Mind you, DI water is not necessarily sterile (same goes for normal drinking water). It does not support significant growth, though. So if you drop some bacteria that can survive the low osmolarity, they will not multiply. But they stay viable for quite some time.
Fungi and Algae in Drinking Water
- Thread starter Diode-Man
- Start date
Totally incorrect for the places I worked in. Potable was NOT considered safe enough. These were sealed containers - filled with distilled water after cleaning - and the seal was broken by squeezing the container.
One simple question: have you never worked in a lab that employed crossive and other harmful chemicals and reagents that could possibly be splashed into your eyes?
no significant growth agreed. still tagged not for drinking. DI that is.
Since you appear to like to bragabout the lab(s) you have been:
I have been working in biosafety 1/2 labs for a bit more than a decade, both in Germany and US. In every single lab the the eyewash system was plumbed instead of a self contained one (due to size restrictions the latter are often less common), but this is actually not really of interest, as everything you posted appeared to be conjecture, derived from how your lab is set up.
The regulations for eye washes in the USA is given by OSHA according to ANSI standards. Here minimum requirements for e.g.temperature, pH and flow rate are defined. For example, it is required that an eye wash has to be able to flow for at least 15 minutes at 0.4 gallons per minute. So a non-plumbed system would require at least six gallon container within a defined range. This is the reason why plumbing is often preferred.
Now to the water quality part. Generally a preserved saline solution is recommended, but the standards really only require the water to be free of debris, pH of near 7.4, within a certain temperature range, and that it is potable (less than 100 cfu/ml).
Now, if you are working under different lab safety regulations, just post it. However, guessing the requirements of bacterial growth from your eye wash set up is kind of hilarious.
I have been working in biosafety 1/2 labs for a bit more than a decade, both in Germany and US. In every single lab the the eyewash system was plumbed instead of a self contained one (due to size restrictions the latter are often less common), but this is actually not really of interest, as everything you posted appeared to be conjecture, derived from how your lab is set up.
The regulations for eye washes in the USA is given by OSHA according to ANSI standards. Here minimum requirements for e.g.temperature, pH and flow rate are defined. For example, it is required that an eye wash has to be able to flow for at least 15 minutes at 0.4 gallons per minute. So a non-plumbed system would require at least six gallon container within a defined range. This is the reason why plumbing is often preferred.
Now to the water quality part. Generally a preserved saline solution is recommended, but the standards really only require the water to be free of debris, pH of near 7.4, within a certain temperature range, and that it is potable (less than 100 cfu/ml).
Now, if you are working under different lab safety regulations, just post it. However, guessing the requirements of bacterial growth from your eye wash set up is kind of hilarious.
i worked with
hf
h2s04
hcl
hno3
and
naoh big deal eh
had a thing we called the acid cart. to move bottles around.
wore an acid suit... loved it
also worked with weird stuff like
y
eu
am
still work woth the acids and naoh for recharging DI resins
thats at home though. cant stop it will drive me nuts
now i run a business that has little to due with any of that stuff
Where did you come up with this "bragging" claim. I did no such thing, but rather made simple, accurate statements about where I worked in the past.
For one thing, the labs where I worked were huge - all three of them covered several thousand square feet, were built in the 1960s (when there was NO OSHA or many other safety requirements that exist now) and the eyewash stations were an add-on rather than preplanned and built in.
Permanent plumbed stations were also added but weren't close enough to each and every single point where an accident might occur. The eyewash bottles were considered to be an EMERGENCY first-action only kind of thing.
Perhaps you understand a bit better now????????????
Modern labs did not suddenly spring into being as they are today. There WERE times prior and transitions and adjustments were made as things moved forward. And the VAST majority of it was done incrementally.
Sigh, what a waste of time. You said that:
I just explained to you that potable is considered safe enough. I also explained a couple of fine points regarding safety regulations and regardless whether the labs were built in the 60s or 20s or whenever, these hold true today. Moreover, you are not supporting your main argument but are clearly side-tracking.
