Beards are not dirtier than clean-shaven faces, research suggests – despite a long‑standing public perception to the contrary.
The belief that facial hair is unhygienic has persisted for decades, influencing everything from restaurant ratings to workplace policies. One study found that restaurant customers rated waiters with beards as dirtier than their clean‑shaven counterparts. Yet the scientific evidence repeatedly challenges this assumption.
A history of suspicion
Concerns about beard hygiene date back more than half a century. During the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, beards were viewed as potential disease vectors. In the early 1900s, fears emerged that bearded men working with milk supplies could spread germs. These historical anxieties helped cement an image of facial hair as unclean – an image that early research would begin to unpick.
The 1967 experiment
One of the earliest scientific attempts to measure the hygiene of beards was a 1967 study that tested how much bacteria could be recovered from men’s faces after being artificially sprayed onto their skin. Researchers compared four conditions: washed and unwashed faces, both with and without beards.
The results upended the simplest assumptions. The dirtiest combination was an unwashed clean‑shaven face, which yielded the highest bacterial recovery. Next came unwashed bearded faces, followed by washed bearded faces. The cleanest of all was the washed clean‑shaven face.
“So if you’re not going to wash your face, it’s better to have a beard,” said John Tregoning, professor of vaccine immunology at Imperial College London, “but if you are going to wash your face, it’s slightly better to be clean‑shaven.”
The implication is clear: a beard may actually offer a slight protective effect when hygiene is lacking, perhaps because the hair itself provides a physical barrier or traps bacteria away from the skin surface. Only when faces are washed does the clean‑shaven option edge ahead.
What about hospitals?
More recent research has focused on surgeons and healthcare workers, where the question shifts from general hygiene to infection risk in operating theatres. The results have been mixed.
Some studies have suggested that bearded healthcare workers may shed more bacteria than clean‑shaven colleagues, particularly when masks are disturbed. Others have found little difference. A 2014 study in The Journal of Hospital Infection compared bacterial ecology in 408 male hospital workers and found no significant overall difference in colonisation between bearded and clean‑shaven groups. In fact, some research indicates that clean‑shaven men may be more prone to carrying certain bacteria, possibly because micro‑trauma from shaving creates entry points for organisms.
One widely reported 2019 study, published in European Radiology, claimed that beards contained more germs than dog fur. The study involved only 18 men and 30 dogs and was originally designed to assess MRI safety, not beard hygiene. Critics have pointed to its small sample size and the fact that the microorganisms evaluated were human‑specific pathogens, making cross‑species comparison questionable. The study’s primary aim was not beard hygiene, and subsequent commentary has highlighted that human mouths contain more germs than dog mouths, undermining the sensationalist takeaway.
Crucially, multiple studies have found no correlation between bearded surgeons and an increased incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs), even when beard covers are not worn. This suggests that while beards might harbour bacteria, the presence of those organisms does not automatically translate into higher patient risk – especially when surgical masks are worn properly.
“Much depends on how samples are taken,” Tregoning noted, “and most studies suggest that if masks are worn properly there is no meaningful concern.”
Expert verdict
Dermatologists and infectious disease specialists broadly agree that the reputation of beards is undeserved. “Everything has bacteria on it,” Tregoning said. “Any part of your body, with hair or without, is going to have bacteria on it. It’s not really a problem unless there’s an open wound. Most of the time it’s fine.”
Sara Hogan, a dermatologist at UCLA, has emphasised that all skin carries bacteria and that beards get a “bad reputation”. Samuel R.G. Finlayson, a physician at the University of Utah, found that clean‑shaven healthcare workers may shed as much or more bacteria as bearded colleagues. Carrie Kovarik, associate professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, has suggested that bearded individuals might carry fewer germs precisely because they avoid the skin trauma caused by shaving.
The bacteria found in beards include common skin colonisers such as Staphylococcus aureus, which can cause infections if it enters cuts, and Enterococcus faecalis, a gut bacterium that can lead to urinary tract infections. Yet these organisms are also present on clean‑shaven skin and in the environment; their mere presence does not indicate poor hygiene. Interestingly, some research has also suggested that bacteria found in beards may possess antibiotic properties, offering a potential avenue for developing new drugs to combat drug‑resistant strains.
Experts stress that regular washing and grooming are key to maintaining a healthy beard – washing with a specialised shampoo two to three times a week, using beard oil to condition the skin underneath, and brushing daily to distribute oils and remove debris. But even without such routines, the scientific record does not support the view that a beard is inherently dirtier than a clean‑shaven face.
“The idea that beards are unhygienic is overblown,” Tregoning concluded.