White Paper

Hypothesis: (Maybe)

If there is not substantial strides to reducing the overuse of hand-sanitizers there will be a significant decline in the immune health of the world’s human population.


The above researches 10 different products on 10 different right- handed males. The language is difficult to understand as it is very scientific, this source may be useful but needs further investigation as to just what the study is saying.









2 thoughts on “White Paper”

  1. 1. Your hypothesis is a good place to start.
    2. It’s, however, clumsily phrased.

    If there is not substantial strides to reducing the overuse

    Its subject and verb disagree in number. And they contribute to wordiness.

    Overuse of hand sanitizers threatens global immune health.

    You can make your recommendation about reducing the use of sanitizers as your proposal if your hypothesis turns out to be true.


  2. This is a good collection of “get me started” sources. The Nature article

    The make-up of human microbiomes is shifting, with diversity declining and keystone species disappearing. Blaser blames these changes on innovations that impede bacterial attempts to set up shop inside us. Examples include germ-killing hand sanitizers, and Caesarean sections that rob newborns of the bacterial kick-start that they usually get by passing through the birth canal. In the United States alone, one-third of all births are now Caesareans.

    already contains conclusions, making it a bit dangerous.

    The ICT source, geared to an audience of medical professionals, contains extremely valuable distinctions between anti-bacterials, anti-microbials, antibiotics, and antiseptics; also between household and hospital products.

    The AJIF source is full of useful topics to consider and seems to be offering overall a risk/reward approach that would reduce infections at home without contributing to antibiotic resistance.

    As for the ProQuest source that compares 10 sanitizers, its purpose appears to be specifically to rank them by effectiveness, and its recommendation is commercial, not scientific: Good brands need to be adopted and “wantonly marketed” ineffective brands should be discouraged or banned as fraudulent.

    (On the plus side, those bad brands aren’t killing many bacteria, so they won’t contributed to resistance.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s