y Alan Mozes
HealthDay Reporter
THURSDAY, Sept. 17, 2015 (HealthDay News) — When it comes to ridding
your hands of bacteria, plain old soap is just as good as many
“antibacterial” soaps, new research contends.
Lab tests conducted by a team of Korean researchers revealed that
when bacteria are exposed to the standard over-the-counter antibacterial
ingredient known as triclosan for hours at a time, the antiseptic
formulation is a more potent killer than plain soap.
The problem: People wash their hands for a matter of seconds, not
hours. And in real-world tests, the research team found no evidence to
suggest that normal hand-washing with antibacterial soap does any more
to clean the hands than plain soap.
“[The] antiseptic effect of triclosan depends on its exposure
concentration and time,” explained study co-author Min Suk Rhee, a
professor in the department of biotechnology and the department of food
bioscience and technology at the College of Life Sciences and
Biotechnology at Korea University in Seoul.
But most people who wash their hands with antibacterial soap do so
for less than 30 seconds, Rhee noted, using formulations containing less
than 0.3 percent triclosan — the maximum allowed by law. And that
combination, he said, is “not adequate for having an antibacterial
effect.”
Rhee and his colleagues outline their findings in the Sept. 16 issue of the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.
Triclosan is the antibacterial component of liquid soap. In bar
formulations, it’s triclocarban, according to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. These ingredients have been somewhat controversial. Some
contend there is no scientific evidence to back up claims that these
products are more effective than regular soap. Others have argued that
these ingredients aren’t safe.
But there isn’t any proof that triclosan is unsafe, the FDA said.
However, the FDA cautioned that animal studies have raised concerns that
the antiseptic may interfere with normal hormonal regulation, or may
contribute to antibiotic resistance.
To address both issues, in 2013 the FDA proposed passage of a new
rule that would — as of 2016 — require soap manufacturers to provide
more solid safety and effectiveness research to back up all
antibacterial claims related to triclosan. If the rule is ultimately
approved, failure to provide such evidence would result in either the
relabeling of triclosan soap packaging to remove all antibacterial
claims, or the removal of triclosan.
To see if triclosan made a difference in controlling bacteria in the
current study, investigators placed 20 strains of bacteria into
laboratory test tubes. They exposed the test tubes to both plain soap
and soap containing 0.3 percent triclosan. The tubes were preheated to
mimic typical hand-washing temperatures, the study said.
When bacteria were continuously exposed to triclosan for very long
periods of time — nine hours or more — the antiseptic demonstrated
“significantly” stronger antibacterial properties, the researchers said.
However, lab exposure to just 10, 20 or 30 seconds of triclosan soap
translated into no more antibacterial benefit than similar exposures to
plain soap, the study revealed.
A follow-up test involving 16 healthy adults confirmed these
findings. All participants first had their hands exposed to bacteria.
They then washed their hands and lower forearms in warm water for 30
seconds with either plain soap or 0.3 percent triclosan soap, the study
said.
The result: While both soaps were largely effective at eliminating
bacteria, the difference between the two soaps was “non-significant.”
Still, Rhee stressed that this result is not the final word on all antibacterial soap products.
“Our study [only] means that the triclosan in soap does not always guarantee higher antimicrobial efficacy during hand-washing.”
Brian Sansoni, a spokesman for the American Cleaning Institute in
Washington, D.C., said his organization believes that “antibacterial
soaps and washes remain a part of effective daily hygiene routines for
millions of people who want the extra germ-killing benefit that these
products offer. They have a long track record of safety and
effectiveness, backed by decades of scientific data and research.”
Dr. Leonardo Trasande, an associate professor with the departments of
pediatrics, population health and environmental medicine at NYU Langone
Medical Center in New York City, said that “this study clearly
reinforces the common sense notion that soap and water work just fine.”
“The FDA has raised concerns about the safety of triclosan, and this
study shows it may not provide any benefit anyway,” he said. “So, I
would say that in most cases plain soap does the trick. Which is what
moms have been saying since the 1930s and ’40s. Turns out they were
right.”Antibacterial Soaps Fail to Beat Plain Soap
- Blogger Comment
- Facebook Comment
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
0 yorum:
Post a Comment