Slashdot Mirror
FDA Bans 19 Chemicals Used In Antibacterial Soaps (nbcnews.com)
The Food and Drug Administration has ordered "antibacterial" ingredients to be removed from consumer soaps, citing a lack of evidence that they are effective in making soap work any better and that the industry has failed to prove they're safe. The banned chemicals include triclosan, triclocarban and 17 others (PDF) typically found in hand and body soaps. Companies have until late next year to remove the ingredients from their products, the FDA said. "Companies will no longer be able to market antibacterial washes with these ingredients because manufacturers did not demonstrate that the ingredients are both safe for long-term daily use and more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illness and the spread of certain infections," the FDA said in a statement. NBC News reports: "In 2013 FDA gave soapmakers a year to show that adding antibacterial chemicals did anything at all to help them kill germs. It made the rule final Friday. The FDA started asking about triclosan in 1978. Environmental groups and some members of Congress have been calling for limits on the use of triclosan. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sued and the FDA agreed to do something about triclosan by 2016. There's no proof that triclosan is dangerous to people, but some animal studies suggest high doses can affect the way hormones work in the body. The proposed rule only affects hand soaps and body washes. Triclosan is often used in toothpaste and it's been shown to help kill germs that cause gum disease."
While anti-bacterial soaps are pointless for most people, there is no reason or justification for the FDA to regulate them since these active ingredients are otherwise safe and widely used.
else it gets Triclosan again.
Saponified oils (real soap) are high enough pH to be antibacterial on their own, most normal soaps nowadays are a small amount of SLS (sodium lauryl sulfate) and gelling agent and are only mildly antibiotic at best. If you want antibiotic soap get some sort of saponified soap, no need to contribute to the overuse of antibiotic agents in our environment that build resistance.
There is no reason or justification for the FDA to regulate them
This patented Antibacterial Snake Oil Goat Weed will repel Tigers & Bears, with the added benefits of making you attractive to the opposite sex and give you rock-hard erections.
since these active ingredients are otherwise safe...
Citation needed
To undo what's already been done.
I need Triclosan on my mitts.
the alcohol based hand sanitzers dry my skin out too much.
I work in the 'elder-care industry, I have to wash my hands hundreds of times per shift
If they allow it in toothpaste, it's fucking stupid to ban it from soaps...
Now, if only I could find a liquid hand soap that doesn't contain moisturizers...
#DeleteChrome
We knew this already.
I'm here for the experience, not the Hyperbole.
The press, being the idiots that they are, don't realize that the FDA doesn't have jurisdiction over "soap." The FDA isn't helping by trying to broaden their reach.
Their order says "The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today issued a final rule establishing that over-the-counter (OTC) consumer antiseptic wash products containing certain active ingredients can no longer be marketed."
That is not soap. In fact, the FDA says it has no jurisdiction over soap, which is confusing because on various webpages they say "Soap," and they do so in the title of said order as well.
Here's the FDA's explanation of Soap:
http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/G...
Here's the part that's relevant.
"Not every product marketed as soap meets FDA's definition of the term. FDA interprets the term "soap" to apply only when
the bulk of the nonvolatile matter in the product consists of an alkali salt of fatty acids and the product's detergent properties are due to the alkali-fatty acid compounds, and the product is labeled, sold, and represented solely as soap [21 CFR 701.20].
