air on it to cool it and pop it out again. Virtually guaranteed to be more effective.
  As for the ozone layer extending to 41km. That's inside the stratosphere. Per the article you linked to, the ozone layer "is mainly located in the lower portion of the stratosphere from approximately 20 to 30 kilometres (12 to 19 mi) above Earth, though the thickness varies seasonally and geographically." Also, "Ozone concentrations are greatest between about 20 and 40 kilometres (12 and 25 mi), where they range from about 2 to 8 parts per million". Also "UV-C, which would be very harmful to all living things, is entirely screened out by ozone at around 35 kilometres (115,000 ft) altitude" which means that it is still present, probably at decent quantaties, sometimes at a lower level, sometimes at quite a high level depending on season, geography and other factors, at 41 kilometers. Also, a maximum sample height of 41 km doesn't mean they can't be present higher than that. Sorry, I'm going to have to stick by my original point which was that there's a vast amount of populated biosphere on earth exposed to pretty much the full UV output of the sun for bacteria to evolve UV resistance, so UV sterilizing don't really provide an evolutionary pressure that doesn't already exist in abundance elsewhere on our planet.
  I should also note that I made absolutely no argument one way or the other on whether or not UV resistance could actually be obtained by bacteria under these conditions. It doesn't matter to my point if they survive under those conditions or die off, just that the bacteria are there and are exposed. I should note also that whatever mechanism they have to survive UV radiation may be retained if these bacteria adapt back to life on the surface and that horizontal transfer of the trait could occur to other bacteria. Presumably there have been bacteria living up there on the scale of hundreds of millions or maybe a billion years. In any case, I don't think that UV resistant superbugs are much of a problem. Hospitals hardly rely on UV exclusively and it's not commonly used to treat infections in humans as far as I know.
  Anyway, I think we can both agree that this keyboard is mostly just a gimmick.
45. Re:Can't wait to see... by Yev000 · 2012-01-07 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  An expensive gimmick...
  As for heat, not terribly sure if that would be effective as you would have to heat up then cool down the device so it can be touched. All that in less than 90 sec? Put your oven to 100 C then stick a metal object in it for 90 sec, then take out and touch it with bare hands.... Not to mention some would survive.
  UV remains the most viable killing method in this day and age, other than employing some sort of Star-Trek like tech....
  But you know what, I can see private hospitals buying into this big time. There are no issues with money and if they can show their clients the level of commitment this shows to the layman, im sure they can pass on the cost quite easily while making a profit.
46. Re:Can't wait to see... by tragedy · 2012-01-07 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  Very expensive. Expensive enough that using cheap keyboards and regularly throwing them away might be better. Or at least using cheap keyboards, cleaning them with a process that might destroy them and throwing them away when they regularly break.
  With proper design I think the heat approach would be doable in 90 seconds. Workbench heat guns provide pretty much instant oven-hot air at high speed. No reason something like that couldn't be built into this box along with air channels designed to apply the hot air exactly where needed and recirculate it. Alternatively, you could have heating elements built right into the keyboard (with contacts that are only connected when it's withdrawn into the box). Or you could do both. I see no reason you couldn't heat a thin keyboard to scorching hot inside 45 seconds, then cool it down to touchably hot in another 45 with a sustained blast of cool air. Sure some would probably survive, but that's going to be true for any sterilization method and, as the article points out, is so true for this particular device that it's not really worth using.
  I would have to disagree that UV is the most viable killing method. Autoclaves are essentially 100% effective, for example, and all kinds of antiseptics are about 99.9% effective. UV does have a place in the arsenal, and niches where it's effective, but plenty of places where you can't use it. For example, you wouldn't want to shine a powerful UV lamp into a patients abdomen during surgery, you'd use antiseptics.
  As for private hospitals buying into this. I can see it absolutely. They just amortize the cost and roll it into the $10 they charge for an aspirin, etc.
$900?! by rgbrenner · 2012-01-04 17:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's $900?! Geez.. Why don't I just buy new keyboards every 3 months instead
1. Re:$900?! by skine · 2012-01-04 17:47 · Score: 1
  
  But also, one can get a UV sanitizing wand for as little as $10.
2. Re:$900?! by mrjb · 2012-01-04 20:44 · Score: 2
  
  Every three months? At 900 dollars you can get 900 silicone keyboard protectors which will give you a clean keyboard every DAY for nearly the next 3 YEARS. And here's an other crazy idea: Silicone is more heat resistant than bacteria. Perhaps you don't want to toss away those silicone covers in the bin after a day, but sterilize them and re-use them.
  
