• Linktank@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    There’s no argument to be had, all soap is anti-bacterial. It’s a fact, not a position.

      • Linktank@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Loving all the kickback for stating an empirically correct statement. This platform is wild.

        • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m curious enough to continue the conversation, if only because talking about definitions is interesting. So I’m not being confrontational, I actually want to have a discussion.

          You say that all soaps are antibacterial because the result in the end is that no bacteria remains on the hands. I see what you’re saying there. But anti-bacterial soap kills the bacteria, including the remaining ones that couldn’t be removed.

          That’s like saying that removing a group of humans based on ethnicity from a region, without killing them, amounts to genocide. Would you say that’s genocide too?* (And I know the comparison is extreme.)

          *I think I read somewhere that forcibly removing people from a region amounts to genocide, though. But you know what I mean…