30 replies to this topic

[salam]

Dear All,

Pls help me by posting some personal hygiene posters or presentations regarding the importance of personal hygiene in food industry.



Thanks and Regards

Salam

[Abdul Qudoos]

Please find as attachment, Is this sufficient or do let us know the exact requirement, what kind of personal hygiene posters?

Attached Files

•  NOTICE01.gif   14.68KB   290 downloads
•  Correct removal of gloves.jpg   42.99KB   298 downloads
•  Hygiene posters.doc   269.5KB   506 downloads

[Inesa]

Dear Salam,

I have my own presentation which I prepared for the Hygiene and Sanitation course exam this year(part "Personal hygiene"). I used it as a tool for my speech as I had only 10min to talk about this very broad topic. It's not some professional masterpiece, but It might give you some ideas if you'll decide to make your own presentation...

Best regards from Inesa

p.s. Last slides Discussion and Conclusion is something that I came up with by myself. Conclusion was something fast I did just for having a "Conclusion". In this topic could be probably 100 conclusions so I just wrote some quickly. Hate conclusions

Change: I see 107 downloads of my presentation It would be nice to know who is using it, if it was useful, if there were mistakes etc. Therefore You're welcome to write personally to me and I will send it to You

Edited by Inesa, 09 January 2011 - 02:39 PM.

[tsmith7858]

Dear All,

Pls help me by posting some personal hygiene posters or presentations regarding the importance of personal hygiene in food industry.



Thanks and Regards

Salam

Go to AIBONLINE.ORG. They have many posters available for hygiene and food safety.

[hygienic]

Dear Salam,

I have my own presentation which I prepared for the Hygiene and Sanitation course exam this year(part "Personal hygiene"). I used it as a tool for my speech as I had only 10min to talk about this very broad topic. It's not some professional masterpiece, but It might give you some ideas if you'll decide to make your own presentation...

Best regards from Inesa

p.s. Last slides Discussion and Conclusion is something that I came up with by myself. Conclusion was something fast I did just for having a "Conclusion". In this topic could be probably 100 conclusions so I just wrote some quickly. Hate conclusions

Dear Inesa:

very interested , more than nice , thanks alot or your effort .

Regards
Hygienic

[Inesa]

Dear hygienic,

You're welcome

I forgot to notice previously about Staphylococcus aureus. AFAIK it can be found in both resident skin micro flora and transient. I didn't add it both places due to lack of space on the slide.
I know my slides are overloaded and normally no one put so much text on slides, but this was to make my talking easier, so its ok.

If you have any questions regarding what's on the slides or more info I will try to explain some of the things deeper based on what literature I've read.

I wonder what Charles C would say about it. I'm afraid

Edited by Inesa, 27 December 2010 - 06:19 PM.

[salam]

Please find as attachment, Is this sufficient or do let us know the exact requirement, what kind of personal hygiene posters?

Thanks for your posters and if you have posters regarding Horrible habits while handling with food, then pls... post it



With Regards

Salam

[salam]

Dear Salam,

I have my own presentation which I prepared for the Hygiene and Sanitation course exam this year(part "Personal hygiene"). I used it as a tool for my speech as I had only 10min to talk about this very broad topic. It's not some professional masterpiece, but It might give you some ideas if you'll decide to make your own presentation...

Best regards from Inesa

p.s. Last slides Discussion and Conclusion is something that I came up with by myself. Conclusion was something fast I did just for having a "Conclusion". In this topic could be probably 100 conclusions so I just wrote some quickly. Hate conclusions

Dear Inesa

Thank you very much for this presentation. This is what I Expect , Now I modify this presentaion in my language , so it is easy to present to our food handlers

With Regards

Salam

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

Very smooth / professional. 10min, really?

Assumes a considerably tech-savvy population I think. As in Denmark no doubt ?
Do people routinely use (handrubbing) alcohol in food factories ? Never seen so far.
Looks like Denmark has a health proverb about (green) apples also
The generality of 3rd World comment in pic.15 rather questionable IMO.
Do people anywhere actually turn taps on using a cloth as per the picture ?. Have never seen this done yet, eg where does the cloth come from? Sensor/Foot/knee-operated more certain but probably also require more maintenance.
Debatable that L.monocytogenes is (relatively) easily destroyed by heat (pic. 23)

Overall very nice.

