Feet and shoes on Bulkhead?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Using the S26 Wi-Fi Smart Plug you can easily convert your existing appliances into smart devices to be controlled remotely with your phone.

Takes just minutes to setup!

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

burmans

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
7,670
Solutions
1
Points
1,010
That's what happens when sharing a plane with other people, who are all different.
The best thing to do is suck it up for a few hours and then move on with your life.
For those who really can't fly with people who recline/ put up their feet/ snore/ shout/ smell/ use upper class toilet or bring their kinds who do all the above, the solution is simple - buy or lease your own plane and create your own utopia onboard :)

+1 and if you can't you'll probably need to get over yourself, you can whinge all you want (and I'm pretty confident you will) but you won't change anything.
 

Rebekkap

Active Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
909
Points
10
While this type of behaviour is uncouth, my main concern is a 60 yo wearing sneakers. As for the leg stretching, there may be a medical reason.

You're right of course. People aged 60+ should be forced to wear only the most uncomfortable footwear, lest a younger person's eyes be offended by the sight of an older person in comfortable shoes. How shocking! How déclassé! How non-u! Let them fly Jetstar!

Honestly, some people need to get a life and stop worrying about the things other people do that can not possibly have any effect whatsoever on anyone else.
 

AustraliaPoochie

Established Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
4,796
Points
595
No one cares anymore, people do anything these days.
On the one time I flew trans Australia, when Qantas used to give out ice cream, (don't think they do anymore do they?)... I found a wooden ice cream stick in the seat back. Maybe it was from an outside bought ice cream stick or I don't know how long it has been there, if QF used to give out stick ice cream, rather than the small tub.
There is no longer any decorum when flying.
If not young kids being in the QP... or the story of finding used nappies in seat backs, or parents (I have seen this one-baby being changed on the seat while in flight)... ugh. And not being done in the loos mind you.
 

Jos888

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
155
Points
175
While this type of behaviour is uncouth, my main concern is a 60 yo wearing sneakers. As for the leg stretching, there may be a medical reason.

OMG I am over 60 and didn't realise I shouldn't wear sneakers anymore!
 

etops1

Intern
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
79
Points
10
As a regular economy flyer in an aisle seat, I've noticed the disturbing trend of people putting a bare foot over the armrest of the aisle seat in front.

I'd be completely grossed out having that next to my elbow as I'm grossed out enough having it in my eye line.
 

k_sheep

Established Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,907
Points
580
Everyone realises that your hands are probably "dirtier" than your feet, socks or shoes in terms of microbes, right? Not mention the sheer number of potential pathogens in your mouth and throat?
 

Mark3000

Active Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2014
Messages
656
Points
10
As a regular economy flyer in an aisle seat, I've noticed the disturbing trend of people putting a bare foot over the armrest of the aisle seat in front.

I'd be completely grossed out having that next to my elbow as I'm grossed out enough having it in my eye line.

But would you agree that it is the "thought of it" that is grossing you out, and there isn't actually any medical danger to your elbow from having someone's foot on that armrest :)
 

timster

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
348
Points
225
Everyone realises that your hands are probably "dirtier" than your feet, socks or shoes in terms of microbes, right?

If your hands are dirtier than the undersides of your shoes you should warn people not to shake your hand.
 

serfty

Veteran Member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
43,978
Solutions
14
Points
3,300
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Platinum
Everyone realises that your hands are probably "dirtier" than your feet, socks or shoes in terms of microbes, right? Not mention the sheer number of potential pathogens in your mouth and throat?

Perhaps not if the feet-on-bulkhead PAX has just visited the lavatory ...
 

Cynicor

Established Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
3,869
Points
700
This is crazy! I can't believe how fearful some people are of "germs" and what they might do to you. It explains why so many of my patients try to pinpoint when they got their cold, and from whom.

You get colds, you get gastros. You are more likely to get them from the faeco-oral and airborne vectors than from anything on someone's socks, especially when you involve a secondary surface such as the bulkhead.

I've been in row 1 a few times before and often used the bulkhead and by be-socked feet to prop myself up. This probably isn't an issue for the shorter people but I didn't realise it was such a point of contention!
 

