Carpet Sanitizer?

[getdusty]

What exactly is a "carpet sanitizer" that I see some carpet cleaners offer?

Thanks!

Dusty

 

[sweendogg]

application of disinfectant and/or sanitizing product that is aimed at killing different bacterias, viruses, and germs that regular cleaning solutions are not designed to. We can not disinfect a soft surface but we can sanitize it.

 

[juniorc82]

To disinfect means to remove around 99%of bacteria while sanitizing is defined as reducing by around 70%

 

[sweendogg]

yup what he said!

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

To legally "sanitize" any surface, the reduction results must show a bacterial reduction of at least 99.9% over the parallel control count within 5 minutes. http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/dis_tss_docs/dis-10.htm

Here we have Carpet Sanitizers mentioned specifically: http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/dis_tss_docs/dis-08.htm

Many people correctly assume that it is a lower threshold than disinfection and the even more stringent classification, sterilization, and they are right. But that low threshold for "sanitize" is a lot higher than people think.
"Disinfectants" range from efficacy requirement of 100% down to 99.999%, depending on branded use. Whether disinfectants for Use in Hospital or Medical Environments versus General Broad-Spectrum Disinfectants, versus Disinfectants with stated Limited Efficacy. Sterilants are 100% efficacy in I think all applications for which efficacy is reasoned.

To legally "sanitize" a porous surface like carpet is no small undertaking. First you have to have an EPA registered method, and requisite chemical, if such method calls for one. Second, the method must be performed only in the manner that has been registered. You can't use any disinfectant/sanitizer/sterilant, and certainly not one inconsistent with its labeling. You will find only a small subset of "sanitizers" chemical agents will have any porous surfaces listed, and scant few have carpet as one of them.

 

[caleb211]

We use australian tea tree

 

[juniorc82]

To legally "sanitize" any surface, the reduction results must show a bacterial reduction of at least 99.9% over the parallel control count within 5 minutes. http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/dis_tss_docs/dis-10.htm

Here we have Carpet Sanitizers mentioned specifically: http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/dis_tss_docs/dis-08.htm

Many people correctly assume that it is a lower threshold than disinfection and the even more stringent classification, sterilization, and they are right. But that low threshold for "sanitize" is a lot higher than people think.
"Disinfectants" range from efficacy requirement of 100% down to 99.999%, depending on branded use. Whether disinfectants for Use in Hospital or Medical Environments versus General Broad-Spectrum Disinfectants, versus Disinfectants with stated Limited Efficacy. Sterilants are 100% efficacy in I think all applications for which efficacy is reasoned.

To legally "sanitize" a porous surface like carpet is no small undertaking. First you have to have an EPA registered method, and requisite chemical, if such method calls for one. Second, the method must be performed only in the manner that has been registered. You can't use any disinfectant/sanitizer/sterilant, and certainly not one inconsistent with its labeling. You will find only a small subset of "sanitizers" chemical agents will have any porous surfaces listed, and scant few have carpet as one of them.

As I was taught in iicrc or what ever it is calling its self now courses, to sanitize merely means to bring a surface to an acceptable level of cleanliness usualy eliminating around 70% of bacteria. I don understand how a disinfectant can have a range that begins at 100% when ha would mean sterill. I dont think we as on site cleaners have the ability to achieve that or even 99% without having a totaly controlled cleaning environment

 

[Mardie]

In my area practically every hot water extractor offers FREE SANITIZING AND DEODOURIZER with every job. I guess that when you are a carpet cleaner you can just say anything as long as it sounds good ,or this magical ability must come from the education they got from clean trust. LOL

 

[HomeSydney]

Hello Lee,

Dry Tech can help you clean your mattress to eliminate dust mites and neutralize the allergens. Their mattress cleaning process is designed to thoroughly clean your mattress and effectively eliminate allergen problems.
Mattress Cleaning Sydney

Looking for end of lease cleaning services in Sydney. Dry Tech will deep clean the inside of cabinets, drawers, the oven, the refrigerator and cleaning of all baseboards, doors, closets, window sills and inside windows.
End Of Lease Cleaning

 

[Stingray]

We receive calls all the time for Carpet Sanitizer. It is my understanding that there is no product that can make the claim of sanitizing carpets available for use in the state of California. There is a company that claims they clean and sanitize carpet for their customers. I don't know why nobody has brought charges of false advertizing against them.

 

[Stingray]

We receive calls all the time for Carpet Sanitizer. It is my understanding that there is no product that can make the claim of sanitizing carpets available for use in the state of California. There is a company that claims they clean and sanitize carpet for their customers. I don't know why nobody has brought charges of false advertizing against them.

 

[sweendogg]

Carpet Sanitizing products:

http://www.prorestoreproducts.com/Conte ... x?cid=1157

http://www.prorestoreproducts.com/Conte ... x?cid=1160

Both EPA registerered for the intetended purpose of santizing and specifically labeled for soft surface such as carpets, upholstery, draps, mattresses, rugs.. etc.

