Sensible advice for aches, pains & injuries
For blind and low-vision visitors, an audio version of this article is freely available on request to visually impaired visitors. Please email requests for audio to and I will send a download link within a day. There are audio versions of seven other popular articles on the site.  This image is linked to a page with more information, or see slash   audio.
Drawing of a man in a bathtub full of large, jagged crystals, a hyperbolic symbol for Epsom salts bathing.

Does Epsom Salt Work?

The science of Epsom salt bathing for recovery from muscle pain, soreness, or injury

updated (first published 2006)
by Paul Ingraham, Vancouver, Canadabio
I am a science writer and a former Registered Massage Therapist with a decade of experience treating tough pain cases. I was the Assistant Editor of for several years. I’ve written hundreds of articles and several books, and I’m known for readable but heavily referenced analysis, with a touch of sass. I am a runner and ultimate player. • more about memore about

illustrations by Paul Ingraham, Gary Lyons

An audio version of this article is freely available to visually impaired visitors. Please email requests for audio to and I will send a download link within a day, but usually much faster. There are audio versions of seven other popular articles on the site.An audio version of this article is freely available to visually impaired visitors. Please email requests for audio to and I will send a download link within a day, but usually much faster. There are audio versions of seven other popular articles on the site. audio version available infoThis is one of seven articles available in audio format as a free bonus for e-boxed set customers. For more information, see Audio Articles.


Epsom salt (magnesium sulphate) in your bath is cheap and harmless and it makes the water feel “silkier,” but it probably doesn’t do anything else you hope it’s doing. Contrary to popular belief, it probably has no significant benefits for most common kinds of aches and pains. Oral magnesium supplementation may be helpful for some types of chronic pain for some people (with magnesium deficiency), and it probably works much better than trying to soak in it. Topical delivery via creams is scientifically controversial, and absorption from baths is virtually unstudied: it may not work in a bath at all, or only modestly and erratically. For pain, the soothing heat of a nice bath is probably far more therapeutic than whatever magnesium might be absorbed. Bathing in a magnesium sulfate solution also has no other known medical benefits other than treating skin infections. Most theories you hear about how Epsom salt baths work are oversimplified and meaningless (for instance, nearly everyone says it is absorbed by osmosis, which is definitely wrong). The case for the healing powers of Epsom salt is mostly made by people selling the stuff, or recommending it as carelessly as an old wives’ tale. If relatively dilute home salt baths were actually medicinal, then far more concentrated sources like The Dead Sea would have clear health effects, which they definitely do not.

full article 11000 words

A cup or two of Epsom salt in a bath supposedly relieves pain — specifically, muscle pain from over-exertion (delayed-onset muscle soreness), conditions like myofascial pain syndrome (“trigger points”) and fibromyalgia — and speeds healing1 from minor injuries such as muscle strains and tendinitis. It is touted by a few as being a good source of magnesium, better than taking pills; nearly everyone thinks it’s “detoxifying.”

Claims and recommendations of this nature can be found by the thousands online. Bags and cartons of Epsom salts are available at any drugstore. Why, I have a package right here.2 It says:

Dissolve desired amount (1–2 cups) of crystals in a hot bath to produce a mineral water treatment to aid in the relief of muscular aches and pains.

Says who? How does it work?

When I went to my super-duper advanced massage therapy college, my instructors suggested Epsom salt baths as a good thing to prescribe to our clients. No scientific basis for this idea was ever presented: it was just one of those things that everybody “knew,” a folk remedy justified by the generations of wise old wives and bathers. The physiology of it certainly wasn’t explained. No one ever mentioned it being a source of magnesium, even though that is by far the most plausible explanation for any benefit it might have.

Mostly my colleagues and mentors just made vague references to “detoxifying” the muscles, perhaps “by osmosis.” Nothing more exact was ever discussed because, frankly, I am sure that not one person in the building could have even named the compound “magnesium sulphate.”3 Me included.

I have wondered ever since if there was anything to it.

I am strongly skeptical of all health-related claims involving “toxins,” mostly because people who toss that word around never seem to know which toxins they are talking about.4 I have thoroughly studied the subject of post-exercise muscle soreness — probably the leading cause of hot baths — only to discover that it’s basically been proven that there are no known remedies for it.5 And after a long, hot Epsom salt bath of my own one night in the early 2000s — which had no apparent effect on my unusually sore muscles, as usual — I decided it was time for a proper reality check. I started studying this topic (and I’ve never really stopped).

Does an Epsom salt bath actually do anything? Does brining yourself like a turkey do any good? Can you pickle your pain away? Is there any plausible way that Epsom salts could have an effect on your sore muscle tissue, or on the healing of injuries?

What is Epsom salt exactly? And why do people always stick an S on the end?

Epsom salts are magnesium sulphate heptahydrate, usually shortened just to magnesium sulphate (note also the American spelling “sulfate”). It was originally obtained by boiling down mineral waters at Epsom, England. The magnesium specifically is often considered the active ingredient.

It is quaintly referred to in the plural — Epsom salts instead of Epsom salt — but it’s just one kind of salt, and other than tradition there’s no more reason to say “salts” than there is to say “please pass the table salts.” It’s just an odd affectation, and both the singular and plural form are fine.

Photograph of 6 basic salt shakers in a horizontal row.

Other than tradition there’s no more reason to say Epsom “salts” — plural — than there is to say “please pass the table salts.”

Diagram of the chemical structure of magnesium suplhate heptahydrate.

The chemical structure of Epsom salts … so that you know this is a serious article.

About footnotes. There are 49 footnotes in this document. Click to make them pop up without losing your place. There are two types: more interesting extra content,1Footnotes with more interesting and/or fun extra content are bold and blue, while dry footnotes (citations and such) are lightweight and gray. Type ESC to close footnotes, or re-click the number.
and boring reference stuff.2“Boring” footnotes usually contain scientific citations from my giant bibliography of pain science. Many of them actually have pretty interesting notes.

Example citation:
Berman BM, Langevin HH, Witt CM, Dubner R. Acupuncture for Chronic Low Back Pain. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 29;(363):454–461. PubMed #20818865. PainSci #54942. ← That symbol means a link will open in a new window.
Try one!

Almost no Epsom salt science

My search for scientific evidence concerning Epsom salt baths was disappointing. I was unable to find even a single scientific paper studying their effect on body pain. Folk remedies are often generally neglected by researchers, but not usually so completely. There are usually at least a few experiments testing popular remedies kicking around. Why wouldn’t the use of Epsom salts for muscle soreness be similarly blessed?

A crystal of magnesium sulphate heptahydrate — Epsom salt.

A crystal of magnesium sulphate heptahydrate — Epsom salt.

There is plenty of research relevant to other medical uses of Epsom salts.6 For instance, on my package of Epsom salts, instructions are also given for internal usage as a laxative — which does work78 and is actually FDA approved and probably the most common and generally known medical usage. Other (internal) uses of magnesium sulphate include the treatment of irregular heart rhythm, low blood magnesium,9 eclampsia,10 and severe tetanus.11

There are also some incredibly bogus and crazy (dangerous) uses of Epsom salts. For instance, naturopaths may use it to try to dissolve gallstones — which doesn’t work, and can cause serious poisoning.

But there appears to be simply nothing at all published about alleviating aches and pains by any means, not magnesium or “detoxification” or anything else. Apparently, researchers just aren’t interested in studying the effect of Epsom salts on muscle pain, or (more likely) they simply can’t get funding for the work.

It’s not just researchers who’ve neglected it. For instance, Epsom salt baths do not even rate a mention in Home Remedies: Hydrotherapy, massage, charcoal, and other simple treatments, a large and credibly referenced compendium of traditional remedies assembled by a pair of doctors. They describe five other medicated baths — alkaline (soda) baths, starch baths, oatmeal baths, peroxide baths, and sulfur baths — for conditions ranging from poison ivy rashes to diabetic gangrene (!), but they never mention Epsom salt baths.

