Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Self Cleaning Mouse

ScuttleMonkey posted about 8 years ago | from the hypochondriacs-rejoice dept.

204

mikesd81 writes "LEWIS Wire is reporting on a self-cleaning mouse that disables the survival of bacteria with an auto-disinfecting surface. From the article: 'According to a recent survey from the University of Arizona, the average desk harbors 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat. Despite this, office workers rarely have time to clean their desktops frequently or thoroughly enough to be effective. As a result, the presence of microbes contributes to the spread of pneumonia, the flu, pink eye and strep throat, among other extremely contagious viruses.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmmm.... (0, Offtopic)

celardore (844933) | about 8 years ago | (#16212633)

I wonder if this has anything to do with the Mapping of mouse brains.... [slashdot.org]

Whats wrong with hygiene? (1)

mustafap (452510) | about 8 years ago | (#16212639)

If you don't clean the environment you occupy for 1/3rd of your day, then heck, you deserve to get sick.

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (4, Insightful)

montyzooooma (853414) | about 8 years ago | (#16212753)

If the average desk harbours 400% more bacteria than the average toilet seat wouldn't it have a helluva lot to do with the relative surface area of each.

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (2, Informative)

mazarin5 (309432) | about 8 years ago | (#16212961)

That's besides the fact that most toilet seats tend to be fairly clean. Bacteria just don't do well on cold porcelain; they like warm, wet places with lots of food.

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (5, Funny)

NSash (711724) | about 8 years ago | (#16212823)

I would call spending 1/3 of every day cleaning excessive, unless you are a janitor.

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (2, Interesting)

osee (944334) | about 8 years ago | (#16213007)

"cleaning" does not kill germs. It pushes them around a bit.
Disinfection does. Which I practically never do anywhere except for the kitchen sink, garbage can and the bathroom/toilet.

Speaking of which, the average publich toilet gets a thorough (? :-)) scrubbing with nasty disinfectants several times a day.
I would expect it to be cleaner than say my keyboard. I would not want to dip that in Domestos/Bref whatever.

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (2, Funny)

mustafap (452510) | about 8 years ago | (#16213185)

>Speaking of which, the average publich toilet gets a thorough (? :-)) scrubbing with nasty disinfectants several times a day.

Blimey, where you do live?

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (2, Informative)

rednip (186217) | about 8 years ago | (#16213159)

f you don't clean the environment you occupy for 1/3rd of your day, then heck, you deserve to get sick.
A third! you Slacker! However I agree fully. Personally I change my keyboard, both at home and at work about once a year, and I get rid of mice at nearly the same rate. I also wipe them (in particular the mouse), with a disinfectant spray once in a while. My desk chair (at home) is changed about every two years (I've also swapped out my chair at work with unused matches before). As anyone who knows me, I am NOBODY's neat freak, nor am I a germaphobe, but I live at my desk, it should be at least as clean as my toilet (which is about a week from it's last scrubbing right now). Of course I've been changing my feather bed pillows every two years these days (that's another one you should see studies on).

Re:Whats wrong with hygiene? (2, Interesting)

God'sDuck (837829) | about 8 years ago | (#16213545)

yeah...but i kinda figure if i wash my hands somewhat regularly, then the germies on my keyboard have become *my* germies over time...i don't expect to actually get sick when exposed to 400 or 4000 percent more of the germs i'm exposed to every day -- that my body's used to fighting -- when compared to a single exposure to someone with a novel strain of the flu.

What I really need... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16213559)

... is a self-cleaning anus! Would that be so much to ask??

So... (5, Funny)

d3m0nCr4t (869332) | about 8 years ago | (#16212641)

We just figured out 90% of the mouse's dna, and already it's cleaning itself... very nice !

Re:So... (2, Funny)

MightyYar (622222) | about 8 years ago | (#16212843)

They need to splice the gene into the New York subway rats. I wouldn't mind seeing rats down there if they were better-groomed.

