PARKERSBURG - For years the public has been told that washing hands with soap is the first line of defense against getting sick, but the debate continues whether antibacterial or regular soap is best.

"Antibacterial soaps have things in them that kill microbes that regular soap doesn't have," said Dick Wittberg, executive director of the Mid-Ohio Valley Health Department.

The main different ingredient is triclosan, which is a bug-fighting chemical commonly found in antibacterial and antimicrobial soaps to help clean hands and prevent disease.

"Everything I've ever read says that antibacterial is the way to go because it kills off everything without the lingering question of whether you will get sick or not," Wittberg said. "Antibacterial soap seems to be fool-proof."

But, in 2005, the Food and Drug Administration voted 11 to 1, with the aid of an advisory panel, that when it comes to staying healthy, antibacterial soaps and washes are no more effective than non-antibacterial soaps.

The panel concluded that there was no evidence to prove antibacterial soaps were more effective than regular soaps for preventing infection and the spread of disease.

It is believed that the mechanical activity of vigorous hand washing with soap removes dirt and pathogens from hands, and is the primary factor in prevention of disease, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site at http://www.cdc.gov.

Wittberg said he would rather people be safe and use an antibacterial soap than risk illness.

"It's better to wash hands with antibacterial, but regular soap is better than not washing at all," he said.