In the near perfect absence of directly relevant science, all we can do is speculate scientifically about the possible mechanisms of action. And that I will now do, at absurd length.

“(With) a grain of salt,” (or “a pinch of salt”) in modern English, is an idiom which means to view something with skepticism, or to not take it literally.

Photograph of a woman in an Epsom salt bath, thinking, “Ah, this is relaxing! But I wonder if there’s any scientific evidence the salt is actually helping my muscles?

“Detoxification” and “osmosis” explain nothing about Epsom salts

Let’s get this out of the way early: regardless of whether Epsom salts baths work, it’s important to understand that the words “detoxification” and “osmosis” are both hopelessly misleading. Usage of these terms just reveals a poor understanding of both toxins and osmosis. If we are to understand Epsom salt, we need to get past this.

Why does osmosis even come up? It is the layman’s idea of how Epsom salts detoxifies, usually visualizing toxins being sucked out of the body through the skin. But even if those nasty toxins are in there and need sucking, that is simply not how osmosis works.

Many people get osmosis bass-ackwards: they believe it refers to the movement of things floating in water across a membrane, but that is wrong by definition. It’s actually the water itself that moves. Osmosis refers to the movement of solvents only across thin membranes, towards the side that is “thicker” with dissolved particles.13 Take it from the Osmosis Cats!show cats14

You can demonstrate this clearly by soaking a potato in salty water. The water is clearly “sucked” osmotically out of the cells: they lose their plumpness, and the potato goes limp. Poor little potato. It’s the water that’s moves around. (Or cats.)

And so, by definition, Epsom salts baths cannot suck the toxins out of anyone, or suck magnesium ions into anyone.

Can salt disinfect? Osmosis and all the wee beasties

Reader Dorrie B. pointed out something interesting: Epsom salts might be an effective treatment for topical skin infections, as salt is certainly inhospitable to many microganisms. It can suck them dry, like the potato example I just mentioned.

An Epsom salt bath definitely cannot disinfect a puncture wound (as one of my readers was told). A strong salt solution is anti-bacterial, but the problem with rusty nails is the risk of deep injection of Clostridium tetani — beyond the reach of any soak.15

But this is also a great example of how complex these questions can be, because salt bathing might also damage populations of other bacteria on the skin, resulting in higher vulnerability to infection.16 Do people who bathe or swim in salt water regularly suffer any ill effects? Are they more susceptible to new infections? They might well be: even a 10% or 20% difference would not be obvious to the victims, but would nevertheless be clinically significant and biologically interesting.

Likely that research hasn’t been done, but my point is just that it’s really surprisingly difficult to say whether or not a given biological effect is “good” — it’s almost never that simple, and it’s a good thing to bear in mind throughout this article.

Skin is definitely waterproof (and therefore also osmosis-proof)

So, however Epsom salts get into the body, if they do, it’s not by osmosis. Osmosis doesn’t work through the skin. Skin is almost perfectly waterproof. If it weren’t, you would dehydrate like an earthworm on a sunny sidewalk. (You do dehydrate significantly by sweating in a bath, of course.17 But Epsom salts do not increase that.18)

The top layer of the skin, the stratum corneum, consists of dead cells stuffed with a kind of embalming substance, keratin, a fibrous protein. Water can’t go through or around them, thanks to a microscopic “uniquely structured fatty layer” between them, which no one knew about until surprisingly recently (2012).19 Plus we have glands that coat the skin in waterproofing oils. When those oils wash off, the dead skin cells can soak up a little water and swell a bit, like soaked beans. (This is not the cause of skin pruning — that’s an old myth.20)

The swelling of the superficial skin cells is not due to osmosis, but rather to a limited “capillary action” in which water molecules flow into small spaces. (Paper towels absorb liquid the same way.) The stratum corneum is mostly waterproof precisely because osmosis is not a significant factor here. Those cells are dead, containing mostly just dry keratin, and surrounded by lipids — not fluid containing dissolved substances which could osmotically “suck” water through the skin. The presence of lipids and their arrangement results in “exceedingly low permeability.”21

Furthermore, the stratum corneum is generally an effective barrier to diffusion: ions and molecules dissolved in water mostly cannot pass through the stratum corneum, again because there is minimal water in the outer layers of skin for them to diffuse through. This is not to say that nothing gets past the skin, just not much, and definitely not water.

“Human skin has unique properties of which functioning as a physicochemical barrier is one of the most apparent. The human integument is able to resist the penetration of many molecules.”22

Booze molecules, for instance. You can’t get drunk through your skin, alas. Contrary to the Danish myth. As proven by Danish researchers in late 2010.23 It’s funny, but it’s not a joke.

The point is that it’s not exactly obvious to people what substances can get through the skin. Ask your friends: most of them will guess that some alcohol probably does get through the skin — maybe not enough to get drunk (or booze baths would be a more popular practice), but some. In fact, none gets across.

Probably because alcohol molecules are just too dang big…

What does get across the skin? Obviously some things do

The skin is not a perfect barrier to all substances, which is obvious because of medicinal patches and creams, allergic reactions, contact poisons and other examples that some things clearly do get past that dead outer layer to interact with the living cells beneath, or even into the interstitial fluids and blood stream. The skin keeps water and much else out, but some things get through. How?

Size matters. If molecules are small enough, they can slip through the skin, like a small fish through a loose net. In 2000, Bos and Meinardi argued that a teensy enough molecule, smaller than 500 Daltons, can drift through the corneum24 — the 500 Dalton rule.

Magnesium ions are way smaller than 500 Daltons, at a barely-there atomic mass of just 24 Daltons. (Water molecules also extremely tiny — just 18 Daltons — but recall from above that the skin is also built specifically to keep those molecules out.)

As in sex, so too in chemistry: size does matter, but it’s definitely not the only thing that matters. There are almost certainly other mechanisms involved. For instance, cells in the living layer of the skin take an active role in managing the passage of some substances. Topical allergic reactions are an obvious demonstration of this: the immune system over-reacts to an “invader.” A complex and imperfect system, obviously.

The 500 Dalton rule means that it’s plausible in principle that magnesium ions might diffuse through the stratum corneum, but “it’s complicated.” Magnesium ions have some special properties. Like tapioca, they may swell when wet. In fact, this has been the conventional wisdom for some time, and one of the main reasons that many experts have dismissed the possibility of magenisum absorption.25

Okay, so it turns out there’s really some serious chemistry involved.

And it gets worse. Surprise surprise, the conventional wisdom has been challenged by some recent research. And I’m going to get into it, because whee, science is fun! But let me emphasize the point of it all first: no one bloody knows how this actually works, and if you think you can guess whether or not magnesium ions get through the skin, please think again. Biology and chemistry is mind-bogglingly complex and the details are truly, madly, deeply non-guessable.

Testing magnesium absorption on harvested human skin samples

Science: Hey, can I have that skin off your belly? You don’t need it right?

Tummy Tuck Patient: Um, sure…

Science: Thanks! Got to find out if magnesium ions can get through that.

This section is all about one odd experiment26 that involves a number of strange rituals performed on skin samples harvested from tummy tucks, like gluing hair follicles shut with super glue. It almost answers the tricky scientific question of whether magnesium ions can be absorbed through the skin, but still falls short.

It does convincingly show that magnesium ions can diffuse through the stratum corneum, and that hair follicles facilitate that movement, but it does not establish that they do so in clinically meaningful numbers, especially in the conditions of a typical Epsom salts bath. Regardless, it’s neato science. These chemists had complicated chemistry reasons to believe that damp magnesium ions actually do not swell up too much to fit through the atomic-scale cracks in stratum corneum.27

So they set out to test it. They tested absorption on patches of skin harvested from patients who got tummy tucks. Don’t need that skin any more? Donate it to science! The main features of their experiment:

Like I said: an odd experiment.