Re:So... (1)

mazarin5 (309432) | about 8 years ago | (#16212981)

Maybe we could get a few of them on 'Queer Eye For The Straight Guy'

Oh no! "bacteria"! (5, Insightful)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | about 8 years ago | (#16212645)

What's this common dread of "bacteria"? You have to look at the big picture. 97% of bacterial species have not the slightest ability to harm us. A typical surface has millions of these critters. Most of them are your friends, as they help crowd out the really bad varieties.

If you "disinfect" a surface, it's like clear-cutting a rain-forest. You've upset the balance, making a fresh new playground where the really baad and hardy weeds might take hold.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (2, Insightful)

MindStalker (22827) | about 8 years ago | (#16212761)

Well new nano technology allows us to create surfaces that no bacteria can live on. So you don't have to worry about good OR bad bacteria, and its smart for surfaces that people often touch. Otherwise I agree.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 8 years ago | (#16212877)

I'd only add that it's not really necessary for your own personal mouse, but might be a good idea for a public terminal or kiosk (or public toilet?). I don't think that many folks are giving themselves pink-eye.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (3, Interesting)

sabernet (751826) | about 8 years ago | (#16213139)

I'm no biologist, but isn't that just 'upping the ante'?

By making a service no current bug can live on, won't it leave a whole new world for tha one bug that happens to mutate in such a way to be tolerant(considering about divisions bacteria make with the percentage of mutation which is only likelier to increase given adverse conditions that may cripple its DNA). A la current anti-bacterial super-bug problem?

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (2, Funny)

tancque (925227) | about 8 years ago | (#16213333)

You're right. These mice will be the natural selection grounds for oxygen radical resistant bacterial strains, maybe even incoorperating them into their metabolic pathways to produce cheap ATP. Next you will find your printer clogged up with strange pulsating mounds of glee. From there the bug will spread in any electronic device where electric charge creates free radicals, bringing down civilisation as we know it.

Has anyone checked these oxygen-radical producing mice for connections with muslim-radicals?

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | about 8 years ago | (#16213165)

The problem with that is erosion. Surfaces that people often touch tend to erode slowly from people rubbing their extremities on them. While that erosion is negligible as far as the integrity of the whole thing is concerned, how about the nano surface? I think that after a while the nanostructures on the surface would get smoothed out, causing the surface to lose its antibecterial properties.

Nonetheless it does sound like a good idea. For non-mouse environments.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (4, Insightful)

Daytona955i (448665) | about 8 years ago | (#16213285)

The problem is, when you mention bacteria to the average person, they think bad things because we've learned that bad bacteria can make us sick. That's why I hate most studies that proclaim the bacteria count is such and such.

Unfortunately, these "studies" are usually trying to convince us to buy an anti-bacterial soap, or as in this case a self cleaning mouse so they play on people's fears and doubts to make them want to buy it, ie... it's just FUD.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (4, Insightful)

asuffield (111848) | about 8 years ago | (#16213367)

What's this common dread of "bacteria"? You have to look at the big picture. 97% of bacterial species have not the slightest ability to harm us.


And of the other 3%, most of them we couldn't survive without and the primary way they can harm us is by dying. The human lifeform is symbiotic with a whole bunch of bacterial species, which do everything from cleaning your eyeballs to assisting with digestion. The biosphere relies on bacteria to maintain everything from soil conditions to oxygen levels in the atmosphere.

Killing bacteria to stop infections is like chopping off people's hands to stop shootings - before they happen.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (2, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 8 years ago | (#16213375)

Enclosed in this post are real-size images of two bacteria. Can you tell which one is the harmful one?
  • Bacterium #1:
  • Bacterium #2:

So... are you feeling lucky?

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (1)

value_added (719364) | about 8 years ago | (#16213543)

What's this common dread of "bacteria"? You have to look at the big picture. 97% of bacterial species have not the slightest ability to harm us. A typical surface has millions of these critters. Most of them are your friends, as they help crowd out the really bad varieties.