 

[sweendogg]

And for you Californians

http://www.prorestoreproducts.com/Conte ... x?cid=1191

still will sanitize per label directions and epa registered. At least I can't find it on the band list of products

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

And for you Californians

http://www.prorestoreproducts.com/Conte ... x?cid=1191

still will sanitize per label directions and epa registered. At least I can't find it on the band list of products

Cal EPA, and California Department of Pesticide Regulation do not list banned products. They only list approved products, and expired approved products. The product must be approved for carpet cleaning, and say so on an approved label. Approved labels only are usable if every claim has been certified by an approved independent laboratory, and application (along with a check) is made to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Then, these label directions will detail the specificity under which claims for application may be performed.

Yes, and the manufacturer makes the proposed label, according to the claims that they intend to submit and prove.

That product is not approved for carpet sanitizing in CA, per se. (exception:water damage).

A product called Steri Fab is approved for post application on typical cleaned carpet. However, the flammability of the product has some safety concerns for me.

The question then becomes, are you going to use the Microban product consistent with labeling, and classify a normal cleaning as water damage?

 

[Brian H]

How about just saying you will be applying a disinfectant or sanitizer to the carpet? Then there is no claim about disinfecting or sanitizing!!

 

[idreadnought]

For one very few companies are ever sued for false advertising. Second the wording makes a huge difference. Applying a sanitizer and sanitizing are very different.

What I would like to find, and micro ban doesn't have it. Is a post sanitizer that I could spray for cheap that didn't have cleaning agents in it. I don't want to spray a product down that will then attract soil and make the carpet get dirty faster.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

How about just saying you will be applying a disinfectant or sanitizer to the carpet? Then there is no claim about disinfecting or sanitizing!!

That used to be a gray area. In fact, another grey area is the situation where a disinfectant chemical is packaged using labeling only indicating usage as a deodorizer.

However, the scenario that you bring up has been cleared up. Since it is a violation of law to use a pesticide (disinfectant/sanitizer/sterilant/antimicrobial), inconsistent with its labeling, then it follows that if you are NOT using it for a usage that is iterated on the labeling, you would also be in violation of law.

The second grey area that I mention has been talked about by the EPA director, but no action that I am aware of has been made. The problem of many products having legitimate primary and secondary usages, "having nothing to do with antimicrobial activity" is the stumbling block.

 

[sweendogg]

Shaun extended label:

Special instructions For Cleaning / Sanitizing Carpet Against Odor Causing Bacteria: Use this product in industrial and institutional areas such as
the manufacturer of the cleaning equipment. After using the product, set the carpet pile and protect the carpet from furniture legs and bases while drying.
Do not over-wet. If applied to stain resistant nylon carpet, apply a fabric protector according to the manufacturer’s directions

While you can't claim to kill virusus or fungicides.. it is more than just a use for water damage loss.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

Shaun extended label:

Special instructions For Cleaning / Sanitizing Carpet Against Odor Causing Bacteria: Use this product in industrial and institutional areas such as
the manufacturer of the cleaning equipment. After using the product, set the carpet pile and protect the carpet from furniture legs and bases while drying.
Do not over-wet. If applied to stain resistant nylon carpet, apply a fabric protector according to the manufacturer’s directions

While you can't claim to kill virusus or fungicides.. it is more than just a use for water damage loss.

That portion of the directions appears to me to be under the heading of usage as outlined for Water Damage. On the primary label, it is more clear, since we have a heading (specifying water damage) in all capital letters, and the verbiage that you cite is under a subheading, indicating that the context of the heading still applies.

However, it is less clear on the extended label (WTF?). The "paragraph" you have extracted is set off from the heading in another paragraph, implying some latitude. But if we take it alone, and apart, we are left with no independent dilution/ready to use statement.

I would say you definitely have a case to be made that the product is suitable for the application you so indicate. It is interesting that it permits an onus of latitude on the manufacturer of the cleaning equipment.

I go back to the Steri Fab case. It is approved in CA for Carpet Sanitization as a post spray. When used as directed over large areas, the room can be made to be a real fire hazard. Yet according to California's antimicrobial authority, it seems little concern to make it known on the product label. We are left with serious inconsistencies that are approved, and then told that we ourselves are never to be inconsistent.

 

[sweendogg]

Agreed too much latitude!

 

[Jimmy L]

I use the prochem's carpet sanitizer for bonnet cleaning sometimes.

 

[Ron Werner]

Application of a sanitizer/disinfectant with the "intent" to san/disinf but you could say you cannot achieve 100%.

From my microbiology class you can achieve some level of sanitization by the physical removal of micro-organisms, ie in the "process" of cleaning. As Steve Swan used to say, clean it and dry it.