Slashdot Mirror


Four Weeks Without Soap Or Shampoo

An anonymous reader writes "A biotech start-up from Massachusetts has an unusual product: a bottle full of bacteria you're supposed to spray onto your face. The bacteria is Nitrosomonas eutropha, and it's generally harmless. Its main use is that it oxidizes ammonia, and the start-up's researchers suspect it used to commonly live on human skin before we began washing it away with soaps and other cleaners. Such bacteria are an area of heavy research in biology right now. Scientists know that the gut microbiome is important to proper digestion, and they're trying to figure out if an external microbiome can be similarly beneficial to skin. A journalist for the NY Times volunteered to test the product, which involved four straight weeks of no showers, no soap, no shampoo, and no deodorant. The sprayed-on bacteria quickly colonized her skin, along with other known types of bacteria — and hundreds of unknown (but apparently harmless) strains. She reported improvements to her skin and complexion, and described how the bacteria worked to curtail (but not eliminate) the body odor caused by not washing. At the end of the experiment, all of the N. eutropha vanished within three showers."

250 comments

  1. Jake from State Farm Commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    She sounds hideous.

    1. Re:Jake from State Farm Commercial by Talderas · · Score: 2

      Ah yes, "Jake". That person from State Farm. We have dismissed that claim.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    2. Re:Jake from State Farm Commercial by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Jake from State Farm Commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Her ears are adorable.

    4. Re:Jake from State Farm Commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well she's a guy, so......

  2. Why make a journalist suffer? by Kaz+Kylheku · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you want subjects who don't mind not bathing for four weeks, just go to any CS lab.

    1. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by phrostie · · Score: 1

      SDCC

      just have a sprayer over each entrance and exist.

    2. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by yendor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem there isn't the lack of showers but the repeated use of clothing.

    3. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why would anyone spray the Small Device C Compiler onto anyone? Even the CS lab people might find that weird.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by TWX · · Score: 1

      If you want subjects who don't mind not bathing for four weeks, just go to any CS lab.

      Please don't. It's bad enough having to put up with that one weekend a year at Comic Con...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by AbrasiveCat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem there isn't the lack of showers but the repeated use of clothing.

      But then you have CEO of Levi Strauss saying don't wash your jeans. http://www.latimes.com/fashion... I guess its back to nature time. I hope the windows open for a fresh breeze...

    6. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's used for de-bugging CS grad students

    7. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      The problem there isn't the lack of showers but the repeated use of clothing.

      But then you have CEO of Levi Strauss saying don't wash your jeans..

      It's a conspiracy by Big Denim to keep us clothed... and, uh, dirty?

    8. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by RJFerret · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of a college student back in the 80s or early 90s who studied the amount of bacteria on jeans and learned single wear washings of them was pointless.

    9. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends...

    10. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 2

      I've done this. I was working with a pair of raw denim jeans, and the advice is to not wash it until you've worn them for 6 months.

      The first month is the worst, but after that, they stop smelling like anything at all. As long as you're not doing deep lunges in the summer sun while you're going commando, it's probably fine. Actually, even that might be fine.

      Those jeans have gone their whole lives with only two full washes and that's it. They still look good and like I said, they don't smell like anything at all, even when you put your face up to them to test them. I think maybe we just have to get used to the thinking that we overwash EVERYTHING.

    11. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Having bought a pair of Levi's jeans, I agree entirely. Three washes and the things fell apart.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    12. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I might wash my jeans every 100 wears or so, though it helps that they don't stained or soiled. I had a date rib me for wearing "two-hundred dollar jeans" when they're $35 a pair, so I don't think the lack of washing has made them repulsive. They also feel terrific.

    13. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Just throw them away and buy new ones!

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    14. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      I don't know, my jeans usually end the day covered in glue, solder, grease, paint, oil, food etc. Something tells me that this would not work for me.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    15. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by msauve · · Score: 1

      "I hope the windows open for a fresh breeze..."

      You misspelled "Febreze."

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    16. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      pre-bugging

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    17. Re: Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does wearing Depends help?

    18. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it's a conspiracy by the clothes to keep us covered. Kill la kill.

    19. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dirt adds friction to every movement of the cloth. Each fold or wrinkle is a point of movement and adding abrasives is not going to prolong fabric life. Biologic colonies (gunkus funkus) will attract and hold abrasives, wearing out the cloth faster but in a more "natural looking" pattern than the mechanical abuse of washing machines. So it's a conspiracy by Big Denim to keep us clothed and buying...

    20. Re: Why make a journalist suffer? by bughunter · · Score: 1

      I'm absolutely positive you'd look sexier wearing them underneath your jeans.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    21. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by matbury · · Score: 1

      Customers should get a free Metalica t-shirt with every Nitrosomonas eutropha treatment.

    22. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Everybody tells me I'm a dirty old man, even after I have a shower!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    23. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by uncqual · · Score: 2

      they don't smell like anything at all, even when you put your face up to them to test them

      They probably don't smell to you. People become desensitized to odors after they have been exposed to them regularly (which is probably fortunate for those working in some areas of sewage treatment plants).

      In the early days, Steve Jobs was sure that he didn't have body odor and didn't need to shower because his diet cleansed him. Some of his co-workers reported disagreed with him on that point.

      Don't be a Steve Jobs WRT body odor!

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    24. Re: Why make a journalist suffer? by wagnerrp · · Score: 2

      I'm absolutely positive you'd look more like a superhero (or at least special) wearing them on top of your jeans.

    25. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Re: Why make a journalist suffer

      Just throw them away and buy new ones!

      Journalists?

    26. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      I have an objective sense of smell, honest. I've had jeans that stunk. I've had these jeans smell bad. But after a while, the smell is gone. I have a partner and I work in mixed company, and I KNOW someone would've mentioned it if they were terrible. (My partner is honest; some of the people I work with are reasonably tactless.) I've been caught out at a restaurant unexpectedly in jeans that I was embarrassed to be wearing because they smelled terrible.

      I shower and wear clean clothes and different jeans. If you held these up with any other pair I have, I doubt you'd notice a difference. They don't smell like laundry soap, but they don't smell like crap, either. Try it. You'll be surprised.

    27. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by guyniraxn · · Score: 1

      Not washing jeans regularly has been the advice from fashion pros forever. I'm not a fashionable person but I do know that frequent washing will make them fade pretty fast and I want to keep my blue jeans blue. For many years I've only been washing them when they smell or got something on them. Honestly, I can only think of one time when they have smelled bad, otherwise I manage to spill some food on them like once or twice a year. I think I only have four pairs in rotation at the moment.

    28. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      I dunno if you're serious or not, but if so, you must have an exceptional use case for jeans, or be getting knockoffs, or the crap jeans that come pre-torn. I currently have 3 pairs of Levi's that have been used in heavy rotation for the past 6 years. I almost never wear anything but those jeans - don't own much else and not subject to a dress code.

      This is the current status of those jeans, after years of continuous usage:
      Black pair - Still holding together, one leg has developed a fray in the knee. I consider this pair to be in the prime stage of its lifecycle.
      Brown pair - The color is a bit dull but other than that it shows nearly zero sign of wear.
      Blue pair - This one developed a full hole in the knee and it was decided to turn them into cutoffs. It should be noted this pair is several years older, circa 2005-06

      All three are still in regular use several times a week. I wear them anywhere from 1 - 3 times (average probably 1.75) between washes.

    29. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a Steve Jobs WRT body odor!

      s/ WRT body odor//

    30. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by russotto · · Score: 1

      I shower and wear clean clothes and different jeans. If you held these up with any other pair I have, I doubt you'd notice a difference. They don't smell like laundry soap, but they don't smell like crap, either. Try it. You'll be surprised.

      I've found that jeans get a funky musty odor after about a week, less if it's hot and humid. Not overpowering at least at first but if I pull them on after showering I definitely smell them -- then I get a fresh pair.

    31. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People become desensitized to odors after they have been exposed to them regularly (which is probably fortunate for those working in some areas of sewage treatment plants).

      A large part of that is continual exposure. If you don't wear such jeans every day, you won't become desensitized. It is one thing to go camping and not notice the lack of showering after a week or two, but once you get back you notice quickly the difference showers make.

    32. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I had a hipster sit next to me on the bus today. He was a fairly clean cut, well dressed guy. I was surprised at the smell.

    33. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by genner · · Score: 1

      pre-bugging

      It's not a bug it's a feature.

    34. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1

      I wash my jeans once a week, because reasons. However, I have recently (as in, today) decided to delve into the magical world of fabric dyes, and it is glorious. I recently became frustrated that all my comfortable (that is, broken in just right) jeans where about half a shade away from white, (it does not help that relaxed fit jeans only come in stone washed where I live, which I think is dumb.) Anyways, I bought a box of Rit Dye in Denim blue, and followed the instructions (3 gallons of hot water in a 5 gallon bucket, mix the dye with 2 cups of hot water, and mix into the bucket of water, soak the pants in clean water, then shake out and sink them in the bucket of dye, stir for 10 minutes, pull them out, wring, rinse starting with hot and moving to cold water until no more dye runs out, wash with mild soap, dry on low heat or hang dry). I have to admit, the results are astonishing. These pants look brand new, save for the mild fraying on various hems. A caveat, I do wear cheep jeans, (Wrangler relaxed fit, 20$ a pair usually, if i hit a sale) so I don't really mind experimenting on a pair, I'm not sure i'd put a 100$ pair of designer jeans in a bucket of dye.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    35. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He bought his at a Goody's or Walmart and you got yours somewhere else more upscale I'd imagine. Even thought they both say Levi 501 on them, they are NOT the same jeans. Years ago when I cared about Levi's, JC Penny had the real ones and Goody's got the seconds or special economy versions.

