You don’t need antibacterial soap at all, if anything it hurts your immune system in the long run.
Your skin is dead. It’s not hurting your immune system in any way.
There is no such thing as “anti-bacterial soap”, on the basis that all soap, by it’s very function, is anti-bacterial. Because of this fact any company can add the words “anti-bacterial” on their soap, as it’s never technically wrong.
How does soap kill bacteria?
Soap is an emulsifier type chemical. That is to say, soap has molecules that like water and hate oil on one end, and hate water and like oil on the other. The molecule looks kinda like a hairpin, and you cannot have soap without it.
Cell and bacterial walls have a double layer of similar molecules that create a barrier between the inside of the cell and the outside world. The soap molecules attach themselves to the bacteria’s walls and then tears them apart.
Your skin is largely protected because it’s made of many layers, the top most being made of dead skin cells. But high enough concentrations of soap can cause serious chemical burns, as what the soap does to bacteria it can do to your skin cells. However, very low concentrations of soap is all that’s needed to wash yourself.
The antibacterial soaps also help create supergerms that can survive the antibiotic used. They should only be used in medical settings when necessary. The overuse of antibacterial soaps and antibiotics are going to help create more pandemics should enough bacteria become antibiotic-resistant.
That’s very true, but also, the overuse of antibiotics on livestock dwarfs any overuse normal people are doing. We need to make the farmers stop, too.
Is antibacterial soap using antibiotics though? I thought it was just using something like alcohol to kill off bacteria and not an actual antibiotic.
Friendly reminder people can stop eating meat at any point if they don’t want to contribute to problems like this.
Your getting downvoted because bacteria exists regardless of farm/ag.
I am glat that you posted this but also sad that it’s not more widely known. The 20-second hand wash with any standard soap is all you need in the entire world.
I’ve seen less and less anti-bacterial soap available at retail anyway.
I was trying to buy some at target about a month ago and there were only like 2 options that even claimed to be soap. The rest were “hand wash” and all of it was weird generic brands I’d never heard of. I haven’t used it yet but I do not feel confident with that purchase at all.
I never stopped to ask what is in " antibacterial" soap that makes it such? Do they straight-up put an antibiotic in it like fucking Neosporin?
Then you’ve got “hand sanitizer” which is usually just denatured ethanol and some gelling agent.
Not sure. I would have been happy with just a product from a brand I recognized that actually claimed to be soap without weird marketing weasel words.
Anyone know if scrubbing with water alone is better or worse than not doing anything? I’ve occasionally ended up in public bathrooms with no soap and I wonder if I should use water or not.
Yes, scrubbing with water is still useful. Besides being a detergent, what soap does is raise skin pH to make it less likely that bacteria can grow on the surface.
deleted by creator
You can also get away from using shampoo. Just spend several minutes vigorously scrubbing under the shower.
All soap is anti-bacterial.
Look, let’s be real. Nitpicking over dictionary definitions like a grammar-Republican isn’t making anyone smarter. When you’re that obsessed with splitting hairs over precise definitions, you’re actually creating a fog of confusion. It’s like trying to explain quantum physics with a thesaurus, you end up sounding like a pretentious know-it-all instead of a clear communicator.
Yeah who cares about definitions of things?
There is “I’m trying to open people’s eyes to the truth” focusing on details and definitions.
Then there’s “I’m a cunt and you’re an idiot” splitting of hairs that add nothing to the conversation or anyone’s thoughts on the matter.
Guess which group you fall in. (Hint; the votes on your comment)
You are literally adding nothing to the situation and being an actual cunt so…
At least I was on topic.
Oh yes very on topic and not a cunt at all LMAO
Go fuck yourself there buddy.
I hope you were being sarcastic…
Obviously.
Apparently not you, you seem to be after arguing with people you don’t even know.
There’s no argument to be had, all soap is anti-bacterial. It’s a fact, not a position.
woooosh.jpg
Loving all the kickback for stating an empirically correct statement. This platform is wild.
I’m curious enough to continue the conversation, if only because talking about definitions is interesting. So I’m not being confrontational, I actually want to have a discussion.
You say that all soaps are antibacterial because the result in the end is that no bacteria remains on the hands. I see what you’re saying there. But anti-bacterial soap kills the bacteria, including the remaining ones that couldn’t be removed.
That’s like saying that removing a group of humans based on ethnicity from a region, without killing them, amounts to genocide. Would you say that’s genocide too?* (And I know the comparison is extreme.)
*I think I read somewhere that forcibly removing people from a region amounts to genocide, though. But you know what I mean…
