The battle between antibacterial and regular soaps is perhaps as old as their concoction. Many gullible consumers choose antibacterial hand washes and bars in hopes of staying healthy and germ-free. But with the increasing emphasis on maintaining good hygiene due to the ongoing pandemic, more and more people are gravitating toward antiseptic soaps now. This increased inclination toward antibacterial sanitary products is starting to stir up some speculations about the efficacy of such soaps and whether they are actually better at keeping people safe from bacteria than regular soaps.
Antibacterial Soaps vs. Regular Soaps
Contrary to popular belief or rather the forced notion of antibacterial soaps being better at killing germs, they are not any more effective at disinfecting people’s bodies than regular soaps. There is no factual scientific data that deems antiseptic soaps as better disinfecting products than their standard counterparts. But surprisingly, many studies have suggested that prolonged exposure to some ingredients used in antibacterial soaps can have adverse effects on the human body. However, those soaps are over-the-counter varieties and do not include those used in healthcare centers and hospitals.
Because of the concerns raised by researches done on the efficacy of antiseptic soaps, the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a rule requiring soap manufacturers to present relevant data and literature supporting the theory that antibacterial hygiene products are better at stopping the spread of various diseases and that all the ingredients used in their production are safe for the human health. To this date, none of the antiseptic soap producers have submitted any research papers or efficacy data to justify their business. Resultantly, the FDA has banned the use of various active compounds, such as triclosan, used in antimicrobial soaps. Now, companies cannot market antibacterial washes and bars unless they show supporting scientific data, which isn’t available.