The Importance of a New Study on Menstrual Product Absorbency and Storage Capacity
A groundbreaking study on the absorbency and storage capacity of menstrual products using human blood has recently been published in the United States. This study marks a significant advancement in understanding the effectiveness of these products, particularly because previous evaluations were conducted using water and saline solutions, which have different properties compared to menstrual blood.
One of the key findings of the study is that the menstrual disc, a small silicone object similar to the contraceptive diaphragm, has the highest storage capacity among the tested products. The menstrual disc is inserted into the vagina to collect blood until it is removed and emptied. This result is important, but the study’s significance goes beyond that. Accurately measuring the capacity of various menstrual products allows for a more precise assessment of menstrual flow, enabling the identification and diagnosis of any abnormalities or medical issues.
The study was conducted by a group of women scientists from the Oregon University of Health and Science and was published in the journal BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health after undergoing peer-review. The researchers performed experiments on 21 different menstrual products, including traditional sanitary pads, internal pads, absorbent underpants, cups, and discs. Although the study predominantly focused on American and Canadian brands, some products, such as the Diva Cup and Tampax internal sanitary pads, are also available in Italy.
Results from the study revealed that the Ziggy Cup, manufactured by Intimina, a Swedish company, has the highest storage capacity and can hold up to 80ml of blood compared to the average of 61ml for other discs. Traditional sanitary pads, internal pads, and cups have storage capacities ranging from 20ml to 50ml, while absorbent underpants have the lowest capacity at an average of 2ml.
It is worth noting that the blood used in the study was packed human red blood cells, which are not the same as menstrual blood. Nevertheless, this approximation was considered valid for the purpose of the study.
The scientists acknowledge the limitations of their research, including the inability to account for variables that influence product effectiveness, such as individual menstrual flow, placement of products, and personal habits. However, the study possesses valuable data and results that contribute to a better understanding of menstruation.
Furthermore, the study highlights the lack of common rules and standards for indicating absorbency in menstrual product packaging. The authors explain that companies often decide absorbency levels arbitrarily, resulting in misinformation on product boxes. This lack of standardized criteria makes it challenging to diagnose menstrual pathologies accurately.
The study’s implications extend beyond the realm of menstrual products. As menstrual research remains scarce, having reliable criteria for understanding product performance empowers individuals to make more informed choices. Additionally, it aids medical professionals in accurately assessing and addressing abnormal or symptomatic bleeding.
In a field that experiences a surge in menstrual product options, this study provides crucial insights into how these products function. It also emphasizes the need for further research and greater standardization in the industry. The quest for knowledge surrounding menstruation continues, and studies like this pave the way for better understanding and care.