    36. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's to hide the fact that Levi jeans are overpriced pieces of shit. The last pair I bought cost $40, shrank a couple of sizes after the very first wash a week later and ripped from a minor slip on the pavement. After that I went to Target and bought a pair of $15 Wranglers, which have faired much, much better.

    37. Re: Why make a journalist suffer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm absolutely positive you'd look more like a superhero (or at least special) wearing them on top of your jeans.

      Add a bike helmet to "accessorize" the look...

    38. Re:Why make a journalist suffer? by airdweller · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that this applies to you in particular, but a lot of people have no idea how to wash jeans properly (hint: lukewarm water, bleach-free detergent).

  3. So? by PuddleBoy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I suspect there are slashdot readers who, uh, know someone who takes long spells between showers...

    1. Re:So? by excelsior_gr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Especially resurrection spells, I've heard, take particularly long to cast...

    2. Re:So? by Jon_S · · Score: 1

      But the article wasn't specifically about not showering. Yes, that was part of it, but the main thing was the application to the skin of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria on a regular basis. It is not as if people just stopped showering. We all know how that turns out. But that's not what this is about.

    3. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard respawn timer is just 3 days, easier to wait it out

    4. Re:So? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Yeah, like about 18 years.

      Why do you assume that everyone has a home with a shower? Our bath was installed in about 1870 and my parents (who still live there) see no reason to install a shower. I literally did not know how to use a shower when I went to university and discovered that was whet the Halls had.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    5. Re:So? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      TFS (and probably TFA, I'm not moved to follow through on this story) shows confusion about their terminology.

      no showers, no soap, no shampoo, and no deodorant. [...] not washing.

      Well, hell, I filled the not showering thing when I was doing field work by the simple process of working from a tent in the mountains where the washing facilities consisted of a cloth and a lake (not even a bucket). Soap, shampoo and deodorant were not weight that I was going to pack into the area when I had to carry my weekly food and fuel rations in.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    6. Re:So? by PuddleBoy · · Score: 1

      I assume a shower because most homes built in the last 40 years have them. It is, essentially, a standard build now. (My house is much older, and one bathroom has only a tub)

    7. Re:So? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Like I said, the house in question was built about 1870 ... which I make to be 140-odd years ago.

      Then, having a bathroom (as opposed to a toilet) was pretty unusual. Most people (e.g. the 3 or 4 servants who lived in the attic rooms) would have had a chamber pot to piss and shit into during the night, and an ewer of water and a wash basin for the morning. And after the servants got up and cleaned themselves, their first task would have been to light the fires in the kitchen to warm up the stove and start to make warm water for their masters to wash with.

      Different world - I remember finding the pull-wires for the servants call-bells when we were re-wiring the house after we moved in. We found the original electrical wiring from circa 1890 ; one of the early owners was a real technophile, in that day. But two parallel single-strand copper wires with rubber (yes, rubber!) insulation, designed for 12V DC and now (then, 1970s) carrying 240V AC ... With the rubber perished to the point of falling to dust. Lovely. I like antiques, but I had no compunction about helping Dad to rip that stuff out and pull new twin+earth with the antiques. For the fiddly bits we trained the cat to run through the floorboards towing string to pull the next cable. Herring beats ripping up acres of floorboards!

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most people have known this for some time. I haven't washed my face in years. It was the only thing that stopped acne. By "not wash", I mean don't use soap or cleaners. Obviously, some shampoo trickles down on it and I rinse with water each day.

    Hair can be handled the same way if you have naturally dry or frizzy hair.

    Captcha: untidy

    1. Re:Derp by dinfinity · · Score: 2

      Most people have known this for some time.

      Yeah, the soap and shampoo industry is really suffering.

    2. Re:Derp by lisaparratt · · Score: 2

      Another alternative for hair is just to condition, not shampoo.

    3. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the other way around for me. I break out if I don't wash my face at least daily.

    4. Re:Derp by Gaygirlie · · Score: 4, Informative

      I take a step somewhere in-between: I shower every 3-4 days, depending on how dirty I feel. Even then, I only wash my body with water, no soaps or cleansers or anything like that, though I do use some basic shampoo and conditioner on my hair. If I take showers more often my skin immediately starts to feel a lot drier and flakier. I dunno if my experiences match anyone else's, but it seems to suit my body quite fine.

    5. Re:Derp by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      For me, cutting back on sugar was the breakthrough. No more soft drinks or sugar candies. Altoids, Starburst, and Skittles are 99% sugar with a little flavoring. I still like all those junk foods, but I stay away. Tried dried and sugared mangoes, but still too much. Don't eat anything that's more than 1/3 sugar, and seldom eat things that are between 1/4 and 1/3 sugar. That includes quite a few brands and varieties of supposedly healthy granola bars. Some of those granola bars are worse than candy bars.

      My acne is far better. Entirely gone for days at a time, and when a pimple does show it's because I backslid a bit and had something sweet, usually a shake or some ice cream, and that always at the urgings of family. I would not have any if I wasn't being so polite and social. Why others just have to press junk food on me is a bit of a mystery. It's like they subconsciously or perhaps consciously hope to make me fat like them.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    6. Re:Derp by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      I have also found the same thing. I use a good moisturizer but I just stopped using anything stronger than water on my face on a daily basis. (Unless I've got on makeup or sunscreen, then it gets a really mild soap.) I still have the occasional zit sneak through - stupid demodex bugs cannot be completely eliminated - but my active acne is gone.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    7. Re:Derp by twocows · · Score: 1

      That's the exact same for me with my face but the exact opposite with my hair. If I wash my face with soap or shampoo, I get acne problems. If I DON'T wash my hair with shampoo, I get all sorts of scalp problems, presumably from the excess of oil. It's worse when it's longer, slightly better when it's shorter.

    8. Re:Derp by tepples · · Score: 1

      [I eat sweets only] at the urgings of family. I would not have any if I wasn't being so polite and social.

      "Sorry, I can't have that much sugar; it gives me pimples." What reaction does that get from family? If bad, how would they react to an actual food allergy?

    9. Re:Derp by butchersong · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I use a bit of ground sea salt as an abrasive but other than that just water. I've never had better skin and it's nice at the end of the day for your face not to be all oily like most whose skins are trying to compensate for the soap having stripped everything away.

    10. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't wash my hair at all these days and I use the mildest soap I can find with the least amount of 'numerals' on it's packet. I'm about ready to make my own soap too because it's pretty easy and I can control what the hell goes into it.

      My facial skin care routine is to wash it once or more a day in cold water cupped in my hands (no washcloths - they are bacteria farms, no soaps, no hot water). Once a day I pop on some moisturiser, because I live in sub tropical Australia and that's pretty harsh on the skin. I stay out of direct sunlight nearly all the time.

      So, am I a filthy, bad smelling computer programmer who lives in his mum's basement? Well, almost. I am a computer programmer, and I do live in a converted garage at my mum's house these days (it helps her and it helps me), but since I shower pretty much every day I smell clean and my hair is in great condition, and I have flawless looking skin (almost no wrinkles at all) despite being well into my 40's.

      I keep my hair short, there's really absolutely no reason to use any hair products if you're sporting a blade 2 haircut :D

      Check out the documentary Addicted To Plastic. You might want to reduce your soap / product use too.

    11. Re:Derp by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Same here. I wash everywhere else but I don't think I've used anything other than water on my face in 30+ years.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    12. Re:Derp by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      This is why I hated that lame study years ago that claimed diet has no effect on acne. That's bullshit. It certainly does, and even common sense would dictate that you are what you eat.
      In the event of this study, it sounds like an excuse for smelly hippies to justify not bathing but once a month. BO is the new beautiful! There was (or is) a big trend in Hollywood for this, from Brad Pitt to Joann whatshername (Mica) on Warehouse13. She's cute but there was one season where her hair looked just stringy, nasty and greasy.
      Granted, many people (myself included) tend to over wash (I shower every morning) but then my head and face have always, always been very greasy, and I'd rather err on the side of not being yucky, I'm challenged enough in the looks department as it is. And I like clean feet before I put socks on.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re:Derp by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If I don't wash my my face daily, I get horribly disgusting, like coated with grease (hurrah eastern European heritage). I need to use a mild, but non-moisturizing soap, and then spot moisturize to have any hope of looking human through the work day.

      Also, my sweat is fowl, I have an ex who used to never use soap, just water and moisturize basically everywhere, but the Irish sweat isn't so gross.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    14. Re:Derp by emag · · Score: 1

      I can count on one hand the number of times I've had processed sugar in the last year. It's amazing the difference it's made (including a needed 70 lb weight loss).

      --
      "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
    15. Re:Derp by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      Also, my sweat is fowl

      So you have poultry roosting in your armpits then?

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    16. Re:Derp by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      It's the other way around for me. I break out if I don't wash my face at least daily.

      Same here. I have seborrheic dermatitis. There are various things that can be done to control the condition, but the easiest way is to simply wash my face each morning with dandruff shampoo. If I skip a day though, I immediately start to get scaling skin (primarily on the cheeks right under the eyes, and on the upper lip). Once it starts it takes 4 or 5 days to get it back under control. If I go a day without showering my hair also becomes greasy enough that it starts to give me headaches.

