Antibacterial Soap? You Can Skip It — Use Plain Soap and Water

 

FDA- Antibacterial Soap? You Can Skip It — Use Plain Soap and Water
September 2, 2016

Silver Spring, MD – When you buy soaps and body washes, do you reach for products labeled “antibacterial” hoping they’ll keep your family safer? Do you think those products will lower your risk of getting sick, spreading germs or being infected?

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there isn’t enough science to show that over-the-counter (OTC) antibacterial soaps are better at preventing illness than washing with plain soap and water. To date, the benefits of using antibacterial hand soap haven’t been proven. In addition, the wide use of these products over a long time has raised the question of potential negative effects on your health.

After studying the issue, including reviewing available literature and hosting public meetings, in 2013 the FDA issued a proposed rule requiring safety and efficacy data from manufacturers, consumers, and others if they wanted to continue marketing antibacterial products containing those ingredients, but very little information has been provided. That’s why the FDA is issuing a final rule under which OTC consumer antiseptic wash products (including liquid, foam, gel hand soaps, bar soaps, and body washes) containing the majority of the antibacterial active ingredients—including triclosan and triclocarban—will no longer be able to be marketed.

Why? Because the manufacturers haven’t proven that those ingredients are safe for daily use over a long period of time. Also, manufacturers haven’t shown that these ingredients are any more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illnesses and the spread of certain infections. Some manufacturers have already started removing these ingredients from their products, ahead of the FDA’s final rule.

“Following simple handwashing practices is one of the most effective ways to prevent the spread of many types of infection and illness at home, at school and elsewhere,” says Theresa M. Michele, MD, of the FDA’s Division of Nonprescription Drug Products. “We can’t advise this enough. It’s simple, and it works.”

The FDA’s final rule covers only consumer antibacterial soaps and body washes that are used with water. It does not apply to hand sanitizers or hand wipes. It also does not apply to antibacterial soaps that are used in health care settings, such as hospitals and nursing home

What Makes Soap ‘Antibacterial’

Antibacterial soaps (sometimes called antimicrobial or antiseptic soaps) contain certain chemicals not found in plain soaps. Those ingredients are added to many consumer products with the intent of reducing or preventing bacterial infection.

Many liquid soaps labeled antibacterial contain triclosan, an ingredient of concern to many environmental, academic and regulatory groups. Animal studies have shown that triclosan alters the way some hormones work in the body and raises potential concerns for the effects of use in humans. We don’t yet know how triclosan affects humans and more research is needed.

“There’s no data demonstrating that these drugs provide additional protection from diseases and infections. Using these products might give people a false sense of security,” Michele says. “If you use these products because you think they protect you more than soap and water, that’s not correct. If you use them because of how they feel, there are many other products that have similar formulations but won’t expose your family to unnecessary chemicals. And some manufacturers have begun to revise these products to remove these ingredients.”

How do you tell if a product is antibacterial? For OTC drugs, antibacterial products generally have the word “antibacterial” on the label. Also, a Drug Facts label on a soap or body wash is a sign a product contains antibacterial ingredients.

 

Triclosan and Health Concerns

Triclosan can be found in many places today. It has been added to many consumer products—including clothing, kitchenware, furniture, and toys—to prevent bacterial contamination. Because of that, people’s long-term exposure to triclosan is higher than previously thought, raising concerns about the potential risks associated with the use of this ingredient over a lifetime.

In addition, laboratory studies have raised the possibility that triclosan contributes to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics. Some data shows this resistance may have a significant impact on the effectiveness of medical treatments, such as antibiotics.

The FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have been closely collaborating on scientific and regulatory issues related to triclosan. This joint effort will help to ensure government-wide consistency in the regulation of this chemical. The two agencies are reviewing the effects of triclosan from two different perspectives.

The EPA regulates the use of triclosan as a pesticide, and is in the process of updating its assessment of the effects of triclosan when it is used in pesticides. The FDA’s focus is on the effects of triclosan when it is used by consumers on a regular basis in hand soaps and body washes. By sharing information, the two agencies will be better able to measure the exposure and effects of triclosan and how these differing uses of triclosan may affect human health.

The EPA reevaluates each pesticide active ingredient every 15 years. The EPA’s Final Work Plan for the triclosan risk assessment can be found in docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0811.

More on the FDA’s Rule

The FDA’s rule doesn’t yet apply to three chemicals (benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and chloroxylenol). Manufacturers are developing and planning to submit new safety and effectiveness data for these ingredients.

With the exception of those three ingredients that are still under study, all products that use the other 19 active ingredients will need to change their formulas or they will no longer be available to consumers. Manufacturers will have one year to comply with the rule.

This rule doesn’t apply to hand sanitizers. In June 2016, the FDA issued a proposed rule requesting additional scientific data from manufacturers showing that the active ingredients in hand sanitizers are generally recognized as safe and effective to reduce bacteria on skin. To learn about the difference between consumer hand sanitizers and consumer antibacterial soaps, visit our consumer information page.

