Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Hotels and Places to Stay > Marriott | Marriott Bonvoy
Reload this Page >

Marriott to Eliminate Single-use Toiletry Bottles

Marriott to Eliminate Single-use Toiletry Bottles

Old Aug 30, 19, 11:27 am
  #166  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 90,961
Higher end hotels that used to have wall-mounted dispensers for hand soap, for shower gel and for shampoo and for conditioner end up moving slowly but surely to streamlining to fewer wall-mounted dispenser and making toiletries multi-purpose (and not just multi-use). For example, instead of having hotel shampoo & hotel conditioner and shower gel dispensers in the tub/shower area, they end up having two products instead of three there and you may end up with the same product being deliberately provided (by the hotel) for use as shampoo and shower gel. And guess what else may happen, the shower gel-come-shampoo ends up being the same exact liquid that is used in the hand-soap dispenser. This reduces the hotel costs and makes things easier for hotel housekeepers but it’s really a down-grading of the product provided to customers in hotel rooms.
cmd320 likes this.
GUWonder is online now  
Old Aug 30, 19, 11:34 am
  #167  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,746
Originally Posted by chipmaster View Post
Shower with lots of water not clean enough? What you been sleeping in, or eating and sweating????
I can't even make sense of this comment. Are you suggesting that Marriott should get rid of soap (bar, bottle, or dispenser) all together because one only needs water to be clean? The whole thread is about different types of soaps and you now suggest that they're totally unnecessary.

I won't question your hygiene habits, but most of us use soap when we bathe or shower, regardless of what we've ate or slept in.
GUWonder, closecover and Antarius like this.
JBord is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 12:37 pm
  #168  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: KHOU + KSFO
Programs: AA EXP | Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador | Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 5,731
Originally Posted by Zeeb View Post
1) Public Restrooms and Airport lounge showers don't provide someone multiday private access in an entirely uncontrolled environment.
2) Nobody is talking about an epidemic. As I posted earlier in the thread, I think that 99.9% of the time there will be no issue at all. The whole objection is that when I go to a name brand hotel I don't want to have to wonder if I'm running in to that 0.1% situation.
Airport lounge showers provide uncontrolled access for a period of time, during which anyone can put anything they want. Contaminating a dispenser isnt a multi day activity.

0.1% seems awfully high, for something we have no scientific evidence to prove. Technically, brand new vacuum sealed sheets for each customer would be safer than washing them, but no one is clamoring for that.
WillBarrett_68 likes this.
Antarius is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 1:39 pm
  #169  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: KHOU + KSFO
Programs: AA EXP | Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador | Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 5,731
Originally Posted by cmd320 View Post
With things people can tamper with who knows what could be in there. Urine, semen, fecal matter, acid, Nair, whatever. Yes, in 99.9% of cases there will probably be no issue, however there's plenty of sick people out there and I'm not really willing to risk it. Personally.
seemingly untouched minis are not always replaced. Also, the pile on the cart is neither secured, nor guarded, making tampering oh so easy.

Given that rooms are merely cleaned and not sanitized, if the fear is sick people, you may not want to stay in a hotel at all.
Antarius is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 2:23 pm
  #170  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,289
Originally Posted by Antarius View Post
seemingly untouched minis are not always replaced. Also, the pile on the cart is neither secured, nor guarded, making tampering oh so easy.
Not really, have you ever tried taking the top off of one of those mini Thann or (whatever the new one is) bottles? It's pretty much impossible without destroying the bottle.
cmd320 is online now  
Old Aug 30, 19, 3:04 pm
  #171  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: SFO
Posts: 2,831
The health and safety comments are fascinating. Given the frequency that this FT community travels, I would think health and safety risks concerns (from non-single use toiletries) would be at or near zero. But apparently I'm wrong.
EuropeanPete, Antarius and JBord like this.
Troopers is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 3:49 pm
  #172  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Somewhere in Florida
Posts: 2,088
Originally Posted by JBord View Post
These are two problems I expect as well, although I think it will probably be only 1-2 times per year. I often get into my hotel the night before a meeting and get up and go the next day. No way I'll think to check the soap dispenser in each room. So a 30 min delay in the morning likely means I'm not showering, because I won't be late to my client's meeting. That bar of soap never lets me down, and I feel cleaner than with the liquid soap.
Besides the moldy dispensers I encountered last month (and posted the photo above), separately I've also encountered non-functional/empty dispensers.
KRSW is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 3:55 pm
  #173  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 90,961
L
Originally Posted by s0ssos View Post
I don't think you understand infection prevention/control measures.
Then what do you think, for surely you just “don’t think”? Or maybe what you say is what you mean?

