Is Neosporin a Devil in Disguise?
Neosporin, known as triple antibiotic ointment, is a medication that’s been used to reduce the risk of infections following minor skin injuries. It was created in the 1950s and approved for use by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in 1971. It does not require a prescription and has long been a mainstay in practically every medicine cabinet and first aid kit. Just recently, a podiatrist told me to apply Neosporin daily to a small surgical wound on my toe.
In 2019 Dr. Anne Marie Tremaine published an article, “Deflating Neosporin,” that explained the inherent dangers of using neomycin because it can cause allergic reactions of the skin called contact dermatitis (polymyxin and bacitracin are indicted as agents that can cause similar reactions on the skin).
(https://tinyurl.com/5n8cavvy)
Mayo Clinic reports that “Contact dermatitis is an itchy rash caused by direct contact with a substance or an allergic reaction to it. The rash isn’t contagious, but it can be very uncomfortable. Many substances can cause this reaction, such as cosmetics, fragrances, jewelry and plants. The rash often shows up within days of exposure.” The Mayo post also goes on to discuss treatment; “… identify and avoid the cause of your reaction. If you avoid the substance causing the reaction, the rash often clears up in two to four weeks.” To Mayo, Contact dermatitis doesn’t seem to be a big deal.
Depending on the study selected, somewhere between one percent and 10% of topical neomycin users develop dermatitis, which cures quickly when the neomycin is removed. Other studies suggest that people who take neomycin by mouth can develop dermatitis but the numbers are even lower, and, again, quickly-curable by removing the antibiotic.
If Neosporin is a potentially harmful product, why has it remained on the market, especially when it has approximately the same effectiveness as plain petrolatum (aka Vaseline)? Perhaps, the dangers are so small that it isn’t worth the effort (resources) it would take to remove approval of the product. Perhaps, it has been such a staple for so many decades that making a fuss over a potential minor/curable problem is unnecessary. Could it be that medical publishing is more important than the topic under discussion? It is a rare substance that will fail to cause contact dermatitis, even plain petrolatum (petroleum jelly).
Our government’s FDA declares a medicine safe and effective and it is rare that they will withdraw their approvals of a product that has been so widely used for so many years without any significant incidences of harm.
In days gone by, findings as mentioned above were published for the benefit of the overall medical system – not for consumers. It’s a sad day when “journalists” have to scratch for a story to get their publications number up, especially when there are so many more serious situations that demand real investigation.
A 1996 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluded that “there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of infection between antibiotic ointment and plain petrolatum jelly.” Because one isn’t better than the other, it makes sense to use neither, just clean the area and protect with a bandage until healing occurs. Furthermore, don’t be alarmed if someone, even a doctor, suggests using Neosporin or Triple Antibiotic ointment. It’s just not an important issue.
Maybe Mother Nature protects us naturally better than we are led to believe.
Larry Frieders is a pharmacist in Aurora who had a book published, The Undruggist: Book One, A Tale of Modern Apothecary and Wellness. He can be reached at thecompounder.com/ask-larry or www.facebook.com/thecompounder.