      Overall though the whole "back to nature" thing just doesn't make sense to me. Back when most of this stuff was common people typically didn't live more than 45-50 years. We're now increasing lifespans to lengths never before seen specifically through medical practices that are not "natural".

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    17. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who has also tried to strictly limit their sugar intake, I'm glad to see your comment about the granola bars. I still can't quite believe how "healthy" granola and granola bars nearly all have sugar as their 2nd ingredient.

    18. Re:Derp by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      that's not where it's bad actually, just a little musky. it's the coating of shit the chickens leave on me everywhere else.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    19. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's different for different people. For me I think it's bread and (some?) dairy products. Maybe the problem with bread is the gluten, but I don't think pasta has quite the same effect.

      Anyway one way to figure it out is to avoid the suspect stuff for about a week or two and see if it gets better.

    20. Re:Derp by sudon't · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Another alternative for hair is just to condition, not shampoo.

      The introduction of conditioner is what allowed the practice of daily shampooing to become common. I can still remember the Clairol Herbal Essence commercial jingle from the late sixties / early seventies:

      "You can wash your hair, now, every night, every night...",

      Myself, I stopped shampooing daily in the eighties. I rarely shampoo more than once per month, just rinse it with water during my daily shower. My (long) hair stays clean enough, looks healthy, and is easier to manage. If you're not using shampoo, you'll have no need of conditioner, (except when you do shampoo).

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    21. Re:Derp by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      You just made my day with that. Thank you :-) I needed the laugh.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    22. Re:Derp by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Granola seems to trigger it in me, among other things. I'm nearly 52 and still having to deal with it, arghh.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    23. Re:Derp by hurfy · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Don't actually wash my face either, but it kinda gets shampooed by default. Do shampoo every other day or so. I hate soap, feels like it strips too much, I use my shampoo or a bodywash instead. Lately I have been using a good shampoo and conditioner (loooong hair) and then a cheap bodywash from the dollar store that probably has very little cleaner in it ;)

    24. Re:Derp by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      Conditioning only keeps my pink hair pink. Without washing it every few days, the loose dye builds up, and then can come off on hands, clothes, and sweat.

    25. Re:Derp by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      That practice is highly dependent on your hair. My hair becomes greasy and matted if I go more than about 36 hours without a shower. after about 54 hours, even putting it in a pony tail won't hide how greasy my hair is.

    26. Re:Derp by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1

      I found that shampoo is the perfect face wash, assuming you have your shampoo dialed in for the kind of hair you have (oily, dry, thin, whatever). When I quit buying 'face scrubs' and started using the execs lather from washing my hair, as a teenager, my acne vanished.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    27. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No more soft drinks or sugar candies. Altoids, Starburst, and Skittles are 99% sugar with a little flavoring.

      Altoids? Altoids!? If you are using more than a few Altoids a day you either have the worst breath in the world or an Altoid problem. Cough medicine also has sugar but I'm not worried about it's calorie content...

    28. Re:Derp by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      The study didn't say don't bathe, just don't use soaps and shampoos.

      Not saying I'd ever follow this, but it does make some sense. You don't take daily antibiotics to clean out your GI system, why should we think daily cleansers were anything the human body was adapted to, either?

      And of course, contemporary perception of beauty is another thing, entirely. 250 years ago people solved it with overpowering perfumes, makeup and wigs. If you went back there today you'd probably consider everyone totally disgusting.

    29. Re:Derp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My plan of approach for my hair was to let it all fall out.

    30. Re:Derp by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I don't think just water by itself is going to do terribly much, but better than nothing at all though, you're right about that. Yeah, I'm sure history is pretty smelly; they may have been cleaner than we think, but still nothing by today's standards. Today, in a first world country, the old saying "Cleanliness is next to Godliness" doesn't seem to make much sense (it didn't to me anyway, I took it for granted), but in the context of a couple of centuries ago, it's probably a very accurate observation.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    31. Re:Derp by airdweller · · Score: 1

      "horribly disgusting, like coated with grease (hurrah eastern European heritage)"
      Care to elaborate on the heritage-skin correlation?

  5. More than this by koan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Scientists know that the gut microbiome is important to proper digestion

    Gut bacteria is more than proper digestion, it's a second mind.
    It's interesting as well that one of the most important parts of a cell are the mitochondria, which by all rights are their own separate critter that set up a successful house in just about everything alive.

    What a menagerie.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:More than this by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 3, Funny

      Indeed. It's also interesting how one of the most important parts of the force are the midichlorians, which is nothing short of amazing.

    2. Re:More than this by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      I think you've re-read the Wrinkle in Time books too often.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  6. Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A 4 week test on something related to skin and they used a female journalist? Could by chance her skin complexion improved because of her menstrual cycle? There's about a 75% chance that she wasn't coming off of her period right before application so of course she probably noticed improvements to her skin, especially her face, over a 4 week test.

    1. Re:Poor example by lanswitch · · Score: 5, Informative

      4 weeks= 1 ovary cycle. Think about it.

    2. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1) She was apparently one of several subjects. 2) She noted that she does have hormone-related skin problems, but that this improved them. Presumably she knows how her skin changes over the course of a month. 3) This is effectively a cosmetic treatment, so women are more likely to be customers for it in the future. 4) She's a journalist, so of course she wrote about herself.

    3. Re:Poor example by sandytaru · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah - something men may not know, that isn't common knowledge, but is a thing. Many women who take BC pills are going for 6-8 week stretches at a time per cycle now. So you cannot assume a woman is on the standard four week cycle (with or without the pills, everyone is different) unless she says so.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    4. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering there was only one test subject, it wasn't even single-blind, and she was doing it so she'd have something to write about at the end, there's a good chance she just bent the truth a little, too. (Not saying she did, mind you.)

    5. Re:Poor example by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      Not to mention it's all self-reported. "I didn't smell that bad." Humans quickly adjust to aromas, noises, etc. You never think you smell as much as you do.

      I'm willing to bet she carved a path through crowds pretty well...

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    6. Re:Poor example by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      And likewise, many who take them do so because they're constantly flowing if they don't. Hormone deficiency, and BC pills bring the levels back up.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    7. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Women don't stink the same as men. My roommate smells like a rancid asscrack even after he takes a shower, but my girlfriend always smells good even after camping for a week with minimal showering.

    8. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because you aren't hoping for sex from your roommate.

    9. Re:Poor example by MBGMorden · · Score: 2

      That's always the problem with impression based results.

      I've seen the same with vegetarians. They'll have a cookout and then claim "I served all veggie burgers and no one even noticed!!!!". More likely, you just don't have a room full of guests who are going to take a bite, throw the burger on the floor, and scream "WHAT THE FUCK IS IN THIS NASTY BASTARD!?!?!". No, people generally just nod and put on a smile.

      Same with things like this. You can smell pretty darned bad before people are going to start coming up to you and complaining.

      Besides, where the hell is the control group in this? They need anonymously submitted ratings of the BO. 4 groups at least. 1 who doesn't wash and the responders are told this. 1 who does but the responders are told otherwise, and vice versa.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    10. Re:Poor example by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Women don't stink the same as men. My roommate smells like a rancid asscrack even after he takes a shower, but my girlfriend always smells good even after camping for a week with minimal showering.

      That may be a pheromone trigger making you not notice her scent. It could be that her scent has Pavlovian effect where her smell is associated with a dopamine release causing you to think it is good where your roommates particular scent has no such association and you still notice the smell.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    11. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of awesome that we can tell nature to go and screw itself like that these days.

    12. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6-8 weeks? My wife is now on a 90 day cycle. Though that in itself hasn't helped her eczema - BUT, being extra careful about not over washing *does*.

      But anyway, though your point is good, you really could have just said "what a fucking stupid sexist comment". So there, I'll say if for you :) Some bozo thinks he knows the tiniest bit about female-specific biology because his sister told him something and now he can generalize.

    13. Re:Poor example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't use deodorant because I get boils in my arm pits if I do. I've always worked in air-conditioned shops where it wasn't much of a problem. One year they remodeled the shop and I got stuck in the head house of the wind tunnel in the Oklahoma summer. No one complained but my visitors stays were short and they got down to business in a hurry. I was bathing every night at the time.

  7. PH by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    I think that these bacteria like something about baking soda. When I started adding it to my baths I stopped smelling. PH maybe? Or the baking soda was a bacteria vitamin?

    1. Re:PH by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      Or the increased pH level saponified the oil on you skin?

    2. Re:PH by Immerman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Baking soda is a base, and as such converts oils into soaps on contact - my first guess would be that it's converting some of the more aromatic oils on your skin. I've heard of it used to clear up enlarged pores as well - the combination of mild abrasion and high PH do a number on the sebum (waxy oils) that otherwise build up in your pores. PH cold definitely also have an effect on your surface microbes though.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:PH by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Informative

      Much of body odor comes from short-chain fatty acids, produced when various bacteria break down skin oils. Baking soda turns those acids into salts, which don't smell nearly as much. However, it can also saponify your skin oils, so it's hard on your skin if you use too much.

    4. Re:PH by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      Baking soda turns those acids into salts...

      ...which are highly water-soluble, and rinse right off. Forgot that extremely important detail.