Rgds / Charles.C

Added - one more particularly nasty bacterium might have justifiably been included in the (individual) survey - E.coli O157

[Inesa]

Dear Inesa,
Very smooth / professional. 10min, really?

Assumes a considerably tech-savvy population I think. As in Denmark no doubt ?
Do people routinely use (handrubbing) alcohol in food factories ? Never seen so far.
Looks like Denmark has a health proverb about (green) apples also
The generality of 3rd World comment in pic.15 rather questionable IMO.
Do people anywhere actually turn taps on using a cloth as per the picture ?. Have never seen this done yet, eg where does the cloth come from? Sensor/Foot/knee-operated more certain but probably also require more maintenance.

Dear Charles.C,
Thanks for finding time to look at my slides and comment them
10min was a crazy short time and had to fly through the slides quickly. Actually it was too much info on them for such short time, but I'm glad to have them so detailed and I still see some things need to be fixed and add the E.coli.

About hand sanitizing, the sources I've been reading mentioned mostly alcohol (60-70%) based hand rubs. I don't think it's a requirement to have them I can't find a very good article about handwashing in my pc , but there is possible to find info in google:
http://www.ofac.org/...r_factsheet.pdf

Thanks for noticing my comments about 3rdWorld. Actually it was a longer sentence and I made it short last moment. The original was: "Most of 3rd World countries have poor personal hygiene procedures and normally handwashing with soap is kept as a luxuriousness. People are aware of handwashing importance and especially during outbreaks". Here I mean places with high level of poverty. These comments I made after running quickly through this research
 HandHygiene7.pdf   160.22KB   398 downloads


The picture about handwashing steps: After my imagination it could be a piece of paper you take to close taps and avoid contaminating hands again. And then you dry hands with another piece of paper

Best regards

Edited by Inesa, 29 December 2010 - 09:41 AM.

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

Thks for the links. Interesting (and sometimes painful) reading.

IMO can find good and poor hygiene everywhere for a variety of reasons. No argument that poverty reduces available options (for everything!) but ignorance is ubiquitous (and sometimes culpable). Hv visited factories for 2 of countries on yr link's list. From very small sample, encountered everything from superb hygienic standard to "best forgotten". 80 pct were acceptable.

My main experience is seafood, hv met triclosan frequently but never chlorhexidine / alcohol. Maybe it also depends on product category / geography. (to be honest I thought their use was restricted to hospitals and hotels [?]). however, I couldn't (yet) find any links to specific bans on yr menu list **sadness**. I think yr link is also not factory related ?

There was a reference (yours?) I saw recently here to a published M/F (secret) study of handwashing activities post-toilet in a developed country. Around 60-70pct positive from memory. Acceptable ?

In seafood factory arena, hand operated taps are, I think, specifically forbidden for non-EC importers into EC. No exceptions. Simplest solution as usual . Within the EC itself hopefully same ??

Last suggestion is highly inventive albeit wasting paper (unless shared?). Would like to see some live video.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Inesa]

My main experience is seafood, hv met triclosan frequently but never chlorhexidine / alcohol.

If you look at page 7: http://www.food.gov....n></span><br />
All literature I've read about hand sanitizing says about minimum 60% alcohol required to kill most pathogenic bacteria and viruses. I'm absolutely sure about that. I'll be back with some good paper I'll try to find it.

Last suggestion is highly inventive albeit wasting paper (unless shared?). Would like to see some live video.

I do it always when I go to a public toilet, f.ex., at my university :)

[Inesa]

And here is a very good paper about hand hygiene :

http://www.nxtbook.c...php?startid=568

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

Useful links, especially 2nd one.

it seems the situation for alcohol based sanitizers / disinfectants in food production has variable degrees of (opinioned) benefit / acceptance. Predictable I guess in view of the range of opinions regarding handwashing technique.

I noted yr previous posted link reported that use was beneficial and acceptable for food handlers in Canada. This Canadian one is negative –

http://www.foodsafet...ail.aspx?id=373

The US Food Code (2005) seems somewhat inconclusive -

2-301.16 Hand Antiseptics.

