Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday September 06 2021, @10:40PM   Printer-friendly

Long-Lasting Disinfectant Protects Against Viruses for Up to 7 Days – Promises To Help Fight Pandemics:

UCF researchers have developed a nanoparticle-based disinfectant that can continuously kill viruses on a surface for up to seven days – a discovery that could be a powerful weapon against COVID-19 and other emerging pathogenic viruses.

The findings, by a multidisciplinary team of the university's virus and engineering experts and the leader of an Orlando technology firm, were published this week in ACS Nano, a journal of the American Chemical Society.

Christina Drake '07PhD, founder of Kismet Technologies, was inspired to develop the disinfectant after making a trip to the grocery store in the early days of the pandemic. There she saw a worker spraying disinfectant on a refrigerator handle, then wiping off the spray immediately.

"Initially my thought was to develop a fast-acting disinfectant," she says, "but we spoke to consumers, such as doctors and dentists, to find out what they really wanted from a disinfectant. What mattered the most to them was something long-lasting that would continue to disinfect high-touch areas like doorhandles and floors long after application."

Drake partnered with Sudipta Seal, a UCF materials engineer and nanoscience expert, and Griff Parks, a College of Medicine virologist who is also associate dean of research and director of the Burnett School of Biomedical Sciences. With funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation, Kismet Tech and the Florida High Tech Corridor, the researchers created a nanoparticle-engineered disinfectant.

Its active ingredient is an engineered nanostructure called cerium oxide, which is known for its regenerative antioxidant properties. The cerium oxide nanoparticles are modified with small amounts of silver to make them more potent against pathogens.

"It works both chemically and mechanically," says Seal, who has been studying nanotechnology for more than 20 years. "The nanoparticles emit electrons that oxidize the virus, rendering it inactive. Mechanically, they also attach themselves to the virus and rupture the surface, almost like popping a balloon."

Most disinfecting wipes or sprays will disinfect a surface within three to six minutes of application but have no residual effects. This means surfaces need to be wiped down repeatedly to stay clean from a number of viruses, like COVID-19. The nanoparticle formulation maintains its ability to inactivate microbes and continues to disinfect a surface for up to seven days after a single application.

Journal Reference:
Craig J. Neal, Candace R. Fox, Tamil Selvan Sakthivel, et al. Metal-Mediated Nanoscale Cerium Oxide Inactivates Human Coronavirus and Rhinovirus by Surface Disruption, ACS Nano (DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.1c04142)


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by fustakrakich on Monday September 06 2021, @10:49PM (8 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday September 06 2021, @10:49PM (#1175141) Journal

    Is this better than plain old copper [smithsonianmag.com]?

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday September 06 2021, @10:58PM (4 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 06 2021, @10:58PM (#1175147) Journal

      It's nanoparticles of a rare-earth** metal, so it is better. For some wallets.

      ---

      ** not really [wikipedia.org]. Looks like easily exploitable deposits are rare, tho.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:46AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:46AM (#1175207)

      It's motherfucking bleach. In the motherfucking lungs. Told you fucking liberal fake news fucks.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Tuesday September 07 2021, @06:23AM

      by driverless (4770) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @06:23AM (#1175239)

      Probably not, and since said continuously-killing nanoparticles can cross the blood/brain barrier you may end up continuously killing your neurons in a manner that you'd probably prefer them not to.

      I don't know whether this will be an actual issue or not, but I'd like to see data from in vivo testing rather than the current in vitro testing.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @04:31PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @04:31PM (#1175352)
      Yes because it's more easily patented?
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Opportunist on Monday September 06 2021, @10:53PM (8 children)

    by Opportunist (5545) on Monday September 06 2021, @10:53PM (#1175144)

    Within 10 days of this becoming available, we'll have a couple dead idiots who swallowed it.

    • (Score: 3, Redundant) by legont on Monday September 06 2021, @10:58PM (4 children)

      by legont (4179) on Monday September 06 2021, @10:58PM (#1175148)

      Within 10 years it will be causing cancer in California.

      --
      "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 07 2021, @01:59AM (3 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @01:59AM (#1175185)

        Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that the FDA pulled all support for hand sanitizers, saying they did more harm than good on balance?

        I'm all for "stopping the spread" but this nuke 'em all approach never works out as simply as the people throwing the germicides around think it will. Good bugs, bad bugs, kill a bunch, they all grow back - surprisingly quickly in most cases. Problem is: bad bugs are generally bad because they grow back faster than the good ones...

        --
        🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @02:57AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @02:57AM (#1175197)

          If I'm correct on what you're thinking, it was anti-bacterial hand soaps. Handsoap -- good, alcohol-based hand sanitizer -- good, anti-bacterial hand soap -- ineffective and risks encouraging anti-bacterial resistant bacterias.

        • (Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday September 07 2021, @04:06AM (1 child)

          by legont (4179) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @04:06AM (#1175217)

          I am more worried about nano part. Apparently, nano particles are more effective than their normal cousins. Would not they be similarly more effective at causing cancer?

