September 22, 2008

To anti-bacterial or not?

Was it that long ago when cleaning a home meant using soap and water? Just when did it become necessary to use hospital-strength cleaners on your kitchen floor?

When is soap enough? What is the difference between cleaning and disinfecting? When is which necessary?

These seem like pretty simple questions. It turns out the answers, and the roads to them, are not that straightforward.

There has been some discussion about the place for anti-bacterials for some time. One concern is that the overuse of these agents result in bacteria, which, being resilient and endlessly clever, become more and more resistant to the point that virtually no remedy can adequately vanquish them.

Another concern is one agent in particular, Triclosan, which can irritate the skin and be hazardous to the environment. http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:Q97AT-uxe54J:www.panna.org/files/factsheetTriclosan.pdf+Lysol+AND+Triclosan&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us

http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/emci/chemref/3380345.html

1 comment:

  1. Too true. We only need the scrubbing action of washing hands, floors, etc. as well as the composition of a molecular soap bubble to get the real job done. It is US that have created resistant organisms. Creating an environment that has become 'too sterile' makes everyone susceptible to things that never affected us years ago. People are sicker now than decades ago, and have 'new' illnesses from organisms that used to part of our normal flora. Leave the sterile environment to the OR and don't be afraid to 'eat a little dirt.'

    ReplyDelete