Do Gloves Really Protect Against Food-Borne Illnesses?
I don’t know about you, but I’ve seen deli folk take my order with their glove on, take my money with their glove on, give me my change with their glove on, and then go to make my sandwich without changing to clean gloves. Uh, hi, do you know how dirty pens and money are?
An article in today’s New York Times emphasizes that gloves may actually be more dangerous than bare hands, and one reason is that food preparers don’t use common sense. Wearing gloves doesn’t mean that you’re suddenly invincible. But there are other problems as well, one of which is allergies to the material the gloves are made of.
What do you think? Would you rather have a sandwich prepared by someone wearing gloves or someone with bare hands? Read the article and weigh in here.
Tags: food-borne, food-poisoning, food-preparation, gloves, Health, Illness, latex, rubber, vinyl, woman, women, Womens-HealthRelated Stories
POSTED IN: Diet, Health, Prevention, Public policy, Real life, Wellness
.gif)
3 opinions for Do Gloves Really Protect Against Food-Borne Illnesses?
Kristen King
Mar 14, 2007 at 10:02 pm
P.S. How good does that sandwich look? Mmm…
Kris
Mar 15, 2007 at 2:33 am
I much prefer the bare hand. I think latex is gross.
Kristen King
Mar 15, 2007 at 2:36 am
Yeah, I am definitely NOT a latex fan. I like those gloves that are basically sandwich bags with fingers. They’re less disquieting. But people need to learn how to use them properly! Like, duh!
kk
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: