Slashdot Mirror
Widely Used Antibacterial Chemical May Impair Muscle Function
New submitter daleallan writes "Triclosan, which is widely used in consumer handsoaps, toothpaste, clothes, carpets and trash bags, impairs muscle function in animal studies, say researchers at UC Davis (abstract). It slows swimming in fish and reduces muscle strength in mice. It may even impair the ability of heart muscle cells to contract. The chemical is in everyone's home and pervasive in the environment, the lead researcher says. One million pounds of Triclosan is produced in the U.S. annually and it's found in waterways, fish, dolphins, human urine, blood and breast milk. The researchers say their findings 'Call for a dramatic reduction in use.' It's in my Colgate Total toothpaste, and in fact, preventing gingivitis is the only use that may be worthwhile, although this makes me think twice about continuing to brush with it."
This isn't the first time Triclosan has been in the news over safety concerns.
... that a substance used to harm life would harm life?
FCKGW 09F9 42
Need to stress this, Triclosan is not the only drug found in waterways
A lot of other substances that human being are using ended up in waterways and they are having all types of side effects on ecology around us
I read an article about 10 years ago that nano-silver particles that we human are using - to kill bacteria, -somehow entered the waterways and end up killing a lot of microbial lifeforms, and the chain reaction (according to the articles that i read, can't find the links to them anymore, sorry) was worrying
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
... is how you put a competitor out of business.
I can certainly dose any given collection of animals with nearly any given chemical in a fashion that will kill them (either quickly or slowly, depending on the particular substance.) I can also dose them with an utterly harmless dose of the most toxic and horrible poisons known to mankind and the animal will live. This applicable to everything from water or oxygen to nasty organic or radiologic stuff.
In the end, it all comes down to the dose. Was the dose these animals were given at all representative of the dosing received by a person using triclosan-based products? (Or animals absorbing triclosan in the environment?) Would have been nice if that press release had mentioned it. Since it didn't, I can guess that the dose is utterly ridiculous.
Theobromine is deadly to dogs but fairly harmless to us
Your neighbor's chihuahua yelping all day (and all night ) long?
Losing sleep because of the inconsiderate neighbor letting that little bitch yelping non-stop?
Well
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Thought it was just age (and, yes, it still could be; I'm not diabetic, so it isn't neuropathy), but my wife insists on using stuff with that in it, and it's damned hard to avoid in normal grocery/department stores.
I'm gonna try harder, now, though.
Suggestions?
We are just begiining to realize how all these medications and chemicals that are poured down the sink and flushed into our planet's oceans and waterways affect our ecology. We are starting to see the effects on the wildlife. Frogs are disappearing at alarming rates because of these chemicals, and their habitats being destroyed.
I never understood the whole "antibacterial" hype. If you broadly and indiscriminately use an antibiotic (and if it is antibacterial, it is an antibiotic per definitionem), all you get are strains of immune bacteria. I am pretty sure that in the average american household, there are more bacteria immune to Triclosan per cubic feet than New York has inhabitants.
...would this be a possible link to the childhood obesity epidemic?
The experiments in mice were performed at 12.5mg/kg, which would be (for the average 65-kg human) a shocking 812.5mg of Triclosan. If your standard amount of handsoap and toothpaste is 2ml that's like brushing your teeth with a 1/3 solution of triclosan and swallowing it.
Like most of the research in PNAS this was not subjected to the high level of peer review expected in most scholarly journals and this paper got through without regard to its relevance and real-world significance.
At a high enough dose, caffeine causes cancer in lab animals. But not at the doses even Slashdotters consume.
12.5 mg/kg! Holy cow! This is ridiculously in excess of any conceivable dose of Triclosan you could get unless you are an utterly unprotected employee of a Triclosan-using factory.
I looked, and maybe I'm blind, but I don't see any way to access the full paper (without a subscription or special request) and the linked article has no such sentence in it.
For one thing, its reversible. Wears off after 60 mins in mice at the dose they were using. Hey that might even mean less free radicals which cause aging. Second, humans aren't going to notice the effects at the doses they receive, otherwise we would have seen it in factory workers that produce triclosan already. So nobody should be alarmed at least, unless maybe it impairs salmon swimming upstream to reproduce.
No idea why. Its mostly women that the utter nonsense known as toilet cleaner is marketed to. Why do I care if there are no bacteria in my toilet? I don't drink out of it , I piss and crap in it. And as soon anyone does that its full of bacteria again so why do I want to spend $$$ on some blue coloured gunk (thats probably a pollutant) to kill the bacteria??
It has been known for decades that household use of antibacterial soaps creates immune bacteria that are causing major problems for hospitals. There is no reason for it, but it takes a new study that shows you are not just fucking shit up for everyone, you are fucking your own shit up too. Now people will stop, selfishness rules.
