Tweet
Antibacterial soap not proven better:
SILVER SPRING, Maryland (Reuters) - Antibacterial soaps and disposable wipes have not been proven any more effective than regular soap in preventing infections among average consumers, U.S. health experts overwhelmingly said on Thursday.
But if plain soap and water are not readily available, alcohol-based hand sanitizers are a "useful" alternative, the advisory panel said.
Alistair Wood, assistant vice chancellor at Vanderbilt University's School of Medicine, said using plain soap and water was "pretty effective."
"There was no data I saw that showed antiseptic hand washing is any better," he said.
Consumer products that include bacteria-fighting ingredients should be required to have scientific data proving they prevent infections, the advisory panel also said.
The Food and Drug Administration, which has been grappling with the issue for more than 30 years, asked the panelists to weigh the products' risks for consumers amid concerns they may create drug-resistant bacteria.
The agency has yet to make a final decision on how to regulate such over-the-counter products, which face many issues similar to prescription antibiotics.
"We're reexamining the risks to consumers," said FDA microbiologist Colleen Rogers.
FDA officials, who usually follow their experts' advice, could take various actions, from changing product labels and restricting marketing claims to pulling the products from the market.
At issue are antibacterial products that include chemicals such as triclosan, which targets a certain enzyme that bacteria need to live and may linger in the environment. Bacteria can mutate to adapt to such chemicals, scientists say.
Soaps with such bacterial-killing agents, such as Procter & Gamble Co.'s Safeguard and Henkel's Dial have been used for years and are now common households products.
Doctors and other experts are concerned excessive use of the products, like overuse of antibiotic medicines, will create drug-resistant "superbugs."
"Bacteria are not going to be destroyed. They've been here, they've seen dinosaurs come and go... so any attempt to sterilize our home is fraught with failure," said non-voting panelist Stuart Levy, a microbiologist at Tufts University.
FDA scientists and other experts said studies showed clear benefits from hand washing with plain soap, but data on antibacterial soap were limited.
"There is a lack of evidence that antiseptic soaps provide a benefit beyond plain soap in (the) community setting," said University of Michigan epidemiologist Allison Aiello.
Alcohol-based hand sanitizers were not a concern. While data did not show they were better than plain soap, panelists agreed they prevent the spread of germs without triggering resistance.
Some industry representatives rejected the panel's concerns, saying antibacterial soaps were safe and effective.
"We think the evidence is crystal clear," Soap and Detergent Association spokesman Brian Sansoni said.
Wood, the panel's chairman, urged the agency to take quick action, but Charles Ganley, head of the FDA's Office of Nonprescription Products, said the agency was not likely to act for at least a year.
"The products are still going to be there," Ganley said.
The FDA has been sorting through the issue since 1972. Six years later it asked for more data on triclosan and again in 1994, when it updated a draft ruling.
SILVER SPRING, Maryland (Reuters) - Antibacterial soaps and disposable wipes have not been proven any more effective than regular soap in preventing infections among average consumers, U.S. health experts overwhelmingly said on Thursday.
But if plain soap and water are not readily available, alcohol-based hand sanitizers are a "useful" alternative, the advisory panel said.
Alistair Wood, assistant vice chancellor at Vanderbilt University's School of Medicine, said using plain soap and water was "pretty effective."
"There was no data I saw that showed antiseptic hand washing is any better," he said.
Consumer products that include bacteria-fighting ingredients should be required to have scientific data proving they prevent infections, the advisory panel also said.
The Food and Drug Administration, which has been grappling with the issue for more than 30 years, asked the panelists to weigh the products' risks for consumers amid concerns they may create drug-resistant bacteria.
The agency has yet to make a final decision on how to regulate such over-the-counter products, which face many issues similar to prescription antibiotics.
"We're reexamining the risks to consumers," said FDA microbiologist Colleen Rogers.
FDA officials, who usually follow their experts' advice, could take various actions, from changing product labels and restricting marketing claims to pulling the products from the market.
At issue are antibacterial products that include chemicals such as triclosan, which targets a certain enzyme that bacteria need to live and may linger in the environment. Bacteria can mutate to adapt to such chemicals, scientists say.
Soaps with such bacterial-killing agents, such as Procter & Gamble Co.'s Safeguard and Henkel's Dial have been used for years and are now common households products.
Doctors and other experts are concerned excessive use of the products, like overuse of antibiotic medicines, will create drug-resistant "superbugs."
"Bacteria are not going to be destroyed. They've been here, they've seen dinosaurs come and go... so any attempt to sterilize our home is fraught with failure," said non-voting panelist Stuart Levy, a microbiologist at Tufts University.
FDA scientists and other experts said studies showed clear benefits from hand washing with plain soap, but data on antibacterial soap were limited.
"There is a lack of evidence that antiseptic soaps provide a benefit beyond plain soap in (the) community setting," said University of Michigan epidemiologist Allison Aiello.
Alcohol-based hand sanitizers were not a concern. While data did not show they were better than plain soap, panelists agreed they prevent the spread of germs without triggering resistance.
Some industry representatives rejected the panel's concerns, saying antibacterial soaps were safe and effective.
"We think the evidence is crystal clear," Soap and Detergent Association spokesman Brian Sansoni said.
Wood, the panel's chairman, urged the agency to take quick action, but Charles Ganley, head of the FDA's Office of Nonprescription Products, said the agency was not likely to act for at least a year.
"The products are still going to be there," Ganley said.
The FDA has been sorting through the issue since 1972. Six years later it asked for more data on triclosan and again in 1994, when it updated a draft ruling.