What classification of clean room is your setup using? That has consistently been the sticking point when it comes to filtering, and it still is today, even with group sterility testing now being a fairly routine alternative (notwithstanding variability within a batch).
Every surface is surrounded by air, and that air carries contaminants.
Having laminar flow would also be a plus:
The move happens between two sealed setups, with the point of transfer cleaned and kept as brief as possible. In my view, whatever risk remains is minimal, perhaps even negligible.
What worries me most is the way even a tiny or negligible risk compounds as time goes on, particularly for those who are reconstituting several vials each week.
On top of that, if the gloves don't fit right, there's no point in bothering.
In my opinion, the HEPA filter and the vent filter go beyond what's needed. For typical home use, that level of setup just isn't realistic. It's not that extra precautions cause harm, but the harder the routine is to follow, the less likely someone like Joe Blow at home will bother with it at all, and he might even point to the difficulty as a reason to skip everything. There's a narrow boundary between recognizing a risk and letting the process completely run your life.
Because each item comes in its own sterile packaging, I'm able to reconstitute and filter while never making contact with the parts of the instruments that need to stay clean. Yep, I'm cutting corners out here with no gloves on.
Yeah, that's overkill. During the 90's I worked as a microbiologist. A negative hood only came out when we were processing human stool or the odd other specimen. For work that truly required sterility, or when the material was especially hazardous, we turned to the Biosafety Cabinet/Box: you placed your items inside, then slid your arms into long gloves sealed at the glass, so whatever you handled within the box stayed essentially sterile.RetCurious said:
In my opinion, the HEPA filter and the vent filter go beyond what's needed. For typical home use, that level of setup just isn't realistic. It's not that extra precautions cause harm, but the harder the routine is to follow, the less likely someone like Joe Blow at home will bother with it at all, and he might even point to the difficulty as a reason to skip everything. There's a narrow boundary between recognizing a risk and letting the process completely run your life.
Because each item comes in its own sterile packaging, I'm able to reconstitute and filter while never making contact with the parts of the instruments that need to stay clean. Yep, I'm cutting corners out here with no gloves on.
That said, your work wasn't in a kitchen lab, and you weren't a compounding pharmacist either.Mr. B said:
Yeah, that's overkill. During the 90's I worked as a microbiologist. A negative hood only came out when we were processing human stool or the odd other specimen. For work that truly required sterility, or when the material was especially hazardous, we turned to the Biosafety Cabinet/Box: you placed your items inside, then slid your arms into long gloves sealed at the glass, so whatever you handled within the box stayed essentially sterile.RetCurious said:
In my opinion, the HEPA filter and the vent filter go beyond what's needed. For typical home use, that level of setup just isn't realistic. It's not that extra precautions cause harm, but the harder the routine is to follow, the less likely someone like Joe Blow at home will bother with it at all, and he might even point to the difficulty as a reason to skip everything. There's a narrow boundary between recognizing a risk and letting the process completely run your life.
Because each item comes in its own sterile packaging, I'm able to reconstitute and filter while never making contact with the parts of the instruments that need to stay clean. Yep, I'm cutting corners out here with no gloves on.
If you work as a compounding pharmacist, that makes sense. At home in the kitchen, though, you'll be fine as long as you take the proper sterile precautions.Calm Logic said:
That said, your work wasn't in a kitchen lab, and you weren't a compounding pharmacist either.Mr. B said:
Yeah, that's overkill. During the 90's I worked as a microbiologist. A negative hood only came out when we were processing human stool or the odd other specimen. For work that truly required sterility, or when the material was especially hazardous, we turned to the Biosafety Cabinet/Box: you placed your items inside, then slid your arms into long gloves sealed at the glass, so whatever you handled within the box stayed essentially sterile.RetCurious said:
In my opinion, the HEPA filter and the vent filter go beyond what's needed. For typical home use, that level of setup just isn't realistic. It's not that extra precautions cause harm, but the harder the routine is to follow, the less likely someone like Joe Blow at home will bother with it at all, and he might even point to the difficulty as a reason to skip everything. There's a narrow boundary between recognizing a risk and letting the process completely run your life.
Because each item comes in its own sterile packaging, I'm able to reconstitute and filter while never making contact with the parts of the instruments that need to stay clean. Yep, I'm cutting corners out here with no gloves on.
This is a misconception. The absence of visible bacterial cultures does not automatically prove the bacteria are dead. It may simply mean they are unable to reproduce, or at least not to a degree that becomes visible to the naked eye, during the period covered by the test.
I had the same understanding, and I'd come across the distinction between bacteriostatic and bactericidal.
Those 3 days had already passed before the photos were taken — nothing was captured right away. Individual bacteria are invisible to the naked eye; what shows up are the colonies formed once each one has multiplied through several generations.
"immediately" when the measurement was taken-
Absolutely — the degree of bacterial 'elimination' is far greater than I had ever assumed. My understanding (shared by plenty of others, I suspect?) was that .9% BA merely held bacterial particles at a constant level...Reading this report has really opened my eyes, and it's useful information to have...