Products that meet this definition of soap are regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission disclaimer icon (CPSC), not by FDA. Please direct questions about these products, such as safety and labeling requirements, to CPSC. "
over the past few years i have had some of my older family members in the hospital for extended periods and i can say the staff is disgusting.. and when you ask them to simply wash their hands in a sink instead of just rubbing hand sanitizer on their hands between patients they reject you like youre a bastard... its like look bitch you had your hands all over that person's open wounds just fricken wash them... its disgusting.. and it results in infections.. my father actually got one and he has been fighting it at home for the past 6 months and its actually taking his life away... so be careful .. seriously .. we have been to 3 doctors and they were all specialists .. and they haven't been able to simply help him rid the problem that the hospital staff gave him... hundreds of thousands of people die from malpractice every year.. if there was an army killing hundreds of thousands of americans the whole country would be on lockdown.. take care of yourself people because they won't
The point of this isn't to ban a harmless ingredient, but to ban a harmless ingredient that could eventually prove to not be so harmless. Completely putting aside the potential long term interactions on the human body - which is hugely significant, lead and arsenic don't cause their damage in one day either - "antibacterial" soaps are essentially the same thing as "antibiotic" soaps, and you may see where this is going. 99.9% of the time, killing off all these harmless bacteria doesn't yield any benefit, but it will breed stronger bacteria over time, and that can lead tro some very nasty things. Gonorrhea, for example, is an STD that was once easily curable, but is now becoming harder and harder to treat, and I believe there is a new strain popping up for which there is no cure known at the present time. When such a disease appears and is immune to our easiest form of defense, it has the potential to become an unstoppable epidemic, and again, there's no benefit at all to killing otherwise harmless bacteria (which may even help strengthen our immune systems).
Secondly, these soaps are snake oil, and in more ways than one. Antibacterial soaps do absolutely nothing to stop viruses, so if you think this soap will help protect you from the common cold or the flu, think again. It's also no more effective than normal soap, so you're paying more for a completely useless product, and I doubt many people know this - at the very least, stronger labeling is definitely required. Bait-and-switch, along with the false sense of security, is an issue.
And if all that doesn't convince you, than consider this: we already have a product for all of this, and it's known as hand sanitizer. If there is a place or occasion where you really need to disinfect your hands, use this stuff; it's cheap, effective, usable on the go (the places where you probably need it the most), and bacteria isn't going to be adapting to alcohol anytime soon. As a result, you limit bacterial adaptability, you save money, you destroy viruses, and you don't play Russian Roulette with our ecosystem. Common sense, people.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Story: FDA approves X
Reaction: Waaah the government puts dangerous chemicals in everything!
Story: FDA bans Y
Reaction: Waaah the government is meddling with our harmless chemicals!
it's the main component in an evil government plot and they've gone so far as to deliver it through the tap to every home and business across the globe! OMFG. those bastards are evil indeed.
BAN DHMO it's so bad, consuming too much can kill you... hell, even just inhaling just a small amount can kill you, too. it's BAD BAD BAD
nice
It's reached FB and HuffPo. Which means (American) mom's read about it. Which means soaps labeled anti-bacterial will sit on the supermarket shelves, as those mom's were the one buying it to protect their little snowflakes.
I read about triclo whatever I think on /. years ago, tried to get my wife to stop buying it. No joy. Now? I'd be surprised if those soaps aren't in the trash today.
The FDA ban
On one hand their government is again controlling everyone's life. They like this and need it badly because people should just not be allowed to control their own destiny. On the other had the liberals are mad because it is taking away their snake oil of choice. Liberals, who have used their magic antimicrobial soap for years to keep getting cooties from evil red necks.
My guess is that liberal east coast eliters will take to wearing those plastic gloves around before touching anything. They love the environment, but care about protecting themselves from bacteria even more. Their immune systems, that have been weakened from decades of antibacterial soap and eating off of clean plates with silverware, can no longer cope with the everyday assaults that non-liberals take in stride.
Or maybe some evil monopolistic corporation could take some of the antimicrobial soap and put it in the bottled water the liberals love to drink. My understanding, having not read the article, is that the almighty government is only outlawing the soap. If lefties drink the scientifically formulated water infused with antimicrobial agents this could be a real hit. They would need a really wholesome cool sounding name and bottle to put this water in. Those uncouth rednecks will continue to drink out of garden hoses, water fountains, and parking lot retention ponds. But they will not be getting allergies.
Safe is a negative. It's impossible to prove that something is "safe." What they should be doing is testing to see if the product is harmful. That's the bar every other type legal standard is based on.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
My humidifier requires a water treatment that contains quaternary ammonium compounds:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0001J05IC
bad news for me, I guess. I have been contributing to antibiotic resistance by humidifying my house:
http://jac.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/5/1160.long
"Our findings raise concern that the exposure of bacteria to antibacterial-containing products, such as QACs, may exert a selective pressure resulting in the co-selection of genes encoding reduced susceptibility for both biocides and antibiotics."