Agreed, but it's the 3% (often from other people) that can get you sick. During flu season, people generally pick up the bug from hand contact. You touch something that someone else has touched, or you shake hands, your own hands end up touching your nose, mouth, eyes, etc. Washing your hands regularly is the best approach, but if it's inevitable that we touch other people or their stuff, it can help to keep our surfaces clean. If you can stay home and sit in your underwear all day long, then no problem.

If you "disinfect" a surface, it's like clear-cutting a rain-forest. You've upset the balance, making a fresh new playground where the really baad and hardy weeds might take hold.

But sometimes waiting for the process of a natural selection isn't possible or desirable so cutting down diseased trees to limit the spread of a disesase can sometimes be the best approach. Doesn't work with co-workers, of course.

Re:Oh no! "bacteria"! (2, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | about 8 years ago | (#16213637)

Isn't influenza spread by a virus, not bacteria?

-Eric

So: (5, Funny)

guybert (827110) | about 8 years ago | (#16212649)

It licks it's own balls?

Laser (2, Funny)

SanderDJ (1004445) | about 8 years ago | (#16212733)

For the ball-less mice: bacteria can also be killed with a laser beam.

Re:So: (1)

pedalman (958492) | about 8 years ago | (#16213573)

It licks it's own balls?
Only because it can.

Special coating??? (4, Insightful)

advocate_one (662832) | about 8 years ago | (#16212655)

so how long will that survive on the surface? It'll have to be tough to withstand ordinary wear and tear... the contact points where my fingers hold the mouse on my desktop are already worn smooth and the mouse has only been in use for 6 months... sounds like snake-oil to me especially the nano-particle crap...

Re:Special coating??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16213271)

you using windows, right?
you must be new here...

Good grief (3, Funny)

Thisfox (994296) | about 8 years ago | (#16212661)

Compulsive telephone sanitisers. I never caught a flu from MY mouse.... What are they worried about, computers catching a virus?

Re: Toilets (5, Funny)

Andr T. (1006215) | about 8 years ago | (#16212677)

the average desk harbors 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat Clearly, people are doing something wrong with their desks or with their toilets.

Re: Toilets (2, Funny)

j00r0m4nc3r (959816) | about 8 years ago | (#16213117)

The solution is just to move everyone's desk into the restroom.

Re: Toilets (1)

thesaint05 (850634) | about 8 years ago | (#16213149)

Maybe THAT'S where all the E. Coli are coming from?

not again (1)

grayblob (732649) | about 8 years ago | (#16212687)

Guess I didn't need to buy that autoclave.

Re:not again (0, Offtopic)

osee (944334) | about 8 years ago | (#16213055)

Please, do post images of the autoclaved mouse on the net. Thanks.

Useless (2, Insightful)

aadvancedGIR (959466) | about 8 years ago | (#16212697)

Yes, you touch your mouse often, but it is just a tiny fraction of what you touch so this mouse is just a waste of money. OK, not a big one for a change.

On the other hand, using such surfaces in hospital for example on doorknobs or armrests may really be helpfull.

Bacteria or Virus (2, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 8 years ago | (#16212701)

It is no surprise the average desktop has too many viruses, what do you expect when the average desktop is running windows? But the Fine Article seems to have confused virus with bacteria. Just switch to Linux and everything will be hunky dory.

Re:Bacteria or Virus (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 8 years ago | (#16212891)

In Vista MS calls them "bacteria".

Re:Bacteria or Virus (1)

Lex-Man82 (994679) | about 8 years ago | (#16212997)

Vista is so resource hungry that it gets rid of the need to have spy ware and virus slowing down your machine.

What's it for? (2, Funny)

Dan East (318230) | about 8 years ago | (#16212703)

So are people supposed to wipe their butt with this thing or what? (Just trying to correlate toilet seats, bacteria and an antiseptic mouse.)

Dan East

Re:What's it for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16213577)

For external use only. "Do not ingest the surface material of the device under any circumstances." So I guess you could wipe your butt with it.

Ahem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16212709)

The coating uses two mechanisms to deactivate enzymes and proteins to prevent a wide spectrum of bacteria, virus, fungi, and algae from surviving on the surface of the mouse.

