Microbiology: Why Does 70% EtOH Work Better Than 100%?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gochi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Microbiology Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the effectiveness of 70% ethanol (EtOH) as a disinfectant compared to 100% ethanol, specifically within the context of microbiology. Participants explore the mechanisms behind the varying effectiveness of different concentrations of ethanol as disinfectants, including penetration, evaporation rates, and protein denaturation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that 70% EtOH penetrates microbial cells better than 100% EtOH, although data supporting this is not universally acknowledged.
  • It is suggested that 70% EtOH takes longer to evaporate, allowing for more effective surface coverage and microbial kill.
  • Several participants mention that 70% EtOH allows for protein unfolding rather than just dehydration, which may lead to more effective microbial damage.
  • One participant notes that 100% EtOH can quickly dehydrate cells, allowing microbes to potentially recover upon rehydration, while 70% EtOH prevents efficient dehydration.
  • Another participant highlights that the optimal balance of alcohol and water is crucial for effective cell destruction, with 70% being identified as the effective concentration.
  • There is a clarification that 95% EtOH is more accurate than 100% due to the azeotropic nature of ethanol.
  • Questions are raised about the disinfectant qualities of isopropyl alcohol mixed with water, with references to common practices in various industries.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the mechanisms of action of ethanol concentrations, and the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the definitive reasons for the effectiveness of 70% EtOH over 100% EtOH.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on assumptions about microbial behavior and the chemical properties of ethanol, and there are references to anecdotal experiences rather than definitive studies. The discussion also touches on the use of isopropyl alcohol, which introduces additional variables not fully explored.

gochi
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
yea so some disinfectants work better at certain concentrations such as 70% etoh as opposed to 100% etoh.

what is the reason for this?

this is a question pertaining to microbiology btw.

thanks.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
it's assumed to penetrate better into the microbial cel. Not aware of data to this point tho have seen data showing faster kill
 
It takes longer to evaporate, allowing you to cover surfaces more effectively. 70% still evaporates fast as lightning, but it's more manageable.
 
I've also heard what JorgeLobo and kingdomof mention, that it takes longer to evaporate and is thus more effective at penetrating, dehydrating, and killing microbes.
 
You want to unfold a protein and not just dehydrate it. 95% EtOH quickly dehydrates the cell, after which the microbes can be brought back to life by re-hydration. 70% EtOH contains enough water so that dehydration is not efficient, now the protein is allowed to enter the cell and unfold proteins by the action of EtOH, this is very damaging to the microbes.
 
Last edited:
Monique said:
The main reason is that you want to unfold a protein and not just dehydrate it.

100% EtOH acts by dehydrating the cell, after which the microbes and their spores can be brought back to life by re-hydration.

70% EtOH contains enough water so that dehydration is not efficient, now the protein is allowed to unfold by the action of EtOH and this is very damaging to the microbes and their spores.

It's actually difficult to find definitive information about this question. Ultimately it's all about contact time. Pure ethanol evaporates too quickly to be effective for the reasons explained by Monique. So all above answers are correct.
 
This is the answer a similar question received in the Pharmaceutical Microbiology forum:

It is because alcohols become more efficient in two ways:

a) By the molecular weight (hence ethanol is more effective than
methanol);
b) the way by which alcohols destroy vegetative cells is by the
absorption
into the cell (which then causes cytoplasm leakage, denaturation of
protein and eventually cell lysis - a combination of effects sometimes
described
as membrane disruption). To be readily absorbed into the cell water is
needed.
Thus an optimal balance between the concentration of alcohol in order to
kill the cell and sufficient water to be absorbed is required. This
Comes out at around 70%. With 95% alcohol there is not sufficient water for
the bacterial cell membrane to signal that the unknown liquid can be
absorbed.

For more information, the following chapter may be of interest:

Sandle, T.: ‘Selection and use of cleaning and disinfection agents in
pharmaceutical manufacturing’ in Hodges, N and Hanlon, G. (2003;
updated 2008): ‘Industrial Pharmaceutical Microbiology Standards and
Controls’, Euromed Communications, England
 
You'd really have to say 95% EtOH rather than 100%. That's the azeotrope.
 
Does the disinfectant quality extend to isopropyl and water in the same fashion? I use 50:50 water and 90% Iso as a general-purpose cleaner/disinfectant around the house.
 
  • #10
turbo-1 said:
Does the disinfectant quality extend to isopropyl and water in the same fashion? I use 50:50 water and 90% Iso as a general-purpose cleaner/disinfectant around the house.

Most industries and hospitals use isopropanol at 60%. This is sometimes supplemented by caustic (NaOH) or peroxide.
 
  • #11
I got into the habit of using that mix when I was a dispensing optician. It was wonderful for cleaning lenses before and after edging the and assembling the glasses. It is a cheap no-streak cleaner for windows and mirrors, and we use it to clean countertops, especially after handling poultry.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
986
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K