  8. Control Groups by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where are the control groups? Shouldn't there also be at least a few of these:
    1) One group that showers daily and uses the spray.
    2) One group that showers daily and sprays plain water.
    3) One group that doesn't shower for 4 weeks and sprays plain water.

    Number 3 is almost required for any accurate study and I would think it would
    the other 2 wouldn't hurt either.

    1. Re:Control Groups by SailorSpork · · Score: 5, Informative

      Where are the control groups? Shouldn't there also be at least a few of these: 1) One group that showers daily and uses the spray. 2) One group that showers daily and sprays plain water. 3) One group that doesn't shower for 4 weeks and sprays plain water.

      Number 3 is almost required for any accurate study and I would think it would the other 2 wouldn't hurt either.

      Reading the article, she was subject 26 of who knows how many. For all we know, she was in the control group, or there may have been separate control groups present. The article recaps her personal experience, not the complete conditions for the experiment. Maybe with the initial findings, they'll do multiple rounds with different variables as you suggest above.

    2. Re:Control Groups by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Informative

      Where are the control groups? Shouldn't there also be at least a few of these:

      Perhaps I missed this, but it doesn't seem that TFA is reporting official results of a study -- it's just the anecdotal description of somebody who participated in a study that's been going on. All she says is: "I was Subject 26 in testing a living bacterial skin tonic." I don't think there's anything in TFA that mentions what control groups there may have been, nor does it imply that there were not any.

      This is just one subject's experience that she decided to blog about... so should we really be questioning the validity of the study or its design when she doesn't even discuss methodology (and perhaps doesn't even know the details, since she was... you know... a PARTICIPANT in the study)?

      About the only thing in TFA that suggests anything about research design is this:

      A regime of concentrated AO+ caused a hundredfold decrease of Propionibacterium acnes, often blamed for acne breakouts. And the company says that diabetic mice with skin wounds heal more quickly after two weeks of treatment with a formulation of AOB.

      Soon, AOBiome will file an Investigational New Drug Application with the F.D.A. to request permission to test more concentrated forms of AOB for the treatment of diabetic ulcers and other dermatologic conditions. "Itâ(TM)s very, very easy to make a quack therapy; to put together a bunch of biological links to convince someone that somethingâ(TM)s true," Heywood said. "What would hurt us is trying to sell anything ahead of the data."

      "A hundredfold decrease," "wounds heal more quickly" -- these imply that there are comparison groups. And if they are applying to do testing with the FDA, they're going to have to do control groups.

      Seriously -- what is it with Slashdot and the "But didn't they think of doing a real science experiment, with, you know, data and stuff" comments? This is a link to a blog post by subject in a study. You want details? Wait until an actual study comes out.

      But if this company is planning on getting its stuff approved as a medical treatment or marketing it on its particular benefits, it would actually be incredibly counterproductive to design poor experiments, since they wouldn't allow them to refine or further develop their products.

      Do you really think these people are idiots?

    3. Re:Control Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      3) One group that doesn't shower for 4 weeks and sprays plain water.

      There's no way that experiment could ever be double-blind. ;)

      Oh my: Captcha = "strong". Captcha Oracle is a freaking comic genius.

    4. Re:Control Groups by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 2

      There's a reason we don't trust journalists to get science stories right. They allow hedlines which ignore issues like control groups.

    5. Re:Control Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or clueless slashdot 'readers' who don't realize this isn't a science story, but a journalists personal story of an on-going study.

    6. Re:Control Groups by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Do you really think these people are idiots?

      More likely they're trying to sell something. A few years ago there were these balls you could throw into your laundry that cleaned your clothes without detergent. Reusable! They de-ionized the water! They didn't really work, but water will get your clothes clean in a lot of cases.

      Same thing here, they're probably not idiots, but they might be looking for idiots.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Control Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mostly, I think it would be hilarious if the journalist was in the control group without realizing it.

    8. Re:Control Groups by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      Same thing here, they're probably not idiots, but they might be looking for idiots.

      Absolutely possible. But (1) the guys mentioned leading up this project have some real science credentials, and (2) they mention that they plan to do studies that involve applying for drug testing, which one can hardly do without things like control groups. (Not saying that drug studies are perfect -- many of them have serious flaws. But an absence of a control group is generally not acceptable.)

      So... until I hear otherwise, I'm going to assume these guys are trying something on the basis of a sound scientific hypothesis. Will it be proven? Is the current experiment well-designed? I don't know -- all I've read is a blog post about an ongoing experiment.

      But, on the basis of TFA, I'm NOT going to immediately assume that these guys can't figure out the basics of experimental design, especially since they explicitly mention in TFA that they are being hesitant about claims until they collect more data.

    9. Re:Control Groups by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I missed this, but it doesn't seem that TFA is reporting official results of a study -- it's just the anecdotal description of somebody who participated in a study that's been going on. All she says is: "I was Subject 26 in testing a living bacterial skin tonic." I don't think there's anything in TFA that mentions what control groups there may have been, nor does it imply that there were not any.

      It'll be hilarious if it turns out that she was in the placebo group.

    10. Re:Control Groups by unitron · · Score: 1

      There's a reason we don't trust journalists to get science stories right. They allow hedlines which ignore issues like control groups.

      Generally they have no control over headlines other than getting angry and resigning.

      Editors write headlines.

      They also determine how much of what the journalist wrote actually winds up getting printed under that headline, and perhaps even in which order.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  9. Uh huh by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Funny

    the bacteria worked to curtail (but not eliminate) the body odor caused by not washing

    I used to work with sailors who would come back after long fishing trips. And I can assure you that they definitely did not have this bacteria present.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Curtail, not eliminate" your coworkers would have been smellier.

    2. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah ok... say no more.

    3. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they hadn't rolled around in the right kind of dirt before going out. And they'd spent their entire lives making their skin as hostile as possible to that kind of bacteria.

    4. Re: Uh huh by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      You sure you don't want to know the nature of my "work"?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    5. Re:Uh huh by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      Fishermen are hostile to pretty much everything except bars.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    6. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the bacteria worked to curtail (but not eliminate) the body odor caused by not washing

      I used to work with sailors who would come back after long fishing trips. And I can assure you that they definitely did not have this bacteria present.

      Please tell us about your "work"!

  10. but..but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did she have sex? could the guy tell she hadn't showered?

    1. Re:but..but.. by fuzznutz · · Score: 2, Funny

      That must have been one foul coochie. Allow me to be the first to say, "NOT IT!"

    2. Re:but..but.. by TWX · · Score: 1

      Did the guy care?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:but..but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A healthy vagina doesn't smell. In fact, washing it with anything other than water is a bad idea.

    4. Re:but..but.. by bughunter · · Score: 1

      did she have sex? could the guy tell she hadn't showered?

      There are several before-during-after photos in this this blog article at the NYT. You decide.

      I know a lot of guys who'd give her a go, regardless of how she smelled (or, ftfa, like "fresh-cut onions and pungent marijuana," maybe because of it).

      Personally, I find other things far more of a deterrent than greasy hair and kronik BO: she looks too much like my sister... and the laptop's fisheye lens and that deathly pallor from the LED display aren't helping her prospects, either.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    5. Re:but..but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you've never eaten out a woman who hasn't showered for three days. Even a perfectly healthy microbiome can be a bit... overpowering. Luckily I'm not feint of heart.

      *clicks "post anonymously" box*

    6. Re:but..but.. by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      Personally, I find other things far more of a deterrent than greasy hair and kronik BO: she looks too much like my sister... and the laptop's fisheye lens and that deathly pallor from the LED display aren't helping her prospects, either.

      Dating advice for girls on /. - I never thought I'd see the day.... ;)

    7. Re:but..but.. by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      lookie there, another virgin who read some urban legend on the internet

  11. Needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are some crazies who have been released from the Texas mental hospital who are wandering the streets of Austin who could definitely use a dousing of this stuff.

  12. Bathe for health by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You bathe for health. You don't bathe for an optimum natural balance; you do it so you get nasty pathogens off your body, and don't get infected wounds.

    Apparently some health comes at the expense of some other health, like how antibiotics destroy gut bacteria but save you from death by sepsis.

    1. Re:Bathe for health by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The idea here is probiotics, good bacteria outbreed and exclude the pathogens... The article even states that the byproducts of the ammonia processing by these bacteria produced nirites and nitric acid which inhibited staph growth, they even noticed reduced healing times for mice.

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    2. Re:Bathe for health by Talderas · · Score: 1

      And that's why you take probiotics with antibiotics.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    3. Re:Bathe for health by Immerman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's the theory, but it's a theory established back when we thought all microbes were bad, or at best harmless. Now they're re-evalutating the theory to see if perhaps it's not actually counterproductive.

      The thing is those pathogens are going to get on your skin again almost immediately after washing anyway (think of everything you touch both before and after bathing), and if you've washed away the beneficial bacteria then the more virulent ones can recolonize your skin virtually unopposed. Meanwhile all your traditional symbiotes have been washed away, so you're not getting their benefits either. Could be a recipe to make people considerably more vulnerable to infection than otherwise.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    4. Re:Bathe for health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reduced healing times for mice compared to what, mice treated with antibiotics and bandages for their wounds like people?

    5. Re:Bathe for health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I don't think you understand how antibiotics work.

      There are some that kill bacteria and some that inhibit growth (specifically cell division) of bacteria, so the immune system can fight off the infection. Different types of bacteria are differently susceptible to different antibiotics, so usually a determination of the disease causing strain is warranted to determine the best antibiotic (which would target the diese conferring bacteria more than others). There are broad-spectrum antibiotics that affect the growth of a wide array of different bacterial types. However, these would affect "probiotics" in the same manner, so they would be rendered useless

      Currently, Probiotics is little more than a marketing term. The wikipedia article on this subject is full of "some have claimed" and "is/are thought to". The European Food Safety Authority does not recognize claims associated with Probiotics "because it embeds a health claim which is not measurable"

    6. Re:Bathe for health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't bathe for an optimum natural balance; you do it so you get nasty pathogens off your body, and don't get infected wounds.

      The main thing that keeps bad bacteria off your skin is good bacteria. Removing pathogen-laden dirt is a good thing, but it's mainly a mechanical process and soap doesn't help it much. Soap may somewhat weaken the natural barriers and defenses that your skin has against infection.

      Apparently some health comes at the expense of some other health, like how antibiotics destroy gut bacteria but save you from death by sepsis.

      If you have sepsis, you're at the point where chopping off limbs becomes a reasonable medical strategy.

    7. Re:Bathe for health by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the byproducts of the ammonia processing by these bacteria produced nirites and nitric acid which inhibited staph growth,

      And this sort of thing is going to become very important once antibiotics stop working.

    8. Re:Bathe for health by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      you do it so you get nasty pathogens off your body, and don't get infected wounds.

      You don't have to wash the whole body just to keep a wound clean, you know? It's perfectly possible to just clean and sanitize the wound and the surrounding area.

    9. Re:Bathe for health by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      With some notable exceptions. Yogurt, for example, has been shown to cause an increase in GABA sensors in the brains of mice. Disconnecting the gut neural ganglia from the rest of the body prevents this from happening, as does sterilizing the yogurt. Thus we know there's two mechanisms here: probiotic interaction with the gut, and gut interaction with the brain.

      With that knowledge, we explain the association in humans between intake of yogurt and reduced stress. There's a gap--we haven't damaged the neural pathways of humans to see if that blocks the effects--but we have pretty strong evidence for that one.

      This particular instance has better study than other probiotics because it deals with neurology, which is a more interesting and more rigorously studied field. Nebulous improvements in digestive health are less interesting, harder to measure, harder to directly alter by experiment, and thus tend to have weaker evidence.

    10. Re:Bathe for health by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      It's about amount and growth. Anthrax is on everything; you can refine anthrax from the soil in your back yard. Straight white powder anthrax will cause severe health impacts, even though you're constantly touching and inhaling anthrax.

    11. Re:Bathe for health by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Originally, these things were not known. Also, we're better at determining where a wound is; back in working man days, you had scrapes and cuts and bruises all over your body. Times have changed.

    12. Re:Bathe for health by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I do understand how anti-biotics work. The most commonly prescribed anti-biotics are broad spectrums like amoxicillin due to it being able to affect many bacteria and most diagnoses of conditions not being concrete enough to justify more targeted antibiotics. It's a rather indiscriminate killer of bacteria. It will flush both helpful and harmful bacteria from your colon and that's the one place where there is good evidence suggesting that taking probiotics is helpful. Further, with the lack of evidence suggesting that probiotics are harmful there's really no reason to not use them when you're using an oral broad spectrum antibiotic which is precise the sort of scenario the post I was responding to was talking about.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    13. Re:Bathe for health by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what we really want to know is if the Batman bandages heal wounds faster than the plain ones.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    14. Re:Bathe for health by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      Great point, and the problem is exactly that we may be way past the health benefits with our soap/shampoo habits. We didn't evolve to use soap on the skin every day, and most people (I assume) do not have such exposure to pathogens that they need soaping every day.

      The effect of overdoing soaping for the abstract modern idea of what healthy means may be diminishing actual health. I think the best first step, health-wise, would be to scale down on cleansing products, and gradually.

    15. Re:Bathe for health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      no the princess bandaids heal faster. (source: my 2 year old daughter)

    16. Re:Bathe for health by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Yes, of course. I don't use shampoo, but I do use soap. I also use a comb to clean my hair, and I scrub the scalp. Sebum production diminishes when I do this, but I have to be thorough: miss cleaning behind your ears and you'll have a rotting, putrid landfill smell coming off your head. If you do get everywhere, your hair smells like ... hair ... the way it would if you used raw detergent to clean it, but with the feeling of soft puppy fur.

      Soap makes it much easier, and is essential for skin. Then again, I use a boar bristle scrub brush on my body; modern practice uses soap and water alone. I do use soap, but I need exfoliation such as by bath rag, pumice or apricot grains, or a stiff brush. Sometimes I'll soap up, wash down, and find large sheaths of white, dead skin flaking off during abrasion by bath towel.

      Modern prudence factors in as well: who wants hot, sweaty sex with the unwashed?

    17. Re:Bathe for health by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      You bathe for health. You don't bathe for an optimum natural balance; you do it so you get nasty pathogens off your body, and don't get infected wounds.

      Apparently some health comes at the expense of some other health, like how antibiotics destroy gut bacteria but save you from death by sepsis.

      You say this, but you have no proof whatsoever it's true. Why would there be any more reason to "get nasty pathogens off your body" daily than to "get nasty pathogens out of your gut" daily by taking antibiotics every day? (I dare you to take daily antibiotics long term. It will fuck up your GI system really good...) If you get a wound, clean it. But otherwise, it's a silly assertion that your skin should be inherently "antibiotic".

      In fact, there is a lot of evidence that "good" bacteria prevents "bad" bacteria. So it's entirely possible that certain bacteria on the skin could act as a natural and non-invasive antibiotic.

    18. Re:Bathe for health by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I should add: case in point. Many other mammals roll around in dirt daily, eat or at least put in their mouth any crap they find on the ground, and on average get sick no more often than humans (probably less).

      Antibiotics are great when used with PURPOSE. But modern "cleanliness" is a cosmetic affectation. Not saying I don't bathe with soap almost every day, as well (and yes, at least washing your hands more often when in contact with other virus-carrying humans is not a bad idea) but to claim without real proof that bathing with antibacterial soaps daily is definitely helping your health is as unscientific as it gets...

    19. Re:Bathe for health by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      What nasty pathogens? The vast majority of us bathe or shower every day because the soap industry convinced us to half a century ago. There's almost no health benefit to bathing daily. Feel free to look that up.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    20. Re:Bathe for health by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Certainly. And the question is which would anthrax (or perhaps staph, as that's more of a skin-residing microbe) find easier to colonize when you get exposed to it 30 seconds after leaving the bathroom: skin with a thriving and well-established microbiome, or skin that's been recently depopulated by soap? Seems like the question is not dissimilar to what happened when Europeans first came to the Americas en masse - the continent had recently been depopulated by smallpox, etc. brought by the first explorers, and so the invaders had an easy time of getting well established.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    21. Re:Bathe for health by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      Michael Pollan's book "Cooked" had an interesting story along those lines:

      The star of this show is the cheese nun, Sister Noella Marcellino, of the Benedictine Abbey of Regina Laudis in Litchfield County, Connecticut. She makes a version of Saint- Nectaire cheese using an old wooden barrel and a beech-wood paddle that are happy hosts to countless bacteria.

      When a cheese inspector balked at the absence of stainless steel, the fervent fermenter made two batches, one in her wooden tub and one in germ-free metal, and inoculated both with E. coli. The sterile vat’s finished cheese was rife with the bug, while the wooden one had almost none. Good bacteria in the old barrel had created “an environment in which (the E. coli) couldn’t survive.” The inspector relented.

  13. "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "She reported improvements to her skin and complexion, and described how the bacteria worked to curtail (but not eliminate) the body odor caused by not washing."

    That must have been one funky monkey...

    1. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      "She reported improvements to her skin and complexion, and described how the bacteria worked to curtail (but not eliminate) the body odor caused by not washing."

      That must have been one funky monkey...

      According to the blog linked in the article, it was apparently somewhere between cut onions and marijuana.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Was the reduction of body stench independently verified? Maybe she just got used to it.

    3. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to the blog linked in the article, it was apparently somewhere between cut onions and marijuana.

      ...piece of ass that will bring a tear to your eye!

    4. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Informative

      Was the reduction of body stench independently verified? Maybe she just got used to it.

      Absolutely possible. This is just her anecdotal report. She has other anecdotal reports in TFA, though:

      Jamas, a quiet, serial entrepreneur with a doctorate in biotechnology, incorporated N. eutropha into his hygiene routine years ago; today he uses soap just twice a week. The chairman of the company's board of directors, Jamie Heywood, lathers up once or twice a month and shampoos just three times a year. The most extreme case is David Whitlock, the M.I.T.-trained chemical engineer who invented AO+. He has not showered for the past 12 years. He occasionally takes a sponge bath to wash away grime but trusts his skin's bacterial colony to do the rest. I met these men. I got close enough to shake their hands, engage in casual conversation and note that they in no way conveyed a sense of being "unclean" in either the visual or olfactory sense.

      And, honestly, it makes some sense on an intuitive level. Perspiration doesn't really have an odor on its own -- the odor comes with the bacteria and such that start growing in the minutes and hours after perspiration.

      If we get rid of all of them every day, we're going to select for certain strains of fast-growing bacteria.

