On tv, I’ve noticed, and other places too I’m sure, antiseptic/antibacterial cleaners want you to think there is a big difference between their product and non-antiseptic cleaners. But is this true? I know I’ve heard that using non-antibacterial hand soap is just as good an antibacterial soap. Simply put, to wash is better than to not wash at all. But does this hold true for, say, a floor cleaner too? Or will a non-antiseptic floor cleaner just spread around the germs, like they claim?
Unless you’re cleaning a hospital, there’s no point in using antibacterial cleaners. Regular ones work just fine. Think about it - how many people do you know who have died from floor-acquired bacterial infections?
Nearly all detergents are alkaline, and just that alkalinity is a hostile environment for bacterial life. All hand soap kills germs, and non-germicidal soaps get your hands as germ-reduced as germicidal ones.
You wrote, “But does this hold true for, say, a floor cleaner too? Or will a non-antiseptic floor cleaner just spread around the germs, like they claim?” The answer is somewhere in the middle. A regular floor cleaner will kill a lot of germs, with its alkalinity, so it’s not just “spreading the germs around.”
However, floor cleaners are in a different category of germ-killing. They’re called disinfectants, regulated by tougher rules. They have to kill everything (actually the standard is 99.9%.) In my house, I use dilutions of the same cleaner (Lysol Disinfecting Cleaner) for many tasks; bathrooms, kitchen counters, sinks, and hard floors. It’s not that I need to disinfect the floors, but why should I keep a separate detergent just for the floors?