Hmmm. I would wager that while H2O2 might not be necessary (maybe not even beneficial at all) in the large majority of cuts and scrapes, if you happen to get cut or scraped by something that happens to have some particularly nasty bacteria on it, it is probably better to attempt to kill that stuff off, even though it is also doing some damage to healthy cells also.

And the amount of damage to healthy cells might be so small that it is worth using the H2O2 most of the time just on the off chance that some particularly nasty and resistant bacteria got in there.

But to be fair, that balance (small chance of particularly nasty bacteria vs guaranteed but negligible "damage" to healthy cells) is probably close enough that there are rational arguments either direction.

And no offense to SciShow, but I think that if anyone was going to sway my opinion on this one way or the other, it should be an actual *doctor* that brings up clinical trials -- maybe a Healthcare Triage video or something...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'hydrogen peroxide, H2O2, Swiss, test, chopper, dragonfly' to 'hydrogen peroxide, H2O2, Swiss, test, chopper, dragonfly, smoky, smoke' - edited by calvados

0-386 mph in 3.58 seconds..
The car is powered by H2O2, hydrogen peroxide.
I checked out some sites and they do say he did the quarter mile in 3.54, maybe the announcer got it wrong.