What you need to know about the sterilising of medical instruments

In the US, the federal government has been moving towards the use of sterilising devices to remove contaminated blood and body fluids.

In Canada, it is also considering using the technology to remove the potentially infectious substances such as gonorrhea and syphilis.

But the potential use of the technology has sparked some concerns about its safety.

One major concern is the use by private companies of the equipment, known as sterilisation equipment, which has been available for some time in some parts of the world.

Some states are now considering whether the technology can be used for the purpose of sterilisation in public health settings.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has previously recommended that the use in public healthcare of sterilised instruments should be limited.

Its advice said the equipment can be useful to detect pathogens, but should be used with caution.

A second issue is that the equipment has a potential for contamination, with some experts suggesting it could be a major source of infection, especially for older people.

But some medical practitioners, including doctors, believe it can be safely used in other settings.

In its latest review, the WHO said it had seen no evidence that the technology had caused any health problems in public or private health settings, but that it was important that the device was properly sterilised before it could reach those in need.

The WHO said its review was based on a review of data from more than 50 countries, including those where the sterilisation technique is used.

In Canada, there have been several reports of infections that have resulted from using the sterilised devices.

But in the US state of Wisconsin, there has been no reported cases of transmission of the infectious diseases that have been attributed to the sterilisations.

Some health authorities have said the sterilises can be a good way to get rid of potentially infectious diseases.

However, the technology is not without risks.

In addition to the risks of the device’s potential for infection, some health experts have raised questions about whether the sterilise can be effective in removing some pathogens.

For example, some experts believe that certain types of pathogens can survive for weeks or months after sterilising.

And while some experts have said there is no evidence to suggest that the sterilisers can effectively remove the bacteria, some doctors believe it is necessary to use the equipment in a public setting to avoid transmission of infections.

“I think we need to make sure that the public health people are educated that we have to sterilise these things in a sanitary way,” Dr Michael Schulman, a paediatrician in New York City, told the BBC.

“The technology is good for the community, but I don’t think it’s the best use of resources in public settings.”

But there are a number of different scenarios where this is appropriate and that is not to sterilize these pathogens in a place where they might be transmitted.

“If we are using the devices in the same place where someone might get sick, I don.

I don, either.”

A spokesman for the American Society of Civil Engineers, which advises the federal Government on civil engineering, said the agency did not endorse the use.

“We are not aware of any studies or reports that have assessed the safety of this technology,” he said.

“It is important that these types of equipment are properly sterilized before they can be deployed in a safe manner.”

Follow the latest news in health and science with the BBC’s Science in Action newsletter.