
Stanford Expert Explains Antibacterial Soap Ban - CapitalistCartr
https://woods.stanford.edu/news-events/news/stanford-expert-explains-antibacterial-soap-ban
======
MOARDONGZPLZ
Interesting! This seems to be the crux of it:

That [2005 study in Pakistan] compared the health outcomes from antibacterial
soap and soap that was indistinguishable from and otherwise chemically
identical to the antibacterial soap, but without triclocarban. Compared with a
control group who received school supplies, children living in households who
received soap and handwashing promotion had 52 percent less diarrhea, 50
percent less pneumonia and 45 percent less impetigo. Impetigo, a skin
infection, was a particularly important outcome, because laboratory studies
had suggested that triclocarban would have antibacterial activity against the
organisms that most commonly caused impetigo. There was, however, no
difference in any of the health outcomes between children living in households
who received the plain soap compared with children who received the
antibacterial soap.

Related, it appears school supplies are not only ineffective against bacteria
that cause diarrhea, pneumonia, and impetigo, but may cause these ailments.

~~~
kbenson
> Related, it appears school supplies are not only ineffective against
> bacteria that cause diarrhea, pneumonia, and impetigo, but may cause these
> ailments.

Obviously we need to reduce the amount of school supplies these children are
exposed to. I suggest we force them to replace everything with tablets. That
will undoubtedly solve this problem once and for all. Anyone that objects to
this just doesn't care about child health in developing countries. /s

It's actually kind of depressing to write that, and realize the sarcasm marker
is desperately needed not just because Poe's law, but because it's all too
plausible to think this might be a common conclusion. :/

------
Someone1234
I'm glad they're doing this.

This is why I moved our household over to the "Method" brand a few years ago
(no triclosan). I'd happily move again if something else was safer, but I do
enjoy foaming hand soaps.

Also why on our newborn I purchased Waterwipes (wiper + fruit juice only).
They massively reduced diaper rash too compared to the Huggies branded wipes
we were using before (and can be used on the face because they won't upset
stomachs if consumed).

I like the FDA and am glad they exist, but feel like they were slow to act in
this case. We've know for almost ten years (via peer reviewed science) that
these compounds are unsafe and ineffective.

~~~
rexfm
FWIW, we found that we can dilute Dr. Brommer's soap with water and it works
really well in those same foaming soap dispensers (and it foams!). Pure
organic saponified oils for washing my hands... for the win.

~~~
wavesplash
Your suggestion also works for most liquid soaps: Just add ~50% water (mix
well) and they foam in a foam soap dispenser.

~~~
coolgeek
Maybe not...

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Frugal/comments/13by00/if_priced_in...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Frugal/comments/13by00/if_priced_in_line_with_foaming_hand_soap_a_bar_of/c72tj46?context=1)

------
grenoire
In line with this development, the United Nations also recently decided to
release a unanimously ratified declaration regarding antibiotics [1]. It
concerns educating the public on the use of antibiotics, development of new
antibiotics, and surveillance and regulation of current use of antibiotics on
humans and animals.

[1]: [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/un-signs-
groundbre...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/un-signs-
groundbreaking-declaration-to-tackle-antibiotics-threat-a7319396.html)

------
zappo2938
Along the same thought, John's Hopkins tested automatic facets with infrared
sensors and standard facets with hand levers for hazardous bacteria. After the
study they removed all the automatic facets because the standard facets where
much cleaner and saver.[0]

[0]:
[http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/latest_ha...](http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/latest_hands_free_electronic_water_faucets_found_to_be_hindrance_not_help_in_hospital_infection_control)

~~~
aggie
Not necessarily due to the automatic vs. manual distinction but the mechanical
design of the valves.

"While the precise reasons for the higher bacterial growth in the electronic
faucets still need clarification, the researchers say it appears that standard
hospital water disinfection methods, which complement treatments by public
utilities, did not work well on the complex valve components of the newer
faucets. They suspect that the valves simply offer additional surfaces for
bacteria to become trapped and grow."

------
keepper
This reminds me ( and I guess every time i leave a shared bathroom ), how
people really don't know how to wash their hands[1]. I guess anti-bacterial
soap came in as a nice marketing gimmick to quick hand washing.

I've stopped shaking some people's hand's after seeing them "drizzle some
water" for a second after, well, you know what.

[1] [http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-
health/in-...](http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-
depth/hand-washing/art-20046253)

~~~
semi-extrinsic
> Always wash your hands after:

> Touching an animal or animal toys, leashes or waste

I guess having a puppy lick your face is right out then?

~~~
sndean
Dogs' saliva actually has a number of antibacterial molecules (e.g., K9CATH,
etc.) that should kill most pathogens, so you might be okay there.

~~~
tajen
Dogs are capable of... if left unattended. Read TheOatMeal then fill in the
dots ;) [http://pleated-jeans.com/2012/09/17/my-dog-the-paradox-by-
th...](http://pleated-jeans.com/2012/09/17/my-dog-the-paradox-by-the-oatmeal/)

~~~
Xylakant
What do you mean by "if left unattended?" I've yet to see a dog that would
check if a human is around before licking whatever part of his anatomy he just
wants to lick. And they're surprisingly agile when it come to that.

------
nsxwolf
Are they going after the toothpaste next? I've used Colgate Total for like 20
years now and my gums really notice when I run out and use something else for
a week.

