It used to be anti-bacterial resistance. Now it’s endocrine disruption. Either way, it’s always junk science.
While products with triclosan may, at best, be only marginally better than products without, “studies” of sheep and mice linking triclosan with various adverse effects are junk science.
Antibacterial resistance is a real problem. It might not be a threat in this application, but it’s a darn sight better than the endocrine nonsense, which is just that from beginning to end. Would you kindly not lump them together, thank you.
If they succeed in banning it, will we see a spike in bacterial infections?