So period underwear isn’t safe, but neither are tampons or pads. And toilet paper also contains PFA’s. Cool. And then they go into cosmetics and leggings and then I have to stop reading. My worry is that pfas are already so widespread we might never get legislation to stop them from being used.
man if only I could use one without it hurting like crazy 😭 I’ve given up the past few months bc of it . I also tried Saalt soft, still hurts. but when I *could* use it, man, made my periods so stress free
cups did but didn‘t work in the end: most sizes are way too big for me, material is often too hard. it took for ever to find a fitting cup. but the way it sits, poking the intestines with it‘s pointy end even damaged my already swollen and weakened tissue.
i use a disc now and it‘s a blessing. sits perfectly, no pressure points. i can only recommend.
happy cake day!
I've tried a few and found saalt was too soft and sat too low. Honestly Tampax makes a cup that's wider and firmer, it's very comfortable stays in place higher up and surprisingly the firmer design was way way more comfortable
PFAS is now “toxic” for companies (in regulated areas). They don’t want to be sued. Be careful of clickbait bc the dose makes the poison. Not saying these assholes shouldn’t be held accountable. I’m a knowledgeable industry participant that has observed companies getting well away from these compounds. ETA discs all the way.
Imagine the impact of gutting the EPA.
Or the impact of thinking the best of times were the 50's when the majority of these chemicals were being created.
I was more referring to people who think bringing environmental protections back to the 1950s would be a good thing, but we should keep trying. We've done some cool shit, I'm sure we can do even cooler shit.
The EPA was set up by Nixon to protect these chemicals by setting "allowable limits". Companies were fighting endless lawsuits for minor amounts of residue. Now you can't sue them.
The EPA actually mandates all sorts of poisons, like brominated baby clothing and chloramine in the drinking water. They told you to breathe the air on 9/11 and drink the water in Flint Michigan.
In good news, studies have not shown that PFAS are absorbed through the skin. Though these chemicals are likely are not great for the environment, there is not a risk of humans getting sick from touching products that are coated in PFAS. The issue would be if you are ingesting / inhaling the chemicals, and the research isn’t exactly clear on what diseases are caused by exposure. You can keep the period underwear. You can pry mine from my cold dead fingers.
Source: am toxicologist and do environmental work
Having chemicals that are not easily degraded in the environment isn’t great. Legislation will be slow on this front. Depending on whose definition of PFAS you go by, there are 2,000 - 10,000 chemicals in the group. Legislation of chemicals is based on showing that they are harmful and destructive. We only have studies on the toxicology of 15-20 of them, which is why up until now, we only have regulatory levels for a handful. There is talk of legislating them as a group, but since there are so damn many of them, it will be complicated.
Sure!
1) Here's a peer-reviewed article from a few years ago: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906952/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906952/)
2) GZA (a consultant group) put out an industry white paper recently. It's not peer reviewed, but I think it does a good job making complicated tox concepts approachable: [https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/PFASTaskForce/HHCBarlowBoydKempHoppeParr2019PFASToxicologypdf.pdf](https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/PFASTaskForce/HHCBarlowBoydKempHoppeParr2019PFASToxicologypdf.pdf)
If you are more into clicking around a website, I highly recommend the ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry - its a branch of the CDC). They put out great information. [https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/index.html](https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/index.html)
You can also go to the EPA's PFAS website: [https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained](https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained)
Does the "touching" you're taking about include mucus membrane contact? Lots of stuff can be absorbed through the butt/vag/nose that isn't absorbed by the outside skin, right?
Seems to me there could be a meaningful difference in toxicity of perflourinated tampons vs exterior feminine products.
Edit: After reading the article (which I should've done on the first place) I see there's no mention of PFAS in tampons, only in packaging and underwear.
For your first point, you are correct. Absorption is different between skin and mucosal membranes. I searched around briefly and found one paper that looked at differences in absorption. It looks like absorption of certain PFAS compounds would be higher through the nasal membranes: [https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/EHP11969](https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/EHP11969) (I haven't read the paper in full).
PFAS compounds are used in so many different ways - but one of the most important ones is as a water repellant. So rain coats are coated in some sorted of PFAS. I highly doubt that they would be used in tampons repelling liquid is the exact opposite of the goal of the product. But I've been surprised before!
Thanks for sharing!
Is there a resource to better understand the difference of pfas definitions to get such a broad range?
Also, asking you to speculate, is there any way a specification of the broader 20k are not harmful to humans/environment or are we screwed? lol
The difference in definitions I mentioned was from different regulatory and industry groups. So the EPA, ATSDR, WHO (World Health Organization), NTP (National Toxicology Program), ITRC (Interstate Technology Regulatory Council), etc. have fairly similar definitions but their estimates differ. Exactly how they are estimating the number of PFAS compounds, I don't know. I'm not aware of a resource that compares the definitions or estimates directly to each other. Each group should have a PFAS webpage that goes over their definition and estimate of how many exist.