      If we instead let things "ferment" over weeks or months, we'll probably select for other types of bacteria, which tend to be adapted to our bodies, rather than whatever random fast-growing stuff happens to land there after a daily shower. Undoubtedly, the odors produced with a hygiene regimen change will be DIFFERENT.

      And, since soap and daily showers are a relatively recent invention, one would think that humans would be less likely to find the build-up of long-term bacterial colony odors offensive, since from an evolutionary perspective, natural body odor shouldn't drive potential mates away. And it's therefore more likely that we'd be adapted to not care about such odors (of even sometimes be attracted to them -- historically, we have lots of accounts of people who describe natural body odor as a significant aphrodisiac).

      I'm not saying all of this is true. But it at least makes sense that a DIFFERENCE in body odor seems likely when bacterial colonies are allowed to establish themselves over time and be selected for in daily body excretions.

      Kind of like trying to create a sourdough starter: if you just mix together flour and water and let it sit for a few days, you have a high likelihood of mold or undesirable things forming over time. If you just empty the container, scrub it out, and try again, you're likely to have similar results. But if you let it sit over a period of weeks and gradually feed it, eventually you'll select for specific bacteria and yeasts. And after a while, you end up with robust bacterial colonies that won't likely mold or grow nasty stuff -- because the microorganisms create an environment conductive to their own growth, rather than the undesirable stuff.

    5. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      The better question is, have we reduced our stench so much as a society that we are simply over-sensitive to *any* scent now? If nobody used deodorants and soaps regularly, a few people would surely smell especially bad, but everyone else would simply smell 'normal' after we got used to it again.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    6. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historically there were a lot of epidemics and infectious diseases. Could it be possible that not washing makes one more susceptible?
      Also, I am wondering how harmless these bacteria are in the case of people with weaker immune systems: AIDS patients, elderly, people working very hard or under a lot of stress, etc.
      It sounds like an interesting idea, but I think everyone adopts it at their own risk.

    7. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was the reduction of body stench independently verified? Maybe she just got used to it.

      Absolutely possible. This is just her anecdotal report. She has other anecdotal reports in TFA, though:

      Jamas, a quiet, serial entrepreneur with a doctorate in biotechnology, incorporated N. eutropha into his hygiene routine years ago; today he uses soap just twice a week. The chairman of the company's board of directors, Jamie Heywood, lathers up once or twice a month and shampoos just three times a year. The most extreme case is David Whitlock, the M.I.T.-trained chemical engineer who invented AO+. He has not showered for the past 12 years. He occasionally takes a sponge bath to wash away grime but trusts his skin's bacterial colony to do the rest. I met these men. I got close enough to shake their hands, engage in casual conversation and note that they in no way conveyed a sense of being "unclean" in either the visual or olfactory sense.

      I bet those guys don't get oral sex from anyone though.. At least not from anyone they aren't paying and isn't also high on something.

    8. Re: "four straight weeks of no showers, no soap" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a red had I have very thin skin. I abused it, badly, in the sun over the years. Since I've gone to showering 2 or 3 times a week and washing my hair evey month or two with Ivory soap I have a lot less problems with my skin. But I protect it from the sun better too.

  14. Does shower mean soap? by yendor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I ask myself if the showers that kill the flora is just water or use soap.
    Shampoo is something I long ago stopped using and after a short period I stopped producing excessive amounts of oil. The only times I have to shampoo is when because of a skin condition.

    Using soap in general isn't something I feel is needed since a regular rinsing leaves me non smelly.

    Question is if I am actually breeding these little microbes and my lack of soaping is why I don't smell or if it's simply because I'm not a smelly person as some of my friends and family asserts?

    1. Re:Does shower mean soap? by EvolutionInAction · · Score: 1

      Or you've just stopped noticing the smell, which is the worrying theory.

      I've actually stopped shampooing as well, though I also have to keep my hair buzzed short. It's the only thing I've found to reduce the oil and irritation. I'm far too aware of BO to stop using soap, though...

    2. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 5, Informative

      Using soap in general isn't something I feel is needed since a regular rinsing leaves me non smelly.

      According to your nose you may be non-smelly. Perhaps you're like a coworker of mine that could not smell BO. He didn't think he needed to wash regularly or use deodorant since he couldn't smell himself. Being an avid runner, he STANK most of the time; I mean he reeked to the point of making people's eyes water.

      You really don't want to be 'that guy'. You might want to get a second opinion from an unbiased source (not "friends and family").

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    3. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      RMS, is that you?

    4. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Question is if I am actually breeding these little microbes and my lack of soaping is why I don't smell or if it's simply because I'm not a smelly person as some of my friends and family asserts?

      Smelly is relative term.Are your relatives are smelly?

      But seriously, I think a lot of folks don't soap their entire bodies when they shower. I just hit the critical spots in a normal shower. Full soaping only happens before a long flight or after doing something significantly dirty. Shampoo once a week at most, keeps my scalp from drying up.

    5. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I had a cow-irker like that at a previous job. Said soap hurt his skin, and was actually proud of the fact that he stank... he bragged that it gave him more clout when in meetings, especially if he could corner someone. At first, his cube would have someone drop some type of BO product in his chair on a daily basis, then when people realized that he liked having people see his past 2-3 meals in his beard, that stopped and people did their best just to get transferred to another department, or just moved to another company. He did get his wish... but when that startup got bought out and shut down, I'm sure the fact that he was remembered far and wide for the lack of personal hygiene didn't help his job chances.

    6. Re:Does shower mean soap? by TWX · · Score: 2

      I found that getting the water as hot as I could stand before rinsing out my hair seems to help rinse out excessive oil buildup. I tend to shampoo two to three times a week instead of daily, and I've noticed that when I do this with the hot water my hair looks better than when I use cooler water.

      But yeah, otherwise soap all the way.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    7. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using soap in general isn't something I feel is needed since a regular rinsing leaves me non smelly.

      Hopefully the people around you agree, and you haven't become a bad stereotype.

      Because, judging by that ID, you probably have a neck beard. And a smelly neck beard is a terrible thing, especially if he thinks he smells OK.

    8. Re:Does shower mean soap? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Funny

      RMS don't need no stinkin' job!

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    9. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using soap in general isn't something I feel is needed since a regular rinsing leaves me non smelly.

      According to your nose you may be non-smelly. Perhaps you're like a coworker of mine that could not smell BO. He didn't think he needed to wash regularly or use deodorant since he couldn't smell himself. Being an avid runner, he STANK most of the time; I mean he reeked to the point of making people's eyes water.

      You really don't want to be 'that guy'. You might want to get a second opinion from an unbiased source (not "friends and family").

      We used to have a guy like that who never bathed. We called him "Pig Pen" right until he was finally fired after the dress code was revised because of him.

    10. Re:Does shower mean soap? by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      >> The only times I have to shampoo is when because of a skin condition.

      Maybe you wouldn't get a skin condition in the first place if you actually used shampoo regularly.

    11. Re:Does shower mean soap? by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, there are variances in people's bodies that cause some to smell more and some less. Some of the variance is known to change with age (see 'Old Person Smell' on Wikipedia). I presume the rest of the variance is due to genetics, microbes like we are discussing here, or other unknown factors.

      Some people obviously require a strict regimen of daily soaping, powdering, de-odorant, and re-odorant (perfumes etc) or they become grossly offensive. That does not necessarily mean he is the smelly guy in the office - just that he can become the smelly guy without the aforementioned mitigation efforts. So, in no way is this meant as a treatise against deodorant. Some people need it.
      Some other people do not need to coat themselves in these products on a regular basis to stay inoffensive. For whatever reason they do not produce the same quantity and/or quality of odor. In a low-activity lifestyle these individuals may not need more than a daily water rinse, with occasional more thorough cleaning as-needed.

      I'm also curious about your anecdote, was this gentleman aware of his odor? If so, how was he made aware? You mentioned a second opinion from an unbiased source, can you be more specific?

    12. Re:Does shower mean soap? by surd1618 · · Score: 1

      I've asked people, told them to be honest, really tried to coax, "Okay yes you smell sometimes" out of people around me. Everybody agrees I don't smell. Some people say it's a matter of diet, it could be related to immunology, water intake, who knows what. I know another person, less physically active than me, who also does not shower, and does not smell like anything. Go figure.

    13. Re:Does shower mean soap? by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      NB your household water contains enough chlorine to kill quite a few things ... you're not bathing in 'just water' any more if you live in a city.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    14. Re:Does shower mean soap? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      I'm also curious about your anecdote, was this gentleman aware of his odor? If so, how was he made aware? You mentioned a second opinion from an unbiased source, can you be more specific?

      It depends on your definition of 'aware' - had he been told, yes. Could he sense it? I don't think so. I don't think he believes it when told there was a problem because I truly believe he couldn't smell it himself. It would be like trying to convince a pre-19th century person that disease was caused by tiny critters he couldn't see and not bad air that he could clearly smell.

      As for the unbiased second opinion, I was suggesting to the OP that he ask someone who's not a friend or family (his words). Perhaps a doctor or nurse at his next checkup, or some other person who has no vested interest in telling him what they think he wants to hear; no one wants to delivery the news that "you stink".

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  15. To maximize bacteria by ColoradoAuthor · · Score: 5, Informative

    IIRC from the book "The Life That Lives On Man," the skin count of undesirable bacteria is maximized by daily showering. That's just frequent enough to wash away the desirable strains, and to keep things moist enough for the undesirable strains to proliferate. That research is over 20 years old, so I'd love to see an update.

