Study reveals presence of 16 metals in popular tampon brands

Recently published in Environment International, a group of researchers from the United States (U.S.)  identified the presence of 16 metals in the various types and brands of tampons tested.

Tampons are a frequently utilized method for handling menstrual flow. Tampons, consisting of absorbent cores enclosed in non-woven materials, along with optional insertion applicators, are widely used among menstruators. Studies indicate that tampon usage ranges from 52% to 86% in the United States, and from 43% to 46% in Spain and France.

The study analyzed 30 tampons across 18 product lines and 14 brands, testing for 16 metals or metalloids. It compared metal concentrations based on various tampon characteristics.

Significant concentrations of toxic metals like cadmium, lead, and arsenic were detected, while mercury and chromium were found in minimal amounts. Calcium and zinc showed higher concentrations compared to other metals.

While metal concentrations within individual tampons showed little variability, there was substantial variation across different types and brands. Factors such as organic vs. non-organic, name brands vs. store brands, and origin (U.K./Europe vs. U.S.) significantly influenced metal levels, although no category consistently showed low metal concentrations.

Lead was a particularly concerning finding as it was present in all tested tampons. Leaching of lead into the bloodstream can result in its accumulation in bones, displacing calcium and persisting in the body long-term.

Even low levels of lead are known to adversely affect neurological, renal, reproductive, immunological, cardiovascular, and developmental health.

The study also highlighted the toxic implications of other metals found in the tampons. Contamination may occur during production, atmospheric deposition, wastewater exposure during raw material production, or through additives like antimicrobials, lubricants, or odor-control agents used in manufacturing.

The study opted to include a diverse array of brands rather than multiple samples from a smaller set of brands. This choice aimed to provide a broader view of metal concentrations in tampons across the market. However, this approach may diminish the detailed scrutiny of individual brands, potentially impacting the reliability of metal concentration data for specific products.

Furthermore, because there was minimal overlap in tampon brands purchased from different geographic locations, it is challenging to attribute differences in metal concentrations solely to location rather than variations in brands. This constraint underscores the necessity for future research utilizing a more controlled sample selection to better discern the influence of location and brand on metal levels in tampons.

Research conducted by Hellal et al. and Srikrishna et al. expressed concerns about the possible presence of metals in tampons, given the documented health risks associated with heavy metal toxicity. Particularly troubling are the characteristics of the vaginal epithelium, known for its high permeability and vascularity, which facilitate the efficient absorption of chemicals into the bloodstream. The vaginal mucosa’s rugae, small folds that increase its surface area, may further amplify the absorption of metals or other substances into systemic circulation.

The study found that a broad selection of tampons available from online retailers or major retail chains in the U.S., U.K., and Europe contain varying levels of 16 metals, many of which are known to pose health risks.

Considering that these metals can leach into the body during use, potentially entering the bloodstream through the vaginal epithelium, additional research is needed to validate these findings. Following this, stringent manufacturing regulations for tampon production are essential to address these concerns effectively.

 

Reference

  1. Shearston JA, Upson K, Gordon M, Do V, Balac O, Nguyen K, et al. Tampons as a source of exposure to metal(loid)s. Environment International. 2024 1; 190:108849.
  2. Personal care product use among diverse women in California: Taking Stock Study | Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 11]. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41370-021-00327-3
  3. Use and perceptions on reusable and non-reusable menstrual products in Spain: A mixed-methods study | PLOS ONE [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jul 11]. Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0265646
  4. Parent C, Tetu C, Barbe C, Bonneau S, Gabriel R, Graesslin O, et al. Menstrual hygiene products: A practice evaluation. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction. 2022 Jan 1;51(1):102261.

Don’t miss our updates!

We don’t spam! Read our [link]privacy policy[/link] for more info.

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!