[Availability of antibacterial towels and fabrics against enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTS: After outbreaks of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli, various varieties of antibacterial kitchen and table materials are being used in Japan. The actual of availability of towels and fabrics, designated as antibacteria, against enterohemorrhagic E. coli was evaluated. METHODS: For an indicator strain a clinically isolated strain of E. coli O157:H7 C2 in Canada was utilized. Material kept in a tube was autoclaved at 121 degrees C for 15 mins, and 200 microliters of the bacterial culture was inoculated on the material, and cultured at 35 degrees C for an adequate interval. Colony forming units (CFU) of the materials were estimated. We also studied bactericidal effects of copper-fixed towels after washing. Materials without antibacterial processing or white cotton towels were used as controls. RESULTS: CFU of E. coli on silver- or copper-fixed materials at 18 hrs after inoculation were markedly decreased, compared to CFU of bacteria on the controls at 0 hr after inoculation. These materials were found to have bactericidal activity. Three materials of 23 samples were found to have bacterial inhibitory activity, because CFU of bacteria on the 3 materials at 18 hrs after inoculation were less than CFU of bacteria on the controls at 18 hrs. Thirteen materials (56.5%) were found to have no evident bactericidal nor inhibitory activity. CFU of silver- or copper-fixed materials were clearly decreased at 3 hrs and 20 mins after inoculation, respectively. It was also recognized that bactericidal activity was sustained at 18 hrs after inoculation even after the copper-fixed towel was washed 50 times. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of bactericidal effects of towels and fabrics, that claim to be antibacterial, showed that a few materials had bactericidal or inhibitory activity. Consumers must not have too much confidence in claims of a product being antibacteria. Even if antibacterial materials are available, the most important measure for us is to wash sufficiently and maintain sanitary conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".