August 13, 2012
Triclosan, A Chemical Used in Antibacterial Soaps, is Found to Impair Muscle Function
A new study indicates that a chemical commonly found in hand soap might be harmful to muscle activity. Photo via Flickr user Lauratitian
Take a look at the bottle of antibacterial hand soap in your bathroom. Chances are good that a particular chemical is listed among its ingredients: triclosan.
The antibacterial substance, which was first developed in the 1960s to prevent bacterial infections in hospitals, has since been incorporated into everything from hand soaps to toothpastes to mouthwashes. Manufacturers see it as a marketing bonus, increasing consumer confidence that a particular product kills harmful bacteria. Even some household products—such as kitchen utensils, toys and bedding—include triclosan.
In recent years, though, research has shed light on a number of problems with employing triclosan so widely. Studies have shown that the chemical can disrupt the endocrine systems of several different animals, binding to receptor sites in the body, which prevents the thyroid hormone from functioning normally. Additionally, triclosan penetrates the skin and enters the bloodstream more easily than previously thought, and has turned up everywhere from aquatic environments to human breast milk in troubling quantities.
To this list of concerns, add one more: A new paper, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, indicates that triclosan impairs muscle function in both animals and humans. The study, conducted by researchers from the University of California, Davis, found that the chemical hinders human muscle contractions at the cellular level and inhibits normal muscle functioning in both fish and mice.
“Triclosan is found in virtually everyone’s home and is pervasive in the environment,” said lead author Isaac Pessah. “These findings provide strong evidence that the chemical is of concern to both human and environmental health.”
In the first phase of the study, the researchers exposed individual human muscle cells, both from the heart and typical skeletal muscles, to concentrations of triclosan similar to what our bodies experience in everyday life. Then, they used electrical stimulation to cause the muscle cells to contract. Normally, electrical stimulations prompts an immediate muscle contraction—a mechanism that is responsible for the entirety of our muscle activity. In the isolated cells, though, exposure to triclosan disrupted communication between two proteins crucial for proper muscle functioning, causing failure in both the heart and skeletal muscle cells.
The research team also tested the effects of the chemical on two types of live animals—mice and fathead minnows. In the mice, heart muscle function was reduced by as much as 25 percent after exposure to a single dose of triclosan, and grip strength was reduced by as much as 18 percent.
The minnows were used in the experiment to mimic the effect of triclosan in marine environments. After being exposed to concentrations of triclosan equivalent to those found in the wild for 7 days, the minnows were significantly worse swimmers than minnows that hadn’t been exposed to triclosan, and were less effective in swimming tests that simulated the the act of evading a predator.
Using studies with animals to make assumptions about human health is always dicey, but the researchers say the fact that triclosan produced similar results in widely varying conditions with different animals—and the troubling effects of the chemical on human heart cells in test tubes—are causes for concern. ”The effects of triclosan on cardiac function were really dramatic,” said co-author Nipavan Chiamvimonvat. “Although triclosan is not regulated as a drug, this compound acts like a potent cardiac depressant in our models.” He speculates that in some cases, triclosan may be responsible for exacerbating heart problems in patients with an underlying condition.
Additionally, the FDA has declared that there is no evidence that using antibacterial soaps with triclosan confers any more health benefits than simply washing with conventional soap and water, and the agency is currently conducting a risk assessment for the chemical. ”Triclosan can be useful in some instances, however it has become a ubiquitous ‘value added’ marketing factor that actually could be more harmful than helpful,” said study co-author Bruce Hammock. “At the very least, our findings call for a dramatic reduction in its use.“
Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.
52 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Triclosan is an active ingredient in Agent Orange.
It was not a component of Agent Orange. Agent Orange is a mixture of two dioxin compounds.
After reading this article,I just called 1-800-258-3425 (Anti-bacterial Dial product) and spoke with a representative. Triclosan was listed as an active ingredient. I read the bar code to them and they said that triclosan was in the product. It was approved and they had been using it for over 30 years. She seemed satisfied that the ingredient was approved. I said since they are even finding it in mother’s milk and that it was known to affect muscle function that its being approved and its being safe were not the same and that I would no longer purchase the product. I asked her to pass the information along but doubt seriously if she will. I will use alcohol and hydrogen peroxide as an anti-bacterial in the future.
Things like this make me so happy I am a Consultant for a company that does care!