  --
  Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
3. Re:$900?! by michelcolman · 2012-01-04 21:31 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, and $900 could pay for a LOT of doctor's visits too, so I'll just keep the old keyboard.
4. Re:$900?! by Joce640k · 2012-01-04 22:15 · Score: 1
  
  It's $900 because it's FDA approved and they want to sell it to governments.
  Next up: $3600 toilet seats with UV sanitizers.
  
  --
  No sig today...
5. Re:$900?! by msobkow · 2012-01-04 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not familiar with any environment or department which even suggests an FDA approved keyboard, much less mandates one. I could see an Underwriter's Laboratory approved keyboard, as they handle safety evaluations for electrical and electronic items in the US.
  But think of the market potential if they can buy enough Congressmen to make these mandatory for hospitals and doctors offices, or even better yet, convince the INSURANCE companies to mandate them to minimize the risk of malpractice lawsuits.
  Ah, they'll find a way to get you to part with that $900 yet...
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
6. Re:$900?! by martin-boundary · 2012-01-04 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know about you, but I don't think my "boys" like that much UV...
7. Re:$900?! by mapkinase · 2012-01-05 00:21 · Score: 1
  
  I would like to see a study on the effects of keyboard germs to health.
  
  --
  I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
8. Re:$900?! by Hatta · 2012-01-05 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  Or why not just buy your own keyboard and never clean it? You're not going to pick up contagious diseases from yourself. Besides, a pristine environment is good for your immune system.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
9. Re:$900?! by Hatta · 2012-01-05 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that should be: "a pristine environment is bad for your immune system."
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Who cleans their keyboard? by Nursie · 2012-01-04 17:35 · Score: 2

Surely it's just exercise for the immune system?
Most folks seem to have had a white keyboard, seen how filthy it becomes over time and (instead of cleaning the damn thing) resolved to use black ones in future.
That said I did used to clean the key covers for my old Model M with vodka every once in a while.
1. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by adolf · 2012-01-04 17:57 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The black ones turn just as gross: Take one apart sometime and have a look inside.
  The wife's WoW-playing machine slowly developed some issues with the W and 2 keys on her fancy Saitek keyboard. It was really pretty nasty in there. Some scrubbing bubbles for the external plastic bits, and a bit of Deoxit on the Mylar membrane switches, and she's got people asking her what she changed because her DPS went through the roof.
  I take apart my favorite keyboard (an old, heavy, squishy white NMB that I really like the key-feel of, Model M be damned) once every year or two and give everything but the keyswitches a good wash in the dishwasher. It's been a good friend for nearly a decade, despite the occasional spill or cigarette ash or the constant bombardment of smoke residue, and I want to keep it around. (The keycaps were worn smooth long ago...)
  So, yeah: I clean keyboards. Time is money, but money can't always buy a keyboard that I actually like. It's more of a functional thing than a spastic reaction to the obvious bacterial flora that obviously must be living on it, but whatever the case cleaning it helps me type in ways that keep me happy.
  
  --
  Kid-proof tablet..
2. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2012-01-04 17:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That said I did used to clean the key covers for my old Model M with vodka every once in a while.
  I'd rather leave the keyboard alone and just disinfect my insides every so often - although I prefer gin rather than vodka.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
3. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by ToasterTester · 2012-01-04 18:19 · Score: 1
  
  i remember at one place I worked I loved my keyboard , but it eventually became so grimy they forced me to throw it away and get a new one. Hey I was only one who used it!!!!
  My last job I did a lot of ProTools editing on computers shared by all the audio team. We kept hand sanitizer next to the computer, but it still would get grimy. When I got bad I would just disconnect the KB and get some q-tips, tissues, and denatured alcohol. KB would clean up real nice and the alcohol evaporates fast so even if I get some inside no damage.
  At home I'll clean my keyboard now and then if it gets bad, but like others said "what doesn't kill you makes you strong" and keeps others off my computer.
4. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by amRadioHed · 2012-01-04 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  The black ones turn just as gross
  Well obviously they get dirty to, they aren't magic... but you have to go out of your way to see it. The point he was referring to which you missed is that by getting a black keyboard you don't see filth.
  
