Shields Incontinence Pads for Men vs Women's Ultimate Pads: which is safer?
These two grade almost identically. Pick on price and preference; neither has a PFAS edge.
Depend
Shields Incontinence Pads for Men
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
LikelyPFAS in waterproof backing
PossibleSuperabsorbent polymer (SAP) integrity and microfiber shedding
ReportedBacterial and fungal growth in absorbent core
Tena
Women's Ultimate Pads
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
LikelyPFAS in waterproof coating (covered separately; listed for completeness)
PossibleSkin irritation from coating degradation or contact
PossibleMicroplastics from synthetic nonwoven breakdown
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in waterproof backing, Superabsorbent polymer (SAP) integrity and microfiber shedding, Bacterial and fungal growth in absorbent core and Skin irritation and sensitization from non-woven layers or residual manufacturing chemical on the Depend and not on the Tena.
- We flag PFAS in waterproof coating (covered separately; listed for completeness), Skin irritation from coating degradation or contact, Microplastics from synthetic nonwoven breakdown and Bacterial contamination or mold growth if stored improperly on the Tena and not on the Depend.
- The Depend is Absorbent core (wood pulp, SAP), non-woven layers, polyethylene backing/waterproof barrier where the Tena is Cellulose/nonwoven blend with unspecified waterproof coating, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- These two are level, close enough that price and fit should decide it rather than our grade.
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: see the full ranking