The recent bottled water topic got me thinking of another common marketing tactic that is possibly even more dangerous than bottled water - antibacterial soap.
We've been deceived into thinking that antibacterial soap is an important, more effective, soap for cleaning ourselves and our possessions.
When in reality, it has never been conclusively proven that antibacterial soap lowers potential infection levels rather it can destroy both good and harmful bacteria simultaneously.
In the study, published in the March 2, 2004 journal Annals of Internal Medicine, people who used antibacterial soaps and cleansers developed cough, runny nose, sore throat, fever, vomiting, diarrhea and other symptoms just as often as people who used products that did not contain antibacterial ingredients.
Researchers pointed out that most of the symptoms experienced by the study participants are typically caused by viruses, which the antibacterial soaps don't protect against.
Perhaps more dangerously than that, some scientists believe that widespread use of antibacterial soaps could eventually cause a strain of resistant bacteria strains that could be detrimental to our health.
Some scientists even postulate that if we hadn't been using anti-bacterial soaps and over-the-counter antibiotics for so many years that the MRSA bacteria strain may not be considered a dangerous bacteria strain, nevertheless deadly.
I've always hated America's obsession with disinfecting products. I completely keeping a clean kitchen/bathroom and not living in a pigsty, but those Lysol products; "Kills 99.9% of bacteria", what about those millions left over that aren't killed? They just reproduce and become resistant! No-one, or more appropriately, enough people haven't considered that and thought it was the least bit troubling?
Of course not! We can;t get sick, that would be inconvenient, it would be too much hassle! Slow the fuck down, America!
It's like what George Carlin said; "Your immune system is like an army, and like any army, it needs practice othersie it gets slow and sloppy [paraphrasing]."
We need to kick our addiction to disinfectants and antibiotics. They have their place, but they are massively overused.
but when you think about it. Shouldn't soap already be antibacterial? I mean its purpose is to clean so why would you need to state that? Its like saying
Your water now comes free with its very own container!!! Its called a cup!!!
but when you think about it. Shouldn't soap already be antibacterial? I mean its purpose is to clean so why would you need to state that? Its like saying
Your water now comes free with its very own container!!! Its called a cup!!!
Generally soap is nothing more than an anionic surfactant, part which bonds with water and part that bonds grease. Soap basically surrounds the grease molecules so they can be rinsed off with water.
So I guess in the simplest form: Oil and water don't mix except in the presence of soap which allows oil to be dissolved in water thereby rinsing them away.
We added the whole antibacterial agents as time went on in an attempt to kill more types of bacteria present on our bodies and on objects, which we've now come to realize has been vastly unnecessary and is allowing the strongest bacterial strains to become resistant to many times of antibiotics.
Antibacterial soap is just another successful marketing story... Marketing is done to persuade consumers into thinking that they need to purchase Product X. We really don't need it, but a vast majority of consumers today have been convinced into thinking that it is a household staple through advertisements and "research studies" conducted by those companies.
It's a little scary how much marketing can get away with in terms of advertisements. Another example of how consumers are being deceived is the "0g of trans fat" label. The FDA will allow you to market your product as "0g of trans fat" so long as it has less than 0.5g within a single serving. So really, a product could still have 0.49g/serving and still be advertised as "trans fat free" on its packaging.
but when you think about it. Shouldn't soap already be antibacterial? I mean its purpose is to clean so why would you need to state that? Its like saying
Your water now comes free with its very own container!!! Its called a cup!!!
Generally soap is nothing more than an anionic surfactant, part which bonds with water and part that bonds grease. Soap basically surrounds the grease molecules so they can be rinsed off with water.
So I guess in the simplest form: Oil and water don't mix except in the presence of soap which allows oil to be dissolved in water thereby rinsing them away.