@david
Agent Orange is NOT a mixture of two dioxin compounds. It, and a whole rainbow of Agent (insert color here) were herbicides, some mixtures of more than one herbicidal compound, that were used during the Vietnam War. In their haste to produce these herbicides, the manufacturers were not carefully following their own procedures. Dioxins were formed as contaminating by-products of the manufacturing process. They WERE NOT deliberately included in the Agent.
The whole world needs to stop acting like they are all about to do surgery. If your skin isn’t broken, you really don’t need a frigging antibacterial at all. Stop living in fear and just wash your hands with soap when they’re dirty. You don’t need to wipe off the shopping cart with the antibacterial wipes. Just live your life.
Amen Jimmy! Just live your life…
Yet another means by which, by chance or design, America is being turned into a nation of drones who will require direction and assistance to accomplish anything, but who will accept that direction, regardless of source, from anyone willing to lead.
I agree w/Jimmy.
If EVERYONE would start washing their hands after using the restroom, we would not need to worry so much about shopping carts! Just wash your hands after using the restroom everybody! ! !
Has ANY ONE THOUGHT OF THE HUGE RISE IN AUTISM RATES? COULD THIS BE A CLUE IN WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THESE INNOCENT CHILDREN? PROTECT THEM FROM BACTERIA AND DESTROY THEIR MENTAL FUNCTIONS. Has this been investigated? Children today are REQUIRED to bring antibacterial hand sanitizers to school as well as pencils and crayons. Someone needs to inform parents and school boards of these issues.
You people crack me up. Autism? The article said “muscle” function, not neurological function. Knowledge much?
As for the woman who panicked and ran off to call Dial and rant about triclosan…are you really so easily frightened. Triclosan has been out for over 30 years. If it was killing you you’d be dead by now. Same goes for everyone running around their houses right now looking for triclosan-containing products to throw away.
That said, when it comes to hand washing, warm water and regular soap removes upwards of 99% of bacteria from your hands because it’s the scrubbing and surfactant action of the soap that remove the bacteria. Triclosan kills it, and is therefore really redundant in soap. When a soap says “antibacterial” it’s both true and false; technically all soap used properly is antibacterial.
On the other hand, if you can’t wash your hands and you’re worried about bacteria (such as in a public setting where most people don’t wash their hands), hand sanitizer is a good idea and probably won’t hurt you unless you’re slathering it on like sunscreen.
I never sought out antibacterial products until I became a cancer patient. I used them diligently until I finished chemo and my blood counts came back up. Then it was right back to basic soap and water. I’m actually more worried about creating super bugs with all this overuse, but this adds another reason to seek out products without the unecessary additives. It can be a challenge sometimes, though. Check out popular brands of dish washing liquid next time you’re at a grocery store to see what I mean.
The American Cleaning Institute (www.cleaninginstitute.org) wants to share some informed perspective on this issue.
The study in question completely distorts the real world safety and everyday use of this oft-tested ingredient, based on faulty comparisons to overdosed test subjects. In this current study, essentially the authors sampled the test subjects (mice and fish) at levels that the test subjects would never be subjected to in the real world, let alone human beings.
Antibacterial soaps are used as a part of common sense hygiene routines in homes, hospitals, doctors’ offices, day care centers, nursing homes, and countless other office and institutional settings.
These products and ingredients have stood the test of time through extensive research and testing. It’s unfortunate that attempts are made to distort real world use of products and ingredients that contribute to better health.
More information on the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial products and ingredients can be round online at http://www.fightgermsnow.com and
http://www.cleaninginstitute.org/antibacterials.
Brian Sansoni/American Cleaning Institute
I had already heard about this information. It seems that this product should have been more thoroughly tested BEFORE marketing began. Another ‘demerit; for FDA.
Sorry, but this is BS in my humble opinion. Triclosan is around for a long time and nobody was able to prove any of the statements above to be true. In my eyes the problem with this kind of “research” is that we can show any outcome and its opposite, depending on the interests of the company, organization or person which or who commission such a project. Sorry guys, but this article is garbage.
honey works good if you can find the real thing!
Manufacturers just add triclosan to their regular products so they can be marketed as disinfectants without revealing the rest of the proprietary formulation.
