A new
research from the University of the Free State (UFS) has revealed that menstrual products used by millions of
South Africans contain hormone-disrupting chemicals, even when marketed as
“free from harmful chemicals”.
The study,
published in Science of the Total
Environment, found that every sanitary pad and pantyliner tested contained
at least two endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), raising serious
questions about consumer safety, chemical disclosure and long-term health
risks.
Researchers
analysed 16 brands of sanitary pads and eight types of pantyliners sold at
popular South African retailers, spanning a range of prices and including
products marketed as “organic”, “plant-based” or “free from harmful chemicals”.
The findings showed widespread contamination across all the tested
products.
The
authors screened for three major classes of EDCs — phthalates,
bisphenols (including bisphenol A, or BPA) and parabens. Every pad and liner
contained at least two of the target chemicals.
“EDCs,
such as phthalates, bisphenols and parabens, are widely used in consumer
products and have been associated with reproductive toxicity, hormonal
imbalance and cancer,” the study noted.
“Menstrual
products represent a potential but under-recognised source of exposure. In
South Africa, several brands advertise as being free from harmful chemicals,
yet limited research has verified these as potential EDC sources.”
The
study highlighted a concerning reality regarding the safety of menstrual
products, head of the university’s department of chemistry Deon Visser said.
“Many sanitary pads and liners contain hormone-disrupting chemicals, even when
they are marketed as being ‘free from harmful chemicals’.”
Bisphenols
were detected in 100% of sanitary pads and 75% of pantyliners, while parabens
were found in more than 81% of pads and 75% of liners. Phthalates, commonly
used as plasticisers, were present in all pantyliners tested and in half of
sanitary pads.
The
researchers emphasised that the chemicals were not necessarily added
intentionally. Instead, they could migrate into products during manufacturing
from plastics, adhesives, packaging materials and even contaminated water used
in production.
“The
heat-pressing process can cause these chemicals to move into the top layer that
touches your skin,” Visser said.
While
the amounts detected in individual products might appear small, the study warns
that the real concern lies in cumulative exposure over time.
Menstrual
products are worn directly against highly permeable genital and mucosal tissue,
which absorbs chemicals more readily than the skin on other parts of the body.
Most users rely on pads and liners for several days every month over decades.
The
results reveal that menstrual products such as sanitary pads and liners in
South Africa are a “significant but overlooked source of toxic exposure”.
Although daily doses might seem low, the long-term, repeated contact with
sensitive tissues poses cumulative health risks, including reproductive
toxicity and cancer.
EDCs,
such as phthalates, bisphenols and parabens, are known female endocrine
disruptors because they can mimic or interfere with natural hormones in the
body. BPA, in particular, has a chemical structure similar to oestrogen,
allowing it to bind to oestrogen receptors. Because oestrogen drives the growth
of some breast cancers, this raises concern about long-term risk.
Heightened
phthalate exposures have also been linked to fertility issues among men and
women, premature puberty onset, endometriosis and ovulation disorders. Cases of
contact dermatitis, thyroid hormone disruption, elevated sex steroid hormone
levels and the induction of reactive oxygen species in the body have been
reported too.
“These
issues, its transplacental transfer ability, its bio-cumulative nature and the
serious damage chronic poisoning can cause to the reproductive system and the
liver have raised concerns about its safety, especially in PCPs … There is
increasing evidence that dermal contact is a relevant route of exposure,” the
study said.
Using
standard exposure calculations, the researchers found that daily exposure to
BPA from pads and liners exceeded the European Food Safety Authority’s
tolerable daily intake by dozens of times. When higher absorption rates — more
realistic for vulvar skin — were considered, exposure levels increased
dramatically.
“Although
individual daily doses may look low, the group and cumulative exposure becomes
significant,” the authors note, particularly given that menstrual products are
only one of many daily sources of EDC exposure, alongside food, cosmetics, dust
and water.
The
findings highlight gaps in the country’s regulatory framework. While the South
African Bureau of Standards sets requirements for aspects such as absorbency,
size and microbiological safety, there are no standards governing chemical
content in menstrual products.
“Manufacturers
are not required to disclose the full chemical composition of menstrual
products,” Visser said. “We believe they should disclose all chemicals, even if
levels fall below daily limits.”
Globally,
only a handful of regulators provide guidance on chemicals permitted in
sanitary products, including the Food and Drug Administration in the US and
Japan’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. In South Africa, the only
BPA-specific regulation applies to baby feeding bottles, not menstrual
products.
The
researchers warn that environmental contamination and weak regulation might
continue to shape the chemical profiles of pads and liners sold locally. The
study cautions that insufficient regulation and safety oversight of menstrual
products compounds period poverty and increases the risk of harmful exposure
among marginalised groups.
Disposable
pads and liners are also mass-produced and widely discarded, where they can
leach chemicals into soil and water systems, creating additional exposure
pathways through food, drinking water and dust.
Unlike
food or cosmetics, the chemical composition of menstrual products is rarely
communicated to users, leaving little opportunity for informed choice.
While
calling for stronger regulation, clearer labelling and routine monitoring of
menstrual products, the researchers also offer practical advice. Visser
recommends choosing products certified under the OEKO-TEX Standard 100, which
restricts hazardous substances, or considering reusable menstrual products.
The
research forms part of a broader UFS initiative on menstrual health and access.
The interdisciplinary team is developing a reusable sanitary pad with
antimicrobial properties.
“This
study serves as a wake-up call,” Visser said. “Current regulations and ‘clean’
labels in South Africa may not be providing the protection consumers expect.”
The
authors said further research was urgently needed to better understand
long-term, low-dose exposure through menstrual products and to inform
evidence-based policies that protect consumer health.










