Antibacterial soaps must be proven safe for use: US

Tuesday, December 17th, 2013. Filed under: Health & Fitness Home & Garden
Antibacterial soaps typically contain the chemicals triclosan and triclocarban, "which may carry unnecessary risks given that their benefits are unproven," the FDA said in a statement. ┬ęGavel of Sky/shutterstock.com

Antibacterial soaps typically contain the chemicals triclosan and triclocarban, “which may carry unnecessary risks given that their benefits are unproven,” the FDA said in a statement.
┬ęGavel of Sky/shutterstock.com

(WASHINGTON-AFP) – In response to concerns that widespread use of antibacterial soaps may be fueling a rise in superbugs, manufacturers will soon have to meet stricter requirements showing long-term safety, US regulators said Monday.

Antibacterial soap-makers would also have to show that their products are more effective than plain soap at preventing illness and the spread of infections, said the proposed rule by the US Food and Drug Administration.

The products typically contain the chemicals triclosan and triclocarban, “which may carry unnecessary risks given that their benefits are unproven,” the FDA said in a statement.

Some studies have shown these soaps may affect thyroid, estrogen, and testosterone function in lab animals, and that they may be boosting people’s resistance to common antibiotics.

“New data suggest that the risks associated with long-term, daily use of antibacterial soaps may outweigh the benefits,” said Colleen Rogers, a lead microbiologist at FDA.

“There are indications that certain ingredients in these soaps may contribute to bacterial resistance to antibiotics, and may have unanticipated hormonal effects that are of concern to FDA.”

The FDA move would require studies that directly test the ability of an antibacterial soap to provide a clinical benefit over washing with non-antibacterial soap.

There is an 180-day comment period before the rule can take effect, and it does not mean that the products will be removed from shelves anytime soon.

Instead, companies have one year to provide the results of scientific studies that support the antibacterial claim.

Otherwise, they must either remove the antibacterial active ingredients or relabel their products to remove any antibacterial claims.

ksh/jm

Share Button

Related posts

US regulators issue emergency authorisation for Roche Zika test: companyTrans fat is not safe and must be removed from food: USThe powdered sugar on Dunkin’ donuts a little less unhealthy nowSalty foods could have protective benefit: studyIn the fight against BO, cotton could be the best weapon: studyAre we too clean?US approves novel remedy for hayfever, pollen allergiesPHILIPPINE CONSUL GENERAL URGES FILIPINO CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE, PHILIPPINE FOOD IMPORTERS, CUSTOMS BROKERS AND FREIGHT FORWARDERS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TO ATTEND ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON FOOD SAFETY ACTUS regulators approve bionic eyeHillary Clinton diagnosed with pneumonia, says doctorFirst Zika-related infant death in US reported in TexasCanada approves genetically modified salmon for foodDOH strictly monitoring Zika virus infectionsUS lifts lifetime ban on gay blood donationsWHO launches campaign for better use of antibioticsAntibiotic resistance threat to patients: studyS. Korea reports 15th MERS death, seven new casesUS experts urge approval of another new cholesterol drugErik Santos suffers from laryngitis after papal mass Scientists find gut bacteria that prevents food allergies