Are your tampons poisoning you? Study findings 16 metals in widely available tampon brands

By Dr. Chinta SidharthanReviewed by Lily Ramsey, LLMJul 8 2024

In a recent study published in Environment International, a team of researchers from the United States (U.S.) investigated the presence of metals in tampons commonly used by menstruating women.

The study tested 30 tampons from 18 product lines and 14 brands for 16 metals or metalloids and compared the metal concentrations based on tampon characteristics.

Study: Tampons as a source of exposure to metal(loid)s. Image Credit: Skrypnykov Dmytro/Shutterstock.com

Background

Close to 50% of the global population are biologically female and experience menstruation. Menstruation begins on average at the age of 12 years and continues till menopause, which occurs around the age of 50 years, and menstruating individuals experience bleeding for an average of four days every menstrual cycle, which occurs every 29 days.

A significant portion of menstruating individuals use tampons to manage the bleeding. Tampons are plugs made of viscose, cotton, or rayon that can be inserted into the vagina, where it absorbs the menstrual blood.

Given that anywhere between 52% and 86% of menstruating individuals in the U.S. use tampons, it is important to understand whether tampon usage can lead to systemic chemical exposure, as the vaginal tissue is highly absorbent.

Previous studies have detected various chemicals in tampons, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, parabens, volatile organic compounds, dioxins, etc.

However, few studies have investigated the potential exposure to metals through tampons.

About the study

In the present study, the researchers aimed to measure the concentrations of 16 metals or metalloids in 14 brands of tampons. The presence of the following metals in tampons was investigated: arsenic, barium, calcium, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, mercury, manganese, nickel, lead, selenium, strontium, vanadium, and zinc.

A total of 30 samples of five different absorbencies, representing 18 product lines (different tampons produced by the same brand), and 14 brands were tested.

The samples included top-selling brands in online retail stores and ‘store brands’ belonging to some of the large retail chains in the U.S. Tampons were also purchased from online retailers in Greece and the United Kingdom (U.K.). 

Tampon products selected for this analysis included various brand-product line-absorbency combinations: seven products labeled as organic (noting that there is no legal definition of ‘organic’ for tampons), four products purchased outside the US, five store-brand products (those carrying the store's brand name or made specifically for that store), and seven products without a plastic applicator (either no applicator or a cardboard applicator). T

he analysis tested eight products with “Regular” absorbency, eleven with “Super” absorbency, four with “Super Plus” absorbency, and one with “Ultra” absorbency.

Tampons generally consist of an absorbent core that is surrounded, in some tampons, by an outer covering made of non-woven material and a string attached to make retrieval easier. If present, samples of the absorbent core and the outer covering were taken. The samples were acid digested, and all samples were processed in duplicates.

The concentrations of all the metals were tested using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, although a slightly different method was used to measure the mercury concentration compared to that of the other metals. The method detection limit and the method quantification limit were calculated.

The metal concentration distributions in the tampons were characterized, and the heterogeneity in the metal concentrations within the tampons was assessed.

The researchers also compared the variability in metal concentrations within tampons with that between tampons.

Additionally, the median values of the metal concentrations in the tampons were used to compare the variability between non-organic and organic tampons, between those with a cardboard or no applicator and those with a plastic applicator, between store-brand and name-brand tampons, and between those bought in the U.S. and those purchased from the U.K. or Greece.

Results

The study found the presence of all 16 metals in the assortment of widely available tampon types and brands they tested.

Several toxic metals, such as cadmium, lead, and arsenic, were found in significant concentrations, but the presence of mercury or chromium was not substantial. Calcium and zinc were found in higher concentrations as compared to that of the other metals.

The variability in metal concentrations within the tampon was low, but the variability was high across different types and brands of tampons.

Metal concentrations also varied considerably based on tampon characteristics, such as between non-organic and organic tampons, name brands versus store brands, and those bought in the U.K. or Europe versus those purchased in the U.S. However, none of these categories had consistently low concentrations of all the metals.

Of concern was the presence of lead in all the tampons tested in the study. Lead leaching into circulation can lead to its deposition in bones, which replaces calcium and can persist in the body for a long time.

Even low levels of lead are known to have a toxic impact on neurological health and behaviour, as well as on renal, reproductive, immunological, cardiovascular, and developmental health.

The study also discussed the toxic effects of the other metals detected in the tampon samples. The contamination of tampons with these metals can occur during the production stage, through atmospheric deposition, or wastewater when the raw materials are being produced.

It can also occur during the manufacturing process or through products added intentionally to the tampons for antimicrobial effect, lubrication, or odor control.

Study Limitations

This study focused on including a wide range of brands rather than multiple samples from a smaller number of brands. This approach was chosen to gain a more representative understanding of metal concentrations in tampons across the market. However, this strategy may limit the depth of analysis for each individual brand, potentially affecting the reliability of metal concentration data for specific products.

Additionally, due to the limited overlap in brands of tampons purchased from different locations, it is not possible to fully attribute any detected differences in metal concentrations specifically to geographic location rather than brand variation. This limitation highlights the need for further studies with a more controlled sample set to better isolate the effects of location and brand on metal content in tampons.

Conclusions

Overall, the study reported that a wide range of tampons sold through online retailers or large retail chains in the U.S., U.K., and Europe contain trace to significant amounts of 16 metals, most of which have toxic effects on the body.

Given that these metals can leach during use and be absorbed into the body through the vaginal epithelium and directly enter the circulatory system, further research is required to confirm these findings, post which strict manufacturing regulations are required for tampon production

Disclaimer: This article does not name specific tampon brands containing metals because the original study, which it summarizes, did not disclose this information. The intent of this article is to raise awareness about the presence of metals in widely available tampon brands and to encourage further research and regulatory review. For detailed information, readers are encouraged to refer to the original study published in Environment International.