At the risk of saying the obvious, viruses don't need to survive on the surface of the mouse. They only become alive (by some definitions of alive) inside a host cell. They don't need active enzymes to remain being able to infect cells.

Also, what the fsck does 30x more tracking power mean?

Self Cleaning House (1)

dparnass (1004755) | about 8 years ago | (#16212715)

A self cleaning mouse, that is cool. You really want to grab my attention. Try a self cleaning house, now that would be a product anyone would want. Tell you the truth what i really need is a self cleaning car for my wife, now that is a different story though.

Germs are good (2, Insightful)

unts (754160) | about 8 years ago | (#16212717)

They help keep the immune system strong. If there's nothing for it to fight off... well... it'll just get lazy. Stay dirty; exercise that immune system!

How to breed super-germs (5, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 years ago | (#16212719)

Face it, you never catch them all. So some survive, that are more resilent against the agent. They breed. And bacteria do that FAST. The resistance gets inherited. And then again. You are actually causing some un-natural selection that way, until you end up with bacteria that are super aggressive and super resistant against your antibac.

Why do you think the most violent, nasty and resistant bacteria stems are found in hospitals?

Re:How to breed super-germs (1)

The_Wilschon (782534) | about 8 years ago | (#16213085)

why would they be super aggressive? Other than selecting for fast breeding, which is selected for quite naturally in any case, I don't see how we would be making them any more prone to attacking humans or anything else. Resistant, sure. Aggressive, ??

Moo (1)

Chacham (981) | about 8 years ago | (#16212729)

Next-up: The self-cleaning toilet seat.

It'll keep the 400:1 ratio back up.

Of course, it's only a bit of time before some renegade made a non-self-cleaning mouse in the form of a toilet seat.

Re:Moo (1)

dochood1966 (996087) | about 8 years ago | (#16213161)

I saw one of these in Germany.

There was a symbol of a "waving hand" over a sensor. Having marveled at the ingenuity of German engineering, I couldn't wait to see what happened.

When I waved my hand over the sensor, a rectangle of plastic came out from the wall over the seat. The seat began to rotate as a small spigot sprayed a cleaning fluid on the seat. A sponge inside the opposite side of the rectangle wiped the chemical off. (It's been a couple of years, so I'm trying to remember the exact details of how it worked.)

Those danged German engineers! What will they think of next!

400 times nothing is... (-1, Redundant)

dohzer (867770) | about 8 years ago | (#16212741)

...nothing.

Toilet Seats!!! (2, Interesting)

splatacaster (653139) | about 8 years ago | (#16212763)

Toilet seats have very few bacteria as they are made of non-porous material. So trying to say they have 400 times the bacteria is not really that outrageous of an amount.

Re:Toilet Seats!!! (1)

porkThreeWays (895269) | about 8 years ago | (#16212957)

They did a myth busters on that. Toilet seats are actually pretty clean. It's like the "we can put a man in space but we can't..." comparison. I'd be more concerned if my desk were more dirty than licking an ass directly.

Re:Toilet Seats!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16213057)

Really though, getting your desk licked won't make you cum harder.

Makes (2, Funny)

Konster (252488) | about 8 years ago | (#16212767)

Wow...so many viruses on my desktop. Does Microsoft make that too?

My Toilet is Cleaner than my Desk (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | about 8 years ago | (#16212785)

Looks like I can no longer have lunch at my desk. I'll have to eat the restrooms for now on. I'll take the handicap stahl if no one minds.

I didn't see anywhere in the article about prevent oil and dirt build up. That's my main problem. My oily and sweaty hands like to build up these nice dirt outlines that I scrap off with my fingernails every month or so. I guess I can start wearing rubber gloves when I touch the mouse.

Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (5, Informative)

tygerstripes (832644) | about 8 years ago | (#16212795)

400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat

Okay, just to clear this up: the average toilet seat is, believe it or not, one of the most sterile and least bacteria-ridden places you will find anywhere in your household. It is usually a barren plastic surface with little purchase for bacteria or moisture, it is cleaned and disinfected more than most surfaces, and the only real chance it has of catching anything that bacteria feed on is if someone ends up smearing crap on it - I'm really hope that's not the norm. In addition, what is unfortunately likely to end up on the seat is urine, which is totally sterile and would kill rather than feed most bacteria. Anyone who ever cleans their house will have a pretty sterile seat, and there is not much chance that anything you do pick up on the back of your legs is going to be transferred directly to your face by your hand.

Just about the opposite of all the points above can be said about your keyboard and mouse. It should come as absolutely no surprise that these things are riddled with bacteria...

As is your skin. All of it. You are fucking covered in the little guys, and it's rarely a problem. If you're the sort of person who's likely to get sick from a mouse that hasn't been disinfected, your life is too sterile for you to survive easily in the wild. Self-cleaning mice and mobility-scooters for the morbidly obese - they amount to the same thing: people's poor lifestyles causing them to be unfit to survive normally. I understand why people need these things, but if they'd exercised moderation in all things from the start, they wouldn't be in this situation.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

Incadenza (560402) | about 8 years ago | (#16212897)

As is your skin. All of it. You are fucking covered in the little guys, and it's rarely a problem.

And don't forget your intestines, plenty off the little buggers inside you too. In fact [too lazy to search for a link] you carry more cells around that are not part of your body than cells that are. Fortunately your own cells are a lot bigger.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

fbjon (692006) | about 8 years ago | (#16212933)

That's OK for your home PC, but public computers? Have you seen the average color of their keyboards?

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16212935)

Since my company introduced remote-dekstop support for end users (rather than me going to the users desks all the time), I've gotta a lot less colds.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

tygerstripes (832644) | about 8 years ago | (#16212991)

I beleieve you, but remember that most colds are transmitted through the air. If you aren't visiting different sites full of infected staff all the time and just staying in the same ol' place with the same ol' bugs, you are certainly less likely to catch colds.

However, try staying in that routine for a few years and then go back to on-site support. I guarantee you'll be more susceptible than ever. Constant moderate exposure doesn't make you completely immune to anything (you still get sick), but it does improve your immunity to almost everything. The body adapts to its environment.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

a_nonamiss (743253) | about 8 years ago | (#16212951)

but if they'd exercised moderation in all things from the start
I don't know where you're from, but here in the USA, we don't do anything in moderation. It's against national policy or something.

Seriously though, most of the problems that we face as a culture stem from the fact that we take everything too far. Think fast food, playground safety, automobile size, etc. If we just tried to balance things a little better, I don't think we would have so many problems. With a few notable exceptions, most things aren't really bad in moderation, and almost everything is bad if you do it too much.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

fbjon (692006) | about 8 years ago | (#16213061)

it is cleaned and disinfected more than most surfaces
What is this 'cleaning' you speak of?

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about 8 years ago | (#16213093)

Just about the opposite of all the points above can be said about your keyboard and mouse. It should come as absolutely no surprise that these things are riddled with bacteria...

As is your skin. All of it. You are fucking covered in the little guys, and it's rarely a problem. If you're the sort of person who's likely to get sick from a mouse that hasn't been disinfected, your life is too sterile for you to survive easily in the wild. Self-cleaning mice and mobility-scooters for the morbidly obese - they amount to the same thing: people's poor lifestyles causing them to be unfit to survive normally. I understand why people need these things, but if they'd exercised moderation in all things from the start, they wouldn't be in this situation.


Very true, exercise will do more for your health than disinfecting your self, your internal organs and your entire surroundings. In fact a lot of the bacteria on our skin are actually helpful in keeping it healthy and many of the bacteria in our stomach and intestines are vital to their proper function. I will never understand why so many people, and Americans in particular, seem to have an obsessive fear of bacteria in general as if they don't realise that most bacteria are completely harmless. Every so often one of those American talks shows (of the silly variety) like 'Oprah' has this big exposé about bacteria in your surroundings and how to get rid of them with disinfecting soap so perhaps it is just an impression generated by paranoid American TV? Personally I can't use disinfecting soap without it having a detrimental effect on my skin.

