to think how your armpits smell isn't as important as whether your children will survive operations in the future?

[IceBeing]

Just seen a sidebar advert for antibacterial deodorant. Seriously, is antibiotic resistance happening in a parallel universe to the cosmetics industry?

I am sure it will all be wonderful fun to use their new product instead of just washing etc. but killing 90% of the bacteria is just focussing the minds of the 10% on how to evade destruction. When our children and grandchildren are in fear of their lives from superbugs every time they require routine surgery, we are not going to look back kindly on this kind of 'innovation'.

Yes bacteria can be alcohol resistant

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC140401/

Makes sense. I have hidradenitis supprativa and neutropenia - so I use it for preventing the HS and also getting rid of any skin bacteria

I don't think the vaccine argument works at all IceBeing - we are told the more people who vaccinate, the better, in order to provide herd immunity. Apparently the same does not apply to use of antibacterial soap!

Who are vaccinated..

I'm just intrigued to know if your friends are aware you don't believe in washing your hands properly after having a dump and before preparing their food. After all, a dose of dysentery is what every good house guest needs.

She IS on about two different things.

And I'm not going to argue, or clarify for someone who can't distinguish between whether a deodorant is cosmetic or not. You're doing a grand job convincing yourself, I'm just on the amused sidelines. As for the thread turning, why on earth should it bother me whether a thread goes one way or another.

Yes, it's the argument for antimicrobial stewardship; only using antibiotics when their use is justified. It's an interesting point to consider when/if this might start to apply to antibacterials too.

Another perspective: I tend to use antibac gel when out and about, but I'd actively prefer to use water and soap (provided there are no appliances to touch) because they are less aggressively antibacterial. I want to reduce the level of contamination on my hands, not scourge them, because that would be bad for me in a different way. We need a certain amount of exposure to microbial flora/plain old dirt or we put ourselves at risk of other conditions such as asthma; too clean is as bad as too dirty in some cases.

round yeah - you have to reverse the argument...but the point is that over users of unnecessary anti-bac products are like the anti-vaxers, they are putting their immediate short term benefit ahead of the general populations and their own and everybody else's long term benefit.

For people without medical conditions, may I recommend baking soda for garments that need extra deodorising before washing? I've been experimenting with it, and it does seem to work.

Whyis that's interesting! I didn't read every word, but is there the suggestion that the alcohol resistance in this case is a mutation, so a developed resistance? Or does it not specify?

I mean is it like saying it is believed animals can't survive prolonged submersion in water, but actually some - amphibians for example - can? Are there just specific microbes that survive alcohol, or does this study say that one which was formerly killed by it can mutate to then survive it?

stratter5 so you disagree with the published literature that antibacterial agents like silver can promote resistance?

tbh whether or not deodorants are cosmetics is not the main thrust of the debate for anyone but you....although wikipedia has the following to say:

"Cosmetics, also known as make-up, are care substances used to enhance the appearance or odor of the human body. They are generally mixtures of chemical compounds, some being derived from natural sources (such as coconut oil) and some being synthetics."

and the FDA says "The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) defines cosmetics by their intended use, as "articles intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body...for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance" [FD&C Act, sec. 201(i)]. Among the products included in this definition are skin moisturizers, perfumes, lipsticks, fingernail polishes, eye and facial makeup preparations, cleansing shampoos, permanent waves, hair colors, and deodorants, as well as any substance intended for use as a component of a cosmetic product. "

So it would appear that on this issue (as with all the others you have raised) you are incorrect.

That does make sense op - people do things to only benefit themselves and not the group. Like my dad, who 'takes a couple of antibiotics' before he flies to India just to make sure he doesn't catch anything he'll be fine, but his various gut bacteria (and any new ones he takes on while there) will be exposed to a relatively low amount of antibiotic, which might be just low enough for some of them to survive, thus driving selection pressure towards antibiotic-resistant species.

I have told him this until I'm blue in the face but he dismisses it as my science nonsense

eat it looks like behavioural resistance - they found a way of organising themselves mesoscopically that prevented the alcohol from attacking all members of the colony.

