Egad. It's cold and flu season. Trying to stay healthy makes
everyone nuts.
The usual formula to combat illness? Get plenty of sleep. Eat
right. Take lots of vitamin C. And don't forget to wash your hands.
It's good advice, but the contemporary version has escalated to
a new level of concern. The battle to avoid germs has become almost
ludicrous. Horror stories about rare, flesh-eating bacteria and
deadly bacteria like ebola have fueled the public's fear and ended
up as themes for movies like the ``Hot Zone.''
Even Donald Trump has germ phobia.
A recent New York Post story described his distaste for
hand-shaking, which put a severe crimp in his presidential
campaigning before he stepped out of the race. He even carried
around bottles of an antibacterial cleanser.
Was Trump eccentric, or is it common sense to arm yourself with
more than a bar of soap?
``The surface of the human body has many bacteria living on it.
It's normal,'' said Dr. David Dodson, an infectious disease
specialist in West Palm Beach.
``The media has publicized the emergence of resistant organisms,
and focused the attention on different, dangerous, microbes. That
has translated into some people's overconcern with germs in their
environment.''
Sure, wash your hands, but don't be lulled into thinking you're
preventing a flu epidemic, Dodson stressed.
``The No. 1 way infection is transmitted is hands. I would
absolutely be the last person to discourage washing with good,
antiseptic soap. A lot of the commercially available antiseptic
solutions also inhibit viruses and bacteria. The bottom line is
they have some inhibitory effect, but they don't kill virus or
bacteria.''
That hope of strangling, if not killing, bacteria has propelled
the public into snapping up soaps and cleansers labeled
``antibacterial'' and ``antimicrobial.''
Mary Kay Murray, a Manalapan Realtor, carries a bottle of
antibacterial hand wash with her, just like Trump.
``I am just a little concerned about the easy transmission of
germs. I had two bouts of flu this winter and I learned germs are
transmitted through handshaking and money. And when you're handling
money, and in my business _ real estate _ you have to be very
friendly and greet people, you're shaking hands. But I kind of have
to take care of my health.''
So, after hours of showing properties and touching doorknobs and
unfamiliar surfaces, she grabs her bottle of Purell hand sanitizer
and rubs it in, like a moisturizing lotion.
``You have to be cautious,'' she said.
But are these antibacterial soaps and creams really more
effective than Brand X?
Absolutely, according to the national Soap and Detergent
Association, an organization representing about 130 North American
manufacturers. Together, they produce more than 90 percent of the
cleaning products marketed in the United States.
Washing hands with an antibacterial soap results in reduced
bacterial growth on the skin compared with washing with plain soap,
SDA claims, because a very small amount of the antibacterial
ingredient remains on the skin after rinsing to control the growth
of bacteria.
And these cleansers aren't a new quirk, the organization points
out on its Web site: www.sdahq.org.
First introduced in the 1920s to control odor-causing bacteria,
antibacterial soaps are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, the SDA notes, assuming some level of consumer
protection.
The FDA does regulate these ingredients, but it doesn't uphold
claims that antibacterials are superior to regular soaps.
An FDA spokesman said that while antibacterial soaps may provide
some additional protection for people working with or caring for
ill people, ``the benefit of routine regular use by the general
population has not been fully demonstrated.''
There also was a concern recently that such soaps and washes may
actually invite the proliferation of new, stronger bacteria, much
like the overuse of antibiotics encouraged the birth of superbugs.
Not so, said the SDA.
``A group of experts convened by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration recently looked at this question and found no
evidence to support it,'' the association wrote on its Web site.
``In fact, scientific studies have demonstrated the beneficial role
of antibacterial wash products in reducing the transfer and
incidence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals.''
The FDA confirms that an advisory committee did research this
question in 1997 and found ``no current cause for concern.'' The
committee suggested, however, that a surveillance system be
developed to monitor the situation, but the FDA hasn't taken any
action yet on that.
Dodson, the local infectious disease specialist, was a little
more direct.
``None of these products would be used for treatment (of
illness), so you don't have to worry about causing superbugs.''
But, he added, ``During the flu season, with people in closed
spaces, it's appropriate to have some level of concern about germs.
But to claim an antibacterial product prevents human illness,
you're on shakier ground.''