We added the whole antibacterial agents as time went on in an attempt to kill more types of bacteria present on our bodies and on objects, which we've now come to realize has been vastly unnecessary and is allowing the strongest bacterial strains to become resistant to many times of antibiotics.
but if soap is better if its antibacterial how is that something we don't need? If it works and is proficient then whats the big deal? People use it for cleaning then what is so wrong by making a good product better?
on the other hand if it didnt actually do what its suppose to or if its just adding something it doesnt need then thats different.
but if soap is better if its antibacterial how is that something we don't need? If it works and is proficient then whats the big deal? People use it for cleaning then what is so wrong by making a good product better?
on the other hand if it didnt actually do what its suppose to or if its just adding something it doesnt need then thats different.
That's just it. There hasn't been an conclusive evidence that shows that antibacterial soap is considerably more effective. For one, you're also killing harmless, or even useful, bacteria from your skin. Two, the more antibiotics a person uses the more bacteria becomes resistant.
We only have a certain amount of antibiotics and bacteria are becoming immune at an increasing rate. We need to use antibiotics only in situations that call for it. (e.g. dangerous bacteria strains, in hospitals, etc...)
At this point, we are using antibacterial soaps not only as hand soap, but as shampoos, conditioners, body soaps, and even dish soap. It isn't a wise decision to use antibiotics without any thought or we'll reach the point where bacteria has become completely immune to all of our antibiotics.
Edit: Hello! Quadruple post? Damn Fakku error is getting rather persistent.
but if soap is better if its antibacterial how is that something we don't need? If it works and is proficient then whats the big deal? People use it for cleaning then what is so wrong by making a good product better?
on the other hand if it didnt actually do what its suppose to or if its just adding something it doesnt need then thats different.
That's just it. There hasn't been an conclusive evidence that shows that antibacterial soap is considerably more effective. For one, you're also killing harmless, or even useful, bacteria from your skin. Two, the more antibiotics a person uses the more bacteria becomes resistant.
We only have a certain amount of antibiotics and bacteria are becoming immune at an increasing rate. We need to use antibiotics only in situations that call for it. (e.g. dangerous bacteria strains, in hospitals, etc...)
At this point, we are using antibacterial soaps not only as hand soap, but as shampoos, conditioners, body soaps, and even dish soap. It isn't a wise decision to use antibiotics without any thought or we'll reach the point where bacteria has become completely immune to all of our antibiotics.
Edit: Hello! Quadruple post? Damn Fakku error is getting rather persistent.
oh i see that's what your problem with it is right? Like how people are allergic to things and that others will make things allergic friendly thus making peoples natural immune system weaker to fight off illnesses.
Basically in our attempt to be a clean, sick-free society we're are overusing those devices that we use to keep ourselves sick-free, which could in turn lead to us be very sickly in the future.
Basically in our attempt to be a clean, sick-free society we're are overusing those devices that we use to keep ourselves sick-free, which could in turn lead to us be very sickly in the future.
i know what you meant but maybe i didnt explain it quite right
Yeah, I realized I kind of negated to mention that part in favor of just labeling antibacterial agents as bad.
Good in moderation is a great way to put it. Problem is many countries in the world, especially the United States, are using antibiotics in anything but moderation. There simply is no reason for commercial antibacterial soaps to exist. It's a nasty marketing ploy that the United States has fallen for - hook, line, and sinker.
You actually have to make an effort to buy soaps that aren't antibacterial. That's just depressing.
Renovartio wrote...
i know what you meant but maybe i didnt explain it quite right
I do not understand why people feel the need to wash their hands after doing everything known to man.
But that aside I do not understand this new "Antibacterial 99.99% germ free" bullshit. If you go through life without catching a bunch of shit you have no immune system and will suffer dearly for it later down the road.
I say just grab some regular old bar soap clean your hands and move on with life. Who cares if some bad bacteria still exist on your hands after...if you have built up your immune system they wont do a damn thing.
I clean my kitchen with water and a sponge. Sometimes I'll use Comet or something like that if I get raw blood on the counter. Antibacterial smells funny and makes me nauseous if I stay around it long enough.
Basically in our attempt to be a clean, sick-free society we're are overusing those devices that we use to keep ourselves sick-free, which could in turn lead to us be very sickly in the future.
i know what you meant but maybe i didnt explain it quite right