Triclosan is not only harmful, but also useless
Scientists are disappointed in antibacterial soap
Dr. Peter Antibacterial soap turned out to be no more effective in fighting germs than ordinary.
The results of the study are published in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (Kim et al., Bacterial effects of triclosan in soap both in vitro and in vivo – VM).
The authors of the study studied the effects of an antibacterial agent containing the antibiotic triclosan (0.3%) and ordinary soap on 20 dangerous strains of bacteria, including E. coli, listeria and salmonella. The bacteria in the Petri Dishes were "soaked" in soap for 20 seconds — that's how long the World Health Organization advises washing hands.
The study was also conducted with the participation of 16 volunteers — the bacteria Serratia marcescens were applied to their hands. Then the participants of the experiment washed their hands in warm water with two types of soap for half a minute.
The researchers did not find a significant difference between antibacterial soap and regular soap — hand washing goes too fast to kill germs. Antibacterial soap worked effectively only when the bacteria were "soaked" in it for 9 hours.
"Consumers should be aware that antibacterial soaps do not guarantee them protection from germs," notes the lead author of the study, Min Suk Ri, an employee of Koryo University in Seoul (in a press release from Oxford University Press Antibacterial soap no more effective than plain soap at reducing bacterial contamination – VM).
Note that the use of triclosan in detergents is often criticized. For example, 40 out of 53 South Korean manufacturers have already refused to add an antibiotic to soap. It is believed that the widespread use of triclosan can lead to a massive spread of antibiotic-resistant microbes. The use of triclosan can also negatively affect the immune system and make the body more vulnerable to traditional diseases, such as colds.
Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru
21.09.2015