Talk:Sterilization (microbiology)

message: This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 October 2020 and 12 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aasif24350. Peer reviewers: Conghuiw.
== at 2.2.1 ethylene dioxide this sentence simply makes no logical sense "Besides moist heat and irradiation, ethylene oxide is the most common sterilization method, used for over 70% of total sterilizations"== Danieledalpra (talk) 21:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: These are all really variants on dry heat sterilization. The exact methods vary, but the underlying mechanism is the same. I would propose that we expand the dry heat sterilization section to cover these methods and remove them as their own sections. TaylorJO (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge or Remove Incineration/Flaming/Glass Beads

message: Does anyone have any info on this?  The USDA has a great photo of it that is in the public domain, found here:  . Thanks! TeamZissou (talk) 20:11, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Section on the sterilization effect of negative air ionization?

message: Someone should add information about what needs which level of sterilization.  Include critical, semi-critical, and non-critical items used in surgery.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.67.1 (talk) 20:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spaulding Classification System 

message: Sterile parts of the body?  Are there sterile parts of the body?
Thirty to forty years ago blood was thought to be sterile.  Bloodborne pathogens were unheard of.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.117.126.2 (talk) 13:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medicine and Surgery 

message: University of Florida engineering researchers have found that microwaving kitchen sponges and plastic scrubbers — known to be common carriers of the bacteria and viruses that cause food-borne illnesses – sterilizes them rapidly and effectively.  Brian Pearson 02:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microwaves 

message: Shouldn't there be a section about sterilization by filtration, which is extensively used to sterilize, for example, heat sensitive protein solutions in biology research? --mglg(talk) 23:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, why not. If you know that, write it there.--Juan de Vojníkov 14:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filtration 

message: I found the text below the middle of the Wikipedia article - I think it doesn't belong there; it belongs here,
or perhaps on a page about the term kill rate in general. Jutta 17:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jutta, I agree.  I just started a Sterility assurance level page for this specific topic. --Microbiojen 01:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kill Rate 

message: Do not support the merger.
These articles dry heat and moist heat:
:1. do add more information
:2. provide a point to link to
:3. are important individual entities and are one of the foundations of sterilization, and need special mention.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarindam7 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will not interfere any more, this is not my domain of expertise. But please be careful of not duplicating/repeating stuff that is in this article. If the other articles merits it then obviously this article may have to be split. Regards. --Triwbe (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Discussion closed. Proposition withdrawn.sarindam7 (talk) 09:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dry and Moist heat 

message: Sodium hypochlorite (chlorine bleach) is not a sterilizing agent. It is a disinfectant and decontaminant only. As a reference, see the "Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories" manual referenced in this very section. Since bleach is not a method of sterilization, this section should be removed from the article entirely. Keenspotter (talk) 22:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bleach 

message: I removed the entire section on spore testing, as it appears as though the person who added it simply copied and pasted an academic paper. Additionally, the section heading was vague and the section itself seemed to go well beyond the scope of the article. If someone disagrees with me feel free to check the archived page in the history, clean it up to meet Wikipedia standards, and re-insert it into the article. As it was, it did not come anywhere close to meeting Wikipedia standards and even referenced this article as a source (in what appeared to be a "works cited" page) material inserted into the article. I'm not entirely sure how an article can reference itself. In short, thanks for contributing, but please read over the Wikipedia standards next time. Chrisbrl88 (talk) 08:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "Spore Testing" section 

message: I removed subsections "Food utensils" and "Bathing" from the "Heat sterilization" section because it was frankly ridiculous to list methods that clearly don't sterilize, and it was stated in those subsections that they don't sterilize. To keep something to clear up misconceptions, I added a section at the bottom called "Cleaning methods that do not achieve sterilization" which is meant to be a BRIEF list of methods Danieledalpra (talk) 21:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things that don't work 

message: If you Google "cellulostics peroxide," the only results appear to be pages that (presumably) plagiarize this Wikipedia article, including a patent  that plagiarizes a large proportion of the article. It is not clear that any source not plagiarizing Wikipedia has ever used this term. 18.93.4.100 (talk) 00:36, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cellulostics" 

message: Tyndallization has its own page, should this be merged? In addition, this is an obsolete method.
TaylorJO (talk) 22:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tyndallization 

message: There are several references to prions in the page, do they belong here? Since they are not living, I would argue that they don't belong with sterilization. Listing parameters for destroying prions seems to be outside of the scope of the page.
TaylorJO (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prions 

message: Removed the sentence that said that "glass for example completely absorbs all UV light.". This needs elaboration and clarification- if this is true, then UV bulbs would be pointless because the glass of the bulb would absorb all the light and none would get out, and they would only emit heat. (Unless this person is implying that UV bulbs have been made out of plastic only for the last hundred years) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.69.187.16 (talk) 03:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi User:Scaraway, I've also heard some skepticism surrounding how effective the UV lights in biosafety cabinets are at sterilizing surfaces, but I've not really looked into it. Do you have any references to back up your thesis? Thanks Ajpolino (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

text: Hi Ajpolino. Currently I don't have references as I haven't yet researched to find papers/sources on this topic (if I had, I would have just modified the main article instead of discussing it here), but I intend to do that investigation someday when I have time to really look into it.
What my thesis is based on thus far is based on my understanding of biology, physics, logic, some limited experience with research about UV-light killing extromophile bacteria, and 1st hand (therefore anecdotal) experience with some microbiology labs in academia.
I might also mention that upon reviewing some CDC resources for sterilization and cleaning health-care facilities, I don't remember seeing UV light mentioned in my reading so far.
If someone else decides to do some research on UV light, that would be cool.
Thank you, scaraway (talk) 10:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  UV light