(A) A hand antiseptic used as a topical application, a hand antiseptic solution used as a hand dip, or a hand antiseptic soap shall:

(1) Comply with one of the following:

(a) Be an APPROVED drug that is listed in the FDA publication Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations as an APPROVED drug based on safety and effectiveness; or

(b) Have active antimicrobial ingredients that are listed in the FDA monograph for OTC Health-Care Antiseptic Drug Products as an antiseptic handwash, and

(2) Comply with one of the following:

(a) Have components that are exempted from the requirement of being listed in federal FOOD ADDITIVE regulations as specified in 21 CFR 170.39 - Threshold of regulation for substances used in food-contact articles; or

(b) Comply with and be listed in:

(i) 21 CFR 178 - Indirect Food Additives: Adjuvants, Production Aids, and Sanitizers as regulated for use as a FOOD ADDITIVE with conditions of safe use, or

(ii) 21 CFR 182 - Substances Generally Recognized as Safe, 21 CFR 184 - Direct Food Substances Affirmed as Generally Recognized as Safe, or 21 CFR 186 - Indirect Food Substances Affirmed as Generally Recognized as Safe for use in contact with food, and

(3) Be applied only to hands that are cleaned as specified under 2-301.12.

(B) If a hand antiseptic or a hand antiseptic solution used as a hand dip does not meet the criteria specified under Subparagraph (A)(2) of this section, use shall be:

(1) Followed by thorough hand rinsing in clean water before hand contact with FOOD or by the use of gloves; or
(2) Limited to situations that involve no direct contact with FOOD by the bare hands.

© A hand antiseptic solution used as a hand dip shall be maintained clean and at a strength equivalent to at least 100 MG/L chlorine.

the above text is interpreted here as negative -

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fy732

This FDA document (updated to 2009) seems to also have a negative opinion -

http://www.fda.gov/F...s/ucm135577.htm

The UK seems acceptable, see section B9.6;, B1.0-B1.3 of UK1 attachment below . (also contains a quite neat although small picture of handwashing sequence [B1.3])

The second (UK2) attachment below, I think, chronicles the detailed expert discussion which preceded the UK1 document [added later - my error the 2 documents are actually unrelated, see subsequent post],. If you try searching “alcohol” can see that the opinion was not particularly enthusiastic on benefit of alcohol based gels compared to normal soap usage.

 UK1 - Infection Control Guidelines for Community Setting.pdf   2.92MB   97 downloads
 UK2 - fitnesstoworkresponse.pdf   223.84KB   108 downloads

I noticed the US Food Code also suggests yr paper wrapping / tap turning technique. Are you usually the only person in the room doing it ? Any strange looks ? Just curious. (Added - I hv to agree that on occasions, hv had to use toilets in certain locations where the overall conditions forced me not to touch anything if I could avoid it ! - the moral is to always carry tissue paper - and alcohol gel?] when travelling))

Rgds / Charles.C

[salam]

Dear inesa

Pls check this Data sheet of sanigel (Hand Sanitizer)...



 DATA SHEET HAND SANITISING GEL.pdf   615.51KB   141 downloads

[Inesa]

Dear Salam, thanks for data sheet

Dear Carles ,

thanks for all links. I found this from your UK2:

Section 7: Action to Take (Workers in a food handling area)
This section refers to the age old statement of 'Please wash hands with soap and warm water and only
using alcohol gels as best practice. However, there is a general move away from 'normal' soap to antibacterial
soap both in the household and throughout the food industry. In addition the use of alcohol based
sanitisers can lead to dermatitis and alcohol free hand gels are now preferred. I would therefore like the
guidelines changed to state that anti-bacterial soaps must be used with best practice being provision of
"anti-bacterial gels"

What do they mean by "best practice"?? I'm not sure I understand what best practice is

about "strange looks" and my hygienic ritual in the public toilet. I do it always in crowded toilets were people don't/"forget" use soap for washing hands and so on. Even if it's a "civilised toilet" and looks clean, but many different individuals are coming there, suffering diarrhoea, woman not using soap after changing their "always". . It's disgusting I just don't want to bring extra bugs to my kids, they get enough in kindergartens.. I don't care about what others think and look like.
Actually I'm that type that don't see/notice people around in the public place. It used to be typical situation many years ago: me and my 3 girlfriends go and talk. Suddenly they get quiet and after a second I hear: " did you see that guy!!!!???"
Me: "What guy??" Where??"


By the way Happy New year !

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

Thks yr comments.

After having a closer look, I realised that the UK2 “comments” upload is actually unrelated to the UK1 document. Sorry for that.