Your post proclaims “Cleanliness is not next to godliness. And not a goal to be achieved by everyone.” Surely, dipping one’s hands in a public facility’s heavily-used toilet bowl isn’t what anyone here would suggest be the goal along with other things to get away from “cleanliness”?

Originally Posted by s0ssos
As for "investing" in antibiotics, pharmaceuticals don't "invest" in things to help or be productive. They do it to make money. If there were money in it ...
I understand the pharmaceutical business well enough. Investing in new drugs — antibiotics in particular in this case — isn’t all that productive for pharma when the costs of discovery of new antibiotics with higher efficacy levels have been de facto hiked up and compromised as a consequence also of increased (and increased variety of) drug resistance due to use/overuse of more and more antibiotics.

If Marriott really cared about the environment and public health — not that they really do — they would be willing to cut back on the hotel gross margins from food and beverage sales/service. But they don’t really care, and they are really just cherry picking to maximize their profits and/or to virtue signal to gullible audiences that don’t fully appreciate that there can be negative environmental and public byproducts from moves that at first blush may seem to be positive overall but really may or may not be.

With or without any appreciation for anything beside a simple-minded “stop single-use toiletry containers” when it comes to this Marriott move, there are going to be practical problems that this kind of move will lead to for hotel customers.

There is a reason why one of the first things I do upon entering a bathroom with fixed toiletry dispensers is to check to make sure that:

1. there is actually stuff in the dispensers to come out; and

2. the stuff comes out; and

3. it seems to be like soap rather than body lotion or who knows what else.

It’s because the hotels mess up way more extremely with dispenser toiletries than single-use toiletries and because cleanliness does matter enough that it’s a public health benefit to have people make more of a habit of properly washing their hands and doing so rather frequently at that.

Washing hands without soap is just a very poor substitute to washing hands with proper soap without manual pump dispenser issues.
closecover likes this.

Last edited by GUWonder; Aug 30, 19 at 4:33 pm
GUWonder is online now  
Old Aug 30, 19, 5:18 pm
  #174  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JMB Diamond Metal Card (OWE) , SAS Eurobonus Gold, (*G) Marriott Ambassador (LTP)
Posts: 11,512
I did not get to the articles yesterday as work took my day, will see if I can get some time this weekend.

I will skip the MSN one though, I doubt the scientific value of that one. Maybe slight higher than News of the World?
CPH-Flyer is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 5:26 pm
  #175  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 90,961
Originally Posted by CPH-Flyer View Post
I did not get to the articles yesterday as work took my day, will see if I can get some time this weekend.

I will skip the MSN one though, I doubt the scientific value of that one. Maybe slight higher than News of the World?
I wouldn’t skip the MSN one, which is but a redistribution of what is indeed akin to News of the World; but it mentions some names that are useful to follow-up on for those who find information valuable in a world where otherwise things are packaged to grab attention as part of the vulgar orders of the day.
GUWonder is online now  
Old Aug 30, 19, 6:12 pm
  #176  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: 42.1% in PDX , 49.9% in PVG & 8% in the air somewhere
Programs: Marriott Ambassador Elite, UA 1K, AS MVP GLD 75K, DL Pt
Posts: 1,031
Originally Posted by Troopers View Post
The health and safety comments are fascinating. Given the frequency that this FT community travels, I would think health and safety risks concerns (from non-single use toiletries) would be at or near zero. But apparently I'm wrong.
Golden post, but it is the internet

chipmaster is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 7:44 pm
  #177  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,847
Originally Posted by cmd320 View Post
With things people can tamper with who knows what could be in there. Urine, semen, fecal matter, acid, Nair, whatever. Yes, in 99.9% of cases there will probably be no issue, however there's plenty of sick people out there and I'm not really willing to risk it. Personally.
Well, the good news is that you won't have a choice.
Policy decisions aren't made at the individual level. There are always different preferences. But that's not how policy works. It is for the good of the whole. Not for 0.01% of the people.
s0ssos is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 7:48 pm
  #178  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,847
Originally Posted by GUWonder View Post
L

Then what do you think, for surely you just “don’t think”? Or maybe what you say is what you mean?

