the mid-seventeenth century to make discoveries . He is credited with discovering bacteria , protists , nematodes , and spermatozoa ( his own , by the way ), among other things . There is no written evidence that Ibn al-Khatib used a microscope , neither is there evidence that he did not . Why is this important ?
Because all those scientists took it upon themselves to follow their experience , trustworthy reports , observations , studies , and curiosities which led to discoveries , further research , and research by others , they were undaunted in their search for the truth and discoveries . They were not victims of “ paralysis by analysis .”
Science is a beautiful thing ; it has led to the discovery of hundreds of thousands , if not millions , of life-changing and saving discoveries . But what would have happened if Semmelweis , Koch , Pasteur , Lister , Ibn al-Khatib , Fracastoro , or Marcus von Plenciz had not wanted to take a stand for what they knew was true ? What if they had to wait for peer-reviewed studies before putting a stake in the ground and declared , “ This , I know is true ,” and moved on from there ?
This article is not a condemnation or denigration of peer-reviewed studies or multiple studies of the same subject . Reproducibility is a core principle of scientific progress . However , “ scientific claims should not gain credence because of the status or authority of their originator but by the replicability of their supporting evidence . Scientists attempt to describe the methodology transparently . And resulting evidence used to support their claims . Other scientists agree whether the evidence supports the claims , citing theoretical or methodological reasons , or collecting new evidence . Such debates are meaningless , however , if the evidence is not reproducible .
( See : https :// eprints . keele . ac . uk / 877 / 1 / Open % 20Science % 20 ( Science % 20Pre-Print ). pdf Too many research papers indulge in circular referencing . If one were to indulge oneself and secure several research papers on a subject such as “ scrubs contamination ,” one would find the same references being quoted time and time again , as if echoing the same studies supported their positions . This is what is known as circular referencing . A circular reference is a series of references where the last object references the first , resulting in a closed loop .
Circular referencing is usually unhelpful and reveals no new information that will further discussions or demonstrates new outcomes . Circular referencing is most often used to support one ’ s hypothesis without revealing unique or compelling information or processes . Such is the case when seeking an answer to why the CDC , OSHA , and other authorities having jurisdiction fail to definitively support facility provision and laundering of healthcare attire or uniforms , aka
Healthcare Personnel Attire ( HPA ). HPA can include any style , type of fabric or clothing worn by clinical or non-clinical healthcare workers in any area of a healthcare facility . To what is all this leading ? The Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA ) regulations require employers to provide laundry processes for reusable personal protective equipment textiles and healthcare attire or uniforms with visible blood or other potentially infectious material contamination .”
Not desiring to be redundant , but out of necessity redundancy will take place .
In the treatise , On the Plague , Ibn al-Khatib wrote : “ The existence of contagion is established by experience [ and ] by trustworthy reports on transmission by garments , vessels , ear-rings ; by the spread of it by persons from one house , by infection of a healthy sea-port by an arrival from an infected land [ and ] by the immunity of isolated individuals .”
As far back as the 14th century , Ibn al-Khatib knew that plague ( germs ) were unseen and that the germs were transmitted on garments , by persons from one house , and by persons with immunity . Ever since SARS-CoV-2 reached our shores , medical professionals had extreme suspicions that SARS-Cov-2 would be widespread . Their worries were based on observation , experience with SARS and other coronavirus-related diseases , training , and “ germ theory ” knowledge . They would present as “ or other potentially infectious material contamination .” Yet , OSHA , CDC , NIH , nor the Public Health Service has not seen fit to require hospitals and other healthcare facilities to provide healthcare attire or uniforms to all healthcare workers with actual or potential patient contact or exposure ( including the expansive definition of “ scrub ” uniforms ) and the required commercial cleaning of all healthcare personnel attire ( HPA ).
In researching the topic of home laundering versus commercial laundering of HPA , it is evident that there are dozens of studies . Still , none of them appear willing to put a stake in the ground and declare , “ This , I know is
Click to review true .” Every study sets forth both benefits and burdens survey results of requiring HPA to be commercially laundered . The CDC on guidance . does not recommend how or where to launder HPA ; however , they do set forth guidelines for laundering healthcare textiles , which includes HPA . When the guidelines are properly followed , hygienic results are attained .
“ Universal precautions shall be observed to prevent
Click to review survey results on employer provided laundering .
contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials . Under circumstances in which differentiation between body fluid types is difficult or impossible , all body fluids shall be considered potentially infectious materials .” ( See : https :// www . osha . gov / laws-regs / interlinking / standards / 1910.1030 ( d )( 1 ))
Within the same standard , they require “ all visibly contaminated clothing , including scrubs or personally owned items , be laundered by the employer at no cost to the employee .”
What is a “ virulent ” matter ? Virulent matter is any infectious and contagious protists , fungi , or even non-living pathogens can cause diseases , such as viruses , prions , or viroids . Are those virulent enough to warrant concern from healthcare workers in alignment with OSHA ? Are they sufficient to be commercially laundered and not taken home to husbands , wives , children , grandparents , loved ones , or friends ? They should be . Virulent matter is not visible to the naked eye and is no less a danger .
Isn ’ t COVID-19 “ virulent matter ?” Isn ’ t Candida auris “ virulent matter ?” Isn ’ t Clostridioides difficile “ virulent matter ?” Potential microscopic pathogenic organisms are prevalent in healthcare facilities . With the abundance of healthcare-associated pathogens in hospitals and clinics throughout the U . S ., healthcare workers and their HPA will be exposed to and contaminated by virulent matter , and no one more so than Environmental Services ( EVS ) technicians .
www . healthcarehygienemagazine . com • august 2021
41