They tested 5, 15, and 60-minute exposures of two concentrations of magnesium solution, medium and strong, corresponding to ocean water and the Dead Sea respectively. (Note that these concentrations are quite a bit greater than the concentration of salt in a typical Epsom salt bath.)

Their key findings:

Magnesium ions diffusing through the stratum corneum. The brighter the warm-toned pixels here, the more magnesium.

But there are some caveats. Of course.

I got into the details of this science not because it proves that magnesium soaks through skin, but because it’s charmingly weird, and because it proves that the whole problem is so absurdly complicated that we absolutely cannot guess the solution. Not even an extremely educated guess. Walter White couldn’t guess it. There are just too many ways the messy details of biology might surprise us. The only way to find that out is to set aside the speculation about what’s possible in principle, and do some proper before-after testing of magnesium absorption, in actual medicinal situations…

Some evidence against absorption: Israeli soldiers smear magnesium all over themselves in high concentrations and it doesn’t get inside

This quote from a book by a doctor28 was submitted to me by a reader as an “authoritative” opinion on absorption:

Regularly bathing in hot water to which Epsom salts have been added can help draw out toxins from the skin.

This is not an authoritative opinion: it’s a vague and unsupported one. That anyone would mistake it for authoritative is rather depressing.29 The only thing that can determine whether magnesium heptahydrate is absorbed from a bath is careful, thorough testing — opinion is irrelevant, even from a real expert.

Fortunately, not all my mail is depressing. Hat tip to reader Bryan B. who found an interesting study and sent it to me. (I love it when readers do that.) It’s a safety study of a lotion developed “to improve protection against chemical warfare agents.”30 Like suntan lotion, but for chemical burns. Yikes.

This lotion had rather a lot of magnesium in it. And soldiers were not poisoned by the magnesium. Indeed, it didn’t appear to cross the skin at all: “there were no significant differences in magnesium levels between the placebo and the study groups in any of the applications.” The delivery system — lotion — could be quite different than soaking in water with dissolved magnesium sulfate. But I agree it’s pretty good evidence that absorption is minimal or nil.


Frequently cited evidence for absorption: Rosemary Waring’s little unpublished 2006 study

In 2006, Rosemary Waring, a British biochemist at the University of Birmingham, did a nice science experiment with Epsom salts.31 She did more or less exactly what any curious person would do if she wanted to know whether or not Epsom salts can get past skin: she measured magnesium and sulphate in the blood and urine both before and after people bathed in Epsom salts.

Dr. Rosemary<br>Waring

Dr. Rosemary

She found them to be higher after the baths! 16 out of 19 people had more magnesium and sulphate in their blood after the baths than they did before the baths.32 Fascinating!

Dr. Waring’s results are straightforward. No therapeutic effects of Epsom salt were studied or claimed — she just studied absorption, and did not try to make any more of it, showing the restraint of a pro. What could be simpler?

I was so interested in these results (although still a bit skeptical) that I contacted Dr. Waring by email. “I agree that it is a bit surprising,” she replied, “but the results are certainly there and in fact there are hints in the past literature that this could happen.”

Better still, Dr. Waring told me that a colleague of hers in London has done another experiment which showed that “magnesium sulphate can cross human skin using pieces of excised human skin in a special apparatus.”

Now twelve years later, neither experiment has yet actually been published,33 and that’s a significant reason for caution.34 It is a basic rule of science that evidence can’t really be taken too seriously until it has been exposed to peer review and repeated by other scientists. Just because experimental results haven’t been replicated yet doesn’t mean we ignore them, but it does mean that we have to take them with a grain of salt. (That pun was simply unavoidable — so sorry.)

Meanwhile, what can we make of Dr. Waring’s results? One thing only so far …

  1. There might be a mechanism for getting magnesium and sulphate across the skin!

It’s not much, but it’s important. And when I found the new evidence, I embraced its implications. (That’s how science works. That’s why being anti-science is like being anti-honesty.35 I happily admit that Dr. Waring’s results might mean that I was simply dead wrong about the absorption question originally.)

How would it work, this crossing of the skin, if it’s happening? Dr. Waring:

I don’t have any evidence as to how magnesium sulphate crosses the skin, though I have always assumed that it simply diffuses across the stratum corneum, helped by the fact that it’s in a hot bath.

Hot hot hot! Does heat increase absorption?

Enough of it sure does. But probably not bath heat.

A 2008 experiment study showed that brief, intense heating of the skin can dramatically increase its permeability.36 Park et al tested short burts of heat: 5 milliseconds to 5 seconds at 100 to 315 degrees Celcius. With more heat, dramatically more molecules could cross (the duration of exposure had less effect). Skin permeability was increased by a few multiples in the low end of the range, all the way up to three orders of magnitude at the most extreme temperatures. Wow.

The mechanism is fascinating: enough heat can basically burn microscopic holes in the surface of the skin, creating artificial pores. Ouch? It sounds awful, but it’s actually painless, because the application of heat is so brief. At lower temperatures, the increased permeability is due to messing with the stratum corneum lipid and keratin structures, making them a less effective barrier.

Is any of this applicable to baths and the absorption of magnesium sulphate? Maybe, but it’s unlikely.

The highest comfortable bath temperature for most humans is around just 40˚C (109˚F), which is less than half the lowest temperature studied in this experiment. The effect studied mostly depends on actually damaging the skin. It is conceivable that permeability starts increasing at lower temperatures with longer exposures … but 60˚ lower? For the duration of a bath? Probably not for most substances. Skin probably evolved to be a good barrier across the range of temperatures humans are exposed to, which would certainly include 40˚C.

Also, not all substances will respond the same way to heat. If you studied transdermal delivery of many different substances at 100˚, you would probably see a wide range of effects. The only way to know if the skin is more permeable to magnesium at 100˚ or 40˚than at room temperature (as with a cream) is to check — and no one has, to the best of my knowledge.

Maybe up your bum? Um …

When you encounter surprising results in science, don’t just settle on the first explanation that comes to mind — it could easily be wrong. Dr. Waring says that she “assumed that it simply diffuses across the stratum corneum,” and that certainly is possible. But what other explanation could there be for the results? How else could magnesium sulphate have gotten into the bloodstream in her experiment? Reader Adrian J. had an unusual idea:

Is it possible that the salt diffuses across the epithelium in the anus if the rectum relaxes to some degree in the warm water?

Wow, that’s some awesome lateral thinking! And I think it’s plausible. But I find myself (uncomfortably) wondering ... just how much do I relax in a hot bath? That much? And how much salt could diffuse across that more permeable but much smaller membrane? It’s a small target! And I shudder to think of the measures required to test this hypothesis! For what it’s worth, we know that alcohol absorbs quite handily through the rectum — rather too well, in fact, so do not try at home.37 But it has to be pretty much injected. (Live a little: click that footnote!)

A number of readers have asked if the vagina might be an absorption route. A fair question, but this has the same problem as anal absorption: too small and too tight. After quizzing several amused female friends about it, I am confident that it would be highly irregular for any respectable quantity of bath water to percolate into one’s ya-ya.

And you thought an article about salt baths would be boring! No wonder this the most popular Epsom salts analysis on the internet!

What about inhalation? Another possibility for absorption?

Perhaps salt can be inhaled with steam. There’s actually a therapy (“halotherapy”) based on this, but it’s a weak idea in general and impossible as a salt delivery system: when water evaporates, it leaves most solutes behind, salt in particular.38 Many substances evaporate with water and “contaminate” steam — lots of volatile compounds and assorted tiny particles basically just getting thrown around, which is why we can smell a bubbling pot of soup — but these occur only in trace amounts, mostly nowhere near enough to be plausibly medicinal. Human olfaction, despite being shabby by animal kingdom standards, can still get a nice rich scent from a mind-bogglingly small number of molecules. Water from a soup is still remarkably pure despite the odour, and definitely has no salt in it.

