Anti-Bacterials in Schools

[Aquila]

:mad: I have been becoming acutely aware of the use of anti-bacterial soaps and cleaning sprays in the classrooms in which I substitute. Sometimes I turn up for work in a classroom where the teacher has used an anti-bacterial on the tables the afternoon before, and have immediately felt a sore-throat and watery eyes. I have to open all the doors and windows if possible, or put the AC on just to breathe.

What are these chemicals doing to our kids? They are used profusely in elementary schools and kindergartens to try to combat germs spread by drooling, runny nosed kids, especially on non-porous surfaces like tables and computers, but are they actually causing more harm than good?

Anti-bacterial soaps containing Triclosan (classed as a drug) can cause skin rashes and the growth of super-resistant bacteria on the skin, and sprays containing anti-bacterials have been linked to many respiratory diseases.

Isn't it time that they were banned by school districts?
Old fashioned inorganic products without drugs work fine, and the best precaution against the spread of common germs is to teach basic hygiene such as thorough hand washing with hot water and regular soap.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I gotta admit I've been wondering about this myself. Triclosan is being tossed into stuff with abandon. I have no idea what sort of safety and efficacy tests have been run.

~~ Paul

[Tokenconservative]

As a sub, I've noticed this, too.

I never knew nor much cared what was in these things specifically, and I'm fairly impervious to allergic/type reactions. All I know is they seem to leave a film on everything that just leaves things feeling "dirty." What's wrong with good old Windex or some such for such cleaning?

I'm sure it kills the turrible germs just as effectively, and doesn't leave behind the film.

Tokie

[Aquila]

Here is a link to the wikipedia page about Triclosan and its health concerns:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triclosan

Also, there was a story yesterday on the internet about increasing staph infections in sports team members. These were resistant to anti-biotics. I wonder if the use of anti-bacterials in locker rooms had anything to do with this.

[rjh01]

Here is a more authoritive link Scientific American (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=024FEAE8-E7F2-99DF-323D8E02C4E48BF6&sc=I100322)


When a bacterial population is placed under a stressor—such as an antibacterial chemical—a small subpopulation armed with special defense mechanisms can develop. These lineages survive and reproduce as their weaker relatives perish. "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is the governing maxim here, as antibacterial chemicals select for bacteria that endure their presence.

As bacteria develop a tolerance for these compounds there is potential for also developing a tolerance for certain antibiotics. This phenomenon, called cross-resistance, has already been demonstrated in several laboratory studies using triclosan, one of the most common chemicals found in antibacterial hand cleaners, dishwashing liquids and other wash products. "Triclosan has a specific inhibitory target in bacteria similar to some antibiotics," says epidemiologist Allison Aiello at the University of Michigan School of Public Health.

[Boo]

Not directly related to schools but an interesting article about the use of air freshner and other air sanitizer products.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7041182.stm



Boo

[technoextreme]

Here is a link to the wikipedia page about Triclosan and its health concerns:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triclosan

Also, there was a story yesterday on the internet about increasing staph infections in sports team members. These were resistant to anti-biotics. I wonder if the use of anti-bacterials in locker rooms had anything to do with this.
Doubt it. To get antibiotic resistant bacteria you need to expose them to antibiotics.
Anti-bacterial soaps containing Triclosan (classed as a drug) can cause skin rashes and the growth of super-resistant bacteria on the skin, and sprays containing anti-bacterials have been linked to many respiratory diseases.
The problem with this statment is that you have no proof or evidence as to what is in the antibacterial soaps. The main ingredient can also be alchohol. Also, there is no proof as to the growth of super resistant bacteria on the skin. It is all purely conjecture. The problem with antiobiotics isn't from overuse. If people actually used them correctly then there would be no problem. I know this is what the doctor told me about antibiotics for TB. If you miss even one day you risk having drug resistant TB.

[Aquila]

Doubt it. To get antibiotic resistant bacteria you need to expose them to antibiotics.

Well that's my point. Triclosan is termed (by Wikipedia) a "biocide", and although technicly not an antibiotic, Triclosan is "bacteriostatic" and targets bacteria by inhibiting fatty acid synthesis. "Some bacterial species can develop low-level resistance to triclosan due to mutations which decrease triclosan's effect on ENR-NAD+ binding, as shown in Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus." (Quoted from wiki - sorry, far too technical for me, please see the refs on the page linked to above [8][9])

If the locker rooms were sprayed with a product containing Triclosan, then it could have gotten into the team members' bodies through cuts, and caused the development of super-resistant bacteria their bodies.


The problem with this statment is that you have no proof or evidence as to what is in the antibacterial soaps. The main ingredient can also be alchohol. Also, there is no proof as to the growth of super resistant bacteria on the skin. It is all purely conjecture. The problem with antiobiotics isn't from overuse. If people actually used them correctly then there would be no problem. I know this is what the doctor told me about antibiotics for TB. If you miss even one day you risk having drug resistant TB.