The UK2 comments doc. was related to a revision in 2008-9 of the original 1995 “fitness to work” / food handlers UK official doc.
The initial proposed draft for comments (as compiled in UK2) is uploaded below as UK3, you can compare the locations mentioned in UK2.
Eventually UK3 was modified as per the comments / notes of UK2 and finally issued in 2009 as UK4 below. (The result is still sort-of cool to "soap-additionals", (also see the "response" comment regarding "cost" to the UK2 suggestion from Chris Woodbridge)

I think the main objective was to present a “simply” worded hygiene document suitable for wide use with respect to food handlers as compared to the healthcare documents for (more?) specialised operators. Not an easy job.

Regarding yr query “Best practices”, I think this is intended to be exactly what the words say in the BP box. However UK3 actually used the word “can” and “addition” as qualifiers. The “qualifying” aspect has been considerably expanded in UK4 presumably due the comments in UK2. You will also see many other “best practices” boxes in UK3, 4.(The text response to Chris Woodbrige above also illustrates the "qualifying" aspect"). I think the BP Box idea is to emphasise / expand key points of the text as required.

As mentioned in my previous post, preferred handwashing options in healthcare / food handling applications seem to have rather diverged, at least in UK / USA. Can see another, healthcare, best practice box in UK5 below (eg slide24).

For perspective, UK6 is a 2008 large scale survey of infected–food-handler related incidents in UK last 10 years. Comments are also added. The results are quite revealing IMO (eg see pg18).

And to get back on topic if any other reader is still interested, hv added 2 documents with quite nice handwashing posters, UK 7 (see pg9) and WHO. Both contain nice simple terms like left dorsum.

 UK 3 - 2008 draft fitness to work - foodhandlers.pdf   81.78KB   101 downloads
 UK 4 - 2009 fitness to work (final) - fitnesstoworkguide09v3.pdf   121.39KB   79 downloads
 UK 5 - healthcare 2008 - ppt.ppt   485KB   87 downloads
 UK 6, 2008 - Infected food handlers - national guideline full text.pdf   316.9KB   94 downloads
 UK 7 healthcare 2005 - sussex_ICP.pdf   1.06MB   68 downloads
 WHO How_To_HandRub_Poster.pdf   426.21KB   158 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C

[Anne Z]

Dear Charles C

The WHO poster is missing the use of the tap. See Website WHO
And here is the older discussion about hand washing I started earlier My link it includes hand washing posters.

[Charles.C]

Dear AnneZ,

You’re absolutely right. The WHO caption was different also. The links I posted were supposedly examples of the standard 6-step “handrub” (I incorrectly classified it as “handwashing”). To be honest, my guess is that the majority of people (myself included) sort of follow the first 3 steps and then it gets a bit random? I also quite liked the rather simpler text of this picture -

 handwashing 0.png   217.66KB   140 downloads

The second link (healthcare) I previously posted had this associated text –

1. Ensure equipment required is available – water at the correct temperature, liquid soap, paper towels, bin with pedal operated lid.
2. Get water to correct temperature, not too hot or too cold.
3. Rinse hands before putting soap on –to not rinse soap away before use.
4. One squirt of soap – one should be sufficient unless hands are greasy.
5. Without putting hands underwater, perform six stage handwashing technique – to cover all areas of the hands. See “Six Stage Handwashing (?) Technique” on page 9. Should take 10-20 seconds.
6. Rinse hands thoroughly – remove all traces of soap.
7. Dry hands with paper towels – especially between fingers.
8. Dispose of towels into bin using foot pedal – lids can become contaminated.
9. Turn taps off – with elbows if elbow-operated taps or with a clean, dry paper towel.

Comments
2. is impractical in the general public case.
5. makes sense but is generally ignored IMEX. WHO apparently prefer 20-30sec for rubbing. (The overall time seemed unspecified?)
9. Elbow taps, never seen one of those. This text would require minimum 2 paper towels / person.

Actually, some food industries (1?) and health care establishments, eg hospitals, now ban/avoid public, hand-operated taps all together (but not the soap dispensers!). Seems like a highly logical step to me but most stores, restaurants that I hv been in obviously disagree (presumably public health departments also). And WHO too ?

I know this is a serious topic but I came across a few “lighter” pictures which also seemed worth posting.

 handwashing 1.png   173.68KB   154 downloads
 handwashing 2.png   272.34KB   134 downloads
 handwashing 3.png   222.63KB   118 downloads
 handwashing 4.png   97.3KB   92 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C

[Inesa]

9. Turn taps off – with elbows if elbow-operated taps or with a clean, dry paper towel.
9. Elbow taps, never seen one of those. This text would require minimum 2 paper towels / person.

