Regular
soap is just as effective as anti-bacterial soap at getting rid of germs
through hand washing, a new study finds. This is hardly the first study to find
no difference between the two types of soap, but it is the first to test
regular and anti-bacterial soaps against 20 strains of bacteria in a lab, the
researchers said. The investigators also tested the soaps on people's dirty
hands. In both the lab and the real-life trials, regular soap performed just as
well as anti-bacterial soap, which contained the controversial chemical
triclosan, according to the study from researchers in South Korea..
"This study shows that presence of antiseptic ingredients (in this
case, triclosan) in soap does not always guarantee higher anti-microbial
efficacy during hand washing," the study's senior author, Min-Suk Rhee, a
researcher of food bioscience and technology at Korea University in Seoul,
South Korea, said. The soaps used in the study were identical except for
the triclosan, an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent developed in the early
1960s that is the most commonly used antiseptic ingredient in soap, the
researchers said. Today, manufacturers add triclosan to an array of products,
including toothpaste, shampoo, clothing, kitchenware, furniture and toys, with
the goal of reducing or preventing bacterial contamination and growth, the
researchers said. However, triclosan has been linked to several negative
effects on health. Research has tied it to antibiotic resistance among germs,
and allergies and hormone disruption in people. One study even found that
long-term exposure to triclosan might cause cancer in mice . In response to
some of these downsides, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a
proposal in 2013 that asked companies to prove that anti-microbial products
were safe for people to use, and that these products were more effective than
plain soap and water in preventing the spread of germs. To investigate, the
researchers of the new study tested regular and anti-microbial soaps against a
panel of bacteria, including Listeria , Salmonella and Staphylococcus , which
were recommended for anti-microbial soap testing by the FDA. To recreate the
conditions of a people washing their hands, the researchers exposed the
bacteria for 20 seconds to one of two conditions: regular soap and soap with
0.3 percent triclosan , the maximum amount allowed by law. (Twenty seconds is
length of time the FDA recommends people spend washing their hands.) The
researchers conducted the experiment at two temperatures: room temperature
(71.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or 22 degrees Celsius) and again at a warmer
temperature (104 degrees F, or 40 degrees C). It's unclear why triclosan didn't
outshine regular soap, but perhaps the substance needs more time to do its
work, the researchers said. (Indeed, when the soap was left on the bacterial
samples for 9 hours, it worked better than the regular soap, the investigators
found.) It's also possible that ingredients in the soap hampered triclosan's
anti-microbial abilities , the researchers said. In the second experiment, 16
healthy adult volunteers had their hands doused with bacteria ( Serratia
marcescens ) and then washed their hands with either regular or anti-microbial
soap in warm water for 30 seconds. Again, there was no significant difference
between the soaps, the researchers found. The results suggest that
manufacturers should scale back claims that anti-bacterial soaps work better
than regular soaps, Rhee said. "If the manufacturer would like to
advertise the antiseptic efficacy of their products, they should supply
scientific evidence to support the claims," Rhee said. It's encouraging
that researchers are examining triclosan's effectiveness in soap, said Dr.
Pritish Tosh, an infectious diseases physician at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota,
who was not involved with the study. "There's a real issue of increasing
antibiotic resistance that we're seeing across the country and across the
world," Tosh said. "And a lot of this is related to unnecessary
anti-microbial use . If soap with triclosan has harmful long-term effects, and
if it performs no better than regular soap, "it makes us question why
these products even exist," he said. :
No comments:
Post a Comment