I doubt many people will really miss the use of Triclosan in things like garbage bags and carpet, but toothpaste is a different story. Dental hygiene seems to me to be the one application where you're better off using wide-spectrum antibiotics all the time. Everyone is born with one set of teeth (yes you could argue two), and you'd like all those teeth to last your lifetime.
"Dental hygiene seems to me to be the one application where you're better off using wide-spectrum antibiotics all the time"
Nonsense. Tooth decay is only caused by a small subset of bacteria and most of them are removed by physical brushing. The only use for the toothpaste is mainly for the flouride. There are thousands of different types of bacteria in the human mouth and no one knows if any of them are useful to our health as the ones in our guts and on our skin are. Just killing the lot of them every day is probably foolish.
I've been trying to convince my wife to stop buying hand wash containing bactericidals and instead just try to keep everything clean with common products.
That said, I would not be amazed if some patent related to triclosan is due to expire. An excellent time for alarm and to push a new, supposedly less harmful, more expensive freshly patented replacement.
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
So are there any "safe" chemicals that we can use?
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
I bet doctors and nurses in swamped urban ERs could get close.
Check any tube of toothpaste from Colgate or Pepsodent sold in any European country, and you will not find Triclosan mentioned on any of them. This begs the question: why are the US citizens treated to this ingredient?
The question of how useful the ingredient actually is also comes up. We over here in Europe don't have this ingredient, and many of us also use "all natural" toothpastes, yet gingivitis is not one bit more common per capita here than with the US citizens. Same goes for fluorization of water - this has been abolished in most European countries long ago, and none of these countries have "cavity problems" larger per capita than the US where fluorization is still done.
Yes, but if triclosan is such a miracle product, why aren't our bodies producing it naturally? Maybe because evolution showed there were some downsides?
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
You are being rather silly, there are a rather significant number of Americans, 600 million or so which is a rather large pool in which to find talented atheletes, compared with other countries where populations are smaller you would expect a larger proportion of medals.
http://www.medalspercapita.com/ is interesting when you break down medals against the population size you find the USA at 49th place and Ireland at 22nd and the UK at 23rd.
with Gold medals the USA rises to 28th place UK is 11th and Ireland is 23rd going by GDP USA was 66th
In terms of obesity the USA ranks No 1 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity 30.6%
followed by Mexico and the UK thou to be fair positions 2 - 9 only are relatively close 18 - 24%
Health wise thou you really don't want to be Mexican.
So more directly on topic you cannot compare the health and fitness of a nation just on the number of medals won. New Zealand seems to be one of the healthiest places to live if your white and English speaking.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Need to stress this, Triclosan is not the only drug found in waterways
Stress it for the terminally oblivious anyways. Anybody who has been paying even a minimal amount of attention for the past couple of decades would have heard mention of prescription and non-prescription drugs and compounds being present in waterways and bodies of water.
Or maybe it's just me being an information sponge.
...and substances (85%) you come into contact with every day have never been tested for their effects on humans. Eighty-five percent of all chemicals have simply never been tested but are used with total disregard for your safety and health.
And we worry about superbugs being created while we have this needless anti-bacterial in everything INCLUDING ourselves. (Did you catch the "it's in urine samples of over 75% of people over 5" bit?)
It is well known and has been for some time that to keep a healthy digestive system, we need certain types of bacteria. Has triclosan been cleared against not killing those important bacteria?
And what of the superbugs?!
I'm all for necessary use of antibiotics and antibacterials, but not for ongoing prophylactic use! It weakens the immune system and build stronger bugs.
This is making me sick...
So instead of killing all the industrialists we just sit here choking on their filth as they drive the species to extinction?
I read an article about 10 years ago that nano-silver particles that we human are using - to kill bacteria, -somehow entered the waterways and end up killing a lot of microbial lifeforms, and the chain reaction (according to the articles that i read, can't find the links to them anymore, sorry) was worrying
The oligodynamic effect is one of the mechanisms by which metals such as silver and copper kill some microorganisms. A benefit in the applications of doorknobs, silverware and copper plumbing; not so much in washing machines and dishwashers that exploit the effect, if what you say is true.
Human consumption of solutions containing colloidal silver (as done in homeopathy) causes an irreversible cosmetic condition, argyria, in which the patient's skin turns a sliver-blue color.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
We find copper for the same reasons as silver. Scientists have also found increases estrogen and estrogen-like chemicals, and there was a story recently about a marked increase in the amount of caffeine in waterways, likely from human waste.
I think 0.54 micromols/L is something like 3E-5 ppm. But I could be doing that wrong.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
You are being rather silly, there are a rather significant number of Americans, 600 million or so Where does that number come from? U.S. populatipn is 314 million. http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
The industry responded today with this, saying the research distorts the real world use of triclosan based on faulty comparisons to overdosed test subjects : http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/research-on-key-antibacterial-ingredient-distorts-real-world-use-166179966.html
"Kicked the world's ass"?
Only if you go by total number of medals won. And seeing as you fielded more athletes then any other competitor except the UK, that's hardly surprising.
Now medals per event (or even number of athletes) entered? That would be a different matter. By that standard China whip your ass (and the UK's, but hell, we lose at everything including sports we invented).
America just has the money to field lots of athletes, some portion of whom will win a medal on an international stage. The proportion isn't the best in the world, it's just the sheer weight of numbers and the money to send them all over and enter them. If China entered more athletes, you'd have had a harder time.
Hell, the UK fielded virtually the same number of athletes as the US, but the total population is one fifth of yours (but, hey, it was the London Olympics). And the UK got 63% as many medals. All that tells me is that, per capita, you get a lot less medals than lots of other places on the planet. Per athlete, you get a lot less medals than some other places on the planet.
If you took an equivalent size population from other places in the world, you'd actually come around about the middle somewhere. If that. By comparison, it's really nothing to shout about.
And, hell, we're now complaining in the UK for putting on quite a poor performance and encouraging more sport in schools, etc. That's how we took the news of the number of medals we got, because we thought it was a bit pants.
I recall reading that one can culture beneficial bacteria in your mouth that outcompete the bacteria that cause tooth decay and gingivitis. No cavities again ever. For some reason dentists don't seem to be pushing this treatment, wonder why.
(Self-interest, or is the claim bogus?)
--PM
Might explain erectile dysfunction
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Those old findings are incorrect and poorly interpreted. Most of the noble metals in bulk will shed Nanomaterials in ambient conditions if exposed to moderate humidity. It ain't the nano, it's the mass, and that hasn't changed much.
there was a story recently about a marked increase in the amount of caffeine in waterways, likely from human waste.
Likely from plants, which is where caffeine comes from in the first place. And it wasn't a "marked increase", but just detection of caffeine. I imagine some regions especially deserts would see an increase in caffeine due to more plants and water from human agriculture and landscaping.
Seat belts increase the rate of cancer.
(Cancer is a disease that becomes more common in old age. Seatbelts help keep you from being killed at a young age before you're likely to develop cancer.)
This is not a reason for limiting seatbelt use.
It's not in our home. We have been avoiding it for years, and will not purchase products that have it.
I am also sure they do not have it in most of the third world.
So, it's a bit disingenuous to say that "it is in everyone's home." I am sure there are millions of homes throughout the world that don't have it.
Oh wait, is this another one of those US-centric stories? I thought Slashdot was a worldwide site with NPOV. Sorry, my mistake.
You should be safe drinking litres of homeopathic colloidal silver as it's statistically not going to contain any silver at all.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
How would this chemical make its way from your skin to your heart muscle? Seems like you'd have to put an awful lot of hand sanitizer on your skin for enough of it to get into your bloodstream and make it's way through the circulatory system.
"Politicians always tell the truth, when they're calling each other liars."
Aw, I'm just sick of all these dire "We're all gonna die" alerts about this or that chemical. Hey, if it was so bad, we'd have won zero medals, that's all.
"although this makes me think twice about continuing to brush with it"
I don't buy antibacterial soaps for this exact reason. Germs are my friends; they help my immune system. I'm sure I run into antibacterial soap in restaurants, etc, but that's a lot less than having it at home.
I stopped using Colgate Total after becoming aware of this issue a year ago, after a decade's use. Switched to Tom's of Maine Whole Care. There was an immediate, radical difference. While using Colgate Total - two brushings a day - I'd wake up with foul breath. That got much better with Tom's within the first few days, and has continued to improve.
The thing is, just as killing off much of the bacteria in your gut is a really bad idea, so is killing off much of the bacteria in your mouth. It's an ecosystem. Continuously assaulting it is not the way to bring it into health. Just went to the dentist, and my teeth were cleaner, my gums in better shape, than when I'd been using the Colgate. Not that they were in bad shape before. Just that this time there was less work for the hygenist, and less to prompt a closer check by the dentist.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Has there been even one documented case of it actually affecting any man, woman, child, pet, livestock animal or anything else other than bacteria? No? Then why is everyone freaking out about this study? Do we not have better things to worry about other than a possible effect which hasn't been observed despite hundreds of millions of people being exposed to triclosan for decades?
I think we abuse the crap out of antibacterials and there are a number of unpleasant ramifications of that which would be good reasons to limit their use, but this just isn't one of those reasons.
One example of your final paragraph is illustrated here.