There is any idea out there that this collective behaviour won't lead to passing on via DNA, but I don't know why that idea exists. The original biofilm behaviour is an evolved property so I don't know why modifications to it wouldn't be driven by evolution also?

I don't think it's unreasonable to lump deodorant into the 'cosmetics' industry.
And I astonishingly am finding some of what the OP is saying to be very interesting. I say astonishingly as they started this thread really poorly and ended up sounding like a bit of a nut job.
I'm glad they came back to verify points and explain things further.
I think the antibacterial products you can buy nowadays all gets a bit ridiculous. There's an advert here in Australia that recommends antibac'ing EVERYTHING, including shoes, schoolbags, phones, sofas. Everything. It's tied in with a school education initiative (on the advert). I'm pretty sure it's better not to live in an antibac bubble, and build up some natural immunity. Unless obviously like a pp this is not actually a possibility.

I am pretty amused at the idea of silver being more effective after its had lunch though!

eatsleep it means something that was not previously alcohol resistant has mutated to become alcohol resistant. In this case I guess because they were using alcohol to sterilise the acupuncture needle.

Although the ability to survive underwater is a good example of things adapting (although obviously animals do it at a much slower rate ~10-50 years for a generation as opposed to an hour or so for bacteria)

I've never thought about this before. A quick glance at the academic literature suggests there might well be a relationship between resistance to biocides/antiseptics and resistance to antibiotics:

"The second issue associated with reduced susceptibility to biocides is whether the emergence of biocide nonsusceptibility in microorganisms results in cross-resistance to clinically useful antibiotics. There is concern that, as biocide concentrations decrease from their recommended use concentrations, these biocide gradients counterselect for nonsusceptible nosocomial pathogens. If the nonsusceptible organism is cross-resistant to an antibiotic, an undesirable outcome is created as a result of biocide use: selection of an antibiotic-resistant microorganism. Therefore, wide availability and use of antiseptics and the selection pressure associated with such use are of primary concern. If we accept this premise, the reciprocal argument that antibiotic resistance counterselects for biocide resistance is also true." from cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/11/1650.long

Also
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC321691/
ec.europa.eu/health/opinions/en/biocides-antibiotic-resistance/l-3/7-explanation-resistance-biofilms.htm

And several other papers!

I must get some marking done! Much thanks to the voices of scientific reason on the thread!

Well I for one feel hugely better informed as a result of this thread!

First I read this on factors impacting on the problem of antibiotic resistance and
I quote, "do these antibacterial products impact on drug resistance? The potential is certainly there."

...then this on Antibacterial Household Products "As with antibiotics, prudent use of (antibacterials) is urged. Their designated purpose is to protect vulnerable patients."

Well whaddya know??

'the voices of scientific reason'

LOL.

BTW if I sound surprised, I am.

As shove says this did start out somewhat hysterically...

Why should we only be concerned about children? What about the rest of the population catching superbugs because people use anti bacterial stuff? Won't someone think of the over 18s!!!

As an aside how many dangerous cases of food poisoning (that might have affected CHILDREN!!) have been averted by people using anti bacterial wipes?

Erm, OP - do you work in the scientific field? I'm slightly concerned over your misunderstanding/confusion regarding antibacterial/antibiotic...

All antibiotics are antibacterial but all antibacterials are NOT antibiotics.

There is a separate concern regarding overuse of antibacterials in terms of exposed to bacteria (links to asthma, allergies etc but this is not the same issue as antibiotic resistant disease.

You're probably right to be concerned about both but probably not right in calling others out about lack of knowledge on the subject.

I always find if I'm going to get really cross and a little bit rude that having the facts in order first is pretty handy.

neorainbow better food preparation and storage is better for preventing food poisoning than 'anti-bac' wipes.

scooby the first paper I linked above says that two laboratory studies have shown a link between resistance to antibacterials and resistance to antibiotics.

...something to do with the same mechanism or resistance?

OF resistance.