Re:Toilet seats are a terrible comparison (1)

NorthWestFLNative (973147) | about 8 years ago | (#16213119)

How very true. The average person doesn't need a sanitary mouse.

However, there are some situations where it could be used. Hospitals could use it to prevent taking bacteria into a clean room housing a severely immune-compromised person. It might also be slightly useful to immune compromised (either natural AIDS, etc. or medically induced chemo/radiation) persons in their homes. Touching a keyboard or mouse with even a small break in the skin can cause serious infection for such people.

Captainnnn Plannnettt (0, Offtopic)

Omniprogram (873068) | about 8 years ago | (#16212807)

Protect the environment of I'll F****** kill yah!!

Not to speak of public terminals... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16212815)

Not to speak of public terminals... uah... there you can usually SEE the bacteria!

Time to move my desk (1)

Nikademus (631739) | about 8 years ago | (#16212825)

Does that mean that I should put my desk in the toilets so that I would have less bacterias?

Proof (1)

StarfishOne (756076) | about 8 years ago | (#16212829)

Rumours have it that, as proof that this really works, the manufacturer is considering a 30-day trial account to one of the most sultry pr0n-sites. ;P

Self-Cleaning Mouse? (5, Funny)

Eradicator2k3 (670371) | about 8 years ago | (#16212841)

That's nothing. I have a self-cleaning dog. A friend of mine watched my dog clean himself and said, "Man, I wish I could do that."

I told him, "You better pet him first; he might bite."

Oh please! (5, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | about 8 years ago | (#16212853)

According to a recent survey from the University of Arizona, the average desk harbors 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat.

There's even more bacteria INSIDE YOU! And no, they're not only "your" bacteria. They are in fact bacteria that you ate, breathed in and so on and so on. They live and breed inside you, and defecate inside you! They also *eat* from whatever is laying around (i.e. YOU).

Shocking? Well it better not be, since they're not going away any time soon. I'm sick of gem-counting revelations and toilet seat comparisons.

I'm proud to say I use a regular dirty mouse and keyboard and I'm still alive and healthy. If someone is concerned he might catch something bad from a computer mouse, he wouldn't be alive to buy this product anyway.

Moore's Law (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16212857)

Cats are already self-cleaning. It was only a mater of time.

I'll lick your mouse if you lick my toilet seat... (1)

Flaming Babies (904475) | about 8 years ago | (#16212859)

Seriously...what a stupid comparison.
How about comparing the number of harmful bacteria on each?
Plus, as others have pointed out, the toilet seat is very often a clean surface due to its being regularly cleaned.

bacteria or virus? (5, Insightful)

emlyncorrin (818871) | about 8 years ago | (#16212921)

that disables the survival of bacteria with an auto-disinfecting surface.
contributes to the spread of pneumonia, the flu, pink eye and strep throat, among other extremely contagious viruses.
What's the point of an antibacterial if the problem is viruses?

mod parent up (1)

oliverthered (187439) | about 8 years ago | (#16213487)

too true

That explains a lot... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16212939)

My job is desktop support, walking around a couple of organisations and helping users sort out their problems. I always thought it was the users that made me sick, now I know it's their mice too.

uh oh.. (1)

general scruff (938598) | about 8 years ago | (#16212947)

I read this as I eat my breakfast. time for more napkins methinks...

What about mobile phones? (1)

jackharrer (972403) | about 8 years ago | (#16212959)

Mouse? Why they're trying to do something with computer mice?

There's much more bacterias on keyboards, phones and, most important, mobiles (cell-phones for all you americans :). Average mobile phone gathers much more bacterias that anything else around you. It's due to simple fact:
It's nice and worm (you know how it is after 30min of call) and because it touches your face it gathers a lot of moisture and dead skin.

jackharrer

A must-have gadget... (1, Funny)

6Yankee (597075) | about 8 years ago | (#16212989)

...for anyone who pushes their mouse around with their tongue.

