Whatever the merits of the manufacturers' claims, it is difficult to see a significant threat to public health or safety in the advertising that brought down the wrath of the EPA on these companies.
It is easy, on the other hand, to see the cost of the fines, and the almost certain additional significant costs for lawyers and other staff who had to deal with the problem. It is easy to imagine the cost of new marketing materials and of increased regulatory compliance.
And it doesn't take long to conclude that such damages to a company's bottom line mean jobs lost because of those increased costs.Now, is it possible that the registered anti-microbial compound is incorporated into the products which brought about the fines in such a way that they are relatively ineffective? Sure, it is possible. But one wonders if the EPA even warned these companies to stop their advertising claims prior to slapping them with job-killing fines. That would seem to be common courtesy given that such private sector companies are the hosts generating the income streams upon which the largely parasitical EPA is living.