Actually, some food industries (1?) and health care establishments, eg hospitals, now ban/avoid public, hand-operated taps all together (but not the soap dispensers!). Seems like a highly logical step to me but most stores, restaurants that I hv been in obviously disagree (presumably public health departments also). And WHO too ?

Dear Charles,
thanks for all your findings and comments.
I agree Hand-free operated taps is the best solution. The comment about the waste of paper is a bit negotiable.
What suggestion would you come up with, if you had to teach your employees and there were no hand-free water taps?

Imagine one blows his nose. He turns the tap on leaving some snot on it. Then wash hands and finally touch his own snot again turning the tap off . (if he doesn't use paper) So where is the result?
Maybe is better to use an extra single paper, when we think about the risks the snot causes and water being wasted? According poster suggestions, water is running during the whole washing process and still run when you finish and dry hands. And this is a thing a don't like. I hate watching water run without being used.

I know I'm nitpicking here. But I think water is more valuable than a piece of paper that could be recycled and give some cheap energy during recycling

Regards

p.s. soap dispensers are not being touched with clean hands.

Edited by Inesa, 01 January 2011 - 08:48 PM.

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

What suggestion would you come up with, if you had to teach your employees and there were no hand-free water taps?

I presume we are talking about control measures to avoid hand touching / cross-contaminating at the handwashing step.?

I would look for validation of (i) necessity (eg during closing the water tap / possible significances of various stages / times of day / efficiency of washroom cleaning attendant) in relation to people having contaminated hands (clothing?) on exiting the handwashing area (particularly if having used the toilet)? (ii) options in event of positive results from (i).
And I suppose it is logical to location-divide the evaluation data, eg perhaps 4-ways - food, unwrapped, retail/food production factory/non-food/ health-care/depending on the data (if any).

Do we have any data for (i) yet ?? And yes, I am passing the buck.

Sadly, the availability of recycling paper is by no means global.

Rgds / Charles.C

Added- As a starter, here are a few, data unvalidated, thoughts –

1. The strictest available options are probably as recommended in healthcare situations. (“intuitive” risk basis even if not specically validated). Additionally, there seems to be a fairly uniform set of guidelines between different locations. There are also many more publications on healthcare situations compared to food handling establisments (comment UK6 attachment, pg11).

2. Food handler specific references are variable compared to the scope of the healthcare lists ranging from close copies to reduced formats. Specific reasons for omissions are usually not given.

The above has some similarities with the results in the parallel thread on (General) Personal Hygiene.

As examples of (1,2) above for healthcare and food handling situations with respect to using a” towel to turn off [t3o] the water tap” –

t3o included - WHO (healthcare workers [HCW] oriented), CDC (HCW, see R2), SFBB/Catering,(FH pg28)
t3o not included – UK4 attachment (Food handling [FH]), CDC (“Basic” handwashing procedure see R1)
t3o optional – US Food Code (2005)(FH, see 2-301.12 [C])(inc.door handle also)
taps to be not hand operated – Tesco FMS,(FH, 8.15), McFoodies (FH pg3, see R3)(inc.soap dispenser also!), Hi-tm (FH, sec.12, see R4)

R1 - http://www.cdc.gov/h...tml#handwashing

R2 - http://www.cdc.gov/m...F/rr/rr5116.pdf

R3 - http://www.hazardhub...iene_100410.pdf

R4 - http://www.hi-tm.com...dwash-FL99.html
(also mentions that tap handles hv not been shown to be a critical issue, ie probably no data)

Haven’t seen one source of data yet to enable a comment.
Almost nobody seems to mention cleaning items like water taps. (SFBB one exception). This would surely minimise any t3o related risk.

My conclusion so far – inconclusive.

[Inesa]

R4 - http://www.hi-tm.com...dwash-FL99.html
(also mentions that tap handles hv not been shown to be a critical issue, ie probably no data)

Dear Charles,

i see... there are so many different opinions and advices that gives me a headache and make me confused.
I do not wonder wonder why in R4 tap handles are not critical issue. F.example, here I found this in chapter 11 "Explanation":

Hand washing is not critical because it is not probable that there are >10 highly infective pathogens:
• After touching raw meat, egg shells, dirty plates, mouth, or garbage bags; blowing nose; touching skin, hair, or beard.