Unfortunately the term "antibacterial" is misunderstood and misused in the commercial world. Many substances can be antibacterial, for example alcohol and boiling water, and they need not be classed as drugs. The problem is that Triclosan, although technically not an anti-biotic, does seem to have a similar action to antibiotics and should, in my opinion, be clearly labelled as a drug, with warnings about the dangers of the growth of resistant bacteria.

When antibiotics are used correctly for the treatment of illnesses such as TB, there is no doubt that they are a good thing, but when they (or biocide substances such as Triclosan) are given out indiscriminately in commercial products such as soaps and cleaning sprays, I think they pose a significant danger to human and animal health.

[technoextreme]

Well that's my point. Triclosan is termed (by Wikipedia) a "biocide", and although technicly not an antibiotic, Triclosan is "bacteriostatic" and targets bacteria by inhibiting fatty acid synthesis. "Some bacterial species can develop low-level resistance to triclosan due to mutations which decrease triclosan's effect on ENR-NAD+ binding, as shown in Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus." (Quoted from wiki - sorry, far too technical for me, please see the refs on the page linked to above [8][9])

If the locker rooms were sprayed with a product containing Triclosan, then it could have gotten into the team members' bodies through cuts, and caused the development of super-resistant bacteria their bodies.

Reading this just proves to me that you have no idea how drug resistant bacteria is produced. Getting Triclosan into your body is not a big deal.

[Aquila]

Reading this just proves to me that you have no idea how drug resistant bacteria is produced.

OK, please tell me.

[LostAngeles]

OK, please tell me.

I'm pretty sure that the bacteria in question are then resistant to the effects of the trislocan. The concern about the resistant staph bacteria has to do with the usage of penicillin and others like it.

Say we took a population of bacteria and split them in half. One group we expose to the anti-bacterial soaps and the others we expose to the anti-bacterial medications. After developing a population that was resistant to the soaps, we then expose it to the medications and vice-versa.

Odds are, unless trislocan and penicillin have similar structures/actions, the soaps will be effective against the sample with the medication-resistance and the medication will be effective against the sample with the soap resistance.

A larger example might be that I have a resistance to strep throat due to having it so many times a child. This does not mean I'm immune or that I won't get, say, the flesh-eating bacteria version. I have the ability to resist one form, but not the other.

[Aquila]

Thank you for the examples Lost Angeles. I like your bikini.

There is still however, the problem that some bacteria, like staph, are becoming resistant to anti-biotics, even though they've not been exposed to anti-biotics. The Scientific American article linked to by rjh01 above, explains this using the mechanism of "cross-resistance". To quote once again from the article...

"As bacteria develop a tolerance for these compounds there is potential for also developing a tolerance for certain antibiotics. This phenomenon, called cross-resistance, has already been demonstrated in several laboratory studies using triclosan,..."

The article also continues...

"When bacteria are exposed to triclosan for long periods of time, genetic mutations can arise. Some of these mutations endow the bacteria with resistance to isoniazid, an antibiotic used for treating tuberculosis,..."

So it seems that Triclosan does indeed alter bacteria genetically. It is scary.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Get rid of all "anti-bacterials" other than soap, water, friction and rubbing alcohol... well, and neosporin if you actually have an injury.

I smoke. I have a cat. I eat peanuts. I live in North Texas and yet I have no asthma or alergies worse than a stuffy nose due to my smoking. I have a hard time believing the same exposure = resistance paradigm exists with bacteria and given what I've learned about resistant strains, I'm even more concerned than I am about nicotine, dander, legumes or pollen since those don't evolve. Anti-bacterial products should be banned and soap should have a government subsidy.

[Aquila]

Anti-bacterial products should be banned and soap should have a government subsidy.

Absolutely! This country has been waging a "biological weapons" war on its own citizens, and shamefully on its own children, for too long!

[UnrepentantSinner]

Absolutely! This country has been waging a "biological weapons" war on its own citizens, and shamefully on its own children, for too long!

This is something I didn't address in my previous post but the last 30 years have been rediculous with the "anti-bacterial" craze. Humans counteracted smell and dirt for about a century with boiling (and autoclaves) with just bleach, alcohol and soap. We attacked bacterial diseases, appropriately, with anti-bacterial medicines. About 30 years ago we started going crazy thinking we needed to eradicate all the less powerful bacteria with special soaps, etc. and take "anti-biotics" (read "anti-bacterials") for every sniffle, even if they were caused by viruses.

This forum is supposedly skeptical and relies on the scientific method, so I'm surprised that more of you aren't decrying the "anti-bacterial" woo which proudly displayed graphics of cleaning solutions showing how only 97% or whatever of bacteria were killed and no one seemed to offer up the question of what happens with that 3% that wasn't killed.

One caveat, while "4 out of 5 dentists" is all well and good, and an example of why argumentum ad populum is a fallacy, the "almost every" meme has infected our society and I'm afraid it's going to result in the infection of our society.