Ultra Heavy Absorbency Underpad vs Incontinence Pads: which is safer?

Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads is the clear pick. McKesson Ultra Heavy Absorbency Underpad carries a failing PFAS grade, and we never recommend buying a failing product.

McKesson Ultra Heavy Absorbency Underpad

McKesson

Ultra Heavy Absorbency Underpad

PFAS grade

Poor 25/100

Overall grade

Bad 13/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

cellulose, absorbent core with waterproof backing (composition unspecified)

Confidence

35%

PossibleWaterproof backing composition undisclosed

PossibleOff-gassing from synthetic backing

PossibleSkin contact irritation from coating additives

Our pick

Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads

Eco By Naty

Incontinence Pads

PFAS grade

Good 70/100

Overall grade

Good 66/100

Verdict

Buy

Hazard flags

⚑ 1

Material

Bamboo-derived viscose, cotton, plant-based absorbent core

Confidence

78%

PossibleHeavy metals in cellulose or plant-derived materials

Where these two actually differ

  • We flag Waterproof backing composition undisclosed, Off-gassing from synthetic backing and Skin contact irritation from coating additives on the McKesson and not on the Eco By Naty.
  • We flag Heavy metals in cellulose or plant-derived materials on the Eco By Naty and not on the McKesson.
  • The McKesson is cellulose, absorbent core with waterproof backing (composition unspecified) where the Eco By Naty is Bamboo-derived viscose, cotton, plant-based absorbent core, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
  • The gap is 45 points, wide enough that this is not a close call, and the Eco By Naty is the one to buy.
  • We are less certain about the McKesson grade, at 35% confidence against 78%, because it discloses less.

Both products run through the same public rubric: materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →

More incontinence pads & protection: see the full ranking