Talk:Dettol

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Bacterial Resistance? 2 odd remark 3 merge? 4 Copyright violation 5 Dettol vs. PCMX

[edit] Bacterial Resistance?

"Overuse of Dettol can also cause bacterial resistance" According to the other article on dettol's active ingredient "Its antibacterial action is due to disruption of cell membrane potentials, blocking production of adenosine triphosphate (effectively starving the cells)", Dettol works by attacking multiple points on a bacteria. Essentially this means that there is little or no way for bacteria to grow resistant to it. So unless someone can cite a source, i say we remove it. Shardakar (talk) 07:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. The next part of that sentence claims it has been proven effective. Need a source there too. Actually, most of this article makes some strong claims with no sources. I think it needs a template for sources and an expert. --Karuna8 (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I just removed that whole section as it was a copy-and-paste from http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/dettol/dettolh.htm. This article needs a lot of work. --Karuna8 (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

A common misconception is that antibacterial agents "create" resistant strains of bacteria. This is untrue, the resistant strains already exist in nature due to normal mutations. However the killing of bacteria sensitive to the antibacterial leaves only the naturally resistant strains remaining. They then grow to large numbers with little competition. I changed this part in the article though I don't have a source, but it has been drilled into me at uni (i am a microbiology major). love my rice (talk) 04:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] odd remark

Dettol

What, no wirebrush? -- unattributed

[edit] merge?

This article contains info that I'm not sure would be appropriate in the chloroxylenol article. The formulation of the product, and the manufacturer info are both useful and should be retained. I'm not sure if the agar test results are for the chemical or the product; if for the product, then those probably shouldn't merge either. So, all in all, we'll lose info without gaining anything. -- Akb4 19:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. They are too dissimilar. I'll remove the tags. If anyone disagrees feel free to put them up to discuss this further. Radagast83 22:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

WHO MANUFACTURES DETTOL?

Reckitt Benckiser -DjD- 17:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violation

The original article , submitted by an anonymous user, is a derivative work of Molecule of the Month: Dettol. It consists of a series of sentence fragments copied and pasted directly from the referenced article, including some very distinctive turns of phrase, such as "safe and gentle enough to use on the skin and yet powerful enough to also use as a disinfectant," and:

effective against gram positive/negative bacteria, fungi, yeast, mildew and even the frightening "super-bug" MRSA. It is able to kill 98% of microbes in just 15 seconds as shown in agar patch studies.

The source does not specify copyright or license information.

Rbulling 23:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a non-issue at this point, as any possible violation was long ago. I removed the notice. --Spike Wilbury 02:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dettol vs. PCMX

It seems to me like the lines between Dettol (the line of consumer products from Reckitt Benckiser) and PCMX (one particular chemical with antiseptic properties) have been blurred. I'm ~95% sure that different Dettol products actually contain a variety of different antiseptics (ie, not just PCMX) depending on the format and region. The distinction is lost in this article. -DjD- 11:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)