  16. Quick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ship a crate to Stallman! Along with a box of chocolate covered toenails-and-bunions.

  17. not so bad by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've gone 10 days without washing (other than water), on a wilderness backpacking trip. Despite the fact that I was sweating a lot every day, at the end of the expedition I didn't feel as "dirty" as I would've expected. I think we could find a happy medium between our modern antibacterial-soap fetish and ye olde annual bath.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:not so bad by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      yea, like soap with bacteria in it. :-)

      Yogurt enema anyone?

    2. Re:not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I went 2 months without showering, when I was working in the Arctic, living in a tent, etc. A snow shower at -40c didn't seem appealing.

      Then my flight out was delayed by weather. I lost the shower day I was going to have between flights.

      So took the bush plane out the next day and ran for my next flight. New sweat to freshen up 2 months of stench. After take off, everyone moved to the front of the plane and the flight attendant discreetly sprayed the entire now-empty-except-for-me rear cabin with air freshener.

      Suprisingly, I felt no embarrassment.

    3. Re:not so bad by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      I felt the same way. And then, when I got back to civilization, everyone within a 5 foot radius of me nearly died from the smell.

    4. Re:not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This reminds me of a neighbor when I used to be in college and stayed at the dorms. He did not believe in washing his clothes much. In fact he was proud of the fact that the pair of jeans he wore daily were never washed in two semesters. What he did to keep them from smelling was to keep the clothes in his freezer overnight, which apparently killed or stunned the stinky germs.

    5. Re:not so bad by drew870mitchell · · Score: 1

      Mary Roach mentions a study on the effects of not bathing or not changing clothes in Packing for Mars. IIRC after about seven days the dirt, oils, etc. on your skin reach equilibrium - old oils fall off as fast as new oils accumulate.

    6. Re:not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your input, Patricia Tannis.

    7. Re:not so bad by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I frequently go on long kayaking or camping trips. You don't take long baths in the Canadian ocean, or glacier fed lakes. In one particular place, the lodge that's the first sign of civilization when you get back has $1 showers. You want to make sure you take at least $1 with you, and don't lose it. Most people take two, one for them, and one for anyone who forgot that they have to share the boat home with.

    8. Re:not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which wouldn't happen if everybody in civilization wasn't so afraid of smelling like an organism.

    9. Re:not so bad by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Fecal transplant. (Real thing - being used to treat C. difficile and other antibiotic-resistant gut infections lately. I had a relative nearly die of C. diff, he was in the hospital for several months, then more weeks bedridden at home, being administered combination IV antibiotics, to no avail)

    10. Re:not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It slowed them down. The temps in a kitchen freezer don't kill much.

  18. I've gone without product by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At first I was stinky and greasy. Later I was just greasy. But hey, I've got greasy skin. So I went back to product, because I didn't want to be greasy. But I have hippie shampoo and soap, no patchouli involved — unscented shampoo, and peppermint soap. No deodorant, I smell at least as good now as I did when I used it in conjunction with a bunch of toxic crap.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:I've gone without product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or so YOU think.

    2. Re:I've gone without product by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      LD50 of peppermint oil is about 2.5 g/kg (for rats). Not terribly toxic, but in the same range as many commercial soap additives.

    3. Re:I've gone without product by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      LD50 of peppermint oil is about 2.5 g/kg (for rats). Not terribly toxic, but in the same range as many commercial soap additives.

      That's nice. It's not bioaccumulative and it doesn't pass through skin as easily as do some of those wonders.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:I've gone without product by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Several components of peppermint oil are absorbed through the skin. It's also volatile, so it's easily inhaled.

      Contrary to today's "natural means nontoxic and 'I can't pronouce it' means toxic" memes, plants don't generally produce products so that you can smell good. They're pesticides and chemical weapons to discourage animals from eating the plant. They're often might be useful products, in controlled amounts, just like lots of other chemicals.

      Would you be as pleased with your soap if it's ingredients list said: "menthol, menthone, menthyl acetate, menthofuran and cineol. May contain small amounts of limonene, pulegone, cargophyllene and/or pinene"?

    5. Re:I've gone without product by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Would you be as pleased with your soap if it's ingredients list said: "menthol, menthone, menthyl acetate, menthofuran and cineol. May contain small amounts of limonene, pulegone, cargophyllene and/or pinene"?

      Yes, I don't see why not. A bunch of the stuff that's typically in shampoo has been proven to end up in your head, sometimes in your brain. You will note that I'm using actual shampoo on my head, it's just not made of proven crap.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:I've gone without product by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Pinene is an insecticide, and is potentially dangerous. Peppermint additives to things like shampoo have been certified as safe, provided the pinene content is low enough. Some varieties of mint produce enough pinene to not be safe. You don't want to be putting those on your head, or anywhere else.

      Chemophobia isn't healthy, particularly when it's combined with naturophillia.

    7. Re:I've gone without product by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Chemophobia isn't healthy, particularly when it's combined with naturophillia.

      Once abused, trust is near impossible to restore.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:I've gone without product by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Ignorance encourages mass generalization.

      Enjoy your pesticide laden shampoo, and your fear of OMG toxic!

    9. Re:I've gone without product by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Ignorance encourages mass generalization.

      How amusing, the same government you trust to sponsor studies which tell you what is safe is the government which has compromised a formerly functioning education system in order to promote ignorance.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re:Camping by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

    It's not "not bathing" she showered, and you could still use a sponge (or something slightly abrasive) to remove dead skin and excessive sebum.

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
  20. Or by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ya know what I'm thinkin'? D&D conventions.

    Have you ever walked into a hobby store on a Saturday with gaming tables set up? Fucking unwashed pigs.

    "Shut up!!! It's Baron Harkonnen cosplay! >:-( "

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Or by fey000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Parent deserves at least a +1 for the visual of Baron Harkonnen cosplay.

    2. Re:Or by Bardez · · Score: 1

      I extend this recommendation to +3

      --
      Perception is the thin dividing line between reality and fiction.
    3. Re:Or by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Have you ever walked into a hobby store on a Saturday with gaming tables set up? Fucking unwashed pigs.

      The real problem often ain't the gamers themselves, but their laundry habits or lack thereof. If you're gonna work around the house, sure, put on yesterday's pants. If you're going to sit right next to someone else, put on a full set of clean clothes, you goddamned savages. And, you know, actually do your laundry.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  21. Missed opportunity by captainpanic · · Score: 0

    Missed opportunity to mention it is "Mostly Harmless" (instead of this "generally harmless"). Also, if they had gone 6 weeks, instead of 4, that would have been 42 days, which is a much better number. Then this invention should have been called the ultimate solution to the universe etc... the only puzzle remaining then is what the heck you always need a towel for.

  22. Probiotic and Gluten free by bjb_admin · · Score: 1

    Want it to sell like pancakes? Just advertise it as a "gluten free probiotic cleansing spray"

  23. Soap and shampoo are just a life style objects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'm only using shampoo every quarter in a year and maybe i'll even stop doing that. i'm not using soap at all UNLESS i'm very dirty and water doesn't cut it. i'm not stinking more than before i started and my hair is just as greasy as it would be if someone who regularly uses shampoo wouldn't shower for like 3 days or so. i rarely shower more often than once a week, the exception being after sports, where i usually just wash away the sweat. all in all i'm saving a ton of water and soap shit. it's all just advertising. i'm cleaning my arm pits and my genitalia with water only on a daily basis. so far no one has complained and i don't feel dirty.

    it's all bullshit to sell you more bullshit.

    1. Re:Soap and shampoo are just a life style objects by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Wow, you must draw babes like flies.

    2. Re:Soap and shampoo are just a life style objects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or flies like babes.

  24. Soap is for hair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I almost never wash most of my skin with soap. Only my hair, armpits and feet.

    1. Re:Soap is for hair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only wash my hair, teeth and asshole. To save time, I use the same brush!

  25. Another datapoint, me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've not used soaps at all (29/m) however I just use deodorant. I've been repeatedly told by several girls that I've dated that I smell amazing and it's one of my defining things that they like about me. I will say that I have semi-dry skin naturally, so I'm not greasy or anything like that. Also, since I don't ever use soap, if I run out of deodorant or run out the door without it, its noticable by me by the end of the day (inside the shirt sniff test).

  26. Nope, I'm good. by B33rNinj4 · · Score: 2

    I'll stick with soap.

  27. Oh noes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darn hippies were right all along.

  28. Dermatologists always say "don't wash" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many dermatologists have long suspected that modern humans wash way way too much, and TFA is yet another possible reason why soap and water can be so bad for the skin. I have suffered from dermatitis all my life. Dermatologists routinely told me not too shower more than twice per week and never to use any form of soap - you use non-soap emollients instead. Washing strips everything off the skin, neutralizes natural acids, and removes the protective oil.

    1. Re:Dermatologists always say "don't wash" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, I recall a media story about a dermatologist who banned actual soap from his family's household, believing it to be so very bad for skin conditions.

  29. Soap no more effective than friction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was shown long ago in hospitals that washing hands with plain water and lots of friction was just as effective as soap and water at killing microbes. People want to smell nice.

  30. Military Applications by Falindraun · · Score: 0

    i could see this having beneficial military uses for deployed soldiers as some of them go months without access to a shower.