I'm surprised, though, that the marketing idiots didn't come up with an ant-terrorism angle - after all, if your mouse kills little bad bug things it'll Keep You Safe(tm) during a biological attack!

Re:A must-have gadget... (1)

6Yankee (597075) | about 8 years ago | (#16213021)

"ant-terrorism", that's a good one. :P Make a mouse that can kill ants, and I'll buy it.

Why not go further? (1)

dp_wiz (954921) | about 8 years ago | (#16213009)

I want autocleaning desktop.

TOP TIP! (2, Funny)

mutube (981006) | about 8 years ago | (#16213071)

Wash your hands.

Thankyou for your attention.

Wrong name (1)

unitron (5733) | about 8 years ago | (#16213079)

They should call it a self-disinfecting mouse or something like that. A self-cleaning mouse would be one that saves you the chore of cleaning all the gunk deposited by the ball on the tension roller and optical interrupter shafts.

Never mind that (1)

bigHairyDog (686475) | about 8 years ago | (#16213105)

I want self-cloning mice [clampettstudio.com] !

If contamination were a problem, we would be dead (5, Insightful)

quigonn (80360) | about 8 years ago | (#16213131)

Seriously: if the current contamination really were a problem, we would all be dead. But we aren't, and why? Because the human body has a immune system. So I bet, such a self-cleaning mouse, or even completely sterile desks deployed everywhere wouldn't have any impact on the infection rates.

Actually, desinfecting too much actually leads to other problems. Current studies suggest that too much hygiene may be a big factor in the recent increases of allergies. Also, fighting too aggressively against any kind of etiologic agents only produces more resistant etiologic agents. A prominent example is the Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a Staph.A. strain that developed antibiotic resistance and is responsible for a good share of all nosocomial infections (i.e. infections you get that you get in hospital but are otherwise unrelated to your actual treatment there).

IANAMD (I am not an MD), but I have an education as combat medic in the Austrian Army where infectiology is a huge subject during education.

Dishwasher-proof Mouse (2)

giafly (926567) | about 8 years ago | (#16213195)

Why doesn't some manufacturer design a mouse and keyboard that you can clean in a dishwasher?

(Also iPods, 'phones, tv remotes and all types of electronic goods in all types of washer. NB patent trolls, if this is original, I claim prior art by publishing here. PS eeuw [gardenweb.com] )

Developing immunity? (1)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | about 8 years ago | (#16213233)

Will my body eventually produce antibodies to everything that infests my workspace?

I wonder... (1)

Hahnsoo (976162) | about 8 years ago | (#16213235)

I wonder if this mouse could have reasonable application in environments which require a higher than normal level of sterilization. For example, there are many biology labs that culture cells of some sort that need to be kept sterile. Just from anecdotal evidence (i.e. walking around and going "ugh" at the sight of those mice), the average office mouse in almost all environments is pretty darn filthy.

Disable the ability to survive? (1)

boyfaceddog (788041) | about 8 years ago | (#16213237)

Is that the same thing as "enabling the disability to survive"? I hope this isn't another attempt to rename "kill" as in "liquidate".

Anti Bacterial Surface? (1)

pete.com (741064) | about 8 years ago | (#16213249)

How does an Anti-Bacterial surface help control the spread of viruses exactly? I can see this helping with Strep, and Staph but not viruses.

Re:Anti Bacterial Surface? (1)

Slaughter'em (976836) | about 8 years ago | (#16213627)

Science smience . . . just tweak the data to support your cause.

Mouse petting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16213279)

I just pet my mouse. Surely this won't kill me?

And the rabbitses..

Cats have been doing this for years (1, Funny)

wile_e_wonka (934864) | about 8 years ago | (#16213313)

My cat has been doing this for years.

Illiterate marketing (4, Informative)

TheMohel (143568) | about 8 years ago | (#16213341)

Interesting product, illiterate article.