  --
  We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
5. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by Clarious · 2012-01-04 19:34 · Score: 1, Redundant
  
  I am not a doctor, but IMHO, most of the bacterias on the keyboard of your personal computer are _yours_ bacterias, meaning they came from your body, your sweat and you are used to it. So I don't think they will do much harm to yourself, unless your immune system is borked somehow. Of course, a dirty keyboard is still need to be cleaned, so it won't look too bad, or become a colony to bad germs.
  And yeah, this only apply to your personal keyboard, mean no one else but you touch it. Or maybe keyboard sharing between family members, your body is more resistant to their germs.
6. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by amRadioHed · 2012-01-04 19:38 · Score: 2
  
  Alcohol works very well, that is why there is little risk of bacteria developing a resistance to it.
  
  --
  We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
7. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by jamesh · 2012-01-04 20:05 · Score: 1
  
  Alcohol works very well, that is why there is little risk of bacteria developing a resistance to it.
  Even the yeast that make the stuff actually get killed by it.
8. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by Joce640k · 2012-01-04 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  That said I did used to clean the key covers for my old Model M with vodka every once in a while.
  Was the vodka 'recycled'?
  
  --
  No sig today...
9. Re:Who cleans their keyboard? by gbjbaanb · 2012-01-05 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  Even the yeast that make the stuff actually get killed by it.
  and we toast them for their noble sacrifice daily!
So... by Mashiki · 2012-01-04 17:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

So is this going to kick into the new phase of products that help create resistances like tricloscan does now? And I'm being lazy, there's already a few hundred studies on the links of this. I'm still waiting for people to get it through their head that either we're filthy dirty creatures, living in a filthy dirty environment. And if you're going to sanitize an area, you need to be 100% sure you're getting everything. Otherwise you're simply kicking into darwin mode, and promoting survival instincts for various 'bugs'.

--
Om, nomnomnom...
1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-04 17:56 · Score: 1
  
  I'm still waiting for people to get it through their head that either we're filthy dirty creatures, living in a filthy dirty environment.
  Or?
2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-04 18:04 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  there is a difference that you're ignoring here. You're talking about an anti-bacterial drug resistance, which is a terrible, tough thing to deal with. Those fundamentally target only anti-bacterial cells based off of the certain cell structure. It means that it's very effective at killing only the bad cells, and it leaves our bodies alone. UV (and say, alcohol based hand sanatizers) is a very powerful anti-bacterial, because UV radiation is very damaging at the cellular level, regardless of whether or not it is healthy. This is fine. We cannot use these treatments to help keep us healthy internally. It would be like using bleach (also very effective against germs) inside our system. So lets uses these external systems which would destroy us internally, and keep the hardcore antibiotics for when we actually get very sick.
so wait by ClioCJS · 2012-01-04 17:58 · Score: 1

keyboards can be cleaned? damn.

--
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
1. Re:so wait by tonique · 2012-01-04 19:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that's my solution: never clean the keyboard. Well, ok, I perhaps rattle it upside down once a year.
2. Re:so wait by Custard+Horse · 2012-01-04 21:12 · Score: 1
  
  Like most people. I only ever upend my keyboard when there is a stable stuck under a key.
  If cleanliness is the goal, surely a traditional keyboard is completely the wrong design. Touchscreen would be ideal and easy to clean with an inexpensive wipe. Who requires a high level of cleanliness but uses a keyboard enough that a traditional keyboard is required? Do neurosurgeons have their personal assistants 'take letters' during surgery?
3. Re:so wait by Neil+Boekend · 2012-01-05 00:20 · Score: 1
  
  Like most people. I only ever upend my keyboard when there is a stable stuck under a key.
  Including a horse?
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
4. Re:so wait by meloneg · 2012-01-05 02:21 · Score: 1
  
  If cleanliness is the goal, surely a traditional keyboard is completely the wrong design. Touchscreen would be ideal and easy to clean with an inexpensive wipe. Who requires a high level of cleanliness but uses a keyboard enough that a traditional keyboard is required? Do neurosurgeons have their personal assistants 'take letters' during surgery?
  Not familiar with computerized medical records, are we?
5. Re:so wait by Custard+Horse · 2012-01-06 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  ROFL. I of course meant 'staple' such as a loaf of bread, some quinoa or a two pound bag of rice. ;-)
But are those germs dangerous? by bogaboga · 2012-01-04 18:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

"...While the FDA has signed off on it, tests show that the UV only kills about two-thirds of the germs living in it, and that it still needs to be cleaned by hand."
Given that we as human beings are full of germs of some kind (especially on the skin), I wonder whether the germs on these keyboards are germs one should worry about.
Are they dangerous?
My answer: Not really, because no epidemic has ever been reported as having had its genesis from an un-cleaned keyboard. I have a feeling that these keyboards will appeal to clean-freaks mostly.
1. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by Brett+Buck · 2012-01-04 18:21 · Score: 2
  