    --
    No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
  31. Skin flora is important. by jpeaton · · Score: 1

    "Scientists know that the gut microbiome is important to proper digestion, and they're trying to figure out if an external microbiome can be similarly beneficial to skin." That's not true. Pick up any microbiology textbook and it'll tell you that your skin flora is essential for it's health. Also, it is not removed by simple washing (soap and water). That just gets rid of excess bugs, and their by-products (that smell). No-one is trying to figure out IF the skin flora is necessary for it's health. If you remove it, you will be prone to colonisation by the bad stuff, just like the effects of when you take antibiotics in your guts.

    1. Re:Skin flora is important. by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

      These AO bacteria are that delicate that soap and water will remove them..

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
  32. I beg to disagree by dubbayu_d_40 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I believe in taking care of myself and a balanced diet and rigorous exercise routine. In the morning if my face is a little puffy I'll put on an ice pack while doing stomach crunches. I can do 1000 now. After I remove the ice pack I use a deep pore cleanser lotion. In the shower I use a water activated gel cleanser, then a honey almond body scrub, and on the face an exfoliating gel scrub. Then I apply an herb-mint facial mask which I leave on for 10 minutes while I prepare the rest of my routine. I always use an after shave lotion with little or no alcohol, because alcohol dries your face out and makes you look older. Then moisturizer, then an anti-aging eye balm followed by a final moisturizing protective lotion.

    1. Re:I beg to disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      American Psycho (the movie)

    2. Re:I beg to disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the uninformed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Psycho

    3. Re:I beg to disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to try camping, bro.

    4. Re:I beg to disagree by Prune · · Score: 2

      Of course, you're quoting to opening narration from the American Psycho movie. But if you think about the described routine, it doesn't really make sense. He first applies an ice pack (which does, indeed, reduce puffiness), and then a pore cleanser. I thought everyone knew that cold constricts pores. That's why at some spas when you get a facial they start with warm steam. This opens up your pores, and the cleaning works better. Another problem with the routine described in the movie is daily exfoliation of the face. You shouldn't be doing it more than a couple of times a week. The point about alcohol-free after-shave, though, is spot on. I use witch-hazel based tonic before a moisturizing aftershave and it really takes away the irritation of shaving.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    5. Re:I beg to disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got bigger issues than your skin.

    6. Re:I beg to disagree by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      Yes, he does, he killed a bunch of people in a somewhat disturbing manner.

    7. Re:I beg to disagree by rhodium_mir · · Score: 1

      Either it was in self defense or he must be a government employee because as everyone knows the government has a monopoly on the initiation of violence.

      --
      You can't spell "oneiromancy" without "roman".
  33. Not In Queensland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might be able to get away with this as an office worker living in a nice cool dry city, but not here in sub-tropical Queensland. Winter is pretty good, it's typically 12-20 degrees celcius each day, but can get down to 4-6 degrees mid-winter...but summer...it can be as host as 35 degrees every single day for a week and humidity up in the 40-80% range that whole time. It can still be 30 degrees at 1AM where I am and 50% humidity or more.

    The problem here is that you sweat, a lot, and that sweat mixes with dead skin cells and can form a type of smelly dead skin slurry that smells horrible and only a really good shower is likely to remove. I shower 2-3 times a day in summer, and we're on water restrictions here. I would shower more if I didn't have to account for every drop of water down the drain.

    Body brushing might be enough to counter in it a cool dry climate, but here in Queensland...fuck no.

    1. Re:Not In Queensland by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Meh, that's roughly the same weather as the southern half of the US. Well, except for the humidity in the SW.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  34. manuar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I spray fecal matter onto my body. I now have a nice dark skin complexion. There are a few negatives such ad the constant flies but overall I am happy with this approach.

  35. Happy to see this research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't surprise me to see this. I haven't used soap for years and have no BO issues which aren't controlled by using deodorant once a week or so. In fact using soap causes me to smell very bad for about 36 hours.
    "Does this happen with all soaps?"
    I don't know, the smell is bad enough to strongly discourage any such experimentation. My theory has been that it has to do with my skin ecology. When I asked a dermatologist about the issue the conversation was very short.
    "So... you smell bad if you use soap?"
    "yes"
    "Well don't do that then"
    I wish I had made that up.

  36. Diapers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget spraying this stuff on my skin, I'll stick with my daily showers, thank you. I'm the parent of several toddlers, and my wife and I have elected to use cloth diapers instead of disposables. The only problem is the ammonia stink from the diaper pail, particularly as the days get warmer. I would love a bottle of ammonia-digesting bacteria that could be spritzed in the pail with each diaper.

    1. Re:Diapers! by airdweller · · Score: 1

      Charcoal? Cat litter?

  37. Haven't used soap or shampoo regularly in years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's been about four years since I've used soap or shampoo for my daily shower. It's one of the best things I've ever done for my skin and scalp, and I've had enough input to know that I don't have elevated body odor.

    The trick is that you still WASH your damn self, which for me means scrubbing with my hands and a handheld shower head so you can get proper access to the undercarriage. I use soap or shampoo without hesitation when I've dirtied myself, and sometimes I'll use conditioner by itself for the hell of it.

    There was about a two week adjustment period until my body's oil production got the message, but from then onward it has been smooth sailing.

  38. recycle those bacteria by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So collect the washwater, add a bit of ammonia to feed them so they multiply, pour the soup into the dirt in your back yard, and take a dirt bath. Problem solved.

  39. France! by McLae · · Score: 1, Funny

    I hear there is lots if N. eutropha in France. Not that I have been there, but from folks I have heard from, this bacteria is everywhere!

  40. Why not Probiotic moisterizer? by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 2

    Shower as usual to strip the skin of all microbes and then moisturize with a probiotic. Seems more logical to me.

    I declare this idea to officially be in the public domain :-)

    --
    Greed is the root of all evil.
  41. They've been testing this for years. by drainbramage · · Score: 4, Funny

    They've been testing this for years in France.
    The research lab is on a road named something like Rue The Day.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
    1. Re:They've been testing this for years. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Rue the day"? Who talks like that....?

  42. Funny / snarky / sexist comments aside ... by MyNicknameSucks · · Score: 2

    There is a lot of research to be done on human bacteria.

    I know many people here react dismissively towards wet science, but there's ample evidence that, for as long as there has been animal life, there have been closely related bacteria hitching a ride with us. And some of those bacteria have co-evolved with us to do useful things -- like termites being able to digest cellulose because of their gut bacteria.

    If we wipe out those populations of bacteria that have been evolving with us for tens of millions of years (or more), it seems pretty reasonable to suggest that there will be repercussions.

    On the more speculative side, my hay fever is largely gone now (no more runny nose, ever, during pollen season -- but my eyes still get scratchy on the worst days) since I've been dosing myself with bacteria (some commercial, made for sufferers of ileitis colitis, and some wild, homemade kefir and spontaneously pickled veg). I've talked to a researcher in the field; he said I basically hit a home run. Out of the possibly hundreds (thousands?) of species of bacteria I'm missing (sickly kid, lots of antibiotics, born by C-section, bottle-fed), I managed to load myself with probably a couple dozen strains of bacteria (mostly bifido and laco) that managed to help regulate the inflammation causing my seasonal allergies (i.e., my nose dripped like a tap).

    FWIW, yogurt as a probiotic is unlikely to do much of anything for you. Most of those bacteria have been bred to produce lactic acid, and little else, as fast and as reliably as possible. Most of them are also unlikely to take up residence in your gut; they've been bred to survive in milk.

    I, for one, really want to see more research in this field.

  43. So what we need now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what we need now is a probiotic after shower spray for the beneficial organisms.
    I can see it now- boutiques where they take a sample of your skin fauna after you don't bath for awhile, they analyze what's there, then recommend the ideal mixture for you.
    This could be big! Get in now on the ground floor.

  44. Smelled before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at a Democrat (Marxist-Leninist) Party gathering....

  45. I scarcely shower by surd1618 · · Score: 1

    I never take showers any more. I do not use soap anywhere but for shaving and for my hands, which I thoroughly wash every time I go in a bathroom or prepare to handle food. I never wear any deodorant or scent of any kind. I am fairly physically active, often bicycling 10 miles a day, dancing, lifting weights, working, etc. I have no problems with the way I look or my body odor. I have pointedly asked people if I smell, to be honest, if I ever ever smell. Nope. Nobody around me ever thinks I smell. I don't have any trouble with my complexion, but I do get acne on my shoulders and back. I would really like to try this stuff, to see if it helps with acne.

  46. so? by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1
    When you are a rich bastard you can afford to have dozens of pairs of expensive jeans, washing them is the least of your worries.

    People think this is funny because it's disgusting, no it's funny because it's like mitt romney saying he'll bet $10k in cash on a whim.

    --

    Liberty.

  47. no shampoo for 2 years or so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a little anecdotal input here:

    I shower at least once, often twice, sometimes a third time every day (I love temperature contrast bathing).

    I have not used shampoo for 2 years or so. (my hair after a few weeks was no longer greasy. It does not have an odor by most accounts)

    I use simple saponified olive oil bar soap once a day in the creases. (a dermatologist told me he thought I had great skin for a 39 year old)

    I never use deodorant antiperspirant.

    I have a couple lovers a year.

    Most people have said nothing, a couple have said I'm a little stinky, a couple have said they really like my personal odor, there are probably quite a few who have never said anything but they didn't become lovers.

    Dogs tend to seek me out or run away. Is that bad? Hahahahaha.

    I'm curious about the product though something in me wants to roll around in some dirt...