Questions remain in FDA’s attack on antibacterial soap

Jan. 10, 2014
Just to be safe, a person might think it prudent to quit using antibacterial soap.

Just to be safe, a person might think it prudent to quit using antibacterial soap.

The US Food and Drug Administration proposed a rule in mid-December envisioning a ban on the antimicrobial chemicals triclosan and triclocarban.

If the FDA is worried, shouldn’t consumers be worried, too? Environmental groups want them to be outright frightened.

One such group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, pushed the FDA into its December move with a lawsuit. In a statement that called triclosan a “dangerous chemical,” the NRDC responded to the FDA’s proposed rule by pointing out the agency first considered the move in 1978.

The agency hasn’t followed through because it hasn’t confirmed triclosan is dangerous. Now it wants manufacturers to confirm the substance is safe.

At a press conference announcing the December proposal, FDA Office of New Drugs Deputy Director Sandra Kweder said animal studies suggest daily exposure to antibacterial chemicals might have hormonal effects. She said laboratory studies suggest the ingredients might change the susceptibility of bacteria to antibiotics.

But are they dangerous?

“How these effects specifically link to human safety, if at all, has not been established,” Kweder said.

FDA proposes to require makers of antibacterial soap to prove triclosan and triclocarban are effective and safe or face the need to reformulate or quit selling the products.

Once again, a pressure group has yelled, “Boo!” and federal regulators have jumped. Frightened consumers will spurn products in question, just to be safe. Yet questions about danger remain open.

Toxicity relates to dosage and exposure time. Were lab rats bathed for hours at a time over many months in triclosan and triclocarban? Or did the animals’ exposure more closely approximate what might be expected for people?

In statements for the public, FDA didn’t say.

Before people quit using soap that might or might not enhance hygiene and that might or might not be harmful, they should be sure they’re not being gulled by a government in league with activism—just to be safe.