Antibacterial Soap No Better And May Be Worse Than Plain Soap

[Ivan Seeking]

ANN ARBOR, Mich., Aug. 16 -- Washing hands with an antibacterial soap was no more effective at reducing bacterial levels or preventing illness than washing with ordinary soap, researchers said. Action Points

Explain to interested patients that antibacterial soaps are no better at preventing infection symptoms -- coughing, sneezing, diarrhea -- than plain soap, and may cause some bacteria to become resistant to commonly used antibiotics.
Furthermore, the soaps, most of which contain the antimicrobial triclosan, produced worrisome antibiotic cross-resistance among different species of bacteria, according to a study reported in a supplement to the Sept. 1 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases.

...Many of the available bacterial-reduction studies have shown that increased application time tends to result in greater efficacy, a practice not typical in real-world practice, the researchers said.[continued]

http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/GeneralInfectiousDisease/tb/6432

I have often wondered about this. AFAIK contact time is always important for antibacterial agents, but I checked some soap that we had which only says to wash hands, and rinse. .

 

[Chi Meson]

We have been using antibacterial hand soap for 6 years now. This coincides with changing diapers. I think that if we didn't have our fingers in **** several times a day, we wouldn't bother. And we scrub for some time too.

Our youngest is 2 years old now, I think we're nearly done with poopers.

 

[Cyrus]

I wipe my hands on my pants, like real men do. Man laws.

 

[leright]

I think I have read about this before.

 

[Moridin]

This is madness. The general public should not be generally using antibacterial soap or toothpaste if it is not necessary. I wonder how long it will take for us to return to the Dark Ages? I don't want to be around when broad spectrum antibiotics and general washing fails to protect us.

 

[Moonbear]

I was pretty sure this was old news.

I have my doubts about pre-lathered soaps too. I keep encountering these more and more in public restrooms and don't understand the concept. Whether it's true or not, I always associate the foaming of soaps when you're scrubbing with them with them being effective at lifting away dirt from your hands. If the soap is already foamed, I'm not sure if that works. I also think that if you aren't taking enough time to wash your hands to lather up the soap, the problem isn't lack of soap lather, but lack of sufficient time washing your hands. What sort of lazy person can't lather up soap?

I have to wonder how many people missed those pre-school lessons on handwashing that they think flicking their hands under the faucet does anything? 30 seconds of handwashing is the minimum for lathering up, and you need to wash ALL of your hand, not just rub your palms together...wash between your fingers too.

Of course, I've realized it's nearly impossible to find non-antibacterial soap anymore...at least in terms of the liquid handsoaps. I prefer those over the mess a bar of soap leaves next to the sink. The last time I went shopping for them, I couldn't find any that didn't say antibacterial on it. Otherwise, I would only keep it in the cat's bathroom for when I scoop the litterbox.

 

[DaveC426913]

We have a tough time finding regular liquid hand soap too, but it can be done.

 

[NoTime]

Afaik, all liquid soaps and detergents (including shampoo) have always had fungicides and bactericides.
Otherwise, they would quickly turn into gray goo as some life forms consider these good to eat.

I never got around to finding out if what they are now advertising as antibacterial contains something additional or if they are just pointing out the existing condition.

 

[zoobyshoe]

So, the question is how antibacterial soap ever became so widely used if there's no scientific evidence it's better than regular soap. Advertising hype alone?

 

[Moonbear]

So, the question is how antibacterial soap ever became so widely used if there's no scientific evidence it's better than regular soap. Advertising hype alone?

Yep. The power of advertising is amazing. It came along with a whole slew of products aimed at germ-phobes. I'm trying to recall which came first, the antibacterial soap, or the hand sanitizer stuff (i.e., was the wide introduction and advertising of antibacterial soap a reaction to people going "soapless" with that hand sanitizer stuff that they perceived as better at killing germs, again, in spite of lack of any scientific evidence). The other products that have come along in the germ-phobe wake are things like disposable toilet scrubbers, bleach-soaked wipes for counter tops, etc.

 

[zoobyshoe]

What sort of lazy person can't lather up soap?