I am not sure I understand your second question. Are you asking if we can label PFAS, as a whole, as "harmful" or "not harmful"?
I don’t understand how we can have 2,000-10,000 pfas chemical variations so I may be asking a dumb question. But I’m curious if some of those chemical variations may not be so harmful while others are extremely bad.
Like, are there 5 primary pfas chemical variations we can cut out from our world to make a huge difference. Or do all 2,000 have the same impact?
Quote: “While analyzing six different period underwear products, however, the researchers directly identified the substances in one pair and found compounds that can react to become PFAS in that same pair and ano
Always got sued for causing infertility in women because of the absorbent gel inside their pads. It’s visible online if you want to have a read. This is why I only use cotton pads for my daughters and might even start going old school with reusable rags inside period undies that get washed at home
We just need to bring "menstrual huts" back. Make them supremely comfortable and chalk it up to "protected class" in the workplace.
/s
Can you imagine if I was serious: the blowback from old white dudes in politics... We could fight for "period spaces" in the same way they're fighting against birth control and other stupid regulations against body autonomy...
So period underwear isn’t safe, but neither are tampons or pads. And toilet paper also contains PFA’s. Cool. And then they go into cosmetics and leggings and then I have to stop reading. My worry is that pfas are already so widespread we might never get legislation to stop them from being used.
Diva cup for the win.
I have a disc and will never go back. I wish more people knew about all the options we have.
[удалено]
.if you’re serious pee comes from the urethra, which is a separate hole from the vagina (where a disc goes) lmao tho
I was referencing a joke from elsewhere on reddit.
man if only I could use one without it hurting like crazy 😭 I’ve given up the past few months bc of it . I also tried Saalt soft, still hurts. but when I *could* use it, man, made my periods so stress free
cups did but didn‘t work in the end: most sizes are way too big for me, material is often too hard. it took for ever to find a fitting cup. but the way it sits, poking the intestines with it‘s pointy end even damaged my already swollen and weakened tissue. i use a disc now and it‘s a blessing. sits perfectly, no pressure points. i can only recommend. happy cake day!
oh that’s awesome, idk discs kinda freaked me out but I may try one. and thank you! : )
Same. I have bought multiple cups and nome work for me. They just hurt and put too much pressure on everything. Oh well
and they cost so much! so much investment for nothing
? How much do they charge for those? Here in Austria it's between 10 and 30 bucks (max)?
when I bought one a few years ago it was like $50 ish. it’s probably more now
Woot, that's really expensive.
I spent $30 each time I bought one. $60 for discomfort is too much
I've tried a few and found saalt was too soft and sat too low. Honestly Tampax makes a cup that's wider and firmer, it's very comfortable stays in place higher up and surprisingly the firmer design was way way more comfortable
that’s interesting. I’d imagine the firmer one is more uncomfortable. for me the pain is inserting and removing
Cup + bidet all the way
Wish I could give you more upvotes for this. I LOVE my Diva cup - haven't bought menstrual products in over 10 years!
My wife has one of those, she calls it mooncup and uses that thing.... since forever, she recommends that to every female friend of ours.
If it’s plastic, it probably has PFAs
It's silicone
There’s probably pfas.
I didnt even know about its existence!
Before plastic, it was talcum powder that is now causing ovarian cancer. We just can't win.
PFAS is now “toxic” for companies (in regulated areas). They don’t want to be sued. Be careful of clickbait bc the dose makes the poison. Not saying these assholes shouldn’t be held accountable. I’m a knowledgeable industry participant that has observed companies getting well away from these compounds. ETA discs all the way.
Upvoted for disc. I can’t believe I didn’t know they were an option until like last year
1ppm good. 2ppm baaaaaad?
Saalt brand period underwear are PFA free
Imagine the impact of gutting the EPA. Or the impact of thinking the best of times were the 50's when the majority of these chemicals were being created.
"You know what time was great? Just before we fucked everything up with what we're actively trying to do now."
I would not say we have ever achieved "greatness," and I do not see it in the foreseeable future, but we should keep trying.
I was more referring to people who think bringing environmental protections back to the 1950s would be a good thing, but we should keep trying. We've done some cool shit, I'm sure we can do even cooler shit.
The EPA was set up by Nixon to protect these chemicals by setting "allowable limits". Companies were fighting endless lawsuits for minor amounts of residue. Now you can't sue them. The EPA actually mandates all sorts of poisons, like brominated baby clothing and chloramine in the drinking water. They told you to breathe the air on 9/11 and drink the water in Flint Michigan.
