In 2013, the Food and Drug Administration issued a challenge to soapmakers: prove within a year that adding antibacterial chemicals to soaps enhanced their ability to kill germs, or else the new ingredient would be removed. It is now 2016, and with the lack of such proof, the FDA has decided to ban the sale of many soaps containing the chemical in question.

The new edict, which argues that the industry has failed to prove that antibacterial soaps were safe to use over the long term or more effective than using ordinary soap and water, requires companies to take the ingredients out of the products within a year.

"Companies will no longer be able to market antibacterial washes with these ingredients because manufacturers did not demonstrate that the ingredients are both safe for long-term daily use and more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illness and the spread of certain infections," the FDA said in a statement.

In total, the FDA took action against 19 different chemicals and the 40 percent of consumer soaps that contain them. The most common among these are triclosan and triclocarban, which are found in hand soaps and bar soaps, respectively.

On the other hand, benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and chloroxylenol have been given the okay for the time being, as the agency waits for more evidence before giving a final ruling.

Interestingly enough, Colgate Total contains one of the chemicals targeted by the FDA, but the company managed to prove to the FDA that its benefits — the reduction of plaque and gum disease — outweigh its risks.

The FDA's move is just a part of a potentially larger crackdown on an assortment of chemicals that companies place in its products.

For example, the agency is also checking the safety and efficacy of hand sanitizers and wipes, and have asked the respective companies to provide evidence that alcohol (ethanol or ethyl alcohol), isopropyl alcohol and benzalkonium chloride are as effective as they say they are. The deadline for that ruling, however, is unclear.

As one might expect, the FDA's ban has elicited a range of emotions.

For example, public health experts — like Rolf Halden from Arizona State University's Biodesign Institute — who have questioned the efficacy and safety of various antibacterials, applauded the ruling.

"It has boggled my mind why we were clinging to these compounds, and now that they are gone I feel liberated," he said. "They had absolutely no benefit but we kept them buzzing around us everywhere. They are in breast milk, in urine, in blood, in babies just born, in dust, in water."

On the other hand, at least one entity  — a trade group known as The American Cleaning Institute — opposed the rule. It argued that the agency already had evidence proving the safety and efficacy of soaps and that manufacturers were in the midst of providing even more evidence to address any data gaps the FDA had identified.

Regardless of how they feel about it, however, now that they've failed to prove the effectiveness of various antibacterials, soapmakers are left with little choice but to remove the chemicals from their products. Fortunately, some of them already making steps towards doing so due to pre-existing consumer concerns. For example, Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble had already announced their intention to phase out the chemicals in their products before the FDA issued the ban.