  I don't know about that. I would suggest that spending to much time in front of a dirty keyboard has led to an epidemic of obesity, social awkwardness, and unnatural obsession with Natalie Portman. That's just apocryphal, of course.
2. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by Rennt · 2012-01-04 19:10 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed, this kind of product is exploitative of people with irrational phobias. These individuals need to realise that every surface in the average office is covered with other people's sweat, urine, semen and maybe blood. Dangerous? No. Gross? Only if you think about it too much.
  What isn't safe is living in a germ-free bubble.
3. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-04 20:01 · Score: 1
  
  Given that we as human beings are full of germs of some kind (especially on the skin), I wonder whether the germs on these keyboards are germs one should worry about.
  Are they dangerous?
  My answer: Not really, because no epidemic has ever been reported as having had its genesis from an un-cleaned keyboard. I have a feeling that these keyboards will appeal to clean-freaks mostly.
  This is for use in hospital and medical contexts where there will be patients that have weakened immune systems due to injury or disease and where you can find really nasty stuff like drug resistant bacteria. Minimizing the bacteria on surfaces touched by medical staff who may subsequently touch patients will probably reduce the number of people that get infections while in the hospital. If it really does work effectively, it's worth $900 per keyboard when you consider the costs of keeping someone in intensive care for a week or two to get them treated for an infection.
4. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by Neil+Boekend · 2012-01-05 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  It's usefull in hospitals.
  MRSA is a slightly evolved version of a normal skin baterie. It doesn't do much on the skin, but when it gets into the blood people can die of it.
  MRSA is only one of the many bacteria that are harmless when on the skin (actually: many are usefull in the defence against germs that can go through the skin) but many of them are a big problem when they get in the bloodstream. Normally the human immune response kills them, but in hospitals there are (typically) a lot of people whith damaged immune systems (due to being young, old or having an immune system problem). They can get sick of it.
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
5. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by mrdogi · 2012-01-05 00:41 · Score: 2
  
  Keyboards? No. However, I've heard of entire civilizations being wiped out due to lack of sanitized phones.
6. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by b4dc0d3r · 2012-01-05 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  The application of this is more of a chair-swapping setup, for example a call center where someone works 8 hours at a station and goes home, and someone else uses the same station for 8 hours, and someone else comes in. You don't want to catch cold/flu from someone else, and you definitely don't want MRSA. Disinfecting between swaps, even if it only removes some of the germs, will go a long way towards keeping employees in their seats in stead of out sick.
  And hospitals probably, libraries, and the germophobes, too.
  Keep in mind, each person may have good bacteria specific to their makeup, what doesn't trigger a disease or infection in one person might throw off the balance in another. So if you borrow someone else's keyboard, there is a very very small possibility of causing problems. Statistically speaking, it will not happen to you.
7. Re:But are those germs dangerous? by avandesande · 2012-01-05 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  I have to wonder about what they would come up with if they ever did a similar analysis of the bacterial exposure of a job like working on a dairy farm.
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
"and that it still needs to be cleaned by hand" by OrangeTide · 2012-01-04 18:05 · Score: 1

wait do regular keyboards need to be cleaned?
I thought you were supposed to just buy a new $7 keyboard when it got too gross to use.

--
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Hooray! by Greyfox · 2012-01-04 18:19 · Score: 1

I can finally stop wrapping my keyboard in Saran Wrap!

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Re:This is meant for the health services industry. by riverat1 · 2012-01-04 18:28 · Score: 1

It makes sense that these are meant for hospitals. Anything that can be done to improve the sanitation there is a good thing.
I've been using the same keyboard for over 10 years now. I shudder to think how germy it is. Mostly I just turn it upside down and whack it to get the Cheetos crumbs out. Occasionally I use alcohol to clean off the grime, looks like it's about time to do it again.
Sanitary spec by Walt+Dismal · 2012-01-04 18:29 · Score: 3, Funny

Er, are these keyboards sperm-resistant? I don't want to know, my, er, friend, does.
obligatory XKCD by BluBrick · 2012-01-04 18:30 · Score: 3, Funny

is obligatory.

