A new study says that antibacterial soap is actually not much more effective as regular soap is. The chemicals are not significantly more cleansing than regular soap. Researchers want to spread awareness of the idea that users should not expect anything special from antibacterial soaps they decide to use. It will not be any more effective on germs.
Studies revealed that there is not a “significant” difference between the two soaps. The study conducted studied the effect of the chemical, triclosan, which according to Science Daily, is the most active antiseptic ingredient in soap and was tested twice for examining different aspects. The 16 volunteering people that were studied here showed that in “the real world” and in real-life situations, there is no substantial difference between the two and thus concluding the no one of the two soaps is better or more efficient to be used.
In the paper written, it was revealed that, furthermore, bacteria was exposed to the triclosan specimens for 20 seconds at room temperature and then at a warm temperature. After nine hours, some differences were visible, but these results were definitely not very applicable to human hand-washing since it is for a considerably short duration in actuality. Thus essentially, the scientists found that there is no difference between the benefit of using antibacterial soap as opposed to plain soap in the short duration it takes to wash hands.
According to Daily Mail UK, consumers in the United States spend 6.5 million dollars on antibacerial soaps, annually. If you are enlightened by this article, then you will probably rethink this and which soap you really need to buy, regular or antibacterial.