After the flu pandemic scare a few years ago, everywhere from libraries to doctors’ office has offered and encouraged the use of antibacterial hand sanitizers, even though several studies have shown that hand sanitizers do not kill N1H1 virus. It is the rubbing and flushing action of hand washing that kills flu virus.
I think the post on autism may refer to the link between parental autoimmune disease and autism spectrum disorders. I wonder if there is any data supporting a link between autoimmune disease and the use of antibacterial products.
I do not buy hand sanitizer, but since everyone was talking about it I wondered with all that alcohol if hand sanitizer actually contained triclosan. It does not. However, the list of items that does is frightening: toothpaste (it helps fight gingivitis), steak knives. my cat’s plastic water bowl, children’s toys, and running shoes. I try not to buy antibacterial products because of the environmental impact, but it gets harder and harder to avoid them.
First of all, I am disappointed in AARP for publishing an article that is under study from only one research company and with so little evidence of the dangers. Our skin is much thicker and more protective than mice and minnows. Plus, after we wash our hands, we rinse and usually dry them. I really tire of all these “germ” scares. As long as we wash our hands vigorously with a soap, rinse, and dry them gently, there usually is not much of a problem. However, I do wipe shopping carts and the such with a simple alcohol swab before using them. This includes elevator buttons too only because I doubt that they are ever cleaned.
Whoops! I meant to write that “I am disappointed in SMITHSONIAN …..
Wow, this is not good news. Hope we can find something to counteract the effects along with removing the chemical.
For all of those doubters out there about the research and think that only one “study” has been done for this article to come out- you should re-read this article. It was talking about NUMEROUS studies and different research articles for credits. Why are you so ignorant to the fact that yes- even though they were studied on some small animals, for example the minnows- the marine life affected is significant. Just imagine all of that soap “washing down the drain” and off of your hands. Sure. Maybe you think it’s insignificant and won’t affect YOU, but ultimately- it is affecting our entire ENVIRONMENT. Another point they made. EXAMPLE: It takes many blades of grass standing together to make a field, or a lawn. WE- the people, are all like blades of grass, if you think of it. A hill of grass can prevent some erosion. We are having a significant affect on our environment from all of the “insignificant” things we think we are doing, like from washing our hands numerous times a day with the triclosan ingredient in soap. Chronic exposure to a chemical can have lasting effects- and children are MUCH more susceptible to toxins than adults. Wake up people. Science is usually good at observing changes in systems. You can believe something all you want, but it’s not going to change reality. THANK YOU SMITHSONIAN for publishing this article! We need to be more aware of the chemicals that the FDA “approves” but really is poisoning us with- so much ignorance follows the FDA and their standards of safety in the majority of the people. Cheers to those who appreciate this article as I do.
And just one more point- The FDA is pretty much siding with MONSANTO- an evil company that makes chemicals, and also makes GMO crops- much of the FOOD we eat. This may seem irrelevant, but it’s not.
We are the ONLY country in the World that has not upheld even just the labeling of GMOS in our food. SO many countries have already BANNED GMOS and we can’t even label it on our food! You think the FDA is on your side? Really? Think again.
To find our more information about Monsanto and the evil they’ve done and how they’re connected to the government- please check out
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm
WOW. why do other countries ban our products,yet the the same counties in American stick it to us? , LIKe the Bankers who committ crimes — this triclosan affects the muscles contraction! when mixed with water and toothpaste forms chloroform (which means CANCER, ALSO AFFECTS THYROID
IN MANY OTHER PRODUCT WHICH MEANS IT ACCUMLATIVE!YES. WHY IS IT BANNED OTHER COUNTIES — LIKE JOHNSON BABY SHAMPOO WAS IN OTHER COUNTIES UNTIL THEY REMOVED CERTAAIN CHEMICALS,YET FOR YRS OUR BABIES YOUNG CHILDREN WERE SUBJECTIVE TO CHEMICALS AND FINALY MOTHER REFUSED TO BUY IT-THEN THE CHANGE–PLEASE WAKE UP THINK -MORE DISEASES THYROID ,CANCER ,MUSCLE ETC AND THIS BEEN GOING ON FOR YRS. I’M SURE THERE ARE PEOPLE PAID TO MONITOR THESE, WHO ARE PROFFESSIONALS TO DEBATE THE FINDS TO PROTECT THE COMPANIES WHO POISON OUR FOOD,WATER AND NEEDE ASSORIES, THE COMPANIES PROFIT — WHO BELIEVE AND SUFFER AND DIE — DO JUST THAT WHO PAYS FOR ALL THIS MISER THE PEOPLE — EVEN ON THE OIL SPILLS– WHO ENDS UP WITH ALL THE PROBLEMS — WHO SUPPORTS ALL THIS — YOU GUESSED IT. OK PAID WRITERS FIND THE MISTAKES SPELLIMG ETC AND AVOID THE TRUTHS!!!