--
Ahh - My eye!
The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
Re:This is meant for the health services industry. by aaronb1138 · 2012-01-04 18:32 · Score: 1

That kind of reasoning is part of the JUST PLAIN STUPID kind why healthcare is overpriced.
I use a 1992 Model M by Osgeld · 2012-01-04 18:39 · Score: 1

you know what keeps a keyboard clean
wash your fucking hands once in a while!
I "wash" my vintage murder weapon once every couple of years, my wife's standard membrane shit gets replaced every year if not sooner (really what does a decent modern keyboard cost today, like 10 bucks at the local computer store? 3 bucks for a shitty one?)
Its really not that difficult people, your computer will function with a keyboard that did not come stock with it.
1. Re:I use a 1992 Model M by bronney · 2012-01-04 19:22 · Score: 1
  
  That's exactly what I do. Wash hands.
Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Twinbee · 2012-01-04 18:43 · Score: 1

Perhaps someone with enough know-how can chime here with something I've always pondered. There's a range of products which rely on UV light to kill bacteria, mold, viruses etc. Unfortunately, many of these products are underpowered such as this one (I can't say for sure, but some of the reviews don't seem great):
http://www.amazon.com/Verilux-CleanWave-VH01WW4-UV-C-Sanitizing/dp/B0018A330K/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1325745037&sr=8-4

My question is how much more powerful can we make these. I understand there's a safety issue, but ignoring that, what kind of wattage could one go to to use on beds, chairs, carpets, cupboards, even sinks and food areas.

Would a kilowatt or two for one of these 'wands' do a good enough job, and not set the house on fire? Would it also clear up dog/cat wee for example? It would be great to have something like this to avoid using liquids/bleach or throwing out the item, especially for pet owners like myself.

--
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
1. Re:Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Osgeld · 2012-01-04 19:03 · Score: 1
  
  its not really power its wavelength...
  A germicidal bulb will start burn your skin and eyes you before you could fart, and those are little 10-20 watt florescent models with quartz tubes, prolonged exposure will blind you and start to really screw up your skin.
  which you really dont want spread all over your keyboard, where most geniuses couldn't find the freaking return/enter key without staring at it for a good 45 seconds
  I powered a small 15 watt germacidal bulb that was intended to be used buried inside of a pool filter with a tube tester powered by a 9 volt battery, and though it was just enough to make it glow a little I saw a BAR of purple for the half of the day ...
  yes these things are 90% placebo, and yes serious versions do exist, but you wont see them cause if you did you might as well be staring at the sun for 2 hours exept all you would see is a dull glow
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germicidal_lamp
2. Re:Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Twinbee · 2012-01-04 19:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yes I know these things may be dangerous, but some consumer products (e.g. heavy duty rust removers) have hydrofluoric acid in them (yes, that's fluoric, not chloric, and yes you can buy it from town). The potential risk may be outweighed by the benefits if the wearer wore special glasses, and there was a clear way that points 'down' (e.g. this product.
  
  If that's not good enough, then it could even detect if there wasn't a surface within an inch or two of the device and would then automatically shut itself off.
  
  I just think these things could be magic for cleaning say, dog rugs (my dog leaks a little in his sleep unfortunately). But would it do that well? If not there's always the peroxide...
  
  --
  Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
3. Re:Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Hatta · 2012-01-05 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  What's wrong with soap and water?
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
4. Re:Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Osgeld · 2012-01-05 05:00 · Score: 1
  
  if you get one thats not a underpowered led blacklight its not oxyclean, it just kills stuff, your buddy's piddle will still be there
5. Re:Perfect UV 'cleaner'? by Twinbee · 2012-01-05 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing's 'wrong' with soap and water. It's just a quick wave of the hand using (lasting say 10 seconds) an ultra high-powered ray of UV light is much less hassle (if it works).
  
  And 6% hydrogen peroxide is 100x more effective than soap and water btw (great as a mouthwash too).
  
  --
  Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
They're YOUR germs... by webdog314 · 2012-01-04 18:55 · Score: 1

Unless you happen to be using a public keyboard, these are going to be germs from YOUR body. If they were going to be a problem, then they already would be. Washing your OWN hands would be a lot more effective.
1. Re:They're YOUR germs... by jamesh · 2012-01-04 20:16 · Score: 1
  
  Unless you happen to be using a public keyboard, these are going to be germs from YOUR body. If they were going to be a problem, then they already would be.
  Stick your finger in your bum, wiggle it around real good, then stick it in your mouth. They are YOUR germs from YOUR body, but that still doesn't mean they won't make you sick.
  