Consumers, Keep Washing with Plain Soap and Water

So what should consumers do? Wash your hands with plain soap and water. That’s still one of the most important steps you can take to avoid getting sick and to prevent spreading germs.

 

FDA Approves First Absorbable Stent for Coronary Artery Disease

 

July 5, 2016

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today approved the first fully absorbable stent to treat coronary artery disease. The Absorb GT1 Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold System (BVS), which releases the drug everolimus to limit the growth of scar tissue, is gradually absorbed by the body in approximately three years.

“The FDA’s approval of the Absorb GT1 BVS offers a new treatment option for individuals who are candidates for angioplasty, but would prefer an absorbable device rather than a permanent metallic coronary stent,” said Bram Zuckerman, M.D., director of the division of cardiovascular devices at the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health.

Coronary heart disease is responsible for about 370,000 deaths each year in the U.S., according to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The condition develops when cholesterol-containing deposits build up and narrow the coronary arteries, decreasing blood flow to the heart. This can cause chest pain (angina), shortness of breath, fatigue or other heart disease symptoms. Doctors often treat coronary artery disease with a procedure called angioplasty to widen the artery using a metal stent. Scar tissue can form within the stent causing the artery to narrow again (restenosis). Drug-eluting stents temporarily release a drug, typically for a few months after stent placement, to combat the formation of scar tissue.

The Absorb GT1 BVS is manufactured from a biodegradable polymer called poly(L-lactide), which is similar to materials used in other types of absorbable medical devices, such as sutures. The device’s absorption by the body gradually eliminates the presence of foreign material in the artery once the stent is no longer needed. After absorption, there are only four very small platinum markers embedded in the walls of the artery, which help cardiologists identify where the Absorb GT1 BVS was originally placed.

In approving the Absorb GT1 BVS, the FDA evaluated data from a randomized trial of 2,008 patients, which compared the rate of major adverse cardiac events between the Absorb GT1 BVS and a drug-eluting metallic stent. After one year, the Absorb GT1 BVS group showed a major cardiac adverse event rate of 7.8 percent, which was clinically comparable to the rate of 6.1 percent observed in the control group. In addition, after one year, the rate of blood clots forming within the devices was 1.54 percent for the Absorb GT1 BVS and 0.74 percent rate for the control.

Possible adverse events that may be associated with the procedure to insert the Absorb GT1 BVS or with the Absorb GT1 BVS itself include allergic reactions to materials in the device or medications used during the procedure, allergic reaction to the drug everolimus, infection or irritation at the catheter insertion site, internal bleeding, the development of abnormal connections between arteries and veins, embolism, or other coronary artery complications that may require medical intervention and that could lead to death.

The Absorb GT1 BVS is contraindicated for patients who have a known hypersensitivity or allergy to everolimus or the materials used in the device, such as poly(L-lactide), poly(D,L-lactide), or platinum. It is also contraindicated for those who are not candidates for angioplasty, have sensitivity to contrast, or who cannot take long-term aspirin therapy along with other blood-thinning medications (antiplatelet agents).

The Absorb GT1 BVS is manufactured by Abbott Vascular in Santa Clara, California.

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.

FDA Issues Final Food Defense Regulation

Regulation marks the seventh and final major rule under FDA Food Safety Modernization Act

May 26, 2016 Silver Spring, Maryland – The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today finalized a new food safety rule under the landmark, bipartisan FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) that will help to prevent wide-scale public health harm by requiring companies in the United States and abroad to take steps to prevent intentional adulteration of the food supply. While such acts are unlikely to occur, the new rule advances mitigation strategies to further protect the food supply.

Under the new rule, both domestic and foreign food facilities, for the first time, are required to complete and maintain a written food defense plan that assesses their potential vulnerabilities to deliberate contamination where the intent is to cause wide-scale public health harm. Facilities now have to identify and implement mitigation strategies to address these vulnerabilities, establish food defense monitoring procedures and corrective actions, verify that the system is working, ensure that personnel assigned to these areas receive appropriate training and maintain certain records.

“Today’s final rule on intentional adulteration will further strengthen the safety of an increasingly global and complex food supply,” said Stephen Ostroff, M.D., incoming deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine, FDA. “The rule will work in concert with other components of FSMA by preventing food safety problems before they occur.”

The rule was proposed in December 2013 and takes into consideration more than 200 comments submitted by the food industry, government regulatory partners, consumer advocates and others.

The FDA is committed to working with both industry and its state, local and tribal partners to ensure effective implementation of this new rule. Implementation of the Intentional Adulteration rule and all FSMA final rules will require partnership, education, and training. The FDA and others will provide industry with valuable tools to make compliance with the final rules easier, such as guidances, training courses and a technical assistance center.

Food manufacturers are required to comply with the new regulation within three to five years after publication of the final rule, depending on the size of the business.

The FDA has now finalized all seven major rules that implement the core of FSMA. The Intentional Adulteration final rule builds on the Preventive Controls rules for human food and animal food, the Produce Safety rule, Foreign Supplier Verification Program rule, Accreditation of Third-Party Certification rule and the rule on Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food. These seven rules will work together to systemically strengthen the food safety system and better protect public health.

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency is also responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.