@ John
Thank you for your humble opinion even though it is as misguided as it can possibly be. The fact that the triclosan has been in use since the 70′s doesn’t mean it has no adverse effects. The University of Michigan has shown that when introduced to chlorinated water and exposed to sunlight (UV specifically) it can degrade into dioxin compounds.
Just the fact that problems haven’t been noticed over the course of forty years doesn’t mean they aren’t there. Just look at the relationship between tobacco and lung cancer or asbestos and mesothelioma. Polychlorinated biphenyls are another good example as they are very closely related in terms of chemical composition and behavior. PCBs have been around since the late 1890s but it wasn’t until the 1960s that someone started to pay attention to the correlation between PCB exposure and endocrine disruption (same as with triclosan) and cancer.
A determination that a chemical is “safe” is always provisional based on the results from further studies, and taking into consideration how widely it is used. Deciding to keep triclosan in commerce involves balancing the societal benefits from its use versus the health and ecological risks. The FDA’s assessment that triclosan confers no greater health benefits than soap and water versus its environmental persistence, bioaccumulation and uncertainties regarding health effects seems to speak against Triclosan’s continued use. Given a similar set of evidence 3M discontinued manufacturing perfluorinated compounds, and few would argue about the benefits associated with Teflon.
A 30 years safety history doesn’t mean safe forevermore. DDT was used for 30 years until enough evidence was amassed concluding that it posed unacceptable ecological risks – the evidence of those risks, coupled with its decreasing effectiveness in agricultural pest control resulted in us deciding to do without DDT. We are probably at a similar crossroads with triclosan.
Being a microbiologist, I’ll tell you – a vast majority of the time, there is no need for ‘anti-bacterial’ soap. Soap IS already highly antibacterial! Just wash your hands and your surfaces properly, and stop poisoning yourself and the environment.
This is really serious because my son was using the antibacterial hand soap and now he has “Myasthenia Gravis”! Which causes muscles weakness to where it mess with your speech and your nerve system. It’s a neurology problem that weaken the muscles.My son is a body builder and have won trophies for his body building expertise.Never had a problem before,the public better take this problem serious!If you don’t care,who will care? Evidently the government don’t care! They are using the public as ginny pigs without the public even knowing.Who ever is doing the research,I thank you all for bring this problem to the attention of the public because we are dying and really don’t know why! Autism is a neurology problem,do your research! Anything that has to do with your nerves or muscles are a neurology problem,”Triclosan” is in the mothers milk! That’s why there are so many “Autism” children and the government is not saying a damn word! Wake Up!
OMG! The shy is falling! The sky is falling!
i really dont think there is anyone out there that cares about the consumer any more; so long as goverment and big business get their money. they dont care if it harms us or our children.
oh i see, these comments are monitored; so much for freedom of speech.
Triclosan, Phthalates, Bisphenyl-A and fire retardants are all leaching into our water supply and flowing out to sea, thereby entering the human food chain.
They should go the way of DDT, Asbestos and Chlordane.
It’s criminal that Monsanto, Dow et al should be allowed to get rich on things that harm humans, then use their ill-gotten gains, to hire attorneys to beat down injured victims in court.
Remember the days when Cancer, Autism, Asthma and HDHD were rare?
Triclosan, Phthalates, Bisphenyl-A and fire retardants are all leaching into our water supply and flowing out to sea, thereby entering the human food chain.
They should go the way of DDT, Asbestos and Chlordane.
It’s criminal that Monsanto, Dow et al should be allowed to get rich on things that harm humans, then use their ill-gotten gains, to hire attorneys to beat down injured victims in court.
Remember the days when Cancer, Autism, Asthma and ADHD were rare?
