The study found that hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite mists can effectively kill airborne influenza virus particles without causing significant harm to animals exposed to the gas.
- Hypochlorous acid gas effectively kills influenza A virus aerosols. - A concentration of 1 vol. of gas in 2 million vol. of air can destroy 99% or more of virus particles. - No toxic effects were observed in preliminary experiments on mice and cats inhaling the gas. - Acute irritation of mucous membranes was noted, but it did not increase susceptibility to influenza infection.
This is from Journal of Hygiene in 2024 at https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/studies-on-airborne-virus-infections-iii-the-killing-of-aerial-suspensions-of-influenza-virus-by-hypochlorous-acid/FED980BCC43BD8CD785AA70C05115496
- Influenza - Hypochlorous acid - Aerosols - Virus - Experiment
Journal of Hygiene
Extract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Experiments are described for determining the effect of hypochlorite mists and hypochlorous acid gas on aerosols of influenza A virus.
The virus aerosol is shown to be at least as easily killed by hypochlorite mists as Streptococcus salivarius. It is also killed by liberating hypochlorous acid gas itself into the atmosphere. A concentration of 1 vol. of gas in 2 million vol. of air is probably effective in destroying 99% or more of virus particles when the proportion of these in the air is small.
Preliminary experiments on mice and cats are recorded which failed to reveal any toxic effects produced by inhaling the gas in relatively high concentrations or for prolonged periods. Acute irritation of mucous membranes only was found. This did not appear to lead to any increased susceptibility of mice to subsequent infection with influenza.
We wish to acknowledge our indebtedness to the late Sir Patrick Laidlaw and to Dr R. J. V. Pulvertaft in co-operation with whom the earlier experiments were made. We also wish to thank Dr W. J. Elford, Dr F. C. MacIntosh, Dr R. K. Callow and Dr T. S. Work for their assistance and advice in parts of the investigation.