Would you wash at 20?

[washer111]

I (nor anyone else) ever made any statement that suggested someone would die from cold water washing. I've merely suggested my own experiences towards the debacle. 

 

Whilst I'm unsure about Scientific Evidence to suggest that warm washing is better, personal experience (whilst not always believed, as we've seen) seems to reign, and provide opinion as to why/why not. I stated my reasons above and won't go into them again. I also cited the fact that one of the Australian Health Departments recommends washing your hands for at least 20 seconds, with warm water to remove germs. At work, our "Wash your Hands" posters by Jasol say exactly the same thing - so it seems obvious warm/hot water is more effective. You also have to look at health regulations: Dishes in commercial machines must be rinsed at 82ºC (180ºF), bedding from hospitals is "Boil washed." This all points to killing germs and preventing their spread. 

 

I've admitted that cold water washing might work, but if you've got stone cold water like in the UK or colder parts of the US or Australia, you will have to use significantly more detergent as Dj-gabriele suggested. This negates any benefit to your "Carbon Footprint," power-bill and so on, as a burden on the environment. I also mentioned some washers increase the wash time for Washes colder than a certain temperature (Our Miele being a prime example).  

 

[rapunzel]

Why would the burden to the environment be any worse? Most (Australian) detergents are formulated to work in cold, warm and hot water and they are biodegradable. It isn't necessary to add oxygen or chlorine bleach, or any other additives - that is purely the choice of the consumer and not specifically necessitated by cold water washing.

Laundry additives are also sold to European housewives with the promise of a cleaner and brighter wash. That suggests washing laundry at various temperatures, using only one detergent, is not yielding the desired results for everyone?

Cold water washing, millions of people do it all over the world and it works for them, or they wouldn't be doing it. They are no dirtier or sicker than people who wash their clothes at 5 or 6 specific temperatures. There is no scientific evidence that proves domestic cold water washing to cause the spread of communicable diseases or increases the incidents of flus and colds.

 

[ronhic]

Last Choice test

I've reproduced the test results for OMO Ultimate front loader detergent below. This was done earlier this year and shows the difference with identical test loads done in the same machine, but with one as a warm and one as a 'cold' wash.

Warm water IS more effective at removing every stain they test.

Choice states:

'Dirt - Using a spectrophotometer, which measures how much light reflects off the swatches after filtering out any effects of optical brighteners, they measure how much dirt is removed. These readings are more accurate than the human eye – differences of about 6% are noticeable.'

It'd be interesting to see the results for 60c.

Tested in: Front loader

Warm (40c) Cold (20c)
Overall score(%) 81 76
General soil removal (%)87 81
Natural oils (%) 66 63
Rice Starch (%) 81 77
Vegetable oil (%) 88 86
Grass (%) 79 75
Motor oil (%) 66 61

 

[rapunzel]

"differences of about 6% are noticeable.' "

When you have eyes like spectrophotometers you are probably right. In some instances yes; but mostly not really. 6% out of a 100% range is hair-splitting for the sake of splitting hairs. What is the ultimate point of this conversation than to say that people who do or don't do this or that, aren't or are that or the other.

To me the above results look pretty close and fairly convincing that cold water washing is more than adequate.

 

[dj-gabriele]

It'd be interesting to see the results for 60c.

I'd love to!

 

[mrboilwash]

Could someone please provide scientific evidence to support or dispute the assertions in this thread?

 

Here you go! Could not find the original thread anymore, but finally found the study on the net.

http://www.sifo.no/files/file48506_fagrapport2003-1.pdf

 

[ronhic]

Olav

Differences of 6% can be seen with the eye, not just with the tool used.

I'm not suggesting that many people are not happy with the results they get from cold water washing or implying they are 'dirty' or otherwise. But, if I can see the difference in performance without need of special tools and based on a single wash, then I would suggest that after repeated wear/wash/wear/wash etc, there will be a noticable difference on how items would look.

In isolation, they would probably appear fine. However, when placed side by side, I'd suggest you would easily pick the one that isn't actually as clean as the other.

 

[rapunzel]

This sums it up

• In the present research, the effect of the washing machine type has not
been taken into account. As such influence is likely, initiating research on
this aspect is recommended.

• The results of this research for the Spanish situation show that even at low
wash temperatures an appropriate level of cleaning and hygiene can be
achieved. It could prove rewarding to further investigate the Spanish situation

"On clean, dry laundry the Total Plate
Count is considerably lower. Samples taken from clean laundry in a cupboard
show that the average count is about log 2.5 CFU /4.7cm2. Drying and ironing
seem to have a positive effect on the amount of micro-organisms. One of the
most interesting findings is that washing seems to spread micro-organisms
rather than removing them. Sterile samples were very often contaminated with
all kinds of bacteria. But the sterile samples are not the only indication of
cross-contamination and the spreading of micro-organisms. Spreading is also
found among laundry items. For example, Enterobacteriaceae were found
only on the unwashed diaper and dishcloth, but all other items were contaminated
after washing.
Another interesting outcome of this research is the increase in hygienic quality
of the laundry items achieved by adding an extra rinse to the washing
process. This finding emerged when verifying the Spanish results. The Spanish
hygiene level seems to be systematically higher than in the other European
countries."

Indirectly the research does touch on the issue of reduced water use in front loaders and that higher wash temperatures may be necessary to compensate for less effective rinsing. Then again, home laundering is not about sterilizing clothes to hospital standard.

 

[dj-gabriele]

The Spanish hygiene level seems to be systematically higher

To me it has to do with the fact that "cold" water in Spain can be like in the south of Italy, when "cold" water in summer is at 35°C coming from the faucet.
Was the temperature of the incoming water sampled in the test?

 

[rapunzel]

"cold water in summer is at 35°C "

That's not what the research states.

