Why (some) women don't scrub up as well as men

Jeremy Laurance
Tuesday 14 October 2008 19:00 EDT
Comments
(PA)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

In matters of personal hygiene, it is men who are viewed as the grimy sex while women strive to keep them scrubbed. But a survey has revealed that female cleanliness is a myth. Women were up to three times more likely to have dirty hands than men.

The difference between the sexes was starkest in London, where 21 per cent of women were carrying faecal bacteria on their hands, compared with 6 per cent of men. Women in Birmingham and Cardiff also outranked men for bacterial contamination, but in the north – Newcastle and Liverpool – stereotypes reasserted themselves and men had the filthiest hands.

The Dirty Hands study was conducted to highlight poor hygiene habits as part of the first Global Handwashing Day today. Commuters' at five train stations were swab-tested for bacteria. The results, analysed by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical medicine, also revealed a north-south divide. Commuters in Newcastle were up to three times more likely than those in London to have the bacteria on their hands – 44 per cent versus 13 per cent. More than a third in Liverpool were contaminated, compared to less than a quarter in Birmingham and Cardiff.

The bacteria were all from the gut and do not necessarily cause disease, although they indicate that hands have not been washed properly.

Val Curtis, director of the Hygiene Centre at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: "We were flabbergasted so many people had faecal bugs on their hands. If these people had been suffering from a diarrhoeal disease, the potential for it to be passed round would be greatly increased by their failure to wash their hands after going to the toilet."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in