Another related possibility is that we might inhale tiny droplets of water (aerosols of salt water) that float over the surface of a bath. Such droplets would contain dissolved salts at the same concentration as the bath, but these are nearly microscopic tiny water droplets. Remember that most people can swallow an entire magnesium pill with no obvious effect, which contains insanely more magnesium than you could ever absorb from the air over an Epsom salt bath, assuming there’s any at all, most of which would never even come close to a mucus membrane. Again, not really a plausible source of medicinal absorption.

Absorption “conclusions”

I’ve presented several lines of evidence, demonstrating that the absorption question is surprisingly complicated (and interesting). None of it is conclusive. We will have to live with the mystery.

Meanwhile, it is reasonable to be skeptical, as many experts are. A thorough 2017 scientific review of both the evidence and rationale for transdermal absorption of magnesium39 makes a critical point: although there may now be adequate evidence to suggest that transdermal evidence is possible in the right conditions, that evidence is not nearly strong enough to support claims that it is superior to oral supplementation. Gröber et al conclude that they “cannot yet recommend the application of transdermal magnesium.”

It’s not just a matter of whether Epsom salts can be absorbed… it also has to be a better way of getting magnesium into the body than simply swallowing it. And that’s a much higher bar to clear.

And then there’s the question of whether or not it ever matters.

What could magnesium and sulphate ions do once they cross the skin?

If Epsom salts do get across the skin … so what? Is it any good to have a few extra ions of magnesium and sulphate kicking around your bloodstream? The rest of this article continues to mostly cast doubt on the possible therapeutic effects.

There might well be a therapeutic effect, but we have no information about what it is, how it works, what it works for, how strong the effects are, what side effects there might be, and so on. The increased levels of these ions shown by Dr. Waring’s experiment are small, about a 10% increase on average (and none in some subjects, remember). The concentrations could also be quite different in the fluids between cells — she didn’t measure that. It is still completely unclear what effects these ions could have on your tissues when they arrive.

There is no doubt that magnesium sulphate has effects on physiology. Several of those effects are reasonably well known, including a few common medical applications mentioned earlier. There are also unpleasant effects. But, judging from the established medical uses of Epsom salt, there is definitely no particular reason so far to believe that having more magnesium or sulphate in your blood is going to be much use to you — unless you have eclampsia or tetanus or autism.40

The closest thing there is to a relevant science experiment on this is one study of injected magnesium sulphate which found that it “did not reduce muscle pain” and caused “unpleasant side effects.”41 Yuck! Not exactly encouraging!

So there’s not really any particular reason to believe anything about the therapeutic effects of Epsom salts for aches and pain. We can really only speculate. And speculating about basic biology is really difficult. It’s a great way to be wrong.

No matter what it can do, it can’t do everything

This is a classic problem with all kinds of supposedly amazing pain cures: pain has too many different causes for one medicine to be really effective.

There are many types of muscle and joint pain that have little or nothing at all in common with each other physiologically. For instance, the pain of fibromyalgia originates in dysfunction of the central nervous system, which is completely different from the pain caused by exercise, which in turn is completely different than the physiology of trigger points. Even “basic” muscle pain is incredibly complex and has many flavours.42

While it’s certainly conceivable that increasing levels of magnesium and/or sulphate ions in the bloodstream could help with some pain problems, it’s extremely unlikely that it would help enough different sorts of pain to be generally “good for” pain. This is an important logical problem: in principle, nothing can possibly help all types of pain, or even more than a couple of them.

Similarly, Epsom salts probably cannot simultaneously perform the two tricks most often touted: “relieve pain” and “speed healing.” Those are completely different things.

They might even be mutually exclusive. For instance, the primary source of injury pain is inflammation — a complex and painful physiological process intended to … wait for it … speed healing. Indeed, the only known mechanism by which you could recover faster from an injury would be to increase inflammation. If bathing in Epsom salts did that, it would make you hurt more, not less. Of course, there could be other ways to speed up healing — in an “anything’s possible” kind of way — but it’s still pretty far-fetched that a single molecule could pull off both that miracle and reduce pain at the same time.

The point here is just that the conventional wisdom is pretty murky.

Vintage advertisement for “Brain Salt.”

Salt has been used for well, just about everything. Like these effervescent brain salts. Cory Doctorow: “The best thing about effervescent brain salt is that it’s not immediately clear whether it’s salt to make effervescent brains even more delicious, or salt to give you an effervescent brain, or effervescent salt for brains. Also, it appears to come in a Tabasco bottle & everything that comes in a Tabasco bottle is always awesome.

What’s a calcium channel, how do Epsom salts block it, and who cares?

Generally speaking, explanations for the benefits of Epsom salts are really vague, as discussed above: “osmosis and detoxification.” Once in a blue moon, you’ll see Epsom salts (or magnesium in particular) more exactingly described as a “calcium channel blocker” with the implication that this is obviously “good for pain.”

Unsurprisingly, this is another misleading oversimplification. Although it’s more specific and impressive sounding, it’s not a heck of a lot more meaningful than “detoxification.”

Calcium channels are itsy bitsy — molecular scale43 — holes in cell walls that let calcium in and out as a trigger for a bunch of biochemical business. They exist primarily in muscle tissue (including the heart), blood vessels, and neurons. There are a number of druggy ways to interfere with them, including magnesium. Calcium channel blockage is a reasonably well understood bit of physiology, and the main clinical usage of calcium channel blockers is to decrease blood pressure by reducing the strength of muscle contraction in the heart and blood vessels. Although other effects undoubtedly exist, there is no particular reason to believe that they have any potent effect on any flavour of pain.

Lots of people are walking around with calcium blockers in their blood. Calcium blockers aren’t rare drugs. Since there are numerous drugs that block calcium channels in various ways, it’s a bit implausible that there would be some kind of powerful pain-killing effect that no one’s noticed. I don’t think that people on calcium channel blockers are walking around feeling no pain, like a superpower.

Yes, it is possible that magnesium absorbed through the skin does something different, something good, for certain kinds of pain. After all, different calcium blocker drugs have different effects! But there’s not a shred of good, direct evidence of it. So it really boggles the mind that anyone would toss this idea around with any confidence. Seriously, they’re pretty much making it up as they go — wild speculation.

Magnesium as a pain-killer after surgery

There is some limited evidence that magnesium (just that ion) may reduce pain, perhaps because it is a “calcium channel blocker and N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist,” as in a 2009 experiment.44 However, this is uncertain science. Several studies have been done, with conflicting results. Most were reviewed in 2007:45 four showed a positive effect, seven showed no effect greater than a placebo, and in one experiment the subjects actually experienced more pain (ouch).

And so, although “the biological basis for its [magnesium’s] potential antinociceptive effect is promising,” the authors actually concluded that no pain-killing effect could be found. So much for the miracle of calcium channel blockage: it fails the “impress me” test. It seems unlikely that magnesium would fail to relieve pain in those tests, and yet somehow succeed when absorbed from Epsom salts baths.

Clearly, this mystery is not solved yet. While there is a plausible mechanism for magnesium ions reducing pain, it is clearly neither well understood nor reliable. Do you suppose the picture is any clearer for Epsom salts in your bath? Don’t bet on it!