Yes Wilma there WAS a time when cancer, asthma and other common ailments WERE rarer than they are now. And just because we are living longer up into our 80s and up does not mean we are healthier, I see many 80+ year olds that look like the walking dead- tubes, bandages, plastic parts and all. If you go overseas and take a look at peoples who grow their own foods, and don’t use all of the products we use on a regular basis they look and feel much healthier than we are. Their skin, eyes, teeth are stronger and more attractive. They can work in the fields and not get exhausted. They don’t need all kinds of weird medications, and “restless leg syndrome” they think is some made up disease (it is, actually) they laugh at us Americans as some sissy-fied medicated weaklings incapable of breathing, thinking, living on our own. And we are.
I’m now 70 and am wondering why I managed to live this long as I have used Triclosan since it first came out, was exposed to DDT and other insecticides before they were banned and other suddenly toxic substances. MOST women used to die BEFORE ever reaching menopause and men usually died in their 50′s back in pioneer days. I think diseases such as cancer, asthma, etc. always existed, but were not even “classified” as cancer as the term was unknown. As I looked back through my own family records, most ancestors died in the 40′s with “cause unknown” on the death records. I have gone overseas and saw native Africans who DID grow their own food, did NOT have pure water, did NOT use any type of soap, toothpaste, etc. Most lost all their teeth by age 25 or 30, had varied illnesses caused by parasites and germs and died by age 40. I am NOT saying Triclosan is necessarily GOOD for people. I’m just trying to put things in perspective here. The bottom line is that humans and animals are MORTAL…and as such, we will all die eventually. WORRY will kill far more people than Triclosan!
Triclosan was in Lifebuoy soap in the 1930′s. Doesn’t mean it’s safe. It took 20 years to associate certain chemicals with bladder cancer. Cigrettes were developed in the 1880′s but it wasn’t until the 1920′s that an increase in lung cancer was begun to be seen. The appearance in breast milk is significant. Also to be considered is the increase in other toxic chemicals. There is the possibility of potentiating actions to be considered. Then, too, down the drain into the water supply means it is probably there too, even though most drinking water is treated. Though continued investigation is in order, banning now is reasonable. As noted by so many, soap and water does a good job.
We clean our house with vinegar, use castille soap and shampoo (which I use half as often as I used to). It’s cheaper, my hair doesn’t look like a flat mop, and it’s returned common sense to me. Why do we buy all these products? I think we like packaging and colors. It’s the beads and shiny object gene. But really, don’t buy products to put on your body or especially on your skin (or your kids) that have more than six or seven ingredients, most of them unpronounceable. Try to avoid ingesting chemicals by avoiding food packaged in plastics and animals injected endlessly with them. Don’t believe chemicals — like anti-bacterial soap — are clean; they are full of chemicals. They just smell clean. (And once you stop using them a few years, you begin smelling in them for what you ignored all along: petrochemical smell. Yuck.) Do I think it’s possible to escape dangerous chemicals? No. Will I try to avoid them when possible? Yes. Why not.
I wonder if they is why my mouth felt so numb after my mother washed my mouth out with soap? LOL. Maybe this product is prolonging our lives because it slows down muscle actions. We only have so many heart beats etc. LOL >.> Thought I put my speculations out there… since others are making some up too. XD
I use antibacterial soap in the kitchen and bathroom. As a medical technologist, I am worried about the Salmonella in chicken, the E coli in hamburger, and the sickness that those organisms can cause. I wipe my counters and wash my hands with the soap after handling any uncooked meat. In the bathroom, feces is loaded with normal (and sometimes pathogenic) bacteria. It makes since to use it there.
I feel strongly that Triclosan should not be in toothpaste and other products and will read the labels.
The schools use anti bacterial soap for the kids to ‘wash up’ with before they eat lunch. The stuff is nasty to try and clean up. The kids like to smear the soap all over the walls.
“The sky is falling!” ???
No, I don’t think everyone is freaking out for no reason.
WHY should consumers be tricked into buying something that “protects them from h1n1, etc.” when it actually doesn’t?
WHY are chemicals allowed to be in products if their safety is unknown?
WHY isn’t this being taken more seriously after multiple studies, linking triclosan to allergies, hormone problems, etc.?
WHY is triclosan put in products when it is not needed over soap and water?
Oh yeah, because the companies can say “OH! new antibacterial formula!! because you’re a good person and you have to buy this to protect your family! if you don’t your kids will get sick! you have to buy our product so you can clean everything!!”
