Posted By Ray Quartz
Hi
New to this forum.

We are a Pest Control Company that is increasingly being asked by clients to provide post infestation cleaning.

(Mainly because their cleaning departments are not deemed reliable or competent enough,,sad).

Because some of our clients are quite large companies, and we state clearly we cannot indemnify against disease, we feel that should something go amiss it would be prudent to have disease testing measures in place.

(mainly because we are flabbergasted at the attitude by some toward rodents; quote one clients' safety rep "oh well I guess mice have to eat as well", after finding mouse droppings in the boardroom kitchen drawers!)

We have decided that in future we are going to take swabs of pre determined locations pre and post cleaning, and we would like these to be sent to a laboratory for analysis against common and rodent bourne diseases.

Can anyone point us in the right direction as to providers of sampling kits and laboratory services?

Thannk you all for any guidance.

Posted By Ray Quartz
Thank you for your response.

1. I didnt say that I wanted to save costs, cost is not an issue.

2. dont need to impress anyone, our clients are well established and are very happy with our efficacy to date, hence the reason they are asking us to diversify outside the norm.

3. As with all analysis, it can never be conclusive, and in this case would be intended as an indicator, test taken pre and post cleansing. by the nature of that method of test you are positive to get a reduction in pathogens.

4. We would never declare a site clear of pathogens, and inevitably there would be a clause stating so.

5. This method would ONLY be used on proven infestation, and only as an indicator of levels not as an indemnifier.

Regards
Ray

Posted By Ian Blenkharn
Ray

Don't feel got at - it's certainly not my intention.

But point 5 of your response worries me.

Why would you want this information, even if it could be done, and could be dome meaningfully? It will prove nothing, and as you say will not and must not be used as any sort of gauarentee.

Walk into a field and count the cowpats? How many cows were there yesterday, and how many went to slaughter last night? You cannot deduce one from the other. Though we might expect some loose relationship between the two counts its a big leap to extrapolate one from the other.

When clearing up spilled blood and gore after major trauma and violence etc, tests for residual protein contamination on surfaces is often used to confirm the extent of the clean-up process. The test is a simple ninhydrin spray that changes colour in the presence of protein.

Your proposal sounds like an interesting long-term resaerch project that would require so much data to become statistacally valid it could never be completed. Until then, the limitations of any information you would get could reflect poorly on your work, which is surely not wanted - the bad use of scientific analysis does not reflect well, even when everything else if OK, ie your point 4.

Why not consider a surrogate marker - spot tests for protein perhaps - or the concentional traps and droppings count etc. It's so much more reliable and less likely to cause confusion

Ian