The last statement on this overhead relates to the old-fashioned idea that touching raw meat, egg shells, dirty plates, mouth, garbage bags, blowing the nose, or touching skin, hair, or beard are hazardous practices. A hamburger might contain 100 E. coli O157:H7 in a 100-gram hamburger. That is 1 per gram of hamburger. Touching the hamburger would result in picking up only a couple of E. coli--not an effective dose. Eggshells have less of a problem, because they are thoroughly washed and sanitized; there might be 1 Salmonella transferred. Dirty plates have never been shown to be a problem; the food was "clean" when it went to the customer. Through the research done on the common communion cup, it is apparent that mouth bacteria are not a food safety issue. Eating someone else's saliva does not represent a real hazard. It happens with the common cup in churches every Sunday. This means that the dish washing area is not a food safety concern. Garbage bags are full of spoilage microorganisms, but not hazards. Blowing the nose relates to S. aureus, which must multiply to a very high level and is not a hazard as it comes out of the nose. The same is true with touching hair, picking a pimple, etc. The organism must be given a chance to grow, which will not happen with the time and temperature controls that exist in the kitchen. In fact, the only critical food, again, is raw poultry in terms of cross-contamination.



yummy

Edited by Inesa, 03 January 2011 - 12:33 PM.

[Charles.C]

Dear Inesa,

Yes, I noticed that segment also. It is sort of praiseworthy that the document puts numbers / specific claims on the table however I suspect that some of the interpretations would be debated by other "Sanitation Experts".

To revert to yr original question -

Have not yet found any specific data-based studies of the "handwashing unit" other than the (limited) one referred above. In the meantime, here is a starting (hardly revolutionary) proposal -

Assuming that “no-hand” options are unavailable, it seems to me that in the case of a food production unit, the primary requirement remains for the Company to provide and maintain a satisfactorily clean handwashing system / environment within the general factory sanitation program, ie "Prevention is better than Cure" (English idiom ). The effectiveness of the relevant cleaning/sanitisation program will then be validated/verified via swabbing routines.

To put it another way, it seems logical to me that it is the Company’s responsibility to provide a suitable, sanitary, working environment. It is similarly their requirement to instruct employees how to properly act so as to use / maintain such an environment. And it is the employees' responsibility to respond / co-operate appropriately.
If the results of the swabbing procedures are unsatisfactory, the cause will have to be investigated and corrected (I know, it's easy to say , this is why corrective actions often reveal unexpected defects).

An example of an elementary statement of the concept is here –

http://www.hygieneex...nd-washing.html

Here is the same concept expanded (manouevred?) to a commercial, wide-scale, healthcare situation -

 Kimberley.pdf   87.79KB   152 downloads

It seems strange that, from memory, most typical food factory monitoring programs do not regularly include the specific location under discussion in swabbing programs. I guess the hand surface monitoring check is simpler to implement and is considered to represent a “personal” indicator of the net efficiency achieved. Maybe a slightly deeper probe is also of initial value ?

Use of gloves is also a significant side-aspect to this issue of course. Also not to forget the practice of many companies of installing a “back-up” glove dipping station at the access point into a processing area.

I have deliberately not ventured into the "general public location" aspect. So many operational variables, eg random users. The "prevention" factor surely zooms upwards.

Other people's viewpoints / experiences are also welcomed

Rgds / Charles.C

[Inesa]

Charles, Thanks for all analysis, it gives a lot of good stuff to think about.
I've made my own conclusion out of all this ocean of documents and opinions.
Relating to a simple hand washing and concerning faeces on fingertips, which might stay on water tap handles and re-contaminate hands, I would put hand sanitation step as a mandatory after each toilet visit. IMO even how clean facilities will be, if someone touch tap handle with faeces on fingers, it will become a big hazard.
And there will be no cleaning assistant winking with cloth after each employee's toilet visit.
Hand sanitation as a final step of all final steps in hand washing would probably ensure the satisfied hand cleanliness after toilet visit.
Sanitizers in the kitchen area are not so much necessary if hands are washed properly.

Regards

[kmasan]

Dear Sir
I am unable to download the pdf file which is containing personal hygien posters hence could you send it again?
Thank

Dear Inesa:

very interested , more than nice , thanks alot or your effort .

Regards
Hygienic