Fomites (inanimate objects that can spread disease by holding infective organisms between hosts) can spread organisms, but office equipment, including mice and keyboards, has never been shown to contribute to the spread of serious disease. In a hospital environment, especially in something like an ICU where you have multiple providers working with the same computers, this might be an interesting thing to study. In the office, there's no point. You're at far more danger from shaking hands with your co-workers than you are from using their mouse. Tellingly, neither the author of the study nor the manufacturer quote any actual scientific study showing that an antibacterial mouse makes a difference anywhere. This is a talisman, pure and simple.

Which doesn't stop the writer of the article, who breathlessly refers to "the spread of pneumonia, the flu, pink eye and strep throat, among other extremely contagious viruses." As a physician who is continually explaining the difference between viruses and bacteria, and the difference between diseases caused by transmission of specific organisms (like strep) and general conditions that have hundreds of causes (like pink eye or pneumonia), this sentence made me twitch violently. Suffice it to say that with this single phrase, the author ensured that I would ignore the rest of the article as an obvious waste of time.

Fortunately, the manufacturer of the mouse did better. I love the disclaimer:

Disclaimer:

This device cannot be used as antibiotic or anti-viral medication. Do not ingest the surface material of the device under any circumstances. If you have symptoms of bacteria or viral infection please consult with your physician and seek medical attention immediately. This device does not eliminate the entire universe of bacteria or viruses. It is not a replacement for cleanliness and good personal hygiene. Please keep your hands and work area clean for optimal protection.

And there you have it. Remember, don't ingest the damn thing under ANY circumtances.

Re:Illiterate marketing (1)

Slaughter'em (976836) | about 8 years ago | (#16213433)

It's amazing what simply washing your hands will do.

Where the heck do these freaks work? (1)

Slaughter'em (976836) | about 8 years ago | (#16213359)

According to a recent survey from the University of Arizona, the average desk harbors 400 times more bacteria than the average toilet seat.
A grad students worst nightmare. Today you'll be swabbing toilet seats to collect data for your dissertation.

Pneumonia? Really? (1)

silasthehobbit (626391) | about 8 years ago | (#16213409)

From http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/infections/lung/p neumonia.html [kidshealth.org]

"The viruses and bacteria that cause pneumonia are contagious and are usually found in fluid from the mouth or nose of an infected person. Illness can spread when an infected person coughs or sneezes on a person, by sharing drinking glasses and eating utensils, and when a person touches the used tissues or handkerchiefs of an infected person."

So essentially, try and avoid touching the mouse or keyboard if they're still wet with someone else's mucuus. Which is something I've been doing for years. Just in case it's not mucuus...

Dammit! (0)

focoma (865351) | about 8 years ago | (#16213423)

I was eating chips when I read that!

When are the human tests? (1)

TempeTerra (83076) | about 8 years ago | (#16213427)

Creating a self-cleaning mouse is all very well, but how long until we can do this for humans? We can cure practically every form of cancer in mice, but reproducing those results in humans is notoriously difficult.

We all know what a boon to humanity it would be to have self-cleaning geeks, but I don't expect to see one within ten years, if at all in my lifetime. This is mmore flying cars and moon domes technology :(

bubble time (1)

pizpot (622748) | about 8 years ago | (#16213583)

Just bleach your whole place, and seal it with plastic. Then stay in side.

Anti Bacterial Plastics (2, Informative)

Beefslaya (832030) | about 8 years ago | (#16213631)

The process isn't that hard, they have been doing stuff like this for years. They inject Anti-bacterial disinfectants into the plastics before they mold them.

They have similar mats in showers, boats, dairy farms http://www.animat.ca/ [animat.ca] .

I'm suprised they haven't done this before. Inter-office disease spreading via keyboards and such is a HUGE problem, costing billions per year.

Think about it? How many times have you been nailed by a cold going "around" the office?

"Superbugs" (1)

Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) | about 8 years ago | (#16213643)

Isn't this just creating evolutionary pressure in favour of disinfectant-resistant bacteria?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?