          --
          "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 07 2021, @10:09AM

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @10:09AM (#1175264)

            AC was right, it was the hand soap that got quashed, though in my mind it is the habitual use that is bad more than the particular chemical.

            As for nano structures vs chemicals, I think the concern would be around the durability of the nano structures in the environment. If they are persistent like asbestos fibers or elemental lead, that amplifies the concern. If they obliterate structures like cell walls, that's not much of a cancer concern, but if they cause subtle damage to DNA then, yes.... Usually things like this do a little bit of everything, making their long term effects difficult to predict.

            --
            🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Monday September 06 2021, @11:00PM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 06 2021, @11:00PM (#1175150) Journal

      Doesn't work when ingested. I mean, it's not even toxic [wikipedia.org].
      Like bleach, it needs to be injected for a full effect.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by Opportunist on Tuesday September 07 2021, @07:16AM

        by Opportunist (5545) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @07:16AM (#1175243)

        Just leave it to those geniuses to come up with a way to poison themselves. Cerium oxide is also used in glass polish and tungsten welding electrodes for arc welding. I leave it to the reader to come up with new and exciting ways to kill yourself with those things.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 06 2021, @11:15PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 06 2021, @11:15PM (#1175157)

      Na Zdrowie!

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Barenflimski on Monday September 06 2021, @11:38PM (14 children)

    by Barenflimski (6836) on Monday September 06 2021, @11:38PM (#1175163)

    Not all viruses are bad. Many are beneficial. Most do absolutely nothing of consequence to anything.

    It would be one thing if this was only going to be used at a hospital. What we'll see is that it'll end up in every bar of soap and sanitizer made.

    While a pandemic might last 2-5 years, this stuff will be around on planet earth as another forever chemical, killing everything it comes into contact with.

    This is a short term gain. Ridding the world of viruses long term is a bad idea.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 06 2021, @11:43PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 06 2021, @11:43PM (#1175165)

      Most people don't have any understanding at all of biology, whether macro or micro. Viruses and bacteria might as well be demons and ghosts to the unwashed masses.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:11AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:11AM (#1175169)

      》 Not all viruses are bad. Many are beneficial. Most do absolutely nothing of consequence to anything.

      Same can be said about Muslims..

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:36AM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:36AM (#1175178)

      Worse, this is one of the ways that you get resistant strains of things.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:49AM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @12:49AM (#1175180)

        That depends on the mechanism of action.

        That is like saying using heat/steam to sterilise surgical tools will lead to resistant strains.

        There are many chemicals that use truly brutal destruction method. e.g. Chlorhexidine

        PS for the Pedants: YES, I know it is POSSIBLE for this to happen, but the odds are so tiny they can be safely ignored.

        • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:02AM (2 children)

          by HiThere (866) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:02AM (#1175199) Journal

          IIRC autoclaves did encourage the development of heat resistant bacteria. So they had to raise the minimum temperature. Still, in principle, get it hot enough and no carbon based life form can survive it.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @08:00PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @08:00PM (#1175495)

            Autoclaves don't just use heat. They use heat and pressure to crack open the bacterial spores.

            The autoclaves you are talking about must have been very ancient or badly made.

            The bacteria themselves do not survive that sort of heat.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 08 2021, @01:37AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 08 2021, @01:37AM (#1175705)

            The issue that lead to the higher minimum temperatures is that the expiramental evidence was that gravity autoclaves required higher temperatures to make up for the fact that the gas mixture has not been adequately purged of ambient air when used in practice.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 07 2021, @02:05AM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @02:05AM (#1175188)

      Ganges water for the win!

      --
      🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @05:22AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 07 2021, @05:22AM (#1175232)

        > Ganges water for the wine!
        FTFY. Well fermented, of course.

    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:00AM (4 children)

      by HiThere (866) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @03:00AM (#1175198) Journal

      Mmmm....viruses are always bad for their host. Some of them are useful to people, but that's just because they live on something we don't want to be too healthy. Lots of bacteria are helpful, but viruses alway depend on hijacking a host cell to produce more copies of themselves.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Moof123 on Tuesday September 07 2021, @05:55AM (1 child)

    by Moof123 (5927) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @05:55AM (#1175236)

    Riddle me this, thus far most everything has pointed to transmission through the air. Sanitizing surfaces is mostly for show against Covid. So how is this some in any way shape or form a “powerful weapon”?!

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Opportunist on Tuesday September 07 2021, @07:24AM

      by Opportunist (5545) on Tuesday September 07 2021, @07:24AM (#1175246)

      And this is one of the reasons I think this will be yet another fun and exciting chapter in the story about people trying any snakeoil to avoid doing what works against Covid. This story here doesn't claim to have any kind of function against the current problem with the coronavirus du jour. It says that it may help with future pandemics. Note the plural s at the end of that word.

      I do agree, though, the wording is kinda suboptimal. It will trigger a reaction by those that are unwilling or unable to do the read - comprehend - deduce - act chain of action, bypassing higher brain functions. Essentially, you have to wonder whether that's intentional to gain more attention.

(1)