The ongoing debate over whether the antibacterial ingredient triclosan should be in soaps seems to have become an issue that is finally settled.
Scientists in Korea have discovered that using antibacterial soap when hand washing is no more effective than using plain soap. The study examined the effects of triclosan, the most commonly used active antiseptic ingredient used in soap on bacteria. (1)
The researchers examined the effect of triclosan, the most commonly used active ingredient in soap, on bacteria in two ways. The first was to examine the bacterial effects of triclosan in soaps against all 20 strains, and the second compared the ability of antibacterial and non-antibacterial soap to remove bacteria from human hands. The results indicate that there is no significant difference between the effects of plain soap and antibacterial soap when used under 'real life' conditions.
Josh Bloom notes, “Even if there was some utility to triclosan would it matter? Probably not. When you think of the kinds of infections that people commonly catch—colds, norovirus (stomach flu), influenza, bronchitis, others—they have one thing in common: they are all viral infections, not bacterial, so all the triclosan in the world won't make a bit of difference.” He also adds that there is the potential harm of using triclosan versus its benefit. The harm is the possibility of facilitating bacterial resistance, just about the last thing the world needs now. (2)
This isn't the last we will hear about triclosan, which has received much media attention. Michael Shaw quotes from the book Pandemic: The Story of People vs. Germs, by Paul Alexander: “In triclosan's almost 50 year history, no one has died or become seriously ill because of ingesting or coming into contact with the substance. But the war on triclosan will continue. There is too much money to be raised by environmental groups and politicians for it to stop on its own.” (3)
The attacks against triclosan have an all-too-familiar ring to them. Foolishly-contrived lab studies are vastly inflated to suggest danger to humans; an assortment of fear entrepreneurial fund-raising groups do their best to scare consumers into sending in more donations; and the tired canard of 'endocrine disruptor' is invoked yet again. The frighteningly real dangers of pathogens are either not mentioned, or are summarily dismissed.
According to Richard Sedlak, Executive Vice President, Technical & International Affairs, for the American Cleaning Institute, “Triclosan is one of the most thoroughly studied and researched ingredients over the past 40 years. Extensive regulatory and scientific reviews of triclosan by the Food and Drug Administration and the EPA, as well as other regulatory bodies around the world, have found the uses of triclosan to be safe.”
Sedlak cited a 2011 review by the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety. It found that the 'use of triclosan at a maximum concentration of 0.3% in toothpastes, hand soaps, body soaps/shower gels and deodorant sticks is considered safe.' In addition, a 2012 preliminary screening assessment of triclosan by Health Canada and Environment Canada reiterated that triclosan containing products are safe for consumers to use. (3)
The recent research by Korean scientists should at least put an end to the hand washing issue. However, this surely will not satisfy those concerned with triclosan in toothpaste, deodorants, etc., in spite of the safety data mentioned above.
References
S. A.Kim et al., “Bacterial effects of triclosan in soap both in vitro and in vivo,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, September 2015, DOI:10.1093/jac/dkv275
Josh Bloom, “Antibacterial soaps: useless and maybe harmful,” American Council on Science and Health, September 17, 2015
Michael Shaw, “It's not green to be pro-bacteria,” healthnewsdigest.com, October 13, 2012
Jack Dini is author of Challenging Environmental Mythology. He has also written for American Council on Science and Health, Environment & Climate News, and Hawaii Reporter.
The ongoing debate over whether the antibacterial ingredient triclosan should be in soaps seems to have become an issue that is finally settled.
Scientists in Korea have discovered that using antibacterial soap when hand washing is no more effective than using plain soap. The study examined the effects of triclosan, the most commonly used active antiseptic ingredient used in soap on bacteria. (1)
The researchers examined the effect of triclosan, the most commonly used active ingredient in soap, on bacteria in two ways. The first was to examine the bacterial effects of triclosan in soaps against all 20 strains, and the second compared the ability of antibacterial and non-antibacterial soap to remove bacteria from human hands. The results indicate that there is no significant difference between the effects of plain soap and antibacterial soap when used under 'real life' conditions.