Sulphate supplementation

I asked Dr. Waring to speculate about the therapeutic effects. She pointed out that patients with rheumatoid arthritis are known to have low sulphate levels. Molecules produced by the inflamed tissues in these patients may interfere with the production of a protein that is used to produce sulphate from another molecule (cysteine), thus lowering sulphate levels.46

However, low sulphate levels are a possible result of having rheumatoid arthritis, not a cause — and thus boosting them back up again will not necessarily solve anything. And even if it did, that’s a therapeutic effect that is very particular to rheumatoid arthritis — a serious, agonizing joint disease — which probably has little or nothing to do with the kinds of pain that most people put Epsom salt in their baths for.

It would be great if Epsom salt baths helped people with rheumatoid arthritis, but good evidence of that would, in a way, pretty much shoot down the other claims of therapeutic effect, which rely on completely different ideas about how and why Epsom salt might work. But, of course, there is as yet no evidence one way or the other.

Mixing up the effects of salty and non-salty baths

Obviously non-salty baths have some benefits of their own. Epsom salts routinely get the credit for these benefits. It goes like this:

  1. Patient has a problem and tries non-salty hot baths or soaking. However, because it’s just a bath and expectations are low, this effort is never particular diligent. This is key to the setup: the patient has never really given non-salty soaking a good try.
  2. Patient gets the idea to try Epsom salts! This seems much more promising.
  3. Thus inspired, the patient proceeds to soak quite diligently — much more diligently than ever before.
  4. When some benefit is then observed, patient attributes this to the salt — of course. Maybe it is, but maybe it’s just the unusual regularity of the nice soaking. The point is that we obviously can’t know … but the patient is now officially biased.
  5. If the benefits are at all notable, this person will usually start proclaiming to anyone who will listen that they "know" that Epsom salts work.
  6. When challenged (“It might be just the hot bath, eh?”), they will almost certainly object and claim (correctly!) that they have tried simple hot soaking without results. They have indeed. But it was never actually tried well enough to really know.

Tricksy, the human mind is.

Consider the source!

An odd square pendant with a metal rim and the letters “Bs” on an olive green background, with the text “bath salts” in smaller print under that.

Dr. Waring’s results are irrelevant to the popular idea of “osmosis,” which refers to the movement of water, not molecules. Nor do her results imply anything about that other popular concept associated with Epsom salts, “detoxification.” And yet, 99% of the time, “osmosis” and “detoxification” are the concepts presented as the justification for bathing in Epsom salts. Can you trust advice that simplistic?

The detoxification claim implies either that Epsom salts somehow “suck” toxic substances out of your muscle tissues, or that Epsom salts get into your system and then somehow “clean up” some toxic substances that they encounter. There is no scientific evidence at all for either of those basic detoxification scenarios, and both involve some seriously optimistic assumptions, leaps of logic, avoidance of detail … all made by people who are usually trying to sell the stuff.

Epsom salt bath prescriptions are invariably brief, and are often accompanied by really strange claims of healing powers. For instance, I found one website that recommended taking Epsom salts internally as well as bathing in them:

Researchers in nutrition, through controlled experimentation, have found that Magnesium sulphate accelerates the body’s healing time by 30%. As an example, if an injury required three weeks to heal under normal or standard conditions, it would only require two weeks to heal if Magnesium sulphate was added to the diet as a nutrition [sic].47

That’s really ludicrous. Accelerated healing time is a comic book concept — something Wolverine does — not an even remotely legitimate medical concept. And imagine the unpleasant surprise of the hapless reader who takes this advice when they discover the laxative effects of ingesting Epsom salts! Naturally, no source for this alleged experiment was given.

Epsom salts bathing is often recommended carelessly and overconfidently, without any genuine knowledge of the physiology or science (or lack thereof). Those who claim to “know” that Epsom salts work cannot seem to demonstrate that they also “know” much about physiology or science. While it certainly remains possible that there is a therapeutic effect, it’s pretty clear that we shouldn’t take their word for it.

Nice-feeling water and floatation therapy

Is there any other reason to put Epsom salts in your bath? Well, Epsom salts dissolved in your bath does make the water feel nice. 😉 No research is required to prove that: just try it! Most people agree that the water feels smoother, slicker, silkier.

And it makes you floatier! Infinitesimally floatier. High concentrations of Epsom salt in your bath will increase the water’s specific gravity (density) to the point where you will start to float — just like in the Dead Sea, or Utah’s Great Salt Lake — because the body is, on average, much less dense than salty water. The concentrations of salt required for floatation therapy are much higher than Epsom salt packaging recommends, by the way.48 However, any salt in your bath — Epsom or otherwise — is going to make you at least a little bit lighter in the water.

The purpose of floatation therapy is primarily to reap the benefits of deep relaxation, which are noteworthy.49 It sounds lovely to me — but irrelevant to the relief of muscle aches and pains except via the straightforward (and perfectly legit) mechanism of relaxation. For more detailed discussion of floatation and immersion therapies, see Get in the Pool for Pain: Aquatic therapy, aquajogging, water yoga, floating and other water-based treatment and injury rehab options.

Something like a conclusion about Epsom salts

I can do no better in defense of Epsom salt bathing for aches and pains than “anything is possible.” There is no good or specific reason to believe that bathing in dissolved Epsom salts will have the slightest effect on muscle soreness or injury recovery time. Although this folk wisdom may someday prove to have a sound rationale, clearly there is none that its advocates have thought of — or even tried to think of, it seems.

There’s even decent evidence that Epsom salts can’t even get past the skin barrier — Israeli soldiers can smear on magnesium rich cream without the slightest effect on their blood levels of magnesium. That’s pretty damning.

On the other side of the evidence, thanks to Dr. Waring, we know that it’s still possible that we are a living experiment in absorbing magnesium sulphate ions every time we bathe in dissolved Epsom salts! And maybe, just maybe, they do something worthwhile once they get past the skin. And it’s very cheap, and almost certainly safe — just as no one is obviously getting any miracle cures out of Epsom salt bathing, they aren’t suffering any obvious ill effects either.

So, why not? At the very least, they’ll make your bath feel silkier! And at most? Who knows — maybe those magnesium and sulphate ions do have some healing powers. It’s certainly not impossible. Just don’t buy into all the crap about osmosis and detoxification. As the old Scottish proverb says, “Always keep your mind open — but not so open that your brains fall out!”

About Paul Ingraham

Headshot of Paul Ingraham, short hair, neat beard, suit jacket.

I am a science writer, former massage therapist, and I was the assistant editor at for several years. I have had my share of injuries and pain challenges as a runner and ultimate player. My wife and I live in downtown Vancouver, Canada. See my full bio and qualifications, or my blog, Writerly. You might run into me on Facebook or Twitter.

Selected Reader Comments and Questions

This is a new section that I’ve just started in the fall of 2012. It will grow.

Industry protectionism for baths? A reader asks, “Why would the FDA allow studies to be published that show Epsom salts are more effective than their muscle relaxers and pain pills? For $1/lb of epsom salt this would kill their market and profits.” The FDA has literally nothing to do magnesium sulfate research. They cannot regulate it. Any Big Pharma/FDA conspiracy against Epsom salt is clearly failing, because the stuff is available literally everywhere, and the FDA actually approves it for use as a laxative and a variety of external uses. Approval seems like kind of a funny way of implementing an anti-salt agenda. In short, this question is just knee-jerk anti-mainstream medicine paranoia based on major misunderstandings of what the FDA is and how it works. Nevertheless, it is a concern I’ve often see expressed, so I decided it was time to address it here.

Ironically, if there is any relevant commercial bias, it is one in favour of Epsom salts. For instance, the Epsom Salt Council exists to promote the industry and is “eager to let everyone know the benefits of our product and … spread the word about the wonder that is Epsom salt.” They prominently publish uncritical and unequivocal claims of medical benefit on their website.