~~~
qohen
FWIW, my dentist recommended Colgate Total because it had Triclosan in it; I
don't remember exactly what she said -- it was years ago --- but something
along the lines of it being the one toothpaste that seemed demonstrably better
than others.

(The usual YMMV/talk to your own dentist/etc. disclaimers apply).

------
Negative1
Quick Summary: Probably safe but not any more effective than normal soap.
Possibly harmful to the environment so not worth the risk of environmental
damage.

------
secabeen
It's going to be really interesting to see what Henckel does with Dial soap,
which has been defined by its antibacterial ingredient for years. (I actually
use Dial Basics in the shower because it's the closest thing I can find to
cheap, plain soap with no moisturizers or antibiotics, but that's not a
product they promote much outside of dollar stores.)

~~~
freehunter
Isn't Ivory a pure, plain soap? If Dial goes away or changes, that's still an
option.

~~~
douche
Ivory is the best. One of my favorite things about it is that it isn't
scented, and doesn't attract mosquitoes and black-flies the way some of the
cloyingly sweet and fruity scented soaps tend to.

~~~
acveilleux
Careful... They did release scented ivory and I accidentally bought some,
worse still it was lavender and packaging was only barely different.

------
dsjoerg
One point for science!

------
skgoaspghqoghn
Best solution: make your own hand soap, or find someone who does it for cheap.
Support local products, save money, and save the world at the same time.

~~~
mrob
Plain soap is already very cheap and widely available. With fancy hand-made
soaps you're paying for the image, and usually also scents and colorings that
add nothing to the cleaning power. The inefficiency of small batch production
is likely worse for the environment. If you want to support your local
community I think it's better to support local services than local products,
because services don't benefit from the same economies of scale.

~~~
__jal
> With fancy hand-made soaps you're paying for the image, and usually also
> scents and colorings that add nothing to the cleaning power

I'm confused; with industrial soap, are the scents and colorings free?

I'm pretty sure that if someone had the numbers, the marginal
energy/environmental externalities of a bar of home soap compared to that of
industrial soap + transport + packaging would be miniscule[1].

To look at it from a different angle, I'm also pretty sure it is more energy
efficient to cook large batches of food than small. Do you suggest single
people and couples not cook at home so as to benefit from the energy-saving-
economies of scale?

[1] Q: But what if everybody did it? A: Perhaps it would add up in that world.
But we don't live there.

~~~
johncolanduoni
> I'm pretty sure that if someone had the numbers, the marginal
> energy/environmental externalities of a bar of home soap compared to that of
> industrial soap + transport + packaging would be miniscule[1].

> [1] Q: But what if everybody did it? A: Perhaps it would add up in that
> world. But we don't live there.

If you're comparing like with like, that shouldn't make a difference (unless
you claim widespread small-scale soap production is somehow actively hurt by
more people doing it).

> To look at it from a different angle, I'm also pretty sure it is more energy
> efficient to cook large batches of food than small. Do you suggest single
> people and couples not cook at home so as to benefit from the energy-saving-
> economies of scale?

You're talking about solving a huge coordination problem. They're talking
about keeping on using a solution to a huge coordination problem that already
exists.

~~~
__jal
> If you're comparing like with like, that shouldn't make a difference (unless
> you claim widespread small-scale soap production is somehow actively hurt by
> more people doing it).

No.

As best I can tell, the GP post was claiming that those considering making
their own soap should not, due to environmental concerns. Exploring a scenario
in which everyone in the world suddenly converting to home lye soap might be
an interesting thought experiment, but has nothing to do with the real world.

> You're talking about solving a huge coordination problem. They're talking
> about keeping on using a solution to a huge coordination problem that
> already exists.

Perhaps I am, in a world in which everyone abruptly started making their own
soap last week.

In this world, I'm talking about arguments that fail because they are
predicated on extremely weak claims of economy of scale.

------
tn13
Please correct me if I am wrong but government banned something because it is
not useful ? Or were these soaps violating "No Harm Done" rule too ? When is
government banning Axe for failure to attract hot chicks ?

~~~
MOARDONGZPLZ
From the article: "Antibacterial soaps are biologically active, and they have
no proven efficacy. So, I don't see dumping tons of them into the environment
each year as being a good idea."

~~~
tn13
Is FDA authorized to ban things because of the impact it might have on
environment ? I thought FDA was restricted to people

~~~
ubernostrum
The quote is from the article, which is an interview with someone who's an
expert on this but who is not one of the FDA officials who made the final
decision. The interview includes both questions about the FDA's action, and
questions about the expert's own personal opinion. The quote you replied to is
an answer to a question asking for the expert's own personal opinion.

It's also not a very long article, and you could have read it to find this out
for yourself instead of jumping to conclusions.