Your post proclaims “Cleanliness is not next to godliness. And not a goal to be achieved by everyone.” Surely, dipping one’s hands in a public facility’s heavily-used toilet bowl isn’t what anyone here would suggest be the goal along with other things to get away from “cleanliness”?

So, do you think the ideal scenario for "infection prevention" is sterilizing the hotel rooms? Do you think having disposable everything is a great solution short of that?

Originally Posted by GUWonder View Post
I understand the pharmaceutical business well enough. Investing in new drugs — antibiotics in particular in this case — isn’t all that productive for pharma when the costs of discovery of new antibiotics with higher efficacy levels have been de facto hiked up and compromised as a consequence also of increased (and increased variety of) drug resistance due to use/overuse of more and more antibiotics.
Actually, I don't think you understand pharmaceutical companies nor research. It isn't so much "discovering" new antibiotics, and efficacy doesn't even make any sense if you know what you're talking about (I've never heard the term "efficacious" antibiotic. What is an efficacy level of an antibiotic?)
It isn't so much about drug resistance, though that is usually the impetus for developing a new antibiotic. It is about the adverse effects/side effects and the fact drugs have to be super-duper safe nowadays. Otherwise it is hard to get approval, with the double whammy of lawsuits. Which can easily wipe out your profits from a blockbuster drug (look at Merck and Vioxx)
s0ssos is offline  
Old Aug 30, 19, 8:33 pm
  #179  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 90,961
I think some need to first understand what “I don’t think” means in this context, as the phrase may or may not be intended to mean “I think you don’t ......”.

Providing questionable lessons about the pharmaceutical industry, antibiotic development pipelines or health and hygiene science related to this Marriott move is of diminished utility when they come packaged with grammar which doesn’t facilitate a meaningful, good-faith discussion about this Marriott move and topics related to it. But good-faith discussions about all of this are far and few between when one or more idea about this Marriott change is rooted in an ideological or financial self-interest to defend Marriott on this move come whatever may from it.

Originally Posted by s0ssos
So, do you think the ideal scenario for "infection prevention" is sterilizing the hotel rooms? Do you think having disposable everything is a great solution short of that?


Actually, I don't think you understand pharmaceutical companies nor research. It isn't so much "discovering" new antibiotics, and efficacy doesn't even make any sense if you know what you're talking about (I've never heard the term "efficacious" antibiotic. What is an efficacy level of an antibiotic?)
It isn't so much about drug resistance, though that is usually the impetus for developing a new antibiotic. It is about the adverse effects/side effects and the fact drugs have to be super-duper safe nowadays. Otherwise it is hard to get approval, with the double whammy of lawsuits. Which can easily wipe out your profits from a blockbuster drug (look at Merck and Vioxx)
It almost seems like I might have to provide a lesson in my meaning of “also” in the post of mine quoted by the above.

But I’ll let Wikipedia be your guide about “efficacy”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy

If Marriott went only to touch-less toiletry dispensers, there would be less of a concern about pathogen exposure via the dispensers. But Marriott hotels are probably too cheap to do that and do it in a way that has them always fully functional for hotel guests.

Last edited by GUWonder; Aug 30, 19 at 9:51 pm
GUWonder is online now  
Old Aug 30, 19, 10:58 pm
  #180  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,289
Originally Posted by s0ssos View Post
Well, the good news is that you won't have a choice.
Policy decisions aren't made at the individual level. There are always different preferences. But that's not how policy works. It is for the good of the whole. Not for 0.01% of the people.
I absolutely do have a choice. I can stay elsewhere. I can bring my own travel size products. I can request the large ones be replaced with new ones on arrival.
cmd320 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: