It’s from the soil in which the cotton grew. And the levels were low.
Makes sense, its also how microplastics are getting everywhere.
Still a big concern though, even if it is low levelsThe article says the opposite, my friend. For both of your claims.
Oh, did you read it?
“It is important to understand that the trace amounts of metals reported in the study are so low that they fall within the FDA safe food intake recommendations. These amounts are also naturally found in water, soil, and air, and do not pose a health risk,” the statement said.
oh, look, low levels.
Schilling and her co-researchers said there were a range of possible explanations for the presence of the metals in tampons—the cotton used to make them, for example, might have absorbed the substances from the water, air or soil while growing.
oh, look, it’s from the cotton.
Hey there, cancerian or pro-human sexuality? Either way, love the essence of your name and vegan pizzas are choice! Really, I wanted to sneak <<< that in but I will also say that I have used many a tampon in my journey to swapping to a cup. And it freaks me some kind of out, not so much that it is found to be relatively safe. And that I do understand that there are trace metals in many things that can be consumed. I guess I am just sad as a whole because I am thinking grand-scheme it’s just one more thing that can compound. But on top of that, it’s one more issue that affects women as a majority. But to be honest the travel from pads -> tampons -> cups felt like an upgrade each time. And I can understand why each has their advantage and I’ve got loved ones who run the gamut. And of course there’s other alternatives even then, and different experiences with mayhaps-monthlies. Just saying as a whole that it stinks even if it is flagged as alright.
And yes, I understand these things are naturally occurring in the environment (and can be the affect of pollutants as well). It just sucks that something so freakin’ wasteful, also increases exposure to a toxin that people keep pointing towards driving the generations above me “mad” and lowering iq levels. Yet as it stands, it’s a necessary evil.
Do women usually increase their levels of lead (i.e. circulating in the blood) via vaginal exposure to lead containing materials?
From 3 weeks ago:
Don’t Panic about Lead in Tampons - by Dr. Jen Gunter
Investigators evaluated 24 unique types of tampons from 14 brands with a range of absorbency (regular, super, super plus, and ultra). Seven of the products were labeled as organic. A total of 30 tampons were sampled (two lots were purchased for several of the products; hence, there were 30 tampons tested but 24 unique types). Each tampon was tested twice, for a total of 60 tests. I would like to point out that this can only be considered an exploratory study since one to two tampons of each type represents a small sampling and is not representative of the likely millions of tampons used every year. The investigators sampled the absorbent part of the tampon, meaning the core (the cotton-looking fluffy stuff), and the woven cover, if one existed, looking for 16 different metals/metalloids. Twenty-six tampons were purchased in the US and four in the EU or UK. The country of purchase does not tell us where the product was made or where the cotton or wood pulp originated. The results do not tell us which tampon brand tested positive for which metal/metalloid. Very little chromium or mercury was found, so we won’t discuss those results further. Dr. Love emailed me a few concerns. She told me that in the “processing of the tampon samples, they use a cotton reference material only, not accounting for the other materials that tampons might contain.” Some of the tampons have rayon, polyester, or polypropylene, and, according to Dr. Love, “these non-cotton materials could impact the results” if they aren’t accounted for in the reference material.
Harmful Levels of Lead in Tampons?! Not so fast…
The study reports a geometric mean of 120 nanograms of lead per gram of tampon material. 120 ng/g is essentially the same as 120 parts per billion.
Why do tampons have lead in them in the first place? Well, because they are made from cotton, which is a plant. Lead is an elemental metal that is ubiquitous on the planet. Plants in particular take up lead as they grow in soil - which means that plants will contain lead.
So let’s talk about some other plants you might encounter:
Textiles and clothing? Yep, also made with plant materials, including cotton.
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) in the US has set a level of 90,000 ppb (90 parts per million (ppm)) for lead in accessible parts of children’s products, including textiles. This was created specifically to help protect children from lead exposure, a population that is of particular risk for lead poisoning. That’s over 750 TIMES HIGHER than the mean lead levels detected in tampons.
The REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals) program by the European Chemicals Agency also sets limits on the use of lead in consumer products, including textiles. Their regulation is set even higher: 500,000 ppb of lead in textiles (including those with skin contact). That’s over 4,166 TIMES HIGHER than the mean lead levels detected in tampons.
Ok, I know what you’re going to say. Well, clothing, fabrics, furniture material, they’re only touching your external skin. The vaginal mucosa is different. A little bit, sure. But, the structure of the epithelium in your skin and the mucosa is actually pretty similar. Tea leaves? Yes, plants you steep in hot water and then drink?
The European Union has a safety threshold of 5,000 parts per billion lead in food stuffs, including tea leaves. That’s over 42 TIMES HIGHER than the mean lead levels detected in tampons.
What about water? We ingest that and it comes into contact with lots of things that could contaminate it.
Tap water and bottled water are regulated by two different safety agencies. Tap water is regulated by the EPA, and bottled is regulated by the FDA. For tap water, there is a safety threshold of 15 ppb, and bottled water has a 5 ppb allowable level.
Say you drink 2 liters of water a day. For ease of math, 5 ppb also equals 5 micrograms per liter, and 15 ppb equals 15 micrograms per liter. That means, at these thresholds for water, something you ingest every single day, you could consume between 10 and 30 micrograms of lead daily.
10 micrograms equals 10,000 nanograms.
30 micrograms equals 30,000 nanograms.
To go back to our tampon example, let’s use the maximum detected level of lead: 936 nanograms in a 2 gram tampon. These levels in water you might consume daily are between 10 and 32 TIMES HIGHER than the lead detected in a tampon.
Alright, what about plants we burn and then inhale? Like… cannabis?
Cannabis is not federally regulated, so regulations vary by states that have legal weed growing practices.
-
California? The ultra-chemophobic state that, because of Prop 65, tells you *everything* causes cancer? Their limit on lead in cannabis is 500 nanograms per gram, which is high than the maximum lead concentration detected in a tampon in this study.
-
Washington state? 1,200 nanograms per gram.
-
Michigan? Even higher. 2,000 nanograms per gram in cannabis.
-
Colorado? The highest. 10,000 nanograms per gram in cannabis.
If you’re terrified of these news headlines regarding tampons, but not about these other things that contain far higher lead levels, you might want to explore your confirmation bias.
And, speaking of menstruation, one common yet ignored source of lead is…
Backyard hens’ eggs contain 40 times more lead on average than shop eggs. Hopefully, people stuffing eggs into their orifices is getting less popular.
I’m saying that starting panics over tampons is a bad idea, as it easily lends itself to moral panics about bodily purity. Then, a few decades later we’re back to monotheistic theories of dirty women and how women should be segregated and kept in huts during the “dirty time”.
@jeffw@lemmy.world
Sweet holy jesus! I can’t tell if you’re being a passive aggressive tunt or trying to actually be helpful @_@!
I see what you’re trying to do. I am just going to walk over here, and chill out. Things are always safe until they’re not. Look, I am no doctor and I am a bunk ass scientist. All I am trying to say is that most people who identify as women tend to menstruate anywhere from like 7-50 years old. And that if they used tampons consistently for every month up until then, because it can dissolve in water, and your sniz-snatch tends to be moist that your body probably absorbs the particles directly. And since it’s not through your digestive system, I am not sure if it gets processed in the way it would if we say…ate a bunch of dried fruits. Which were shown to be higher in lead quantities. Because I am not sure if it ever passes through the kidneys. But what I am saying is all speculation, because I very openly say - as I am saying here - I don’t know. You can link a study - and I will absolutely read it. I don’t need to be handed something with all sorts of craziness and zero explanation as to why you (specifically) are passing me it. And yes, I know most things have lead in them. But like I said, lead can be dissolved in water (I had a nightmare lead situation at one point in my life moving and I had to learn this stuff the hard way). I know it can be in tea, because I know it’s in pretty much all crops. I would be a fool to think that it could not be in clothing made from said crops. But at the same time, a piece of clothing makes its way to me and it’s probably pre-washed several times over. A tampon? I don’t know because I haven’t looked into the manufacturing process. Clearly you have to prep cotton before it can even be utilized. But I can’t imagine it would be as washed. Because it doesn’t have to go through a mutli-formation process to become a tampon like a shirt does or a pair of jeans. And on top of that, I wash my clothes too. I mean that’s at least three washes before my body gets it. And it’s external, it’s not a moist pocket. I mean, you can sweat. All lead exposure isn’t ideal. But it’s really different when we’re talking vaginal health - which already gets the short end of the stick. Likewise, I wasn’t panicking. In fact, I have a very “is what it is” kinda vibe to it, because I literally could not give a shit outside of the fact that I do not like things that hurt women’s health.
And in expressing it on a personal level, I think if you think about it - it’s just another series of pollutants that are added to our lives (cause women do a lot of cleaning and women do a lot of grooming and all of that stuff can be caustic as well). But in the grand scheme of things I have absolutely zero - no - control over whether anything has lead. Is used. Etc. I just know that women tend to bleed (not all women) and that there will be a set of women who will insert tampons into their vaginas for a extended period of time. And it’s a stressor that most men will never have to face. Even if we lined people up and made them all eat the same things, wear the same things - if the person who could menstruate added regular tampon use to the list it just adds extra exposure. That’s all I was saying. People can have different lifestyles and their lifestyles can expose them to all sorts of stuff but having a period outside of some situations or forms of control are pretty standard affair for most vagina holders. Is all.
Jesus freakin’ christ. Jesus.
EVERYTHING I SAY IS PURELY OPINION AND I LITERALLY NEVER KNOW WHAT I AM SAYING. I’M JUST GOING WITH THE JAZZ IN MY HEAD AND HAVING A GOOD TIME TRYING TO CHILL WITH STRANGERS ON THE NET <<<<<
Yo, you broke me homes.
Likewise, I wasn’t panicking.
I wasn’t referring to you, but to the post itself.
And it’s a stressor that most men will never have to face.
While it’s not as unnerving as the exposure from tampons,
Some condom and lubricant brands contain alarming levels of PFAS – study | PFAS | The Guardian
Jesus freakin’ christ. Jesus.
Yeah, his fanclub is part of the problem.
Bloody Hell: Does Religion Punish Women for Menstruating?
There’s a term: “period poverty”. Look it up.
If you allow this baseless accusation on tampons to become an
urbansuburban and rural myth, you end up promoting these assholes’ ideologies. They can use this “fact” about lead in tampons to deny relevant healthcare or to prevent stuff like: https://www.freethetampons.org/ by claiming that it harms girls. It’s important to prevent the noxious disinformation of tomorrow just like it’s important to prevent heavy metal bioaccumulation.
-
So there’s plastic accumulating in testicles and lead contamination in the tampons. The future is insane.
In all seriousness though, when I was having the water tested at my house a few years ago, I was told there’s no safe amount of lead to have in drinking water, and everything I looked up agreed with that.
So now I’m confused. Either there’s safe levels or not. Or do they mean any amount that sets off this standardized test strip is unsafe?
I’m sure these researchers are using more sensitive tests, but corporations at least deserve the side eye and an investigation for the ‘no lead’ rule not applying to their products. Especially products like tampons…something that’s in contact with mucus membranes for hours at a time.
Microplastics are affecting both sides of the coin, well…everything to be honest. But they’re hormone disruptors on both sides as far as I know. But I haven’t given it the greatest of looks. Because while knowledge is power, there’s really only so much cack you can take in before everything seems so sad and hopeless. So, eh. It is what it is.
I think the reality is that you cannot really have mass-produced no-lead option. But I am not sure because I am not an agriculturist, a geologist, or a chemist. Because I believe a majority of crops (if not all!?) contain heavy metals to some extent. So it’s ultimately about limiting that exposure and keeping levels down I suppose. But hell if I know what happens in this situation when the chemical gains direct exposure to the body instead of being processed through the digestive system. I am guessing it’s probably a similar process as when you get a shot, but idk and I am all outta shits to give on the subject.
I guess I just expected the fda to investigate and figure out which sources of cotton have the highest contamination rates… or something.
Then finding a way to remove the lead? I don’t know… it’s fiber. We treat and process it constantly. Lead removal doesn’t seem insane to me I guess… but maybe it is?
Instead we got the fda saying it’s fine and shrugging their shoulders.
You’re probably right and this is a sign of acceptance about how fucked we are pollution wise. Damn.
Heavy metals are present in the soil/water in many regions. It’s often a natural accumulation. For example the arid production zones in California and Arizona were highly contaminated naturally (and salty). When they started irrigating the land they deep plowed it to breakup the caliche layers. They then continuously flooded it to push the salt and water soluable heavy metals lower in the soil profile. Much of it ended up in the groundwater.
Some heavy metals like lead and arsenic were used as pesticides for almost 90 years. Most productions zones were contaminated during this period. Of course once you apply them, they don’t disappear.
At this point, pretty much all production areas are contaminated to some degree. We have no good way to remediate the issue in the soil. So regulators focus on limiting the contamination from controllable sources.
I hear you, I used to expect the government to protect the people as well. But I think it’s kinda been shown it’s more so operating from a stance of economic strength leading to more prosperity overall for its citizens. But also through out the years of meeting distraught statisticians and scientist and they have all seemed to have a common theme in that their findings have always either been stolen and fudged or they themselves have been forced to fudge their own work in order to continue having a job.
Also I know that a lot of tampons are bleached. So I think they are being treated (typically) in some way. But also cotton as a whole is a really fucked up crop when you think about it. Because it’s full of stickers and the cotton is covered in pods and stuff. As for the acceptance. I think like, in general - I really don’t have much power over how things are going because I seemingly never had much power over the way things have gone. I know it sound defeatist, but I’d rather say it’s realist. I try my best to do the least harm I can do. But I’m no angel, and I’m not perfect. But if I sit around and eat all the doom and gloom in the world I think I’d kill myself tomorrow. So instead, I think you know - take off little bites here and there. Give it a think. But realize that there’s very little influence you have over all this stuff. Unless you’re hob-nobbing with someone who hob-nobs with others and you create a chain reaction to shift rich individual’s focus towards it.
But that’s also hard because I think a lot of rich people actually believe super hard into eugenics and lean heavily into whatever logic formed stuff like manifest destiny and what not.
Also on eating organically (and I thought about this because I do have some organic cotton bads for “cup out” days) I am not sure it’s any better than non-organic. Although in theory it should be. And it’s highly pushed among people who have excess wealth. But I also know (from when I was living a different kind of life) some organic farmers who would straight up cheat to get pests off their crops. But also watched this Vice doc on how farmers being given free compost (I believe it was) were actually poisoning their lands. And I know this can’t just be an isolated thing, because waste management (even with farms) is really dodgy and that same kind of free-dirt stuff (is it run off? I can’t remember) is offered all over the US. So eh. Damned either way? Eh.
Just keep trying to be a decent person, I guess? I always wonder what Lord of the Flies persona I’ll take on if shit goes south. But I always figured I’d probably end up pill-bellied or dead pretty early on into all the chaos >_>…!
Hey, so I am by no means an expert but have experience in environmental public health. We talk a lot about risk mitigation. A lot of people smarter than me measure what chemicals are appropriate levels in certain products. Because while yes, it is true that no amount of lead is good for you, there are so many factors that come into play that you have to contend with the fact that there will be a number of chemicals that will be occurring within our environment that can’t always be controlled, so they end up in our products. It’s a really fascinating field, I have a textbook recommendation that’s really good if anyone is interested - it isn’t open-source, though. :/
There are no “safe levels of lead”, it’s toxic as-is and bio-accumulates in the body, which is the main problem. It also doesn’t matter in what chemical-compound or what route the lead comes in, it’s still toxic as a heavy element.
Why is everything laced with lead then? Well, it’s fantastically useful and cheap element, with wide applications… Paint, pipes, bullets, leaded petrol (the absolute worst incident), batteries, radiation-shielding, it was/is on everything. It’s entirely a man-made problem.
Except modern day reality is that if we keep using it we’ll all die or at least become dummer. This cost is obviously greater than banning/avoiding all uses of lead in the first place. In the science circles they are betting if a some new magic material contains lead, it’ll never (or is allowed to) exit the lab.
I can’t wait to lose arguments on the Internet in 50years from kids calling me a zoomer with microplastic poisoning. Karma for all the boomers with lead poisoning I’ve made fun of 😭
Lol.
In 50 years you’ll be dead from the earth is on fire and uninhabitable poisoning.
Honestly I am of the opinion that climate change is far less of an existential threat to humanity than mutually assured destruction was. Ecosystems are gonna collapse and lots of people are going to die. I think the true climate change doomer pill isn’t that it’s too late and the world is doomed, it’s that the people living in the global north will not make the sacrifices needed to stop the climate catastrophes that will happen in the global south. We could all go vegan tomorrow and cause the largest single decrease in greenhouse emissions. We could all stop buying products that are made unsustainably and unethically in countries that are supposedly no longer colonised. But we won’t. No one will pay higher prices for the same products. No one will make an effort to change their lifestyle. And no one will care that other people, far away, will die because of it. Entire cultures will be erased and we will not lose sleep over knowing that we let it happen because it was easier than doing something about it.
Actually there is a serious risk that Earth turns into Venus. Perpetually self-reinforcing green house effect. All life on Earth, fried, for all eternity.
Edit: Well, until the sun blows.
Actually there is a serious risk that Earth turns into Venus.
I’m sorry, but no. There’s not. Not only is there not a serious risk, there’s not even a slight chance. Even if we burned every drop of oil and bit of coal and released all the methane deposits, the earth still wouldn’t even be close to reaching the conditions required for runaway greenhouse effect. Not for about 2 billion years, when it’s estimated the sun’s output will have increased sufficiently to vaporize much of our oceans.
I get that climate change is serious - my graduate thesis centered around it and carbon cycling - but please don’t spread bullshit. We have enough issues to deal with already without making up more. Please fact check yourself and others.
Relevant articles you should read:
Scoping of the IPCC 5th Assessment Report Cross Cutting Issues
Low simulated radiation limit for runaway greenhouse climates
Can Increased Atmospheric CO2 Levels Trigger a Runaway Greenhouse?
Thank you. Wow. I was basing that on something I saw or thought I saw in Cosmos (the 1980s version with Carl Sagan). Perhaps I was stoned when watching it. There is little better than to watch one of the Cosmos series while stoned - or the autotuned versions by Melodysheep (on YouTube).
For anyone who wants a quicker read on the above: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect
I shall have to revise my world view now. 🤯🤯🤯 Wow. I feel optimistic.
Tardigrades - they will likely survive then. And cockroaches, and other life. So even if we all + most animals die out, we will be like the dinosaurs, and life may indeed bounce back.
I mean… A shadow has been lifted from my soul.
Goddamn. I know it seems like I am joking but I am not.
Good news.
No worries! I get corrected on things all the time. Thanks for taking it constructively instead of saying choice things about my mother.
Want even better news? The earth totally isn’t fucked! Humans might be, but life on earth will probably be alright.
Edit: I got in trouble with crazies when I said “fine” before, so let me elaborate - I mean life will likely survive and in sufficient variety to have no issue rebounding.
The last big extinction event we had was the Permian-Triassic Extinction Event. Almost 90% of species died out. We’re not quite sure what caused it (probably volcanoes), but CO2 levels were nearly 6x higher than now, the oceans were sulfurous, acidic, and oxygen starved, and global warming was leagues beyond where we’re at now. Life bounced back and we’re not even close in severity.
So should we keep fighting climate change? Hell yeah! But it’s not as dismal as it seems.
Isn’t the carbon were releasing now from fossil fuels carbon that used to be in the atmosphere? What self reinforcing mechanisms will allow for temperatures roughly beyond what has already occurred, which still sustained life?
Briefly, they’re wrong. I responded in detail above.
You are correct, what we’re burning as fossil fuels is largely the remains of millions of years of vegetative and microbial life, altered due to heat, pressure, and time. Millions of years of time.
All that carbon making up those organisms was fixed from the atmosphere. While biological functions have been busy fixing CO2, volcanoes, the Earth’s mantle, and even some geochemical processes release CO2. If not for biological fixation, the atmosphere’s CO2 content would be higher.
I don’t believe you
Well, the Irish do call them bullets. Guess they’re ahead of the curve.
Yes, it’s a huge issue. We need to ban use of vehicles in fields as soon as we are able to wean off them. Tires and exhaust all leave heavy metals and other carcinogenic compounds in our fields which get taken up into our food/crops itself. We need to bioremediate all of our fields and use drone fleets in the future to reduce pollution.
I am always so baffled at how highways are allowed to run next to things like say…great lakes or entire farms and people think “that’s the produce I wanna eat!” It also makes gardens in a city feel so sad. But you gotta grow what you want, with what you’ve got.
Removed by mod
Who wronged you?
I’m reading my comment and it is still funny to me. I’m just a bad person I guess.
