評(píng)論
打印
Many of us choose antibacterial soap thinking we are taking extra measures to protect ourselves from germs.
不少人在洗手時(shí)會(huì)用除菌皂，認(rèn)為這能提供額外保護(hù)，是我們應(yīng)對(duì)細(xì)菌的有效措施。
But now, a study has found it is no more effective than plain soap at killing bacteria.
但目前一項(xiàng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，它的除菌效果其實(shí)并不比普通肥皂好。
Millions of consumers in the US use antibacterial hand soap and body wash products, spending nearly $1 billion annually, researchers said.
研究人員表示，全美境內(nèi)有幾百萬(wàn)人會(huì)選購(gòu)除菌洗手皂和身體清潔用品，每年花費(fèi)于此的金額約十億美金。
In the UK, the soap, bath and shower market, which includes both anti-bacterial and plain soap, was worth 638 million euros in 2014, according to Mintel.
市場(chǎng)調(diào)查公司英敏特稱，全英國(guó)境內(nèi)，肥皂（包括除菌皂和普通皂）和各類沐浴用品市場(chǎng)在2014年市場(chǎng)價(jià)值約為6.38億英鎊。
The expectation is that antibacterial products will provide more protection from germs than plain soap, the researchers continued.
研究人員還補(bǔ)充道，顧客對(duì)于除菌產(chǎn)品的期望是：此類用品要優(yōu)于普通肥皂，能為他們提供更好的保護(hù)，免于細(xì)菌的傷害。
However, their study revealed there is 'no significant' difference between antibacterial soap and the normal type.
然而，他們的研究表明，除菌皂和普通肥皂其實(shí)并沒(méi)有“顯著”區(qū)別。
Korean scientists examined the effect of triclosan, the active antiseptic ingredient most commonly used in these types of soaps.
三氯生是此類肥皂中最常見(jiàn)的活性除菌原料，來(lái)自韓國(guó)的科學(xué)家做了實(shí)驗(yàn)來(lái)檢驗(yàn)三氯生的除菌效果。
They examined how effectively the ingredient killed bacteria, testing it against 20 strains.
實(shí)驗(yàn)檢驗(yàn)了此原料面對(duì)20多類細(xì)菌，殺菌能力到底有多強(qiáng)。
They added triclosan to bacteria warmed to 22°C (room temperature) and 40°C (warm temperature) for 20 seconds, to recreate the conditions under which humans normally wash their hands.
他們?cè)?2度的細(xì)菌培養(yǎng)皿（室內(nèi)溫度）和40度的細(xì)菌培養(yǎng)皿（暖和的溫度）內(nèi)加入三氯生，并等待20秒，來(lái)重現(xiàn)人們洗手的場(chǎng)景。
They used a triclosan concentration of 0.3 percent - the maximum allowed by law.
他們使用的是濃度為0.3%的三氯生，為法定最高濃度。
They found triclosan had killed significantly more bacteria after nine hours or more, but not during the short time required for hand washing.
他們后來(lái)發(fā)現(xiàn)，在等待九個(gè)多小時(shí)以后，三氯生的殺菌效果非常卓越，但洗手的短暫時(shí)間仍不足以殺死細(xì)菌。
Then, they compared the ability of antibacterial and non-antibacterial soap to remove bacteria from human hands, by using 16 healthy adult volunteers.
然后，他們通過(guò)16位健康成人志愿者的參與協(xié)助，再次比較除菌皂和普通肥皂去除手上細(xì)菌的能力。
They found it was no more effective, both experiments indicating that there is 'no significant difference' between the effects of plain soap and antibacterial soap when used under ‘real life’ conditions, they concluded.
他們最后總結(jié)道，結(jié)果表明除菌皂不比普通皂有效，所有的實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果都證明這兩種肥皂在“日常生活”中并沒(méi)有“顯著區(qū)別”。
The paper's lead author, Dr Min-Suk Rhee, of Korea University, said 'advertisement and consumer belief regarding the effectiveness of antibacterial soaps needs to be addressed.'
高麗大學(xué)的李敏碩博士是本論文的第一作者，他表示，“關(guān)于除菌皂的能力，廣告的錯(cuò)誤引導(dǎo)和消費(fèi)者扭曲的認(rèn)知都需要改改了。”