To remind you, your point was that distillied water supports bacterial growth because eye washes have to be cleaned regularly.
I said that a) distilled water does not contain enough macronutrients to support growth and b) the setup of eye washes is according to certain safety standards, but is no include indication of sterility. So even if you clean up the flasks regularly is likely just for cleanliness reasons but not due to likely growth within it. These procedures therefore do not support your main argument (unless you use really dirty bottles).
Also if you do not have any additional eye washes, you are not adhering to standard lab safety procedures.
I just explained to you that potable is considered safe enough. I also explained a couple of fine points regarding safety regulations and regardless whether the labs were built in the 60s or 20s or whenever, these hold true today. Moreover, you are not supporting your main argument but are clearly side-tracking.
To remind you, your point was that distillied water supports bacterial growth because eye washes have to be cleaned regularly.
I said that a) distilled water does not contain enough macronutrients to support growth and b) the setup of eye washes is according to certain safety standards, but is no include indication of sterility. So even if you clean up the flasks regularly is likely just for cleanliness reasons but not due to likely growth within it. These procedures therefore do not support your main argument (unless you use really dirty bottles).
Also if you do not have any additional eye washes, you are not adhering to standard lab safety procedures.
And a very heavy sigh of my own!
And I sincerely doubt that you ever worked in a lab too many years ago. You're just too hung up on today's standards - therefore I must assume that you haven't been in the industry all that long.
Do you care to tell us just HOW long?
I have a quick question, I give my dog water from the tap twice a day and rinse the bowl out each time, but on hot days when I clean the bowl for the eve feed I notice a green tinge around the bowl.....I know this isn't vets open time but was wondering if there could be any harmful effects...?
im not a vet but i can tell you that i observe animals drinking water that has algae in it all the time.
my best guess is, its ok.
for what its worth tap water has a fair amount of nutrients in it.
besides the stuff that hitches a ride. they will add phosphates as a corrosion preventative and chloramine as a longer lasting preservative than regular chlorine. the chloramine breaks down into chlorine and ammonia. the ammonia is futher metabolized by nitrifying bacteria which creates nitrates and that with the phospates are the nutrients for algae.
eye washes.... these are what we had http://www.allsafetyproducts.biz/site/323655/product/SAS 5135 or similar. we also had the plumbed in ones. not many that i recall.
i cant recall that i ever saw someone change the water but, that means nothing.
i cant recall that i ever saw someone change the water but, that means nothing.
To think that I actually considered apologizing for my rather snippish posts. I got some (graduate) students getting on my nerves now and your comments very much reminded me of them (really, the quality of students here is close to abysmal). But as you are side-tracking again and obviously are not able to follow a discussion through I think I will leave it as that and just give the last following comments.
If you had read my posts you would have known that I worked in bio-labs for around a decade now (including postdoc). In turn, I do have a hard time believing that you spent a significant amount of time in the lab (either as scientist or technician) because even by chance grad students and especially technician will pick up lab procedures with time. Your line of reasoning so far was really sub-undergrad level. However this is still irrelevant.
Even if your lab adheres to safety standard of the last century, distilled water (unless conducted with a really dirt-crusted system, which then would not yield class II or even III water) is still largely free from carbon contamination. Side-tracking to eye washes does not change this. Even less if for some reason it should be relevant that your eye washes do (or do not) to adhere to some safety standards.
It only tells me that you have never managed a lab before and/or are not aware of bio/lab-safety procedures, which, by the way, are mandatory for both private as well as uni- or institute labs.
In any case, I think I have wasted enough time on this nonsense, I do have enough students to discuss irrelevant points (including why wikipedia is not a scientific source and why stuff and why it is not sufficient for a practical course to come in once or twice a week for a few hours
---- why oh why didn't I get the Chinese grad students!!!). Really, they are still like bloody kindergarten kids (well, with one exception, but he is almost older than me...).To Pinocchio if you rinse it out daily and clean up any growth it should be fine. You should avoid it standing for more than a day, especially if anything got into the bowl (e.g. grass), though.
Thanks Charonz & BuckyBeam...........