It has always been regarded as too much of a pain in the butt, even when lives are at stake:

"He lectured publicly about his results in 1850, however, the reception by the medical community was cold, if not hostile. His observations went against the current scientific opinion of the time, which blamed diseases on an imbalance of the basical "humours" in the body. It was also argued that even if his findings were correct, washing one's hands each time before treating a pregnant woman, as Semmelweis advised, would be too much work. Nor were doctors eager to admit that they had caused so many deaths."

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blantisceptics.htm

 

[zoobyshoe]

Yep. The power of advertising is amazing. It came along with a whole slew of products aimed at germ-phobes. I'm trying to recall which came first, the antibacterial soap, or the hand sanitizer stuff (i.e., was the wide introduction and advertising of antibacterial soap a reaction to people going "soapless" with that hand sanitizer stuff that they perceived as better at killing germs, again, in spite of lack of any scientific evidence). The other products that have come along in the germ-phobe wake are things like disposable toilet scrubbers, bleach-soaked wipes for counter tops, etc.

It's amazing. The way it was showing up everywhere as the newly accepted standard operating procedure for public soap dispensers automatically implied important official recommendation in my mind. Funny to find out it was all about catering to germophobes.

 

[Moridin]

Wonder how long it will take before they start adding vancomycin to the drinking water?

 

[mgb_phys]

Wonder how long it will take before they start adding vancomycin to the drinking water?

Didn't the USA just allow one of the last MRSA beating antibiotics to be used in beef cattle? So it probably already has been.

>zoobyshoe
Nice quote, I wonder at what point doctors will have saved enough lives to cancel out the number of people they killed?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Wonder how long it will take before they start adding vancomycin to the drinking water?

That would be a funny joke on the germophobes since:

"Vancomycin never became first line treatment for Staphylococcus aureus for several reasons:

1. The drug must be given intravenously, because it is not absorbed orally."

-Wikipedia

 

[zoobyshoe]

Didn't the USA just allow one of the last MRSA beating antibiotics to be used in beef cattle? So it probably already has been.

>zoobyshoe
Nice quote, I wonder at what point doctors will have saved enough lives to cancel out the number of people they killed?

In another version of the story I read it was pointed out that the majority of pregnant women being treated at the Vienna hospital were low-income or impoverished, and it wasn't considered of much importance if they and their children died. All this handwashing was really too much trouble in their case.

 

[Moridin]

That would be a funny joke on the germophobes since:

"Vancomycin never became first line treatment for Staphylococcus aureus for several reasons:

1. The drug must be given intravenously, because it is not absorbed orally."

-Wikipedia

Using antibacterial ingredients it in hand soap is a joke on the germophobes as well. The question was really 'what is the next ignorant thing they make up to try and save people when it is actually harmful'.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Using antibacterial ingredients it in hand soap is a joke on the germophobes as well. The question was really 'what is the next ignorant thing they make up to try and save people when it is actually harmful'.

This particular problem, increasingly resistant strains of bacteria, is allegedly primarily an iatrogenic one: a long period of doctors misprescibing antibiotics in cases of flu virus. The word has gotten out though, and they've stopped doing this.

 

[mgb_phys]

The anti-bacterial hand washes they have started putting at the entrances to all the wards in the UK seem to be just alcohol - presumably bacteria aren't going to build up an immunity to having their cells dehydrated.

Next question is do you use them on the way in or out ? Personally I try to keep my hands in my pockets in hospitals ( as well as in biochemistry and high voltage labs)

 

[zoobyshoe]

The anti-bacterial hand washes they have started putting at the entrances to all the wards in the UK seem to be just alcohol - presumably bacteria aren't going to build up an immunity to having their cells dehydrated.

I don't know. But if this method works, it's not clear to me why doctors and surgeons don't simply immerse their arms in a tub of alcohol rather than go through a lengthy medical wash up.

 

[mgb_phys]

Doctors attitudes don't seem to have changed too much since the 1850 report, I was talking to some and asked why their operating theatres were so much dirtier than my clean room and why they didn't have such simple features as laminar flow hoods.
They claimed that there was no point in being cleaner than the patient!

