Not all eco-friendly period products are created equal, researchers warn after chemical testing
-
Nearly 30% of reusable period products show signs of intentionally added PFAS.
-
Researchers tested 59 items using advanced fluorine screening and chemical analysis.
-
Safer reusable options are possible chemical-free versions exist.
Reusable menstrual items like period underwear, washable pads, menstrual cups, and incontinence underwear are growing in popularity. Theyre hailed as ecofriendly alternatives to single-use products.
However, a recent study revealed an unsettling truth: PFAS, also known as forever chemicals, turn up in many of these items.
PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, resist breaking down, can enter our bodies through the skin, and have been linked to immune, hormonal, and developmental issues. Products that touch the skin for hours may unknowingly transfer these substances, raising new safety questions for reusable menstrual products.
The reusable menstrual product market is a rapidly growing market, which relies heavily on the idea that these products are environmentally conscious because of the significant reduction in the use of paper and plastic products, researcher Graham Peaslee, professor emeritus in the University of Notre Dame Department of Physics and Astronomy, said in a news release.
To the extent that they use organic textiles, these products are also marketed to consumers who are typically health and environmentally conscious. However, we found that almost a third of them were being made with PFAS. This means these products are both a risk to the wearer, as well as to the rest of us when they are eventually disposed of, since we know that these forever chemicals persist when they end up in landfills, contaminating irrigation and drinking water systems for all of us.
The study
The team collected 59 new reusable menstrual and incontinence items from North America, South America, and Europe. From there, the study was broken down into two parts:
-
Screening for fluorine. Each layer (a total of 323 layers) was tested using particle-induced gamma-ray emission (PIGE) spectroscopyan advanced method that detects total fluorine, which typically indicates the presence of PFAS.
-
Chemical breakdown. Nineteen items underwent a deeper mass spectrometry analysis targeting 42 specific PFAS compounds.
This two-step method allowed them to distinguish between incidental contamination and PFAS that were intentionally added likely for water/stain resistance.
The results
Heres a breakdown of the study results:
-
About 71% of products had low fluorine levels likely unintentional contamination.
-
A significant chunk stood out: 33% of period underwear and 25% of reusable pads contained fluorine above 110 ppm strong evidence of intentional PFAS use. Some reached over 1,000 ppm, levels consistent with fluorinated coatings.
-
In detailed testing, PFAS were detected in every single product tested: levels ranged from 21 to 2,200 ng/g, with a median of 380 ng/g. The most common were neutral PFAS like fluorotelomer alcohols, notably 8:2 FTOH, which can break down into the toxic PFOA when absorbed into the body.
Crucially, not all brands used PFAS meaning it's possible to make reusable menstrual products without them.
Only a subset of the products had high levels of PFAS present, which means that PFAS must not be essential in the manufacture of reusable feminine hygiene products, researcher Alyssa Wicks said in the news release.
This is good news in that it demonstrates PFAS are not required to produce these environmentally conscious products, and manufacturers should be able to make these textile products without chemicals of concern in them.
Be a conscious consumer
The goal of the study was to make consumers more aware of whats in the products theyre purchasing. Moving forward, the team hopes that these findings make consumers think twice before purchasing.
While we do know that these chemicals have been linked to serious environmental and human health issues, we do not yet know what fraction of these PFAS make it into humans by direct exposure and indirect exposure at the end of life of these products, Peaslee said.
What this study, and others to follow, can do is help consumers ask manufacturers the right question: Does this product contain any intentional use of PFAS?
Currently, theres no labeling requirement for these products, and only a handful of U.S. states have drafted legislation requiring consumer products to be free of intentional PFAS use. This paper and others like it will help regulators and manufacturers alike to identify product markets where PFAS are being used and to find better alternatives moving forward."
Posted: 2025-07-22 21:21:23