  Washing your OWN hands would be a lot more effective.
  One not-yet-discredited (I think) theory is that some auto-immune diseases are caused (or triggered) by the allergen getting somewhere it shouldn't, causing an exaggerated immune response. One my my kids has coeliac disease, and there is some speculation that this is triggered in some cases by repeated exposure to other parts of the body by gluten, one of those being repeated handwashing cracking and damaging the skin on the hands allowing gluten proteins to enter (as well as by wheat based products in the soap/hand wash itself).
  OTOH, not washing your hands at all is hardly a good way to overcome that :)
2. Re:They're YOUR germs... by Zironic · 2012-01-05 00:03 · Score: 1
  
  Actually you're fairly unlikely to get sick from your own feces, that doesn't make it less gross though.
3. Re:They're YOUR germs... by geekoid · 2012-01-05 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  No it's not the gluten.
  Gluten proteins through the skin.. sheesh.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
4. Re:They're YOUR germs... by jamesh · 2012-01-05 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Actually you're fairly unlikely to get sick from your own feces, that doesn't make it less gross though.
  Try putting your contact lens in your mouth then...
BSoD! by pbjones · 2012-01-04 18:55 · Score: 2

Did I get to say it first??? Ex-Microsoft employees build a useful Blue Screen of Death!

--
There was an unknown error in the submission.
Isopropanol by jps25 · 2012-01-04 18:57 · Score: 2

Just buy some 99.9% pure isopropanol and some distilled water. 5L cost like 10-15EUR here and last a long time.
Then submerge the keyboard or spray it with a 70-80% isopropanol/distilled water solution and let it dry.
1. Re:Isopropanol by petman · 2012-01-04 22:05 · Score: 1
  
  I'm genuinely curious - why not just use pure isopropanol? Why add the distilled water?
  
  --
  Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
2. Re:Isopropanol by subreality · 2012-01-04 23:02 · Score: 2
  
  60-70% IPA actually kills bugs better than pure, which is why the stuff at the drug store is usually 70%. I've heard two explanations why: #1, it doesn't coagulate the proteins at the surface as much and therefore does a better job getting inside the critters; #2, it evaporates an order of magnitude slower, whereas 100% disappears from your skin or the surface being cleaned within seconds.
3. Re:Isopropanol by pz · 2012-01-05 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  I've heard this many times, too, and yet, 91% (the normal high-proof isopropyl that we get around here) stings in cuts more than 70% does.
  Also, it would seem that higher proof alcohols, rather than isotonic, would serve to dehydrate a bacterium and thus kill it better.
  
  --
  
  Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
4. Re:Isopropanol by Hatta · 2012-01-05 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  Pain receptors are on membranes, so that's consistant with anhydrous alcohol dehydrating the top layer more powerfully. Your sensation of pain doesn't necessarily mean it's damaging the tissue, just activating the receptors on the surface.
  Also, 70% alcohols are still dehydrating enough to kill bacteria. We use 50% isopropanol in the lab to precipitate DNA. The alcohol literally strips the solvating water molecules away from the DNA, causing them to aggregate and precipitate. I'd say that would be pretty antibiotic.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
5. Re:Isopropanol by avandesande · 2012-01-05 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Pure isopropanol has the ability to dissolve plastic and is absorbed much more readily through the skin.
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
Isnt this a bit paranoid? by digitaldude99 · 2012-01-04 19:16 · Score: 1

Is anyone on record of having died from a dirty keyboard? I never heard of it. Germs are rarely dangreous. What about when you walk out your door into the coutryside, no one ever sterilises that. If we follow the logic behind this, we should sterilise that to.
1. Re:Isnt this a bit paranoid? by jamesh · 2012-01-04 20:24 · Score: 1
  
  Is anyone on record of having died from a dirty keyboard? I never heard of it. Germs are rarely dangreous. What about when you walk out your door into the coutryside, no one ever sterilises that. If we follow the logic behind this, we should sterilise that to.
  google agrees with you.
  "died from a dirty telephone" only gives HHGTTG references. Even "died from a dirty toilet" scores only 6 results, and most of those seem to be people asking if anyone died that way.
  I guess germs aren't that dangerous after all... or they are so dangerous that nobody lived to blog about it ;)
2. Re:Isnt this a bit paranoid? by nedlohs · 2012-01-05 02:10 · Score: 1
  
  Because when somebody dies from a flu-pnemonia one-two we record the death as "died from door knob" or "died from Bill's cough", right?
3. Re:Isnt this a bit paranoid? by digitaldude99 · 2012-01-05 17:59 · Score: 1
  
  Well youd think they would have made an attempt to quantify that annual death toll from dirty keyboards before deciding it was worthwhile sterilizing them.
Re:This is meant for the health services industry. by gl4ss · 2012-01-04 19:25 · Score: 1

hospitals should just use a keyboard cover and the cleaning lady should clean that with disinfectant.
900 bucks buys like all the keyboards in the hospital. but buy a 100 fancykeyboards at 900 a pop..