…and that’s exactly what the consumer does. Talk about “the sky is falling.”
There is just simply NO reason for people to be exposed to something if the safety is unknown. Sure, maybe they’ll find out triclosan is totally safe (doubt it). And that’s FINE. It shouldn’t be in products in the meantime though.
I’ve noticed Triclosan in a lot of the toothpastes I buy too. Might as well avoid it if there are no inherent benefits.
I use triclosan soap every day when I shower after work. I work with raw seafood and do a lot of gross cleaning. It’s messy work; I get splashed with the juice from raw fish and my clothes get soaked in dirty water. The bacteria I get on my arms and legs from handling raw fish (and sometimes raw fish that’s gone bad) is something I don’t even want to think about! I wouldn’t feel even remotely comfortable sitting on my couch or getting into bed after work if I used regular, non-antibacterial soap.
what are the professional sources of this information?
these comments came directly from the fda:
In light of questions raised by recent animal studies of triclosan, FDA is reviewing all of the available evidence on this ingredient’s safety in consumer products. FDA will communicate the findings of its review to the public in winter 2012.
At this time, FDA does NOT have evidence that triclosan added to antibacterial soaps and body washes provides extra health benefits over soap and water. Consumers concerned about using hand and body soaps with triclosan should wash with regular soap and water.
Yes, it’s under review currently for safety by the FDA and Health Canada and just because the FDA approves something doesn’t mean it’s safe. Take aspartame for example, the FDA was politically pressured to approve it’s use by none other than Donald Rumsfeld when he was chairman of Searle – Big pharma, here’s just one article, but feel free to check the internet and do you own research:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robbie-gennet/donald-rumsfeld-and-the-s_b_805581.html
If this link is blocked, check Huffington Post for one place to find it.
ANOTHER ‘softkill’ technique.
American Cleaning Institute representative, do you dispute the article content accuracy or validity? You state overdosing was used, in contradiction to the article.
“After being exposed to concentrations of triclosan equivalent to those found in the wild for 7 days, the minnows were significantly worse swimmers than minnows that hadn’t been exposed to triclosan, and were less effective in swimming tests that simulated the the act of evading a predator.”
Hemp cannabis products are safer, greener and naturally antibacterial. What the federal government says is safe or dangerous depends more on lobbyist influence than pure science. If safety and effectiveness were the benchmarks, triclosan would have never been imagined or produced.
Got food allergies? Remember the news item in December 2012 where they said that people with food allergies were found to have elevated amounts of dichlorophenol in their bodies. The article said it was coming from the tap water. It did not say where it came from, to get into the tap water. I did my own research and found that two huge sources for dichlorophenol are Triclosan and 2,4D (a weed killer commonly used on wheat). It’s no wonder there’s so much germ-killing chemicals being found in our water.
As a result of talking with the water treatment people near me, I learned that they are now using chloramine instead of just chlorine. Chloramine is made from a combination of chlorine and ammonia. Remember how you’re not supposed to combine chlorine bleach and ammonia because it forms a deadly gas? That’s in our water, unless your water comes from a source without it. And that’s not the end of it. If you combine chloramine and dichlorophenol, it makes chloroform. And when the body metabolizes that, it forms phosgene.
Chloraminated water keeps killing germs longer than chlorinated water, even though chloraminated water doesn’t kill them as quickly. Chloramine stays in the water longer. It won’t gas out. It won’t boil out. I will kill your fish. You can’t use it for kidney dialysis patients because it would kill them. Sound like it stays active long enough to kill the “good bugs” in your digestive tract, which can lead to food allergies because the “bad bugs” (molds, yeast, candida, anyone?) take over.
If you’re going to keep your immune system healthy, you need to keep your “good bugs” healthy. If you surround yourself with germ-killers all the time, you’re going to find that the “good bugs” are eliminated long before the “bad bugs” are.
I think this article is interesting because, when I switched from a bath soap containing Triclosan to one without it, I noticed that I no longer felt fatigued when I finished showering. I noticed it the first time I used the non-Triclosan soap in more than 30 years. I was not expecting anything like that to change. I was just trying to reduce the load of germ-killers in my body. But this article helps explain why I did not feel weak and fatigued after showering with non-Triclosan soap.
I think we should spend less time trying to kill all the germs around us, and spend more time trying to encourage our “good bugs”.