Triclosan, Still

May 21, 2013

I’ve written here a number of times over the past couple of years (most recently here) about triclosan, an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent that is used in a wide variety of consumer products, including anti-bacterial soaps, toothpaste, deodorant, mouthwash, other cosmetic products, and household cleaning supplies.   The US Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has been conducting a safety and effectiveness review of triclosan for some time now. The review was originally scheduled to be released in April, 2011; last summer, it was promised by the end of the year (2012).  We’re all still waiting.

The Singularity Hub site has an article on this ongoing saga.  It gives a bit more of the history: the FDA issued draft guidelines in 1978, which classified triclosan as “not generally recognized as safe and effective”.  Since the guidelines were never finalized, nothing changed.

The FDA has not given an updated timetable for the release of its review.


Triclosan Again

May 5, 2013

The Yahoo! News site has an article from the Associated Press [AP] about the US Food and Drug Administration’s [FDA] ongoing review of triclosan, an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent that is used in a wide variety of consumer products, including anti-bacterial soaps, toothpaste, deodorant, mouthwash, other cosmetic products, and household cleaning supplies.  The FDA’s original goal was to release the results of this review in April, 2011; clearly they are a bit behind schedule.   (According to the article, the results should be released later this year — or, at least, real soon now.)  Triclosan does have one use explicitly approved by the FDA: it is used in some toothpastes to help prevent gingivitis.  Its other uses have not, as far as I know, been subject to any formal approval process.

I’ve written here a couple of times before about the use of triclosan.  It is suspected, based on animal studies, of being an endocrine disruptor, boosting the effect of testosterone and estrogen, and reducing that of thyroid hormones.  Another animal study, reported last summer, suggests that triclosan can interfere with muscle function.   What is most striking, though, is that, for its main use, as an anti-bacterial agent in consumer products, there is essentially no evidence that it has any value at all.  As the FDA website, and other publications, have said for some time:

For other consumer products, FDA has not received evidence that the triclosan provides an extra benefit to health. At this time, the agency does not have evidence that triclosan in antibacterial soaps and body washes provides any benefit over washing with regular soap and water.

This is not to diminish, in any way, the importance on washing in  general, and washing ones hands in particular.  (The Centers for Disease Control have resources on hand hygiene.)  But, as the FDA’s note suggests, the evidence suggests  that ordinary soap and water work just fine.  As I wrote in an earlier post:

My own conclusion is that, since I have seen no evidence that these anti-bacterial products provide any benefit, and since there may be some risk, they are not worth using, especially since they cost more than plain old soap.

Apart from the possible negative effects of any particular chemical, there is a general argument for not using anti-microbial products indiscriminately.  There is a possibility that excessive usage may contribute to antibiotic resistance, and there is also a risk of disrupting the normal population of microbes that are part of our personal biosystems, which can lead to serious health problems.  It hardly seems worth much risk to use something, like triclosan, that in most cases doesn’t seem to work anyway.


Another Problem with Triclosan?

August 17, 2012

I’ve written here a number of times about some of the potential risks associated with the misuse and overuse of anti-microbial agents.  One such substance is triclosan, an antibacterial agent used in soaps, toothpaste, deodorant, mouthwash, other cosmetic products, and household cleaning supplies.  There have been some suggestions that widespread use of triclosan  may contribute to the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria; the chemical is also suspected, based initially on data from animal experiments, of being an endocrine disruptor.

A group of researchers at the University of California, Davis, and the University of Colorado, has now found evidence that triclosan hinders muscle functioning in mice and in fish.

Triclosan, an antibacterial chemical widely used in hand soaps and other personal-care products, hinders muscle contractions at a cellular level, slows swimming in fish and reduces muscular strength in mice, according to researchers at the University of California, Davis, and the University of Colorado. The findings appear online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

(The abstract for the published paper is here.)

The investigators found that the presence of triclosan, at levels that might reasonably be encountered in practice, inhibits muscle contraction by interfering with the action of two proteins that serve to regulate the transport of calcium ions.  The effect was sizable:

Anesthetized mice had up to a 25-percent reduction in heart function measures within 20 minutes of exposure to the chemical.

The mice also exhibited reduced grip strength after exposure to triclosan.  Fathead minnows exposed to triclosan in their environment had reduced swimming ability, compared to a control group.

The growing body of evidence suggesting that triclosan may not be entirely benign is of some concern, because the chemical is so widely used.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1998 estimated that more than 1 million pounds of triclosan are produced annually in the United States, and that the chemical is detectable in waterways and aquatic organisms ranging from algae to fish to dolphins, as well as in human urine, blood and breast milk.

The FDA is currently reviewing the safety status of triclosan, although the results, originally due in April 2011, are still not completed.  Triclosan does have one use for which the FDA has given explicit approval: it is used in some toothpastes to help prevent gingivitis.  Otherwise, the FDA makes this statement on its page Triclosan: What Consumers Should Know:

For other consumer products, FDA has not received evidence that the triclosan provides an extra benefit to health. At this time, the agency does not have evidence that triclosan in antibacterial soaps and body washes provides any benefit over washing with regular soap and water.

Many people seem to be fixated on the idea, imported from cloud-cuckoo land, of getting an entirely microbe-free environment, using not just anti-bacterial soap, but toys and even trash bags.  (Do they intend to autoclave all their rubbish?)  And yet it can be difficult to get some of the same people to wash their hands.


%d bloggers like this: