Hand Sanitizing Practice During Pandemic Has Negative Impact on the Environment

Researchers pointed out that the use of hand sanitizing gels and constant hand-washing is impacting the environment negatively as well as public health.

According to the study, the manufacturing and use of hand sanitizing gels has resulted in around 2% of the usual carbon footprint.

Researchers' comprehensive analysis to determine the impact of hand sanitizers was recently published in the journal Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Hand Sanitizer Contributes to Carbon Footprint

According to a comprehensive disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) impact analysis, the manufacturing and use of hand sanitizing gels has resulted in around 2% of the usual carbon footprint; depending on the sanitizing gel or handwashing practice employed, human health has been impacted, with people losing between 16 and 114 hours per year.

As per Phys.org, hand hygiene is one of the most essential ways to prevent or reduce pathogen transmission, hence why the WHO and NHS England suggest hand washing with soap and water or cleansing hands with alcohol sanitizer to give some protection against COVID-19.

These behaviors, however, have considerable influence on global health. Washing hands, for example, necessitates the use of water, but the creation of sanitizing gel packaging-as do the active components themselves-contributes to carbon emissions, resulting in ozone layer depletion and global climate change.

Analyzing the Environmental Impacts of Hand-sanitizer

The researchers performed a comprehensive analysis in the study recently published in the journal Environmental Science and Pollution Research, in which they projected the effects of the UK population following each of the four hand-washing routines over the course of a year: Ethanol-based sanitizing gel, isopropanol-based sanitizing gel, liquid soap and water, and bar soap and water.

They looked at the effects in 16 distinct groups, including climate change, freshwater ecotoxicity, ozone layer depletion, the use of water etc.

Hand hygiene, in whatever form, has an environmental cost. Sanitation gels based on isopropanol had the least effect in 14 of the 16 categories. In this category, these gels have a four-fold reduced environmental impact than liquid soap hand washing.

Using isopropanol-based sanitizing gels would result in a 16-hour decrease in disability-adjusted life years per person at the low end of the range. Using liquid soap and hand-washing for an extended period of time would result in a loss of 114 hours per person.

The journal article's primary author is Dr. Brett Duane, an associate professor at Trinity College Dublin's School of Dental Science.

Sanitizing Gels Vs. Soap and Water Practices

He said: "Hand hygiene has certainly made a big difference in slowing the transmission of COVID-19 over the past two years, but this research-the first of its kind that assesses the use of sanitizing gels and increased hand-washing practices in a way that clearly quantifies the impacts on human and planetary health-shows these practices do cause significant harm," according to Trinity College Dublin.

Most importantly, the research reveals that sanitizing gels are less harmful than soap and water, with isopropanol-based gels having a lesser effect.

This is helpful information for preventing additional harm, but the research also highlights the need for more ecologically friendly gels.

For more news, updates about COVID-19 and similar topics don't forget to follow Nature World News!