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Only Americans by amRadioHed · 2012-01-04 19:45 · Score: 1

We're talking about something for use at hospitals. Guess where those immune deficient 1% you mention are likely to be...

--
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Tochscreen? by Yev000 · 2012-01-04 19:52 · Score: 1

If this is meant for bacteria free environments why not use a touchscreen to type and wipe/flash it with UV afterwards?
You could make a grooved one (a little pit for every key) to make it easier to touch type on.
1. Re:Tochscreen? by geekoid · 2012-01-05 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  If ti's bacteria free, then just sanitize your hand with an alcohol based hand sanitizer before and after using keyboard.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:This is meant for the health services industry. by riverat1 · 2012-01-04 20:00 · Score: 1

I've never seen a keyboard cover that's as easy to use as just a plain keyboard. Also it's better to have continuous cleaning. Apparently the keyboard retracts into its UV lit box whenever it is not in use. Waving your hand over it causes the keyboard to pop back out. If they start selling the price will probably come way down. Under $200 a pop I imagine. Still expensive but affordable in the right situations.
Get an IBM model M by HBI · 2012-01-04 20:09 · Score: 1

Disassemble it using your 7/32" nut driver (buy online, it's an uncommon size) and run everything but the circuit board through the dishwasher. Enclose the key caps in a basket so they don't end up melted by the heater.
Works remarkably well and doesn't take the print off the keys, either. Use alcohol to clean the board. It will have some crumbs on it, mostly, unless you spill liquids into the keyboard.

--
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
1. Re:Get an IBM model M by Rob+the+Bold · 2012-01-05 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  Disassemble it using your 7/32" nut driver (buy online, it's an uncommon size) and run everything but the circuit board through the dishwasher. Enclose the key caps in a basket so they don't end up melted by the heater.
  Works remarkably well and doesn't take the print off the keys, either. Use alcohol to clean the board. It will have some crumbs on it, mostly, unless you spill liquids into the keyboard.
  Serious question: have you actually done this? How do you keep the keys oriented the right direction in the dishwasher so they don't come out upside down full of water and gunk?
  
  --
  I am not a crackpot.
2. Re:Get an IBM model M by greed · 2012-01-05 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  I've done it by hand, but air-dry, so it's much the same thing.
  They don't hold enough water to retain gunk; the two rinse phases (typical machine) are enough to sluice enough water through the upside down ones so you're left with clean water.
  I just shook them around several times as they dried to rearrange which ones were upside down. If you're not in a big rush, that's good enough.
  (I do the same thing with stuff that tips over in the dishwasher; maybe a quick rinse with hot water in case there's some detergent left, then just stick it in the drying rack with the hand washed stuff.)
3. Re:Get an IBM model M by HBI · 2012-01-05 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  Yes.
  The other answer above is correct, it doesn't gather much water and gunk. You can handwash them if you care, but the dishwasher has done well for me.
  
  --
  HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Nuke it from orbit. by Snufu · 2012-01-04 20:37 · Score: 1

Its the only way to be sure.
Today's fortune by gopla · 2012-01-04 21:23 · Score: 1

Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. -- Redd Foxx
Errors by Threni · 2012-01-04 23:01 · Score: 1

> Deep down, most people ,now that the germiest thing they touch all day is the thing
> they're touching all day: their keyboard.
Does no-one proof-read this stuff? They `now` it, right? "Germiest"? Spaces BEFORE a comma? Incorrect use of commas etc. It's as if this forms part of an 'English as a foreign language` test - question 1 maybe?
1. Re:Errors by John+Hasler · 2012-01-05 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  > Does no-one proof-read this stuff?
  Yes. You do.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Extended warranty? How can I lose? by CuteSteveJobs · 2012-01-04 23:12 · Score: 1

Germs are everywhere. If you disinfect it with UV light, all you'll end up doing is growing strains of UV-resistant bacteria. And for what point? Only a very small number of germs are pathogenic. The vast majority of bacteria and viruses aren't interested in you at all.