Ok so you don’t believe that Epsom salt will do anything in a bath. So how about sea salt? You believe it’s the same? Useless for muscle aches and stuff like that? Yes, I believe it is “the same,” at least insofar as it is “useless muscle aches and stuff like that.” Of course there is much more chemistry going on in sea water than Epsom salts, but not in any way that seems to make any practical difference. In fact, it’s pretty clear that people who swim in the ocean a lot are not enjoying impressive pain-killing benefits the rest of us are missing out on — which is yet another example of how the skin is a pretty effective barrier.

Vintage photo of a man in galvanic bath, seated on a chair between a pair of basins for his legs and a pair for his arms. There’s some old timey electrical hardware on the wall above him.

Do not try at home

Oddly, there are a lot of electric baths in medical history. Electricity was a wonderful way to make health ideas based on vitalism seem more real & science-y.

Maybe there’s a “bio-electric” function to epsom salts in water. There’s more and more being discovered about small electric/magnetic fields and how we are affected by them. Er, no, I think not. It’s not inconceivable, but it is pretty far-fetched. It’s generally true that biology ingeniously exploits most properties of nature to get things done, including electromagnetism, and we likely still have things to learn about that (that’s what the book The Body Electric was about, and despite its age and flaws it’s a darned interesting read). But whatever those systems might be, it’s super unlikely that they have any meaningful interaction with a slightly salty bath, let alone one that’s relevant to aches and pains. It’s even less likely that any such effect wouldn’t be much more obvious in, say, sea water. Even if salty baths just bestowed a vague feeling of well-being and vitality, like mountain air, that would be biologically remarkable … but still well short of a useful medical effect. And in fact salty baths do not have an obvious mountain-air like goodness.

Still need help with myofascial pain?

If you think this article is detailed, you should see my tutorial about muscle pain and myofascial pain syndrome! This kind of exhaustively researched writing about Epsom salts is only possible because I sell some of the other articles on this website. No writer can afford to create truly good, detailed content and then just give it all away: we have to make a living somehow. Please reward my efforts by taking a look at my tutorials. Although Epsom salts seem unlikely to be a significant source of relief, there are plenty of other options for self-treatment of muscle pain. publishes an extremely thorough tutorial about myofascial trigger points (muscle knots):

Trigger Points & Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Myofascial trigger points — so-called “muscle knots” — are increasingly recognized as a factor in many of the world’s aches and pains. This book-length tutorial focuses on advanced troubleshooting for patients who have failed to get relief from basic tactics, but it’s also ideal for starting beginners on the right foot, and for pros who want to stay current and as science-based as possible. 190 sections inspired by the famous texts of Drs. Travell & Simons, but also much more recent science. Also offered as a free bonus (2-for-1) with the low back, neck, muscle strain, or iliotibial pain tutorials. Buy it now for $19.95 or read the first few sections for free!

BUY $1995

Related Reading

Other interesting reading:

What’s new in this article?

Fifteen updates have been logged for this article since publication (2006). All updates are logged to show a long term commitment to quality, accuracy, and currency. more When’s the last time you read a blog post and found a list of many changes made to that page since publication? Like good footnotes, this sets apart from other health websites and blogs. Although footnotes are more useful, the update logs are important. They are “fine print,” but more meaningful than most of the comments that most Internet pages waste pixels on.

I log any change to articles that might be of interest to a keen reader. Complete update logging of all noteworthy improvements to all articles started in 2016. Prior to that, I only logged major updates for the most popular and controversial articles.

See the What’s New? page for updates to all recent site updates.

This is one of the oldest and most regularly updated articles on, though no updates were logged for at least the first four years of its lifespan. But it has always been popular, and has always attracted lots of feedback, including some great comments that have inspired many corrections and improvements.

2017New (short) section, “Absorption ‘conclusions’,” citing Gröber et al.

2017Really fun new section: “Testing magnesium absorption on harvested human skin samples.” I laughed out loud repeatedly writing this one. Because what’s funnier than harvested human skin, amiright?

2017New section, “Hot hot hot! Does heat increase absorption?” Based on Park et al.

2017Expanded on discussion of inhalation as a vector for salt magnesium absorption.

2017Correction about the size of water molecules, and some clarification about how skin waterproofing works thanks to some interesting science.

2016Small but worthwhile clarifications of the 500 Dalton rule and the “Osmosis mistake” (which I continue to get too much ignorant email about).

2016New section, “What does get across the skin? Obviously some things do.” Discussion of the small size of magnesium ions and the 500 Dalton rule of absorption. This isn’t exactly a reversal of my position on absorption, because I was always officially and openly agnostic about it. However, I also clearly thought absorption was a priori implausible, and this update reverses that opinion, which is worth emphasizing.

2015Fixed an incorrect premise of a minor point: water vapour is pure by definition and cannot be salty, and therefore cannot be even a slightly plausible mechanism of delivery of salt to mucous membranes.

2015Fixed incorrect information about skin pruning and added the actual (and much more interesting) explanation; cited to substantiate the impermeability of the stratum corneum.

2013Added an explanation of why it is probably a bad idea to use Epsom salts as a replacement for a tetanus shot after a dirty puncture wound.

2012Added the first piece of evidence against the absorption of Epsom salt.

2012Added a particularly awful example of a bad article about Epsom salts. See immediately above in the Further Reading section.

2011Added picture of cats demonstrating osmosis.

Some updates missed.

2010Added information about the effect of Epsom salt on bacteria on the skin.

2010Corrected several typographic errors.

Many earlier updates unlogged.



  1. “Relieves pain” and “speeds healing” are as different from each other as a flying dream is from actual flying. Actually speeding up healing is kind of a big deal. BACK TO TEXT
  2. Of course! Can’t very well debunk it without trying it, can I? I’ve had many Epsom salts baths! BACK TO TEXT
  3. I still can’t remember it reliably, because chemical names stick in my head about as well as my cousins’ birthdays. Ambush me with the question sometime: “What’s the chemical name for Epsom salts? Schnell, schnell!” I’ll be stumped as likely as not. BACK TO TEXT
  4. The idea of “toxins” is usually used as a tactic to scare people into buying some kind of de-toxifying snake oil. Obviously there are dangerous substances; the problem is with the kind of people who toss the idea around, the reasons they do it (fear, profit, ignorance), and because toxin claims are usually so vague that they are literally meaningless, except as a marketing message. Indeed, “detoxification” may be the single most common marketing buzzword in alternative health care.

    The body deals with undesirable molecules in many ways. It eliminates some and recycles others; some are trapped in a safe place; and quite a few can’t be safely handled at all (metals). Most alleged “detox” treatments are focused on stimulating an excretion pathway, like sweating in a sauna. But it’s not like sweating is broken and the sauna is fixing it! The only truly “detoxifying” treatments help the body eliminate or disarm molecules the body cannot process on its own. A stomach pump for someone with alcohol poisoning is literally “detoxifying.” So are chelation for heavy metals, and antivenoms.

    I cover the specific idea of “flushing” toxins in Why Drink Water After Massage? (Massage is wonderful for all kinds of reasons — it doesn’t need the support of the idea that it detoxifies.) For more general consumer advocacy and education about toxins, see “Detoxification” Schemes and Scams (from

  5. For more detail, see another article on, Post-Exercise, Delayed-Onset Muscle Soreness: The biology & treatment of “muscle fever,” the deep muscle soreness that surges 24-48 hours after an unfamiliar workout intensity. Basically what it boils down to is that the top 5 effective treatments for muscle pain after exercise are:

    1. diddly
    2. zilch
    3. zip
    4. zero
    5. maaaaybe massage, but probably not
  6. Swain R, Kaplan-Machlis B. Magnesium for the next millennium. South Med J. 1999 Nov;92(11):1040–1047. PubMed #10586828. See also the Wikipedia article magnesium sulfate (Wikipedia). BACK TO TEXT
  7. Izzo AA, Gaginella TS, Capasso F. The osmotic and intrinsic mechanisms of the pharmacological laxative action of oral high doses of magnesium sulphate. Importance of the release of digestive polypeptides and nitric oxide. Magnes Res. 1996 Jun;9(2):133–138. PubMed #8878010.

