A microbiologist experiments with dropping food on various surfaces to see how much bacteria they pick up. Carpet is, apparently, not bad at all. And the five-second rule might be just right. Oh, no. (Credit: BillClintonCEO/YouTube screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET) We all have our rules. For some, it's five seconds. For others, ten. And for students, it tends to be measured in days. Every time we drop food on the floor, we know we're taking a risk by picking it up again and putting it in our mouths. But, well, it's food. And it wasn't there for that long. A microbiologist took it upon himself to test just how dirty food gets when dropped on the floor. Anthony Hilton of Aston University in Birmingham, UK, thought it might be instructive to try various surfaces to see if what goes down can come upon again intact. He and his students dropped toast, pasta, and sticky candies on various floors -- carpet, laminate and tiled surfaces -- for between 3 and 30 seconds. Then they ate them. No, wait. Then they examined them for bacteria. Given that this research was happening in my own home town, I worried for the results. What Hilton and his students discovered is that the five seconds rule might be appropriate. The longer food stays on the floor, the more likely it is to attract biological nasties. More Technically Incorrect LeBron James, Samsung rep, tweets rage at his Galaxy Mathematician says Candy Crush is really, really hard Facebook's Hot Mom enjoys more cold stares Kissing YouTube video goes viral (oh, no, it's an ad) Mom sues Google after 5-year-old spends $65 on virtual currency Interestingly, though, they also discovered that different surfaces had different levels of risk. Hilton said: "We have found evidence that transfer from indoor flooring surfaces is incredibly poor with carpet actually posing the lowest risk of bacterial transfer onto dropped food." I find this shocking. I have seen carpets (in Birmingham and elsewhere) that defied definition. It was as if a carpet had become one wide, green piece of bacteria. Surely, then, it depends on the state of the carpet. I thought that everyone had, at one time or another, picked food off the floor and eaten it. It's either because they food is so good or the eater is so hungry. However, Hilton's research discovered that only 87 percent admitted they would eat food off the floor or had already done so. Naturally, I don't condone conducting this experiment on various floors in your home. I have a feeling, though, that I may not be able to stop you.
A microbiologist experiments with dropping food on various surfaces to see how much bacteria they pick up. Carpet is, apparently, not bad at all. And the five-second rule might be just right.
Oh, no.
(Credit: BillClintonCEO/YouTube screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET)
We all have our rules.
For some, it's five seconds. For others, ten. And for students, it tends to be measured in days.
Every time we drop food on the floor, we know we're taking a risk by picking it up again and putting it in our mouths. But, well, it's food. And it wasn't there for that long.
A microbiologist took it upon himself to test just how dirty food gets when dropped on the floor.
Anthony Hilton of Aston University in Birmingham, UK, thought it might be instructive to try various surfaces to see if what goes down can come upon again intact.
He and his students dropped toast, pasta, and sticky candies on various floors -- carpet, laminate and tiled surfaces -- for between 3 and 30 seconds. Then they ate them. No, wait. Then they examined them for bacteria.
Given that this research was happening in my own home town, I worried for the results.
What Hilton and his students discovered is that the five seconds rule might be appropriate. The longer food stays on the floor, the more likely it is to attract biological nasties.
More Technically Incorrect
- LeBron James, Samsung rep, tweets rage at his Galaxy
- Mathematician says Candy Crush is really, really hard
- Facebook's Hot Mom enjoys more cold stares
- Kissing YouTube video goes viral (oh, no, it's an ad)
- Mom sues Google after 5-year-old spends $65 on virtual currency
Interestingly, though, they also discovered that different surfaces had different levels of risk.
Hilton said: "We have found evidence that transfer from indoor flooring surfaces is incredibly poor with carpet actually posing the lowest risk of bacterial transfer onto dropped food."
I find this shocking. I have seen carpets (in Birmingham and elsewhere) that defied definition. It was as if a carpet had become one wide, green piece of bacteria. Surely, then, it depends on the state of the carpet.
I thought that everyone had, at one time or another, picked food off the floor and eaten it. It's either because they food is so good or the eater is so hungry.
However, Hilton's research discovered that only 87 percent admitted they would eat food off the floor or had already done so.
Naturally, I don't condone conducting this experiment on various floors in your home. I have a feeling, though, that I may not be able to stop you.
