You know those hot air hand dryers found in almost all public restrooms? I’ve never liked them to begin with. Time-consuming, don’t really dry your hands thoroughly—and now I discover that they throw a bunch of viruses into the air, particularly one of the newer designs called the Dyson:

Researchers have long known that warm hand dryers can launch bacteria into the air””compared to dabbing with paper towels, which unleashes virtually none. But new jet air dryers, made by Dyson, are significantly more problematic””they launch far more viruses into the air, which linger for longer periods of time and reach much farther distances, researchers recently reported in the Journal of Applied Microbiology. This is particularly concerning because viruses, unlike many infectious bacteria, can easily maintain their infectiousness in the air and on surfaces, and just a few viral particles can spark an infection.

Peachy keen.

Then again, what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, right? Doesn’t exposure to a “normal” amount of bacteria (not sure about viruses), particularly when young, increase our resistance and in particular decrease allergies?

Not only that, but you know those antibiotic soaps and washes that have become so popular in recent years? Just to show you how curmudgeonly I am, I go to great lengths to buy soap that doesn’t have them, because from the start I haven’t trusted them. I ordinarily wash my hands with regular soap in order to reduce colds and the like, and when I’m leaving a hospital or medical building I usually do take a shot at those antibiotic washes, but otherwise I steer clear of them.

And it turns out I might be wise to do so:

Aiello next considered the antibiotic soaps and wipes now used, in one form or another, by 75% of American households. Odds are that you use them. Go check your labels. Sadly, Aiello and colleagues found that antibiotic soaps and wipes with triclosan were no more likely than good old-fashioned soap to prevent gastrointestinal or respiratory illness. In Aiello’s words, “There was little evidence for an additional impact of new products, such as alcohol-based hand sanitizers or antibacterial soaps compared with nonantibacterial soaps, for reducing either gastrointestinal or respiratory infectious illness symptoms.”

For example, in a study Aiello reviewed that was conducted in Pakistan, gastrointestinal illnesses were reduced by half when people washed their hands with soap and by a little less than half when they washed their hands with antibiotic soap. What is worse, perhaps the most comprehensive study of the effectiveness of antibiotic and non-antibiotic soaps in the U.S., led by Elaine Larson at Columbia University (with Aiello as a coauthor), found that while for healthy hand washers there was no difference between the effects of the two, for chronically sick patients (those with asthma and diabetes, for example) antibiotic soaps were actually associated with increases in the frequencies of fevers, runny noses and coughs. In other words, antibiotic soaps appeared to have made those patients sicker. Let me say that again: Most people who use antibiotic soap are no healthier than those who use normal soap. AND those individuals who are chronically sick and use antibiotic soap appear to get SICKER.

Not only that, but take a look at this:

…[A] group of scientists recently made artificial drains clogged with bacteria (oh, the difficulties of science) and then subjected them to low and high doses of [one of the main ingredients in these antibacterial soaps] triclosan (similar to what happens when your detergent goes down the drain). Even at high concentrations, triclosan appears to have no effect on the number of bacterial cells in our drains. BUT, it does affect which species are found there. Triclosan kills “weak” bacteria but favors the tolerant, among them species of bacteria that eat triclosan. Yes, I said eat triclosan. Triclosan may also favor lineages of bacteria that are also resistant to the oral antibiotics used in hospitals and elsewhere, though how often and consistently is, as of yet, unclear.

Not good. No, not good, and pretty much what I suspected might happen from the start, when I first saw these products on the market.

But I also know—from many long years of involuntary observation—that the majority of people don’t even wash their hands after using the bathroom. And scientists back that up when they try to quantify it: “A study of nearly eight thousand individuals in five U.S. cities found almost half of the participants failed to wash their hands after going to the bathroom.”

Somehow, though, most of us manage to survive pretty well, until old age or some non-catchable disease gets us. We are a hardy bunch for the most part, at least nowadays when the plague and smallpox and many other traditional scourges of mankind have been mostly eradicated. That doesn’t mean something new couldn’t rise up—as the scaremonger media often likes to suggest is happening. Nor does it mean we shouldn’t wash our hands assiduously. We should.

Which reminds me of an old Jewish joke. It goes like this:

In the olden days, pharmacies often had soda counters too. An elderly woman walks into that kind of pharmacy and goes up to the pharmacist, and asks (best done with a Yiddish accent), “Do you test the pee here?” The pharmacist answers (best done with a generic American accent), “Yes, we do urine analysis here.” Then she asks, “And do you test the spit, too?” He answers, nodding, “Yes, we do sputum analysis.” Then she asks, “And how about the kaka? Do you test that, too?” He nods and solemnly says, “Yes, we do fecal analysis.”

She says, “Okay, then—vash your hands and make me a chocolate malt.”

ADDENDUM: And then there’s Sheldon: