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