As the Soapers' World Turns

The scenario could have been plucked from a lachrymose soap opera. For years, the leading soapmakers--Procter & Gamble, Colgate Palmolive and Lever Bros.--successfully wooed the U.S. housewife. By concocting an endless variety of "new" ingredients to make her wash "whiter," "brighter" and "sparkling," they induced her to buy more than a billion dollars worth of detergents and "pre-soaks" annually. The courtship intensified in 1967, when the soapmen introduced wonder-cleaning enzymes with a splashy campaign. The enzymes were first promoted in "pre-soaks," in which they act the way stomach acids work on food, eating away hard-to-remove stains. Later, they were put into almost all detergents to help brighten the wash.

Lately the housewife's attention has been sought by new suitors: consumerists, ecologists and politicians, who warn that enzymes could be a health hazard and detergent phosphates a major despoiler of the environment. Embattled soapmakers deny the first charge and dispute the second, but their romance with homemakers is strained. Sales of enzyme pre-soaks have slid from a high of $75 million in 1969 to about $25 million now. For the first time in years, detergent sales in 1970 did not grow, running at an estimated $1.2 billion, about the same as in 1969.

Enzymes' End. The detergent makers are quietly moving to allay consumer fears and reduce friction with Government agencies by dropping enzymes. P. & G., which holds an estimated 55% of the market, is expected to start this month by eliminating enzymes from Tide, the nation's bestselling detergent. (The company has no plans for changing ingredients in Biz, its enzyme pre-soak.) Colgate will gradually sift out enzymes from its detergents--Ajax, Punch, Burst, Cold Power--and possibly from Axion, the leading pre-soak. Lever will replace the enzymes in its Drive detergent with sodium perborate, a bleach.

No decisive evidence has yet been produced that enzymes in the family wash harm health. But a cloud of suspicion was raised by a 1969 report that English factory workers developed asthmatic symptoms and skin irritations after exposure to enzyme dust. To eliminate the dust, the soap companies began making their products in the form of tiny, coated beads. As for skin irritations, the detergent makers tested their products on many volunteers and pronounced enzymes safe. Disagreeing, the American Academy of Allergy declared in January that enzymes are indeed a potential hazard. The Federal Trade Commission has just completed a study of enzymes but has not yet released its findings.

The decline of enzyme pre-soaks has put a damper on the manufacturers' profits. They are even more concerned about the rising clamor over phosphates, a basic detergent ingredient that loosens grime in hard water. Detergent phosphates flow into the nation's waterways, where they act as nutrients and cause excessive growth of algae. In a complex process called eutrophication, these algae ultimately pollute lakes and rivers. Soap-men contend that the major sources of phosphates in the waterways are not laundry products but sewage and runoffs from chemical fertilizer.

Last week 42 U.S. Congressmen introduced a bill to ban phosphates in detergents by June 1973. New York's Suffolk County barred the sale of all detergents after residents complained of suds and noxious odors in their drinking water. A ban on detergent phosphates in Akron, Ohio, is being contested in court.

Though the detergent industry continues to defend the use of phosphates, manufacturers are casting about for a substitute cleaning agent. NTA, a nitrogen-based ingredient, seemed briefly promising until it was found to be a potential health hazard. A return to soap chips is not feasible because they would literally gum up the works of most automatic washing machines.

Tattletale Gray. Many marketers are rushing in with phosphate-free detergents under brand names like Valley Dew, Nature and Concern. Sears, Roebuck is selling Sears Non Polluting Laundry Detergent; Purex is promoting Instant Pels; and Church & Dwight is out with Arm & Hammer Laundry Detergent. North American Chemical is distributing its Ecolo-G in almost every state. A magazine specializing in product information, Consumer Bulletin, reports that Ecolo-G is "not recommended," largely because of its poor performance in soft water.

The chemical composition or possible dangers of the phosphate-free brands are largely unknown. Most use sodium carbonate, which has a higher alkaline content than detergents and common soaps and could, if used improperly, damage eyes and mucous membranes. Since most laundry experts agree that phosphates clean best and brightest, the new brands could presage a return to the old tattletale-gray washes. Still, in only six months or so the phosphate-free products have captured 3% of the market. Says Hercules A. Segalas, a leading analyst of soap-industry stocks at William D. Witter, Inc.: "People figure they can't do much about most pollution. But buying phosphate-free detergents gives them the feeling that they are keeping the water cleaner."

Will the big detergent makers win back the affection of the housewife? Can they find a substitute for phosphates? Are enzymes doomed? As in all soap operas, the answers must await the drama's next installment.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.