Cleaning products - "Kills 99% of all germs"

DAIR · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:36

I'm sure many of you have heard that line before.

I want to know what the illusive 1% is. What is this immortal germ?

tom_e · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:36

Bad AIDS.

Sega Mega Dave · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:38

Real bad AIDS.

balky12 · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:38

I would imagine it's probably to do with marketing/ advertising. If it claims to kill 100% of germs and you bleach an area, and germs remain (not due to the bleaches fault) it opens up a can of worms?

Although I would be interested in hearing that there is this immortal germ.

EDIT; Extremely bad AIDS

Gilly · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:38

They can't say 100% solely on the basis that by killing 99% of them they're ensuring there's always going to be one that they create that is resistant :rolleyes:

dirtychinchilla · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:38

It's probably 98% good germs, 1% bad, and 1% they can't account for.

ADT · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:39

The other 1% is there to protect themselves as it basically does not guarantee anything 100%

Mat · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:43

It misses Bacillus Lawsuitius, the germ that if they claimed to kill, and didn't, would infect the customer's brains and make them file a class action.

DAIR · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:43

Okay. So they can kill 100% of all known germs?

TwsT · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:45

Mat said:
It misses Bacillus Lawsuitius, the germ that if they claimed to kill, and didn't, would infect the customer's brains and make them file a class action.

balky12 · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:45

It's a bit like contraception. They stick with the 99% because 'just in case'.

Caseh · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:47

DAIR said:
Okay. So they can kill 100% of all known germs?

They could, but in the large majority of cases that wouldn't be a good thing. We need germs to stick around.

TwsT · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:49

well yeah it's pretty obvious that it is a clause because nothing is certain.

In 1998, an American microbiologist worked out that the number of bacteria on Earth at that time was five million trillion trillion

DAIR · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:50

But to go as far to say 99%. Rather bold isn't it?

Mat · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:52

It's pretty much as high as you can go without opening yourself up to potential law suits. If you say "Kills 95%!!!", your next competitor will just say "Kills 96%!!!", which is obviously better.

StriderX · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:52

These products using that as an advert is pointless, you create a biased ecosystem that makes no sense in the real world.

It's bad enough we have the imminent collapse of antibiotics, we don't need peoples immune response to be wet towels aswell.

Tuppy_Glossop · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:53

In fact, given they don't know exactly how many types are present and how many of each type, they don't know what 100% is and therefore can't honestly claim to kill 99%.

Freakbro · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:53

[factoid]Your body is only made up of 10% human cells (by number) the other 90% is bacterial cells[/factoid]

joeyjojo · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:53

Gilly said:
They can't say 100% solely on the basis that by killing 99% of them they're ensuring there's always going to be one that they create that is resistant

This.

This kind of "disinfectant" is pretty pointless and just appeals to ignorance. The microbes left are the resistant ones which and then are encouraged to thrive.

TwsT · 1 Dec 2015 at 13:54

well if you're prepared to prove beyond all doubt that it's not 99% you go for it. Whilst I agree with the sentiment of the thread 1% is a moot point when there are so many.