Originally Posted by
gsoltso
There is a difference between a sterile location such as a hospital, and a checkpoint in an airport, recognizing that, and the fact that sometimes cross contamination is going to happen in the airport setting is merely facing a reality.
Originally Posted by
chollie
As you point out, a checkpoint is anything but sterile and cross-contamination can happen (it can also happen in a so-called 'sterile' environment - witness recent events in a quarantined government facility where a dangerous 'superbug' got loose).
Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
Neverthelss, every hospital does acknowlege that, even given their best efforts, iatrogenic infections will happen. Everybody who posted in this thread agrees that what was observed by the OP is unacceptable, but I also agree that cross-contamination is inevitable.
Of course infections happen in hospitals. But the attitude demonstrated above was "it doesn't matter if someone contaminates the swabs because contamination is inevitable." I find it unlikely that a hospital would say "it doesn't matter who handles the surgical instruments or whether the doctors wash their hands, because contamination is inevitable."
There's a difference between taking reasonable measures to avoid contamination and dealing the odd case that couldn't be anticipated, and taking no measures to avoid contamination at all. And so, as gsoltso says, there's a difference between a hospital - where they try to prevent contamination - and a TSA checkpoint - where they don't.