...uniformed pedantic libertarian nonsense?
I agree with the government that people keep using products that kill many or most of the germs, the survivors will kill us, because they would have become immune to them.
People lose track of the fact that we are living things, living in an eco system. We are made of germs, and we have germ friends in our gut, and around our body. To listen to marketing spheal, you would think we are inorganic beings that should be separate from the rest of the world.
I disagree with some of the other stated reasons.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
You may have missed the following text from the same page:
If a product....is intended not only for cleansing but also to cure, treat, or prevent disease...it is regulated as a drug, or possibly both a drug and a cosmetic. Examples include antibacterial cleansers.
From the FDA announcement:
Antibacterial hand and body wash manufacturers did not provide the necessary data to establish safety and effectiveness for the 19 active ingredients addressed in this final rulemaking. For these ingredients, either no additional data were submitted or the data and information that were submitted were not sufficient for the agency to find that these ingredients are Generally Recognized as Safe and Effective (GRAS/GRAE).
Having classified these products as drugs, the FDA does have jurisdiction. The ruling was proposed in 2013, subjected to public review, subjected to congressional review and finalized last week.
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
From the announcement:
This rule does not affect consumer hand “sanitizers” or wipes, or antibacterial products used in health care settings.
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
Antibacterials are antibiotics used to treat surfaces rather than being ingested. This article predates the ruling but the scientific explanation is still relevant. Note the following text:
Additional experiments found that some bacteria can combat triclosan and other biocides with export systems that could also pump out antibiotics. It was demonstrated that these triclosan-resistant mutants were also resistant to several antibiotics, specifically chloramphenicol, ampicillin, tetracycline and ciprofloxacin.
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
Let's say you get your hands really dirty, maybe handling rotten garbage, then you wash your hands with regular soap and water, maybe with a nail brush. Afterwards, did you ever look at your squeaky clean hands and worry that there was still bacteria on them? Me neither.
Unless I misread, it sounds like this statement applies to Tea Tree oil: "...drug products containing these /actually/ brain damaged (perhaps from drinking too much antibacterial hand wash) or are they just trying to act like it?
active ingredients are new drugs that will require FDA approval"
Question: Are they
OMG OMG Agenda 21 they're trying to kill us run run to the hills!
there must actually be a lot of bacteria going around for them to want to do some "useful".
and make-up too. GRAS: Generally Regarded As Safe. In the states food & make-up are innocent until proven guilty. It's why European makeup is so popular and why Mexico bans more food additives than the US. For medicine I think the opposite is true though.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
as soon as the phrase "Active Ingredient" gets involved. e.g. when you're making claims about actual medical effects. Homeopathy has dozens of ways to dance around this which is how they get away with their shenanigans.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Antibacterial soap is just marketing. Soap is antibacterial. It's like trying to make "dessert cake". Cake is already dessert, you don't have to add anything to make it more dessert-y.
For those who think that adding antibacterial compounds to soap makes it "more" antibacterial, no it does not. Soap is already very effective and adding antibacterials to it doesn't make it more so.
Antibacterial soap is sold to hypochondriacs, overanxious parents, and people who simply don't know any better. These consumers have bought into advertising that implies antibacterial soap is better when there's literally zero evidence of that. And we'd know by know if there were evidence to be had.
On the other hand, we know for sure that large scale and excessive use of things like antibacterials, antibiotics and similar substances, breeds resistance. Plain soap has no such danger. So why are we fooling around, risking resistance to useful antibacterials?
The FDA should be proving that they're unsafe, the onus shouldn't be on the manufacturers to prove that they *are* safe, that starts with an assumption of guilt.
Reading the FDA document, they only plan to ban soaps with :
Phenol (greater than 1.5 percent)
Phenol (less than 1.5 percent)