According to wiki, more than 200 nanotech-silver products are on the market, which is probably enough to have some effect. Most distinctly, I remember Samsung being sued over their plans to distribute nano-silver lined washing/drying machines to hospitals. Samsung claimed that the machines would be so effective as to eliminate the need for bleach. Others claimed it would wreak havoc on municipal sewage-management which relies on bacteria to break down the waste.
Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
Actually, in the Puget Sound, caffeine comes courtesy of a Starbucks on every corner: http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/3617/20120807/caffeine-pollution-pacific-waters.htm. Artificial flavor esters are also found in the water.
So you are saying, the little fish are strung out on caffeine, but have no muscle strength to anything?
It is a good bet that the chemical manufacturers pull off the shelf to replace Triclosan will be as bad or worse.
I am looking forward to seeing "Contains noTriclosan" on labels soon.
I wonder how long the studies were done on this chemical before it was allowed to be invade the world?
I just love how shit is pushed out the door in 5 years or less and the long term effects are never known until the damage has been done.
Like now
Your skin absorbs far more stuff than you think. This is the impression I got over the years, but just to back it up i will throw a link at you.
In the end, it all comes down to the dose.
Well, dose size and other concerns, like subject development, genetics, and environment. Giving an embryo and an adult mammal equivalent doses will have varying effects; depending on the chemical. Frequent blood alcohol levels of .10 are fun for adults, not so funny for a fetus. If triclosan does impair muscle function then embryo (and later) development would certainly be a concern and worth studying.
It's an antibacterial agent that weakens your immune system when you're exposed to it.
They should have banned the stupid shit as soon as that was discovered.
yes your correct, my mistake sorry about that i thought it was 600 million. The first link gives the population as 313 million and some. Still doesn't invalidate the figures thou.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
It's the burden of the company, entrepreneur, developer, chemist, physicist, scientist, bio-geneticist, etc... to assure that's items sold are
"safe". Our entire world market is based on sell now, pay later and in most cases companies will never pay.
The process of creating and placing practically anything to market is totally controlled by companies, politics and LOTS of money.
Only companies with a somewhat "moral compass" or objective tend to assure that their products are safe - the vast majority do not.
Making the case to change this or put laws into place to protect against this, is almost unsurmountable since so many companies
are outside of the US laws and therefore, reach.
Seem to recall quite a buzz about the chemical used to butter the kernels on microwaved popcorn. When the employees started showing bizarre symptoms and the news leaked, you saw stories about Diacetyl (DA) - the chemical compound used to form the buttery yumminess found on
nuked corn kernels...
Not only did a number of manufacturers change - but several commercials featuring 'DA-FREE' were marketed. Some makers still proudly display this badge on boxes of popcorn today....
The same info has been studied in regards to immunizations all the way to the current battle over HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup - IMHP the single-most reason why diabetes and obesity has increased in the USA), and the billions spent by the Corn Lobby Farmers to battle the
science....
HFCS is not sugar, and it's not good for you (why do you think you can buy Mexican Coca-Cola still in your favorite market - because in Mexico HFCS is BANNED!!!)
So, the story goes - "buyer beware"!
To researchers surprise the waters nearest waste treatment plants and large populations did not show the highest concentration of caffeine. High levels were found in Carl Washburn State Park, for example, an area not near any potential pollution sources.
I don't think the story backs your assertion. Plus I think it's a bad error to attribute caffeine to humans when there are natural sources for it and no way currently to distinguish between the two. We may well find that most northwest caffeine found in water comes from undiscovered plants or fungi growing in the area rather than humans.
According to http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=3574 and other sources, this research is already years old. Europe has acted on the research in 2010 to ban the additive.
.. dirt cheap.
There is good reason dentists recommend salt water gargling after tooth removal and oral surgery. It works very well. Try it.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Triclosan just wouldnt do as deodorant. I used AD for so many years that I no longer have bad smell sweat. But it went out of the market, along with aluminum hydrochlorhydroxide, I ve waited years for it to appear in another brand because it worked and triclosan did not. Now if triclosan is retired... we ll have no deodorant substances left! Even if it did not worl fo me, but I wonder what were the **reasons** to retire AD and AH? I do find distressing that triclosan is the active ingredient in many OTC products, because from my viewpoint it is like getting a simple creme and nothing else worth the while. But overall it does seem that the pressure is toward... disposing of all bactericide products, like going back in time to before biochemistry and medical science. At least one religion does have that opinion and it is Hinduism, bactericides are wrong because they KILL, period. It also does seem weird that no previous studies were performed, when triclosan was discovered/invented. I would even suspect it was overproduced because it was known it could produce muscular weakness! But that is not the point of the study being commented here... Fact is: medicine is not really well accepted by most people in the world, but you think all are happy commenting in slashdot PER FORCE...