An aneasthetist my mum worked with 40years ago when she was training invented the gas exchange and filter system for theatres when the anesthetics were toxic enough that you didn't want to breathe them too much, this also had the effect of creating a positive pressure clean room.
When they switch to safe intravenous drugs all this technology was forgotten about.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Doctors attitudes don't seem to have changed too much since the 1850 report, I was talking to some and asked why their operating theatres were so much dirtier than my clean room and why they didn't have such simple features as laminar flow hoods.
They claimed that there was no point in being cleaner than the patient!

An aneasthetist my mum worked with 40years ago when she was training invented the gas exchange and filter system for theatres when the anesthetics were toxic enough that you didn't want to breathe them too much, this also had the effect of creating a positive pressure clean room.
When they switch to safe intravenous drugs all this technology was forgotten about.

There's nothing more ironic than picking up a new disease or infection at the hospital. ER had one episode about this: the big fat guy who answers the phones wasn't washing his hands after using the bathroom.

 

[Moridin]

This particular problem, increasingly resistant strains of bacteria, is allegedly primarily an iatrogenic one: a long period of doctors misprescibing antibiotics in cases of flu virus. The word has gotten out though, and they've stopped doing this.

Or doctors prescribing shifting antibiotics in degenerated Russian hospitals and prisons. Or doctors prescribing antibiotics that people sell on the black market in Russia and the United States for money or for drugs. Or people buying random antibiotics on the black market for self-medication.

 

[Moonbear]

I don't know. But if this method works, it's not clear to me why doctors and surgeons don't simply immerse their arms in a tub of alcohol rather than go through a lengthy medical wash up.

It doesn't work, so it's especially disturbing if they have those in hospitals! Well, let's put it this way, soaking in alcohol will kill a reasonable amount of germs, but it takes about a half hour of soaking with 70% ethanol, and I don't think anyone wants to soak anybody part in alcohol that long. Even with the surgical scrubs used (betadine), it takes 10 min of scrubbing (with a scrub brush and sponge, not just rubbing hands together) to be considered properly scrubbed to don sterile surgical gloves and gowns (the scrubbing is just a secondary protection should a glove break, and is not sufficient by itself to be sterile).

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The reason that alcohol is used is not for its anti-bacterial properties; rather it is used because it is a good solvent and very effective at removing contaminants.

 

[zoobyshoe]

It doesn't work, so it's especially disturbing if they have those in hospitals! Well, let's put it this way, soaking in alcohol will kill a reasonable amount of germs, but it takes about a half hour of soaking with 70% ethanol, and I don't think anyone wants to soak anybody part in alcohol that long. Even with the surgical scrubs used (betadine), it takes 10 min of scrubbing (with a scrub brush and sponge, not just rubbing hands together) to be considered properly scrubbed to don sterile surgical gloves and gowns (the scrubbing is just a secondary protection should a glove break, and is not sufficient by itself to be sterile).

Them germs are hardy.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Or doctors prescribing shifting antibiotics in degenerated Russian hospitals and prisons. Or doctors prescribing antibiotics that people sell on the black market in Russia and the United States for money or for drugs. Or people buying random antibiotics on the black market for self-medication.

I hadn't heard of these problems. Much harder to contain.

 

[Moridin]

I hadn't heard of these problems. Much harder to contain.

Details on that, and the things mentioned by Moonbear are described at length in books such as Garrett's "Betrayal of Trust: The Collapse of Global Public Health" (Hyperion 2000)

 

[mgb_phys]

There's nothing more ironic than picking up a new disease or infection at the hospital.

It's usually keyboards. You know how filthy your keyboard is, imagine ne used by every doctor and nurse on a ward! It's even worse when you see them using the keyboard while wearing gloves.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A hospital is a very good place to get sick.

CBS) About two million infections are acquired in U.S. hospitals each year, killing about 90,000 patients. [continued]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/14/earlyshow/contributors/emilysenay/main680009.shtml

Tsu could probably talk all day about why this happens, but a large part of it comes down to bad patient handling practices, lazy cleaning crews, budget cuts, and in general a profession that is now run by business managers instead of medical professionals.

 

[zoobyshoe]

It's usually keyboards. You know how filthy your keyboard is, imagine ne used by every doctor and nurse on a ward! It's even worse when you see them using the keyboard while wearing gloves.

Adds new meaning to the term "computer virus".