F
fix
Guest
Which is the so called middle ground?Can we please take the off topic debate elsewhere? (BTW, there is a middle ground between sanitized and unhygienic)
Which is the so called middle ground?Can we please take the off topic debate elsewhere? (BTW, there is a middle ground between sanitized and unhygienic)
Why is it a “phobia” when these people clean their hands? Is it possible some of us are not as hygienic as we should be?I just have to rant a bit…
I felt a little upset today during Mass. After the Our Father and the Sign of Peace handshakes, the woman next to me pulls out hand sanitizer and wipes her handsI understand their are people that have phobias about germs but it really bothered me that they would do such a thing…as if they were that clean!
oh well just ranting thats all.
It is* one hypothesis* but how does that make your point? Should people not clean their hands? Your position seems to be it is bad to have clean hands. Hardly a position worth defending.I suggest we all stop arguing and read the article referred to above. Here is another excerpt:
" ‘The immune system is there for a reason, said Dr. Kugathasan. "It’s there to recognize ‘the bad guys.’ The immune system allows your body to kill those bad guys and allows you to survive. In order to harden the immune system, the immune system requests some kind of stimuli all the time.’
" ‘The hygiene hypothesis suggests that the more hygienic one becomes, the more susceptible one is to various autoimmune diseases. The autoimmune diseases, the diseases that result from all the activation of your immune system, are increasing. The hygiene hypothesis - and we don’t yet have a proof of it - acknowledges that the maturation of the immune system needs some kind of hardening, some kind of resistance. Put another way, you cannot really build up good muscles without doing exercise.’
"From Pet Dander to Pig Worms
The common belief that has driven medicine, as well as public perception and hygiene practices, is that when we get sick it is because of something we ate, or inhaled, or were exposed to in other ways. The hygiene hypothesis points in a different direction, proposing that in many diseases it is a lack of exposure to the ‘bad guys’ that causes harm.
While the evidence was by no means clear-cut, one study indicated that in some cases contact with certain pet dander in the home actually decreases a child’s risk of wheezing from asthma later in life. Other studies show that children who lived on farms when they were very young have reduced incidence of asthma, which has led several researchers to conclude that organisms in cattle dust and manure may be the stimuli that their immune systems needed to fight off asthma."
Your link does not claim people should stop cleaning their hands when they ought to. You are arguing it is bad to sanitize one’s hands in church before distributing communion or shaking hands using a link that does not prove your point.Well, I tried. It won’t hurt anyone to investigate the hypothesis by reading the cited article, and if it changes behavior (if the hypothesis is correct) it might actually prevent some child from developing asthma.
Remember the scientific method? Hypothesis>testing>theory, where “theory” in the sciences means near-certainty.
“If you eat or drink something without washing your hands, or if you touch your own nose, mouth, or eyes after shaking someone’s hand, you can introduce whatever germ was on their hand, and now your hand, into the portals of your body,” says Tierno.
Indeed, hand-to-hand contact can be such a potent way of passing germs that the CDC issued a special advisory which reads, in part, “The most important thing that you can do to keep from getting sick is to wash your hands.”
Tierno agrees: “Frequent hand washing is the single most important weapon we have against disease.”
SOURCES: Philip M. Tierno Jr., PhD, director clinical microbiology and immunology; associate professor, departments of microbiology and pathology, New York University Medical Center.
Neither, (it couldn’t be the middle ground if it were one or the other).Which is the so called middle ground?
Which is the middle? Not which extreme you implied.Neither, (it couldn’t be the middle ground if it were one or the other).
But these extremes are not at issue. The issue is some person cleaning their hands before or after handshaking.I have relatives who sterilize everything (even the teapot) before use. I have relatives who, quite frankly, live in squalor. For the most part my immediate family lies somewhere in between.
This is your opinion. How often and why any particular person uses any sanitizer will depend on many factors. Claiming it prevents an adult from developing their immune system is not any fact I am aware of.The constant and pervasive use of antibacterial cleaners prevents people from developing their immune system, and breeds resistant strains of bacteria. However, that does not preclude common sense cleanliness.
Yes, that may be your experience.In my experience, those who have a ‘relaxed’ attitude toward cleaning (that is, wash your hands with non-anti bacterial soap before meals, after working in the garden/cleaning/applying flea drops to the dog/etc) tend to be healthier than the people on either extreme.
I doubt folks are making a show of it and we should try and place such things in the best possible light.As for EMHC’s I have more of a problem that they made a show of it. There is good cause, in that instance, to try to prevent any spread of microbes. But it is not usually the case that you need to be … paranoid about germs.
There are two positions on the table. The middle, by definition is not either of them. Perhaps you meant to ask: What is the middle?Which is the middle? Not which extreme you implied.
Where is the middle? Pedantic?There are two positions on the table. The middle, by definition is not either of them. Perhaps you meant to ask: What is the middle?![]()
Ok, you want to argue over when they should use it. Fine. I see no significant difference.There is no need for EMHC’s to pull out hand sanitizer on the altar, from a liturgical standpoint. Before they go up? Great! I seem to recall saying that was a good thing to do?
Soap and water are not always available that is why they use the sanitizer.The confusion with hand sanitizers and simple hygiene is another thread. I would appreciate it though, if you would stop accusing those of us who, in general, disagree with a disinfected culture of being unhygienic. Washing with just soap and water is enough to prevent the spread of most diseases in casual contact.
Not sure of your point here?*On second thought, it wouldn’t hurt for some people to have a little more tact, at avoid making faces like they just reached into the trash.![]()
Why be offended at such a thing? There is no reason for offense. The person who used it may have a medical problem and they may need to avoid bacteria, viruses, etc as much as they can. Again, why not place this situation in the best possible light rather find a reason to take offense?just have to rant a bit…
I felt a little upset today during Mass. After the Our Father and the Sign of Peace handshakes, the woman next to me pulls out hand sanitizer and wipes her handsI understand their are people that have phobias about germs but it really bothered me that they would do such a thing…as if they were that clean!
oh well just ranting thats all.
The normal social implication is that the person finds those who just shook their hand somehow unclean or otherwise beneath them. Otherwise it can signal a desire not to be associated with such a person.Why be offended at such a thing? There is no reason for offense. The person who used it may have a medical problem and they may need to avoid bacteria, viruses, etc as much as they can. Again, why not place this situation in the best possible light rather find a reason to take offense?
No, the normal implication is that the person wants to not catch a cold or some such thing. We are required to assume the best, not the worst. There is no need to create inauthentic suffering by claiming offense. We have have enough authentic suffering to offer up.The normal social implication is that the person finds those who just shook their hand somehow unclean or otherwise beneath them. Otherwise it can signal a desire not to be associated with such a person.
Each case is different. I see no reason to find the worst possible motive of some person who desires to clean their hands. Why not look upon the situation and think gee I will offer up a prayer for that brother in Christ who may have a serious illness, rather than finding some way to be offended?Those that wish not to give offense can usually manage to do so merely by a slight smile (slightly apologetic?) as they sanitize their hands. As I said before, tact is helpful.
They are not introducing anything into the Liturgy. If I sneeze and use a tissue is that introducing a Kleenex into the Liturgy?As to when they use sanitizer that it is a matter of introducing something into the liturgy, when it could be easily kept a personal action (not to mention a modicum of discretion can prevent giving offense).