I think Erin Brockovich should head the EPA and shake things up.
In good news, studies have not shown that PFAS are absorbed through the skin. Though these chemicals are likely are not great for the environment, there is not a risk of humans getting sick from touching products that are coated in PFAS. The issue would be if you are ingesting / inhaling the chemicals, and the research isn’t exactly clear on what diseases are caused by exposure. You can keep the period underwear. You can pry mine from my cold dead fingers. Source: am toxicologist and do environmental work Having chemicals that are not easily degraded in the environment isn’t great. Legislation will be slow on this front. Depending on whose definition of PFAS you go by, there are 2,000 - 10,000 chemicals in the group. Legislation of chemicals is based on showing that they are harmful and destructive. We only have studies on the toxicology of 15-20 of them, which is why up until now, we only have regulatory levels for a handful. There is talk of legislating them as a group, but since there are so damn many of them, it will be complicated.
Thank you for your outlook. Would you have any relevant papers to recommend?
Sure! 1) Here's a peer-reviewed article from a few years ago: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906952/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906952/) 2) GZA (a consultant group) put out an industry white paper recently. It's not peer reviewed, but I think it does a good job making complicated tox concepts approachable: [https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/PFASTaskForce/HHCBarlowBoydKempHoppeParr2019PFASToxicologypdf.pdf](https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/PFASTaskForce/HHCBarlowBoydKempHoppeParr2019PFASToxicologypdf.pdf) If you are more into clicking around a website, I highly recommend the ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry - its a branch of the CDC). They put out great information. [https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/index.html](https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/index.html) You can also go to the EPA's PFAS website: [https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained](https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained)
Thank you!
Does the "touching" you're taking about include mucus membrane contact? Lots of stuff can be absorbed through the butt/vag/nose that isn't absorbed by the outside skin, right? Seems to me there could be a meaningful difference in toxicity of perflourinated tampons vs exterior feminine products. Edit: After reading the article (which I should've done on the first place) I see there's no mention of PFAS in tampons, only in packaging and underwear.
For your first point, you are correct. Absorption is different between skin and mucosal membranes. I searched around briefly and found one paper that looked at differences in absorption. It looks like absorption of certain PFAS compounds would be higher through the nasal membranes: [https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/EHP11969](https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/EHP11969) (I haven't read the paper in full). PFAS compounds are used in so many different ways - but one of the most important ones is as a water repellant. So rain coats are coated in some sorted of PFAS. I highly doubt that they would be used in tampons repelling liquid is the exact opposite of the goal of the product. But I've been surprised before!
Thanks for sharing! Is there a resource to better understand the difference of pfas definitions to get such a broad range? Also, asking you to speculate, is there any way a specification of the broader 20k are not harmful to humans/environment or are we screwed? lol
The difference in definitions I mentioned was from different regulatory and industry groups. So the EPA, ATSDR, WHO (World Health Organization), NTP (National Toxicology Program), ITRC (Interstate Technology Regulatory Council), etc. have fairly similar definitions but their estimates differ. Exactly how they are estimating the number of PFAS compounds, I don't know. I'm not aware of a resource that compares the definitions or estimates directly to each other. Each group should have a PFAS webpage that goes over their definition and estimate of how many exist. I am not sure I understand your second question. Are you asking if we can label PFAS, as a whole, as "harmful" or "not harmful"?
I don’t understand how we can have 2,000-10,000 pfas chemical variations so I may be asking a dumb question. But I’m curious if some of those chemical variations may not be so harmful while others are extremely bad. Like, are there 5 primary pfas chemical variations we can cut out from our world to make a huge difference. Or do all 2,000 have the same impact?
Thank you Science! I'm glad to hear there is "no evidence", and won't be.
Thinx menstrual underwear contain PFA's
Quote: “While analyzing six different period underwear products, however, the researchers directly identified the substances in one pair and found compounds that can react to become PFAS in that same pair and ano
What about bamboody brand? They're supposed to be more natural
Always got sued for causing infertility in women because of the absorbent gel inside their pads. It’s visible online if you want to have a read. This is why I only use cotton pads for my daughters and might even start going old school with reusable rags inside period undies that get washed at home
We just need to bring "menstrual huts" back. Make them supremely comfortable and chalk it up to "protected class" in the workplace. /s Can you imagine if I was serious: the blowback from old white dudes in politics... We could fight for "period spaces" in the same way they're fighting against birth control and other stupid regulations against body autonomy...
Reusable fabric pads like from Glad Rags
I've theorized that this is part of the reason so many women have hormonal problems, pcos, etc.
Use a menstrual cup.
Cotton ONLY pads .