Like those disinfectant wipes you find in the supermarket that say "Kills 99.9% of Germs," this is something for idiots.
1. Re:Extended warranty? How can I lose? by treeves · 2012-01-05 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  I imagine the UV is much more than 99.9% effective.
  But as for stuff that says 99.9% effective, you're right.
  If there are a million bacteria on a surface and I kill 99.9% of them, I can leave the 1000 strongest ones alive to multiply and make a million much stronger bacteria.
  
  --
  ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
What? The FDA? by bradley13 · 2012-01-05 00:16 · Score: 1

No one else seems to have asked the question: Why is the Food and Drug Administration even involved? Keyboards are not food, and UV is not a drug. The company intends to use the FDA approval (of what, exactly?) to to leverage this this $900 idiocy into hospitals.
Did you know: many keyboards do just fine in the dishwasher, as long as you let them dry thoroughly afterwards. For those that don't? You can destroy a lot of normal keyboards before spending $900 for a gimmick.

--
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
1. Re:What? The FDA? by PPH · 2012-01-05 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  Did you know: many keyboards do just fine in the dishwasher,
  
  So what we need is some certification that a particular keyboard is 'dishwasher safe'.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
2. Re:What? The FDA? by nedlohs · 2012-01-05 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  Because the FDA does far more than just food and drugs. Medical devices for example. Radiation emitting devices for example.Cosmetics for example.
  And obviously company wants to sell the things to hospitals, where putting the keyboard into the dishwasher after every 2 minute use isn't exactly practical.
Go Steampunk, Go Copper! by Tekoneiric · 2012-01-05 01:05 · Score: 1

Just make a keyboard with high copper content (copper, brass, bronze), any microbes on it will die... Just goes to show you that steampunk is the way to go with keyboards!

--
*It's not what you can do for the Dark Side but what the Dark Side can do for you!*
Re:Overdoing it... by PPH · 2012-01-05 01:09 · Score: 1

Yet one more reason to legalize hookers.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Re:One problem by PPH · 2012-01-05 01:11 · Score: 1

Excellent excuse to keep a couple of bottles in my desk at work.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Not your keyboard. by John+Hasler · 2012-01-05 01:49 · Score: 1

Most likely the "germiest" thing you touch is your mouth. That's where the "germs" on your keyboard come from. Even the most fastidious of you are quite literally crawling with bacteria.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Our war on germs will kill us by sckeener · 2012-01-05 02:13 · Score: 1

Our War on germs is going to get us killed. Soap and water are enough. Anything more and we risk making the places where we really need more (hospitals) breeding factories for superbugs. Oh wait, that is what is happening. Stop eliminating superbugs competition. If those keyboards are wiping out 2/3s the germs, I bet 1/2 of the germs or more were good germs. I remember reading an article years ago, no clue on the current state, where some research doctors were trying out putting yogurt on their hands after washing to make sure their hands were protected by a protective layer of good germs.

--
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
1. Re:Our war on germs will kill us by geekoid · 2012-01-05 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  More then 1/2 actually. Also, UV MIGHT work on up to 66% of germs, it's only 99% effective with those 66%. SO thats 10,000 germs per million you started with.
  Also, it does nothing from airborne germs.
  You know whats better? wipe your hands with an alcohol based hand sanitizer when you are done.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Patented Over a Decade Ago by macs4all · 2012-01-05 02:58 · Score: 1

Well, this idea is hardly new. Check out this Patent. Application made in 1999, approved in 2001.
Copper Keys? by Confessed+Geek · 2012-01-05 03:47 · Score: 1

Hmm... Wouldn't it be easier to just put a thin layer of copper/brass on the keys?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_properties_of_copper
Hmm maybe I should have kept that to myself..
Idea
?
?
profit?
Keyboard life expectancy by g0bshiTe · 2012-01-05 03:55 · Score: 1

I'd be interested to see the life expectancy figures for this. I've seen firsthand what UV lights do to plastic a/c filters and it's not pretty.

--
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
A useless device by geekoid · 2012-01-05 06:30 · Score: 1

to sell to clueless scared people for too much money.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Do not kill my bacteria! by manu0601 · 2012-01-05 16:56 · Score: 1

On my keyboard live my own bacteria. They came here from my body, which means I am able to cope with them. And while living on my keyboard, they hold the place against other bacteria that are alien to me.
Simple!!!!!!!!!! by AssholeMcGee+ · 2012-01-05 22:16 · Score: 1

Use a small dose of Clorox (bleach) and some hot (very hot) water problem solved... This is just a small sample of why the FDA should be ousted from stamping worthless drugs/products... Another part of the Federal Government allowed to stay with the status quo even tho they are worthless..