Mark3000

Active Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2014
Messages
656
Points
10
This is crazy! I can't believe how fearful some people are of "germs" and what they might do to you. It explains why so many of my patients try to pinpoint when they got their cold, and from whom.

You get colds, you get gastros. You are more likely to get them from the faeco-oral and airborne vectors than from anything on someone's socks, especially when you involve a secondary surface such as the bulkhead.

I've been in row 1 a few times before and often used the bulkhead and by be-socked feet to prop myself up. This probably isn't an issue for the shorter people but I didn't realise it was such a point of contention!

Pure common sense! Obviously from someone who understands microbiology.

I would say too that the lavatory floor, even though it looks dirtier and would have urine drops on it, urine being mostly sterile, would be less risky than the faecal E Coli contaminated taps from people washing their hands after using the toilet.
Honestly people, you really do not need to fear getting a disease from socks on the bulkhead.
Common sense says wipe your hands before eating or putting them in your mouth. Other than that, relax and enjoy life :)
There is a lot of evidence that those who use too much antibacterial soap / washing powder etc have a higher risk of allergic disease too.
 

Pablo

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2011
Messages
466
Points
220
I've just read through the thread and surprised no one has thought about those "windy" passengers who "follow through"!! Imaging sitting on the same seat as them!!!!
 
V

vet

Guest
My socks repel microbes. They're so bad, I always get a window seat so the window gets wound down :)
 

medhead

Suspended
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
20,288
Points
0
socks are fine. dirty, filthy shoes with bits of dog [do] on the bottom are not acceptable anywhere people will touch.
 

timster

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
348
Points
225
You are more likely to get them from the faeco-oral and airborne vectors than from anything on someone's socks, especially when you involve a secondary surface such as the bulkhead.

As malodorous as her socks may have been, we're concerned by the women putting her shoes on the magazine holder (read the OP), likely initiating that very faeco-oral (shoe-hand-mouth) vector.

Regarding secondary surfaces, from people who know about microbiology (too?):
Bacteria Can Linger on Airplane Surfaces for Days
"MRSA lasted longest (168 hours) on material from the seat-back pocket while E. coli O157:H7 survived longest (96 hours) on the material from the armrest."
 
Last edited:

Cynicor

Established Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
3,869
Points
700
As malodorous as her socks may have been, we're concerned by the women putting her shoes on the magazine holder (read the OP), likely initiating that very faeco-oral (shoe-hand-mouth) vector.

Regarding secondary surfaces, from people who know about microbiology (too?):
Bacteria Can Linger on Airplane Surfaces for Days
"MRSA lasted longest (168 hours) on material from the seat-back pocket while E. coli O157:H7 survived longest (96 hours) on the material from the armrest."

Sure, but some of the comments are about socks. Shoes will be a bit worse too, I agree.

But- while it would be nice to think that articles in peer reviewed journals are correct and written by experts, this just isn't always the case. I have published research and I know it is poor quality, medical student research that was done to pass my course and obtain a qualification. These two are not clinical microbiologists but one is a grad student. I haven't looked into the other one in any further detail.

Next, this was not swabs from an air plane surface which would be a more representative/realistic study. Other bacteria colonise particular surfaces and out-compete less efficient/well suited microbes. They have (as far as I can tell, cannot find the published data) mere inoculated materials representing air plane surfaces and then seen how the bacteria go. I will keep trying to find their methods but this is extremely unrealistic already.

Thirdly, they have gone for headline grabbing bacteria. If you want to study something useful, maybe ETEC would be better than EHEC, which is responsible for very few (relatively) illnesses. ETEC is the most common cause of traveller's diarrhoea. MRSA is similar in head-line grabbing potential, but the ability for you to get an illness from coming into contact with S.Aureus, let alone MRSA is very low. I.e. both these bacteria are not really that pathogenic in this circumstance.

I would suggest that my clinical microbiology is as good as that of those two researchers, and I have no worries about EHEC or MRSA from planes or any other non-medical object.

Edit- the other is an associate director for research, and has a PhD. I think it likely that his name ends up on lots of papers which he supervises only minimally or assists in some vague way, otherwise he would be lead author, especially as his name is alphabetically first.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top