 

[henene4]

@rapunzel:
On your points:
-type of washer: Yeah, your right on that point. A traditionla toploader will handl a cold wash better than a frontloader. But only because of the extremly high usage of water. Like our German Panasonic NA148VG4 uses only 50 l/76 l (ECO/normal) for a wash with 8kg. A conventional USA toploader uses az leats 130 l of water. So there is just more water for all kind of dirt and other stuff to be solved and washed away.
-drying and ironing: Yes, that has of course effects on the number of bacteria and germs of all kind. But, These things have to be used. In Germany, only 3/4 of all washers have a dryer beside it, and only a small amount of clothing is dried ( because of the even higher energy usage than a hot wash and the fact that most items are just not dryer-proofed).
But you have to mention dj-gabriele's point. If your "cold" water is infact already that warm, you got different effects than in a 10° german winter faucet.

 

[DADoES]

 
Some times of the year I couldn't wash in 20°C water unless I refrigerated it first for a while.  Tap cold at the moment is running 31°C.

 

[rapunzel]

They are not my points henene. I've copied that info from the research papaer.

The Spanish cold water wash temperature, referred to in the paper, is 15 degrees, not 35.

 

[rapunzel]

About the notion that top loaders use 'extremely' large amounte of water - that is nothing more than a moot point. On the basis of that argument it would then also be fair to say that modern front loaders and other high efficiency machines are performing less than optimal due to insufficient water use. In the past, European front loaders used up to 160 liters or more per cycle, to wash and rinse 4.5 to 5 kg of laundry.

 

[mrboilwash]

This would sum it up better for me

"Hygienic quality of washing at lower temperatures
The results show that the hygienic quality of the washing processes at low
temperatures (i.e. 15°C and 30°C) leaves something to be desired. A small
reduction of the Total Plate Count is achieved only in some cases. The contamination
level after washing is still relatively high. A significant temperature
effect on the hygienic quality is found (ANOVA-One Way, á = 0.05):
from a hygienic point of view a 30°C washing process is better than a 15°C
washing process. There is no effect of the bleaching agent on the hygienic
quality. The hygienic properties of the detergents in the dosages used have the
same level in the four European countries. No significant differences were
found at 15°C and at 30°C."

"A very general finding in this research is that in daily laundering, the cleaning
properties expressed as washing efficiency are worse at lower temperatures.
Lower temperatures mean lower hygiene levels. This is due to reduced germ
elimination combined with increased cross-contamination."

"The boil wash laundering process, which was used traditionally, showed appropriate
cleaning properties combined with excellent hygiene efficacy. As
mentioned in the previous sections, lower wash temperatures result in lower
hygienic quality. Thus it may be assumed that for domestic textile laundering
the measures to reduce energy consumption may have stressed the conditions
for proper hygiene."

But, as with any studys or statistics one is always free to pick out only the parts that suit oneself *LOL*

I wonder if in Spain might be higher concentations of chlorine in the tab water as an explanation for the different results besides the high sudsing detergents and possible extra rinses.

I also found it little surprising about liquid detergents` rinse efficiancy. We all know that liquids have a much lower pH when they contain enzymes than any heavy duty powder. So of course the risidual alkalinity test shows better results for the liquids...

 

[maytagbear]

I washed at 20-

had to, because at 20, I was at university in the halls of residence.

I even washed at 11, to relieve my hardworking mother of a big task she found sometimes burdensome.

Contact time, activity, temperature, and chemicals all have to be balanced for a good wash. Lee McMichael/Mac said it, Our darling Laundress says it, and I believe it. That should settle things.

Lawrence/Maytagbear

 

[rapunzel]

Don't come the raw prawn with me...

...and then LOL me.

If I picked out the parts that I liked best, what did you do? Just like you, I cut and pasted part of the report's summation without altering the words. It's there for everyone to read and draw their own conclusions.

 

[mrboilwash]

No offence intended at all !

It was exactly my point that everyone draws their own conclusions by reading what they want to see and overlooking what they don`t like. I didn`t say I was better than anyone else in this perspective.
Again no need to feel attacked.

 

[henene4]

@rapunzel: You just cant compare these washers with todays ones. But if you say that these are not your points, why do you say we have to depend on the washer type? And on, after i took my statement, you again say that we dont have to take the type of washer into view because there were washers 40 years ago which used even more water. We are talking about today. Washers made 40 years ago are a moot point, too. Both US and EU washers washed at higher temperatures 40 years ago, but the amount of water AND the temperature was reduced over time in the EU, but US still common type of traditional toploader still uses the same amount of water. And on, when did I say that EU has higher hygenic standards that the US? And as you told mrboilwash, everyone can draw their own conclusions.
And now a fact: YOU told BY YOURSELF: Extra rinses give better hygenic results. An extra rinse uses more water to solve all kind of bacteria and rinse it away. So why is it a moot point to say US toploaders use more than twice as much water? And again, espacily becaus EU frontloaders use lower amounts of water, you need a higher temp OR more chemicals OR longer washtimes to get the same cleaning results.

 

[pierreandreply4]

washers depending on where they are made are diffrent

rapunzel i have read the article seems that article dates from 2003 not all washers are made the same each brands are unique and if you look at us top load washer not all washers have an extra rinse option me in my case i had a set like this from 1993 to 2004 it was a direct drive washer and i did not have an extra rinse option and washing machines with years the model changes so in a way you might have what is top of the notch in your brand of washer for the current 2012 2013 years of production but that do not mean that next year the same washer you have same model will be its like the us canadiens washers if you look at the top load models of today the temp is dumb down like what was a true hot water before the changes in energy star qualification might be warm today warm water on today might be cool water and there auto cold with the possibilaty of hot water adding to disolve detergent and there tap cold for true cold water wash.