    “A common use for high doses of oral magnesium salts is to produce a laxative effect to treat constipation,” explain the authors of this scientific paper. “In the intestinal lumen the poorly absorbable magnesium ions (and other ions such as sulphate) exert an osmotic effect and cause water to be retained in the intestinal lumen.”

  8. James LP, Nichols MH, King WD. A comparison of cathartics in pediatric ingestions. Pediatrics. 1995 Aug;96(2 Pt 1):235–238. PubMed #7630676.

    This paper compared the effectiveness of different laxatives, showing that Epsom salts do indeed move the bowels along … but not as quickly as sorbitol.

  9. As occurs with chronic diarrhea, magnesium malabsorption, alcoholism, diuretic use and a few other disorders. BACK TO TEXT
  10. Eclampsia is a dangerous and fairly common complication of pregnancy. BACK TO TEXT
  11. Muscle spasms caused by bacterial infection with Clostridium tetani, which produces the neurotoxin tetanospasmin. BACK TO TEXT
  12. I’m deliberately over-simplifying the definition of osmosis there, just for readability. Osmosis actually involves the movement of any solvent across a membrane. And water is a solvent, of course. I referred only to water in this context because, unless you bathe in turpentine, the only solvent in your bathing-osmosis equation is going to be good ol’ H2O. BACK TO TEXT
  13. Full, formal definition of osmosis: “Osmosis is the spontaneous net movement of solvent molecules through a selectively permeable membrane into a region of higher solute concentration, in the direction that tends to equalize the solute concentrations on the two sides. It may also be used to describe a physical process in which any solvent moves across a selectively permeable membrane (permeable to the solvent, but not the solute) separating two solutions of different concentrations” BACK TO TEXT
  14. A reader asked: “Isn’t that cat diffusion?” Good question, because that would be the easier visual metaphor, and you could easily caption it that way. But this caption makes it clear that the cats here are representing solvent molecules (e.g. water molecules) and not solute (which isn’t represented by anything). So the cat is a water molecule “flowing” across the “membrane.” BACK TO TEXT
  15. There are a lot of microorganisms that might be on a rusty nail, but CT is the scary common one that can kill you very unpleasantly (a chance of death by muscle spasm, arg). The reason you get a tetanus shot in that situation is that it is a very effective just-in-case prevention, good bang for buck. The idea that anyone would recommend an Epsom salt bath as a replacement for that is quite terrifying, a fine example of dangerous ignorance. While a very strong Epsom salt solution might kill every bacteria in a shallow wound, a deep wound can put bacteria into the bloodstream that leaves the site in seconds — completely inaccessible to any topical antibacterial solution. Ironically, as mentioned above, magnesium heptahydrate is actually treatment for the muscle spasms caused by CT — but it can’t prevent the infection via a puncture wound in the first place. BACK TO TEXT
  16. It is now well understood that every microscopic nook and cranny of our skin — indeed, our entire body, inside and out — is thickly populated with an ecosystem of microorganisms, more diverse than any jungle (see We Are Full of Critters). It is also likely that one of the primary functions of these teensy jungles is to maintain a balance of power, where it’s difficult for any organism to dominate. If soaking in salt water kills bacteria, it might kill off the bacteria that normally live on the skin as well. BACK TO TEXT
  17. If you weigh yourself before and after a bath or sauna, you may find a surprising 1-5 pound weight reduction. This fairly obvious effect is presumably due to fluid loss from sweating. The amount is impressive, considering that you may well have consumed fluid at the same time that you were getting rid of it through your sweat glands. However, it’s certainly consistent with the well-known hazard of fainting in that context, which every public hot tub has very clear warnings about. So I think it’s a reasonably safe assumption that we really do sweat a lot in a hot bath! BACK TO TEXT
  18. The sweat is not “sucked” out of you by salty osmosis, thank goodness, but actively excreted by busy, clever cells that systematically squirt out a variety of waste products along with water, regardless of what you are or are not bathing in. This process is entirely mediated by the clever physiology of those glands, and has nothing (known or significant) to do with any fluid in contact with the skin. If there were, people playing in Great Salt Lake or the Dead Sea (which are waaaaaay saltier than any Epsom salt bath) would experience a dramatically greater and more obvious dehydration effect — to the point of being extremely unpleasant and dangerous! They don’t, of course: they just float and have a good time, immune to any vampiric syphoning of fluids from their bodies. BACK TO TEXT
  19. Iwai I, Han H, den Hollander L, et al. The human skin barrier is organized as stacked bilayers of fully extended ceramides with cholesterol molecules associated with the ceramide sphingoid moiety. J Invest Dermatol. 2012 Sep;132(9):2215–25. PubMed #22534876. This is a really cool paper; has a nice plain English translation: “Strange fat explains skin’s waterproof properties.” BACK TO TEXT
  20. The stratum corneum swells, but only a little, and we know it’s not the cause of pruning because it doesn’t happen when the nerve supply to the fingers is damaged, which means it’s a neurologically regulated phenomenon. We’ve known this for a long time, but we didn’t have any good idea why until quite recently. This video and this article in Nature explain in detail. Basically, “wrinkly fingers improve our grip on wet or submerged objects, working to channel away the water like the rain treads in car tyres.” The mechanism is constriction of the blood vessels under the skin: as they constrict, they pull the skin with them. And testing has confirmed that this actually improves grip on wet surfaces, which “could have helped our ancestors to gather food from wet vegetation or streams.” I’ll be darned. BACK TO TEXT
  21. Potts RO, Francoeur ML. The influence of stratum corneum morphology on water permeability. J Invest Dermatol. 1991 Apr;96(4):495-9. PubMed #2007788. “The stratum corneum (SC) provides the barrier to water loss for the skin of mammals. A significant body of evidence now exists suggesting that extracellular SC lipids are primarily responsible for this barrier. … These results are interpreted in terms of the unique morphology of the SC, where lipids form an extracellular continuum that is highly tortuous. Thus, the exceedingly low permeability of the SC may be due, in large part, to its unique morphology.” BACK TO TEXT
  22. Bos JD, Meinardi MM. The 500 Dalton rule for the skin penetration of chemical compounds and drugs. Exp Dermatol. 2000 Jun;9(3):165–9. PubMed #10839713. BACK TO TEXT
  23. Hansen CS, Færch LH, Kristensen PL. Testing the validity of the Danish urban myth that alcohol can be absorbed through feet: open labelled self experimental study. BMJ. 2010;341:c6812. PubMed #21156749. PainSci #54850.

    Can you get drunk through your skin? In this MythBusters-style experiment, three adults were “tested” in the office of a Danish hospital: specifically, their feet were submerged in a bowl containting three 700 mL bottles of vodka. It’s hard to tell if the researchers are serious about this, but they obviously had fun doing it!

    However, the subjects did not become intoxicated, and their blood alcohol levels did not change. They concluded: “Our results suggest that feet are impenetrable to the alcohol component of vodka. We therefore conclude that the Danish urban myth of being able to get drunk by submerging feet in alcoholic beverages is just that; a myth. The implications of the study are many though.”


