We often come across advertisements that tell us that this particular soap has “antibacterial” properties which help it fight-off germs quicker than any other normal soap. We, the consumers, often believe these statements and for the good health of ourselves and our family, we tend to buy them over normal soaps. However, a latest study has confirmed that these so called “antibacterial” soaps are no better than plain soaps when it comes to getting rid from bacteria.
A team of Korean researchers have found that fighting bacteria becomes easy with if the bacteria are treated for hours with triclosan, which is an over-the-counter antibacterial agent which is often found in these antibacterial soaps. However, the problem is that people only wash their hands for some seconds and thus in real-world usage, the researchers found no evidence that could suggest that antibacterial soaps are better than plain soaps.
Antiseptic effects of triclosan are dependent on the exposure concentration and time. Since, most people wash their hands for only 30 seconds or less with these antibacterial soaps that have only 0.3 percent of triclosan, the antibacterial can hardly be seen in daily use. From the very beginning, the use of triclosan in liquid soaps and triclocarbon in soap cakes has been controversial. While some say that there is lack of scientific evidence which can back-up these claims, others have raised concerns over the safety of these ingredients.
With these new discovery, the very roots of the usage of triclosan in soaps have been shaken and there ineffectiveness to fight off germs better than other plain soaps will only deter people from buying them.