The Trouble with Non-Organic Tampons

[Guest guest]

The Trouble with Non-Organic Tampons JoAnn Guest Oct 23, 2005 16:12 PDT

http://www.organicconsumers.org/bodycare/tampons090704.cfm

Emagazine - The Environmental Magazine

September/October 2004

Volume XV Number 5

www.emagazine.com

 

The Trouble with Tampons

by Ilya Sandra Perlingieri

 

Tampons have been around since the 1930s, and women have largely taken

their safety for granted. But over the past three decades there has been

a staggering increase in illnesses that were once thought of as rare,

including endometriosis, fibroids (growths in the uterus), pelvic

inflammatory disease, PCOS (polycystic ovarian syndrome), and cancer,

causing some to take another look at those ubiquitous products.

 

 

© Brand X Pictures

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, there was an outbreak of Toxic Shock

Syndrome (TSS), caused by Staphylococcus aureus, a bacterium whose

toxins are amplified by several synthetic fibers that were being used in

tampons to increase absorbency. More than 50 women died and more than a

thousand suffered.

 

The worst offenders were Procter and Gamble’s ultra-absorbent Rely

tampons. According to the book Soap Opera: The Inside Story of Procter

and Gamble, the company dismissed consumer complaints about the tampons

for years. A 1975 company memo disclosed that Rely tampons contained

known cancer-causing agents and that the product altered the natural

organisms found in the vagina. Rely tampons were taken off the shelves

in 1980, but many women claim they left a legacy of hysterectomies and

loss of fertility.

 

After this crisis, carboxymethylcellulose, polyacrylate rayon (a

derivative of wood pulp) and polyester were outlawed for tampons, but

viscous rayon can still be used, which concerns some observers. “Viscous

rayon can still amplify toxins to some extent, and the lowest risk [for

TSS] would be had by using all cotton,” says Dr. Philip Tierno of the

New York University Medical Center. Today most tampons are made with

rayon, conventional cotton, and undisclosed chemical fragrances. The

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) insists such tampons are safe.

 

The TSS specter has not disappeared. As the National Women’s Health

Network points out, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention track

the syndrome only through voluntary reporting, so it is difficult to

know the true threat. Three years ago, a 13-year-old London girl died

after using tampons for the first time.

 

Further, according to Women’s Health International, several American

tampon brands have been rejected in Japan, where government regulation

of the industry is stricter. The stated reason? High bacterial levels.

 

Some college courses on women’s health conduct a simple class

demonstration: Place a new tampon in a glass of water. After it absorbs

water, remove it, and watch all the remaining fibers floating in the

water. These fibers remain inside a woman’s uterus.

 

In the U.S., more than one billion tons of pesticides and herbicides are

sprayed on cotton crops every year; and residues may taint tampons. Many

of these pesticides can damage the nervous system, lead to cancer or

function as hormone disruptors.

 

Although the effects of hormone disruptors on women’s health are poorly

understood, it is known that estrogen itself can cause problems at

certain levels. Dr. Susan Lark, author of Fibroid Tumors and

Endometriosis, notes that women “are at higher risk of developing

fibroids or endometriosis…if they have high levels of estrogen…or use

estrogen-contaminating medication [such as Hormone Replacement

Therapy].” A 1996 report in the journal Science concluded that when

estrogen-like chemicals are combined, they often become more damaging.

Jan Stout of Physicians for Social Responsibility argues, “We’re

creating a threat to an entire generation.”

 

Much of the cotton crop in the U.S. is now also genetically engineered,

a fact that has some health advocates worried over long-term effects.

The London-based Institute for Science in Society has warned that

genetically engineered cotton in tampons and bandages could give rise to

antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

 

Further, what is the risk to women’s health posed by highly toxic

dioxin, a by-product of the chlorine bleaching process historically used

to make tampon fibers white? According to the Village Voice, in 1992 a

Congressional subcommittee uncovered an exchange of memos in which FDA

scientists reported discovering trace levels of dioxin in some tampons.

“Citing studies that indicated dioxin was unsafe at any

level…subcommittee chair Ted Weiss accused the FDA of ignoring its own

scientists’ warnings,” wrote the Voice.

 

In the mid-1990s, tampon manufacturers switched to “elemental

chlorine-free bleaching,” reducing the production of dioxin. However,

the FDA acknowledges that the alternative process can still

“theoretically generate dioxins at extremely low levels.” The agency

says even average background levels of dioxin may lead to developmental

and immune problems and birth defects.

 

Since a typical woman uses more than 11,500 tampons in her lifetime,

even small traces of dioxin may add up. Yet the FDA has not called for

testing of potential dioxin levels in tampons, and does not require

package warnings. Alternatives to conventional tampons include organic

cotton products such as GladRags (800-799-4523, www.gladrags.com),

Organic Essentials (806-428-3486, www.organicessentials.com) and

Natracare (303-617-3476, www.natracare.com), sea sponges (SeaPearls,

800-219-9765, www.jadeandpearl.com) and The Keeper (800-799-4523,

www.keeper-menstrual-cup.com), a menstrual product made from all-natural

rubber.

 

Ilya Sandra Perlingieri is the author of the 2003 book The Uterine

Crisis.

 

 

JoAnn Guest

mrsjo-

www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Diets

 

 

 

 

AIM Barleygreen

" Wisdom of the Past, Food of the Future "

 

http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Diets.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.