Giving up soap is good for the skin, expert says, but what about the natural environment?

I don't do fads. I refused to take part in the Ice Bucket Challenge, despite much browbeating from friends, and I'm probably the last person you will hear talking about some new diet advocated by an airhead in Hollywood.

Which is why even I'm surprised I decided to follow advice I found online to stop washing.

Well, sort of.

In his video series, If Our Bodies Could Talk, James Hamblin, senior editor for The Atlantic magazine, meets with microbiologists and dermatologists who say that constantly scrubbing with soap, shampoo and other products is actually bad for our skin.

Apparently, the human body produces a microbe organism network - a bit like the good bacteria in our stomachs - that acts like a natural moisturizer and protects the skin.

"There is a fundamental principle, that there are good bugs and bad bugs. Good bugs help us to live our lives," explains Martin Blaser, director of the human microbiome project at New York University. "So, if you're removing your good bugs, through soap or cosmetics or antibiotics or hand cleansers, etc, you may not be doing yourself any favors. Even though you might think you're cleaner, you may not be."

On top of the video, what also interested me was the reaction, with some people using it as evidence that washing products, or even just showering, is bad for the environment.

I wasn't entirely convinced by any of it, but I decided to give it ago and see for myself. So, other than soap for washing my hands, which is still highly recommended, for the past four weeks I've cut out soap, shower gel and shampoo, and now wash only with hot water.

Naturally, I had my reservations. By attempting such an experiment with Beijing summer in full swing, I had visions of my immediate colleagues hanging air-fresheners off their computers and of large "exclusion zones" opening up around me on public transportation.

However, four weeks in, my skin has actually started to look and feel healthier. And when it comes to smell, I've noticed no discernible worsening in my odor - nor has my wife or work colleagues, as far as I know (they haven't cared about hurting my feelings in the past, so I have no reason to believe they're keeping schtum now). Even after playing an hour of badminton in 30 C heat, the real test for the odor factor, a quick shower in hot water did the trick.

So far, the experiment also seems to have helped curb the rash I get on my hands, arms and legs in high temperatures.

Bathing with buddies

OK, so for me, the skin science appears to be checking out. But what about the surrounding environmental claims: that showering wastes water, and that using all these cosmetics for washing damages the environment?

Depending on the flow, a shower consumes roughly 12 liters of water a minute, according to several conservancy groups. So, if you stay in there for longer than 10 minutes, you're actually using about the same amount of water as for a bath, which on average is 130 liters.

If the aim is to save water, experts advise simply taking shorter, more-efficient showers. Some prescribe the "pits and bits" strategy to cover the essentials, while British nonprofit Waterwise even suggests people "bathe with a friend", although I hazard to guess such a proposition could be misinterpreted.

But what about the water after we're washing it down the drain full of soapsuds? Is there an environmental cost from our products?

For this question, I turned to the oracle: my dad. He's worked for a water company in Britain for more than 25 years, including as a quality inspector, so I asked him what effect, if any, our various soaps and shampoos are having on the natural environment.

After getting the insults out of the way ("You must stink" was his initial response), he told me: "If soaps, detergents and other cleaning fluids go into a surface water sewer or directly into a watercourse then it would have an impact on that aquatic environment ... (and have) a detrimental effect on local biodiversity.

"It can also result in bioaccumulation within food chains," he says, which basically means a buildup of poisons and chemicals that increase as plants and animals eat each other.

Sounds lovely. Plus, the more of these chemicals that are discharged, the harder water treatment facilities need to work, which costs more time and more money.

So, it is true these chemicals can have a lasting effect. But - and this is a big but - "it's worth noting that the difference between using products for some things and not using them for other things is minimal", he adds. "To have any real affect you would technically need to stop using all forms of chemicals for everything, such as washing dishes, washing clothes, general cleaning of baths and sinks, and using moisturizers and deodorants that would eventually wash away in the shower or sink."

So we need to stop washing everything?

Well, not exactly. If you don't want to give up your "smellies", as they are known in my neck of the woods, many stores, including in China, now sell eco-friendly and organic products for the shower, washing machine and kitchen sink. If you are an adventurous sort, you could even look into enzyme cleaners, which can be made at home using food scraps.

I don't think I'm ready to start scrubbing myself with compost, but for now, the no-soap experiment appears to be working.

craig@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily European Weekly 08/05/2016 page21)