FDA: Antibacterial scrubs might be worse than plain soap

Antibacterial soaps are not proven to be more effective than plain soap and water and might have some negative side-effects, the FDA said Monday. It is calling for an investigation.

Kiichiro Sato/AP/File
Dawn Ultra antibacterial soap contains the ingredient triclosan. The Food and Drug Administration said there is no evidence that antibacterial chemicals used in liquid soaps and washes help prevent the spread of germs and there is some evidence they may pose health risks.

The Food and Drug Administration issued a proposal that would require manufacturers to prove that antibacterial soaps and body washes more effectively prevent disease than plain soap and water.

There is currently no evidence that antibacterial soaps are any more effective at preventing illness than washing with plain soap and water, said Colleen Rogers, a lead microbiologist at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in a Monday press release.

In fact, the risk of long-term use of antibacterial soap might outweigh the benefits, according to a Monday announcement from the FDA. There are indications that certain ingredients in these soaps may contribute to bacterial resistance to antibiotics and may have unanticipated hormonal effects that are of concern to the FDA.

This new proposal would not apply to hand sanitizers, hand wipes, or antibacterial soaps used in medical settings. So-called “over the counter” antibacterial soaps contain chemical ingredients that plain soaps do not. One of the most common of these commonly added ingredients is triclosan.

Animals studies have shown that triclosan may alter the way hormones work. The chemical can also contribute to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics, thus making medical treatments less effective, the FDA reported. It is not entirely clear how triclosan affects humans.

The FDA has called for consumers, clinicians, environmental groups, industry representatives, and others to weigh in on the proposed rule. The comment period extends for 180 days.

Before the proposal is finalized, companies will need to provide data to support their claims, or – if they do not – the products will need to be reformulated or relabeled, CNN reported.

Some toothpastes and mouthwashes also contain tricolsan, which has been shown to help prevent the gum disease gingivitis, the FDA said, according to Agence France Presse

The FDA works closely with the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure government-wide consistency in the regulation of triclosan, which is also used as a pesticide.

Last week, the FDA announced new voluntary guidelines for manufacturers to phase out the use of antibiotics in livestock feed. 

The two issues were not directly related but were "part of a larger framework of assuring that there is a well established benefit and risk assessment that can be conducted before these products can be just put out there widely for general use,” said Sandra Kweder, deputy director of the FDA's Office of New Drugs, to AFP.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.