Despite many scandals over the years, from the Grenfell tragedy to #dieselgate, from the variant CJD (‘mad cow’) disease outbreak to fake spices, most people still probably think that if an item is on sale in shops in the UK – or probably even online – that it will be safe. Yet the committee stage of the product regulation and metrology bill in the House of Lords is – from a variety of directions – shaking up that assumption.
Spotlight on period products
One area that I am working on, which deserves a great deal more attention, is period products. I am hoping that this debate will be one more step forward in being able to talk, openly, honestly and without embarrassment, about the health concerns associated with many of the period products on our shelves today that contain obvious risks.
In the age of #PeriodTok, we have surely gone past the days of allusive adverts featuring white jeans and blue ink, haven’t we? (Even if it took until 2017 for actual menstrual blood to be shown.) And we found out last year menstrual blood, up until now, has not been used to test period products. Saline has.
Let’s start with the biology. The vagina contains a large number of blood vessels, which makes the skin there very absorbent. That means that what is contained in period products, both single use and reusable, really matters to individuals’ health. Yet – as I learned from Women’s Environmental Network campaigner Helen Lynn – there are more regulations about what can be in a candle than in a tampon.
Harmful chemicals in period products
Earlier this year lead, arsenic and cadmium were found in a variety of tampons tested in the UK and internationally.
Single-use menstrual products have been shown to contain phthalates, bisphenols and parabens. These chemicals are all linked to cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, birth defects, asthma and allergies. They are considered to be a “neglected source of phthalates exposure for women”. And these are just one of the many chemicals that have been discovered in many single-use, but also reusable, period products.
Despite their apparently ‘cottony’ appearance, both tampons and pads can be up to 90% plastic, meaning they will continually be shedding microplastics. Research carried out by the University of Manchester found that tampons can shed an estimated maximum of 17 billion nanoplastic fibres – an average of 9.4 billion per tampon – working out as 86 trillion fibres over a lifetime of use. These tiny pieces of material that have been found in placentas and breast milk, as well as human testes and brains.
Products containing fragrances – as many do – are a particular concern. These synthetic fragrances are compiled from a cocktail of up to 3,000 chemicals. They can contain chemicals which are carcinogens, allergens, irritants, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs). EDCs are linked, not only to breast cancer and infertility, but to many other reproductive diseases and disorders such as endometriosis.
Despite changes in bleaching practices to purify the wood pulp, chlorine and dioxin (which you really don’t want around you) can still be found in menstrual pads and tampons. But consumers have no way of knowing if their period products contain dioxins or any other chemical residues due to the lack of transparency and regulation currently required around period products. This also applies to reusables, with recent research finding PFAS (see more detail below) in period pants, although there was no indication of this on the packaging.
Chemical solutions to social stigmas
Chemical additives in period products are a chemical solution to a social problem – a way to address the social stigma, taboos and constructs around menstrual odour and menstrual blood.
And while reusable products have ridden to far wider use on environmental concerns, there are reasons to worry about them too. They too have been subject to the age-old stigma around our periods and menstrual blood. Particularly those advertised as containing silver or nano-silver. (And this doesn’t just apply to menstrual products – see also socks, T-shirts and other products). That risks both direct toxicity to the human body, but also negative effects on the vagina microbiome, which can then lead to bacterial infections and even problems with pregnancies.
An acronym that has ridden right up the public concern thermometer also can be found in some reusable products – PFAS, often covered with the phrase ‘forever chemicals’, which only keep accumulating in bodies and environments, with nature having no way of getting rid of them.
Call for regulation on period products
Those issues are direct human health concerns to any individual. But there is an intersectional element to this also – certain jobs, including in hairdressing and beauty, cleaning, pharmaceuticals and electronics, are associated with occupational exposure to these and related chemicals, with likely ‘cocktail’ effects. That means the dangers may be greater for period product users from minoritised communities.
In some parts of the globe such as New York State, period products are regulated. Consumers there have a right to know what is in the products they use in some an intimate place. But even regulating them as medical devices, as they are in the USA, doesn’t protect against us finding toxic residues. In Catalonia – reusable and organic single-use products are provided freely to all those who need them, quality is guaranteed as is local production. This could be easily replicated as part of the UK’s women’s health strategy.
And there is the public health aspect: making these products, and disposing of them, is putting all of these materials out into the environment. They cannot be thrown ‘away’ – there is no such place as ‘away’. The environmental and human health concerns are obvious.
Note: The amendment that I’m proposing covers part, although not all, of the Menstrual Health, Dignity, and Sustainability Act that the Women’s Environmental Network has proposed, and which the Green Party supports. That proposal also includes a call for action on period poverty, poor menstrual education and the ongoing stigma surrounding menstrual health that is beyond the scope of the product regulation bill. The act, signed by 43 organisations, academics and period products producers, including myself, Monica Lennon MSP and Dr Karen Joash – consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology – and GirlGuiding UK.
More from Natalie Bennett:
