I don't think I have ever seen a toilet brush with a lever to eject the brush. I also don't think it solves much. You'd have to wash your hands anyway.

[–] myrrh@ttrpg.network 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

...say hello to my little friend!..

(basically a compact dish scrubbie + bleach detergent embedded into each disposable head: never have to touch the business end to load refills from the caddy nor to eject used scrubbies into the trash)

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Wow, that is really terrible!

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 3 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

So imagine you use that, would you lick your fingers right afterwards?

[–] myrrh@ttrpg.network 3 points 3 hours ago

...straight back to the prep line at chipotle...

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It’s the difference between a large and a small pathogenic load. It seems as though everyone here believes themselves to be perfect hand washers when they likely are not. You can reduce the chance of an occurrence, but rarely can you completely negate it.

No, you’d scrub your hands clean after washing the toilet using a toilet brush and gloves because you expect to perform the act many times across your utterly fallible life. Why introduce additional risk and hassle for no benefit? Frankly, obstinately arguing for extra chores, particularly ones involving poop water, doesn’t make sense to me.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 1 points 35 minutes ago

I just think that the head of the brush is a rather arbitrary threshold for when a toilet brush is considered icky or not. The whole thing, including your hands, go into the toilet when you use it. Being able to detach the brush head hand free is a very small but costly improvement. I'd go as far as calling it a false sense of security.

Also, I wash my butthole when I shower. With my hand.