The Benefits

  • Active ingredient kills 99.99% of disease causing germs in the first couple of minutes, continued activity for up to 6 hours.
  • Repeated application increases germ killing effectiveness throughout the day.
  • Formulated to not dry out hands or cuticles and leaves hands feeling silky soft
  • Essential oils protect and soften hands against drying
  • Safe for children
  • Food safe
  • No eye hazard
  • Safe for disinfecting hard surfaces like cell phones, airline seat areas, grocery cart handles, toilet stalls, door handles, and school desks
  • Container 100% recyclable

The Science

In today’s culture people are more aware of germ exposure and transmission like never before(6, 7). We are educated by various media on how to sneeze properly, how and when to use hand sanitizers, not to touch our faces, to wash our hands more frequently, and these guidelines are as prevalent in schools as they are in the hospital setting nationwide(8-14). As a result, hand sanitizer purchases have increased in proportion to awareness. While alcohol hand sanitizers are very effective at killing pathogenic germs, and are the gold standard in preventing the spread of germ through hand and surface contact. Alcohol hand sanitizers have a major drawback: when the alcohol evaporates the hands are vulnerable to repopulation with pathogens until the next use. If one were to shake hands with someone who had e.coli or cold virus on their hands, they would become exposed to the pathogens. With alcohol hand sanitizers, protection is momentary at best and nonexistent after the alcohol has evaporated. Because of this, an unmet need exists for hand sanitizers that can go beyond the first few seconds and minutes, and provide extended efficacy and limited protection for the next few hours or more. That doesn’t mean they need to be 99.99% effective, as all of them are required to be in the first couple of minutes, but that they can provide some protection against pathogenic re-exposure in the interim until reapplication is desired. That requires active ingredients that will not evaporate or absorb into the skin, but remain in contact with the skin surface where target pathogens reside. TOUCH Sanitizing Germ Block is FDA approved and outperformed alcohol hand sanitizer because it contains benzalkonium chloride (BZK). A proven and approved broad spectrum microbicide (kills bacteria, viruses, fungi, molds), that does not evaporate, will not permeate the skin, and maintains residual microbicidal quantities on the surface for hours. BZK has been used in hospitals safely and effectively for over 100 years, the restaurant industry, and for food safety. Literature reports that the residual BZK on the skin actually becomes more effective as additional applications are applied over time(15), providing greater protection from re-exposure to pathogens. The TOUCH formulations were designed to be the ideal carriers for bringing BZK into contact with pathogens on the skin surface. The TOUCH Sanitizing Germ Block carrier quickly evaporates leaving behind the BZK, and demonstrated extended in-vitro efficacy out to 6 hours…


Previous time-kill studies published in the literature(1), and also confirmed by time-kill studies(2) conducted by this company, clearly demonstrated that alcohol based hand sanitizers kill 99.99% of bacteria in first 15 seconds and are the industry standard for which all hand sanitizers are compared. Time-kill studies conducted by this company have also demonstrated that TOUCH Sanitizing Germ Block kills 99.99% of bacteria in 60 seconds, as is required by the FDA, and is typical of BZK based sanitizing products currently available in several sanitizing market sectors(3, 4, 5). What this study has demonstrated is the extended efficacy of TOUCH sanitizing products past the immediate time frames of the first few minutes after application. As one would expect, at T0 both TOUCH Sanitizing Germ Block and the alcohol hand sanitizer showed similar efficacy at killing germs. A drawback for alcohol based hand sanitizers, while very effective, is that they do not have any extended activity beyond the first minute due to evaporation and absorption the active ingredient. TOUCH Sanitizing Germ Block was superior to Alcohol Gel Hand Sanitizer at time points from 5 minutes to 6 hours post application due to the active ingredient remaining in the immediate area over a 6 hour time period to kill bacteria.

  1. McDonnell, G and Russell, AD, Antiseptics and Disinfectants: Activity, Action, and Resistance, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1999, 12(1):147.
  2. An evaluation of four test materials for their antimicrobial properties when challenged with three bacterial species using an in-vitro time kill method. Study Number: 140745-201, 2014, Sponsor: Relevo, Inc., Testing Facility: BioScience Laboratories, Inc.
  3. Oxford, J.S., Potter, W., McLaren, C., and Hardy, W. 1971. Inactivation of influenza and other viruses by a mixture of virucidal compounds. American Society for Microbiology, 21 (4): 606-610.
  4. Nikaido, H. 2003. Molecular basis of bacterial outer membrane permeability revisited. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 67(4): 593-656.
  5. Armstrong, J.A., and Froelich, E.J. 1964. Inactivation of viruses by benzalkonium chloride. Applied Microbiology, 12 (2): 132-137.
  6. Deprez, E, Versprille, A, Nash, J. Ebola-Wary U.S. Seeks Solace in Sanitizer, Prayer, Oct 16, 2014,
  7. Bain, J. Germs in the News, AARP The Magazine, October-November 2014.
  8. White, C., Kolble, R., Carlson, R., Lipson, N., Dolan, M., Ali, Y., and Cline, M. 2003. The effect of hand hygiene on illness rate among students in university residence halls. American Journal of Infection Control, 31:364–370.
  9. White CG, Shinder FS, Shinder AL, Dyer DL., Reduction of illness absenteeism in elementary schools using an alcohol-free instant hand sanitizer, J Sch Nurs. 2001 Oct;17(5):258-65.
  10. Prazuck, T., Compte-Nguyen, G., Pelat, C., Sunder, S., and Blanchon, T. 2010. Reducing gastroenteritis occurrences and their consequences in elementary schools with alcohol-based hand sanitizers. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 29 (11): 994-998.
  11. Lau, C.H., Springston, E.E. , Sohn, M.W., Mason, I., Gadola, E., Damitza, M., and Gupta, R.S. 2012. Hand hygiene instruction decreases illness-related absenteeism in elementary schools: a prospective cohort study. Biomedical Central Pediatrics, 12 (52): 1-7.
  12. Hammond, B., Ali, Y., Fendler, E., Dolan, M,D.S. 2000. Effect of hand sanitizer use on elementary school absenteeism. American Journal of Infection Control, 28:340–6.
  13. Gormley, N.J., Bronstein, A.C., Rasimas, J.J., Pao, M., Wratney, A.T., Sun, J., Austin, H.A., and Suffredini, A.F. 2012. The rising incidence of intentional ingestion of ethanol-containing hand sanitizers. Critical Care Medicine, 40 (1): 290-294.
  14. Aiello, A.E., Coulborn, R.M., Perez, V., and Larson, E.L. 2008. Effect of hand hygiene on infectious disease risk in the community setting. American Journal of Public Health, 98 (8): 1372-1381.
  15. Fazlara, A., and Ekhtelat, M. 2012. The disinfectant effects of benzalkonium chloride on some important foodborne pathogens. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Science, 12 (1): 23-29.