  24. Bos 2000, op. cit.

    They argued it in three ways:

    1. virtually all common contact allergens are under 500 Dalton, larger molecules are not known as contact sensitizers. They cannot penetrate and thus cannot act as allergens in man;
    2. the most commonly used pharmacological agents applied in topical dermatotherapy are all under 500 Dalton;
    3. all known topical drugs used in transdermal drug-delivery systems are under 500 Dalton.
  25. Jahnen-Dechent W, Ketteler M. Magnesium basics. Clin Kidney J. 2012 Feb;5(Suppl 1):i3–i14. PubMed #26069819. PainSci #52761. Chandrasekaran et al regarding this paper: “The radius of the hydrated magnesium ion has been reported to be 400 times higher than its dehydrated form, leading to the assertion that it is almost impossible for magnesium ions to pass through biological membranes.” BACK TO TEXT
  26. Chandrasekaran NC, Sanchez WY, Mohammed YH, et al. Permeation of topically applied magnesium ions through human skin is facilitated by hair follicles. Magnes Res. 2016 Jun;29(2):35–42. PubMed #27624531. BACK TO TEXT
  27. For context, I’ll repeat this quote from Chandrasekaran et al: “The radius of the hydrated magnesium ion has been reported to be 400 times higher than its dehydrated form [Jahnen-Dechent et al], leading to the assertion that it is almost impossible for magnesium ions to pass through biological membranes.”


    “When we re-examined this calculation, it was found that the volume of the magnesium ion is 451.76 Å3 [4 (4.76)3] in the hydrated state, but based on the ionic radii of dehydrated and hydrated magnesium ions, i.e., 0.87 Å and 4.76 Å respectively [10-13], we calculated that the hydrated radius of the ion is only 5.47 fold (4.76Å) greater than its dehydrated radius. Based on our recalculation… we postulated that the hydrated magnesium ion could potentially penetrate by bulk diffusion through the 10 Å pores formed by protein subunits in the lipid membrane [5, 14], or by other means, such as hair follicles.

  28. Singleton, Kenneth B. The Lyme Disease Solution. 2008. p396. BACK TO TEXT
  29. Medical training credentials are not remotely a guarantee of an intelligent opinion, and this demonstrates it beautifully. All it does is show the kinds of ridiculous things that get said about Epsom salts without a shred of evidence or even an intelligible biological rationale. BACK TO TEXT
  30. Eisenkraft A, Krivoy A, Vidan A, et al. Phase I study of a topical skin protectant against chemical warfare agents. Mil Med. 2009 Jan;174(1):47–52. PubMed #19216298. BACK TO TEXT
  31. Waring RH. Report on Absorption of magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts) across the skin. Unpublished. 2006. PainSci #56301. BACK TO TEXT
  32. The others had increased urine levels of magnesium, implying that “the magnesium ions had crossed the skin barrier and had been excreted via the kidney, presumably because the blood levels were already optimal.” In other words, whatever magnesium was absorbed into the bloodstream was promptly removed by the body. BACK TO TEXT
  33. When I asked Dr. Waring about publication, she explained “we just haven’t got around to it yet. I hope to do a bit more and then publish with my London colleague.” BACK TO TEXT
  34. There are any number of flaws in the experiment that we can’t know about. For example, one reader sent me this interesting point by e-mail: “Dr. Waring could not possibly have measured absolute MgSO4 blood content: the only way to do that would be through dialysis or post-mortem, only relative concentration. Any degree of dehydration would have an absolute effect on relative concentration; i.e., all solutes would show increased concentration due to dehydration, including any magnesium already present in the bloodstream. Since the study is unpublished, it's not possible to know whether the Dr controlled for this.” BACK TO TEXT
  35. Little rant there. It really gets my knickers in a twist when people gripe about science “not knowing everything,” or “there’s other ways of knowing.” As if science doesn’t know it has limits! If scientists thought everything was done, they would stop! Sheesh. BACK TO TEXT
  36. Park JH, Lee JW, Kim YC, Prausnitz MR. The effect of heat on skin permeability. Int J Pharm. 2008 Jul;359(1-2):94–103. PubMed #18455889. PainSci #52769. BACK TO TEXT
  37. See 2007 Darwin Awards: The Enema Within, in which a man died from an alcohol enema. “In order to qualify for a Darwin Award, a person must remove himself from the gene pool via an ‘astounding misapplication of judgment.’ Three litres of sherry up the butt can only be described as astounding.”

    See also, if you dare, this real news item about a frat boy who almost killed himself “butt chugging” — getting drunk from alcohol injected into the butt. Seriously. “The only thing more embarrassing than almost dying from allegedly butt-chugging is hiring a lawyer to deny it.” No doubt.

  38. Water vapour is mostly pure H2O by definition. There is such a thing as solutes that get “dissolved in steam” and carried along with it without technically “evaporating,” but that’s a fairly exotic phenomenon. Your standard salts neither evaporate nor get carried away with evaporated water. BACK TO TEXT
  39. Gröber U, Werner T, Vormann J, Kisters K. Myth or reality-transdermal magnesium? Nutrients. 2017 Jul;9(8). PubMed #28788060. PainSci #52771. BACK TO TEXT
  40. Dr. Waring has done other research claiming to show that autism is correlated with magnesium deficiency, and her primary reason for studying Epsom salt absorption through the skin was to investigate it as a possible autism treatment. BACK TO TEXT
  41. Chestnutt WN, Dundee JW. Failure of magnesium sulphate to prevent suxamethonium induced muscle pains. Anaesthesia. 1985 May;40(5):488–490. PubMed #4014628.

    Muscle pain is one of the side effects of suxamethonium chloride, an anaesthetic drug used to cause short-term paralysis. In this study, injecting magnesium sulphate had no benefit compared to doing nothing, and was “followed by unpleasant side effects.“

    Granted, the relevance of this kind of muscle pain to the more common kinds is unknown. But it is suggestive. BACK TO TEXT
  42. Consider the seminal text, Muscle Pain: Understanding its nature, diagnosis and treatment. It has nine chapters devoted to nine different kinds of muscle pain. It also doesn’t mention Epsom salts. Not once. BACK TO TEXT
  43. [Internet]. Cell Size and Scale; 2010 [cited 17 Jan 21].

    A beautiful animated tool for visualizing the scale of cells.

  44. Kogler J. The analgesic effect of magnesium sulfate in patients undergoing thoracotomy. Acta Clin Croat. 2009 Mar;48(1):19–26. PubMed #19623867. BACK TO TEXT
  45. Lysakowski C, Dumont L, Czarnetzki C, Tramèr MR. Magnesium as an adjuvant to postoperative analgesia: a systematic review of randomized trials. Anesth Analg. 2007 Jun;104(6):1532–9, table of contents. PubMed #17513654. The authors of the review concluded: “These trials do not provide convincing evidence that perioperative magnesium may have favorable effects on postoperative pain intensity and analgesic requirements.” BACK TO TEXT
  46. Dr. Waring: “The cytokines released in the inflammatory state actually depress the expression of cysteine dioxygenase, the rate-determining step in the conversion of cysteine to inorganic sulphate. About 80% of the in vivo requirement of sulphate goes through this pathway as sulphate is not well-absorbed from the gut.” BACK TO TEXT
  47. [Internet]. Epsom Salt & Apple Cider Vinegar Treatments Nature's Healing & High Energy Bath; 2006 [cited 10 Nov 2, page defunct]. BACK TO TEXT
  48. Which actually suggests an interesting point: if modest amounts of Epsom salts in your bath allegedly has therapeutic effects, then it is reasonable to guess that the much higher concentrations of salt used in floatation therapy or found in the famous salt lakes would have a really dramatic effect — perhaps even a toxic effect. But bathing in much higher concentrations of salt has no significant effect at all … other than making people float. BACK TO TEXT
  49. A UK floatation tank manufacturer’s website,, admirably restrains itself from extravagant claims of medical benefits, discussing only the benefits of relaxation. As for Epsom salt, the website says it is used “because it raises the density of the water, making it easy to float, and because it has a silky feel which is very good for the skin.” I’m not sure what they mean by “good for,” but I’m guessing it just feels pleasant. BACK TO TEXT