3 ms·

It seems really unlikely that vacuuming is worse for your health than not vacuuming. But maybe a good air filter and a roomba that runs while you sleep? I actua

It seems really unlikely that vacuuming is worse for your health than not vacuuming. But maybe a good air filter and a roomba that runs while you sleep? I actually do that already but really because I’m lazy and don’t want to have to dust often.

DoreenMichele 6y ago
If you eliminate things that create dust, like books and carpeting and upholstered furniture, it doesn't get that dusty.
- mattmaroon 6y ago
  “ More than just dirt, house dust is a mix of sloughed-off skin cells, hair, clothing fibers, bacteria, dust mites, bits of dead bugs, soil particles, pollen, and microscopic specks of plastic” Most of those have nothing to do with carpet or furniture. And it’s hard to imagine that whatever a vacuum does to kick them up is worse for you than just breathing them in all the time and disturbing them when you walk. But really, that’s a case for a robot vacuum because it can eliminate the stuff when you’re not there.
  - DoreenMichele 6y ago
    You are basically dismissing my firsthand experience. Maybe that's not your intent, but you start off It seems really unlikely that vacuuming is worse for your health than not vacuuming. I'm telling you from firsthand experience that I don't have a lot of dust and my health is better these days and I don't own a vacuum. I'm not asking you to give up your vacuum. If you want citations supporting the idea that vacuums can spread germs and particulates, here's one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811220/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811220/ If you want to continue to imply that I'm wrong to choose to live without a vacuum cleaner, I'm done. That's out of bounds for debate. It's a personal choice.
    - mattmaroon 6y ago
      There’s basically no chance that’s real but I don’t want to get into one of those weird HN arguments about whether or not vacuums can really make someone less healthy in response to an article about an AWS outage so you do you!
dragonwriter 6y ago
If you have hard floors instead of carpet, “not vacuuming” is not equivalent to “not cleaning”.

DoreenMichele 6y ago

If you eliminate things that create dust, like books and carpeting and upholstered furniture, it doesn't get that dusty.

mattmaroon 6y ago
“ More than just dirt, house dust is a mix of sloughed-off skin cells, hair, clothing fibers, bacteria, dust mites, bits of dead bugs, soil particles, pollen, and microscopic specks of plastic” Most of those have nothing to do with carpet or furniture. And it’s hard to imagine that whatever a vacuum does to kick them up is worse for you than just breathing them in all the time and disturbing them when you walk. But really, that’s a case for a robot vacuum because it can eliminate the stuff when you’re not there.
- DoreenMichele 6y ago
  You are basically dismissing my firsthand experience. Maybe that's not your intent, but you start off It seems really unlikely that vacuuming is worse for your health than not vacuuming. I'm telling you from firsthand experience that I don't have a lot of dust and my health is better these days and I don't own a vacuum. I'm not asking you to give up your vacuum. If you want citations supporting the idea that vacuums can spread germs and particulates, here's one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811220/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3811220/ If you want to continue to imply that I'm wrong to choose to live without a vacuum cleaner, I'm done. That's out of bounds for debate. It's a personal choice.
  - mattmaroon 6y ago
    There’s basically no chance that’s real but I don’t want to get into one of those weird HN arguments about whether or not vacuums can really make someone less healthy in response to an article about an AWS outage so you do you!

dragonwriter 6y ago

If you have hard floors instead of carpet, “not vacuuming” is not equivalent to “not cleaning”.