Microbiological Testing

Independent Testing

Envirolyte systems and generated solutions (anolyte and catolyte) have been put through extensive series of independent tests and on-site trials including hospitals, breweries, water systems and agricultural environments.

Safer World

Being environmentally friendly, completely safe, non-toxic and non-irritant Anolyte is welcome where traditional chemicals fail to produce the desired results or can't be applied at all.

Better Alternative

The conclusions prove that Anolyte being a low-cost and powerful disinfectant is set to become the preferred solution for many sterilisation, disinfecting and water purification procedures.

I. ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY


Testing of Anolyte against 2 bacterial isolates from the uterus of a mare undertaken by Capital Diagnostics, Scotland, and UK.
S zooepidermicus
Bacterial counts
Dilution 30s 1 min 5 min 10 min 20 min
102 0 0 0 0 0
103 0 0 0 0 0
104 0 0 0 0 0
105 0 0 0 0 0
Total viable count of inoculum > 5000 cfu/ml
E coli
Bacterial counts
Dilution 30s 1 min 5 min 10 min 20 min
102 0 0 0 0 0
103 0 0 0 0 0
104 0 0 0 0 0
105 0 0 0 0 0
Total viable count of inoculum > 5000 cfu/ml

II. ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY

Undertaken by Department of Laboratory Medicine and second department of Internal Medicine, Nagasaki University School of Medicine, Nagasaki, Japan.

Anolyte microbial activity was tested against methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermis, Serratia marcencens, Escheria coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Burkholderia cepacia which are important pathogens.

The bactericidal properties of Anolyte were evaluated with three conventional disinfectants, including 0.1% chlorhexidine (Herbitane solution, ICI-pharma, Osaka, Japan), 0.02% povidone iodine (Isodine solution, Meiji Seika, Tokyo) and 80% ethanol (ethanol for disinfection, Maruisha Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd, Osaka). The selected concentrations represent those commonly used in solutions prepared for handwashing. All disinfectant solutions were mixed with sterile distilled water at the time of their use. Sterile distilled water was used as a control. The results are summarised in Table 1 and Table 2.
Table 1. Bactericidal effect of Anolyte inoculum 1.7 x 104 cfu/mL
Bacteria Disinfectant 10s 60s 180s
MSSA methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
MRSA methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
Staphylococcus epidermis Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
41
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Escheria coli Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
0
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Serratia marcencens Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
27
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Burkholderia cepacia Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
Table 2. Bactericidal effect of Anolyte inoculum 1.7 x 106 cfu/mL
Bacteria Disinfectant 10s 60s 180s
MSSA methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
8
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
MRSA methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
15
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
Staphylococcus epidermis Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
Escheria coli Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
71
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
1
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Serratia marcencens Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
0
0
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
27
>500
0
0
0
0
>500
Burkholderia cepacia Anolyte
0.02% Povidone iodine
80% Ethanol
0.1% chlorhexidine
Control: distilled water
3
>500
0
>500
>500
0
137
0
>500
>500
0
0
0
>500
>500
Conclusion: The number of bacteria was reduced below detection limit following incubation in Anolyte for 10s. The bactericidal activity of Anolyte was similar to that of 80% ethanol, but superior to that of 0.1 chlorhexidine and 0.02% Povidone iodine. We conclude that Anolyte is a low cost but powerful disinfectant.

SPORICIDAL ACTIVITY

Undertaken by Hospital Infection Research Laboratory, City Hospital NHSTrust, and Birmingham, UK.

Log10 spores remaining after exposure to Anolyte or 2% glutaraldehyde
Contact time Anolyte 2% glutaraldehyde
Pre disinfection challenge 7.76 7.76
1 min 4.84 7.63
2 min 2.34 7.60
5 min 1.30 7.46
10 min 0 7.19
20 min 0 6.87
30 min 0 6.34
1 hour 0 2.75
2 hours 0 0
Conclusion: This study shows that Anolyte (ORP > 1100mV and pH 2.0-3.5) generated using equipment produced by the Envirolyte Industries International Ltd. was highly effective as a sporicidal agent. A 6 log10 reduction in test spores was achieved with freshly generated solution in 5 minutes. This is far more rapid than the widely used 2% glutaraldehyde.