Talk:Oligodynamic effect

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

September 17 to 23, 2017 (14th)

Dumb looking list?

Why would you keep listing things that are composed of cells after you mention cells?

"on living cells, algae, molds, spores, fungi, viruses, prokaryotic and eukaryotic microorganisms, even in relatively low concentrations"

I realize that viruses might not count as "living" so they're excluded but algae, molds, spores, fungi and microorganisms are all completely composed of living cells, right?

I'm editing this paragraph and if someone sees a better way to structure it please by all means change it.

Stosseled (talk) 13:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References?

This article contains some fascinating information but unfortunately no references. I am no expert so I don't feel qualified to evaluate references, but a quick google search turned up this one:

http://www.springer.com/life+sci/microbiology/book/978-0-904477-30-6

Neoprote (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy brass hospital doorknobs?

Brass doorknobs therefore tend to be more sanitary than stainless or aluminium doorknobs. The effect is important in hospitals, and useful in any building.

This appears to be just a hopeful assertion. It is not the occurrence of the antibacterial effect that I would dispute; it's the relatively sparse occurrence of brass! After working in a number of hospitals, I'd be surprised if I could locate many brass doorknobs.

How can this effect possibly be important in hospitals, if the better part of a rostered shift must pass, in order for self-sterilisation to be effective?...

Brass doorknobs disinfect themselves in about eight hours...

My guess is that any doorknobs important to the potential spread of infection are typically plastered by fresh handfuls of germs every few minutes. Best to stay focused on realistic infection control, rather than hoping for hospital administrators to retain period fittings.

Not to mention writing articles blindly asserting the established "importance" of an application of a biochemical effect, with zero supporting evidence. A brass knob sterilising itself in the lab is irrelevant if hospitals tend not to install brass doorknobs!

Aboctok (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colloidal silver

The claim about colloidal silver is not supported by the source cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.207.182.234 (talk) 00:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch, thanks! I removed the claim. AxelBoldt (talk) 19:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stub?

This article is not really all that good. It can hardly be understood unless you already have a competency beyond what can be expected by the average reader. It should be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.191.124 (talk) 00:38, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong date of discovery of effect.

The article states that Nägeli discovered the effect in 1893, but Nägeli's wikipage puts his death at 1891. Seems like the paper that described his discovery appeared posthumously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.92.203.79 (talk) 15:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, it was a posthumous publication. :) Greg (talk) 21:09, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aluminium salt plugs in antiperspirant

The second sentence in this section talks about plugging sweat ducts and reducing perspiration, but this has nothing to do with the biocidal qualities of aluminium compounds. I have removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.99.42.147 (talk) 09:25, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copper vs Zinc for Drinking Water?

I have sensitive skin, and have had problems with burning from sulfur smelling bacteria everywhere with copper pipes, but never with the old galvanized water pipe. I had the same problem with my vaporizer, so a threw a piece of zinc/aluminum hot water heater cathode in the tank and the problem stopped. Anyone know about the biocide difference between copper and zinc?