PFAS in Incontinence Products, Where the Waterproof Backing Changes the Grade

This category divides on one component, and it is not the absorbent core. Of the 217 products we grade, 21 sit at 70 and 196 at 25. Pads built from cellulose, fluff pulp and cotton with a plainly described backing sit at 70 out of 100, while products whose backing is described only as a waterproof layer, with no chemistry given, fall to 25. Across the graded products the recorded concerns were dominated by PFAS in a waterproof backing, which accounted for more flagged hazards than every other concern in this category combined.

No product in this category grades above 70. This guide previously graded the Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads 100 on a MADE SAFE certification. On 17 September 2026 we could not confirm that certification, and Eco by Naty makes no PFAS statement for these pads, so they now grade 70 with the rest of that tier. Below we break down the products in the table so you can see where each lands and why.

Summary comparison table

Product	PFAS grade	Verdict
Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads	Good, 70/100	Plant-based materials, no certification or PFAS statement on record
PBE Tranquility Personal Care Pads	Good, 70/100	Cellulose, rayon and cotton core, no PFAS-prone component described
Tranquility Personal Care Pads	Good, 70/100	Cellulose and cotton core with a described polymer layer
Tranquility Essential Booster Pads, Heavy Absorbency	Good, 70/100	Fluff pulp core with nonwoven layers, no DWR treatment found
NorthShore Premium 36	Good, 70/100	Cellulose and SAP core with a polyethylene backing, named rather than vague
NorthShore Champion XD Washable	Good, 70/100	Washable product with a cotton blend outer fabric
Because Booster Pads	Good, 70/100	Cellulose, superabsorbent polymer and cotton blend
LILLE Suprem Form Maxi 2920ml	Good, 70/100	Cellulose core with a plastic backing, no unnamed barrier
LILLE Suprem Form Regular Plus 1570ml	Good, 70/100	Cellulose and SAP absorbent core
Seni Lady Maximum	Poor, 25/100	Absorbent core with a waterproof backing layer, chemistry not given
Seni Lady Maximum Protection Pads	Poor, 25/100	Waterproof backing layer, composition undisclosed
Seni Lady Plus	Poor, 25/100	Absorbent core recorded as likely carrying a water-resistant layer
Seni Man Active Guards	Poor, 25/100	Absorbent core with a waterproof backing layer
Seni Man Fit Guards	Poor, 25/100	Nonwoven with a waterproof backing layer
Seni Booster Pad, Case of 120	Poor, 25/100	Cellulose and SAP with unspecified waterproof layers
Seni Booster Pad	Poor, 25/100	Cellulose core with a plastic backsheet and a moisture barrier

How we graded these

Every grade in this article is a model-based estimate built from publicly available materials disclosures, manufacturing descriptions and brand documentation, not a lab test performed by our team. A high score means lower concern based on reviewed sources, never PFAS-free and never safe. No product in this category carried published independent lab data. The recorded concerns across the category were PFAS in a waterproof backing, PFAS in a waterproof backing layer and PFAS in a waterproof coating, and separately a small number of non-chemical hazards relating to skin maceration and bacterial growth where a pad is left in place too long, which are use questions rather than materials questions. Every product here starts from the same category baseline, and none of the makers says anything about PFAS, which adds 15. A record that describes the materials without a waterproof treatment earns a 10 point material credit and lands at 70. A record that describes a waterproof or water-resistant backing or coating adds 35 and lands at 25. You can compare any specific product using our PFAS product finder.

One thing to be fair about before the low grades

Every product at 25 in the table below is from Seni, but the bottom tier is not one brand. The 196 products at 25 come from 34 brands, including Tena, Tranquility, Prevail, Seni, Always Discreet, Attends, Depend and Poise, and several brands have products in both tiers. Tena has one product at 70 and 27 at 25, Tranquility four at 70 and 17 at 25, and NorthShore three at 70 and seven at 25. A low grade does not mean a brand uses fluorinated backings, because no brand in this category discloses its backing chemistry and none has been lab tested in our data. It means that product's record describes a waterproof layer or treatment, which our model counts, while the records at 70 describe their materials without one. A brand that describes its backing plainly will grade better than one that does not, even if the two products are identical.

The Good tier, 70 out of 100

Twenty-one products share this grade, nine of them in the table. The pattern is that the record describes the materials without a waterproof treatment.

Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads are built from bamboo-derived viscose, cotton and plant-based absorbents. Pros include plainly described plant-based materials. Cons include that there is no certification or brand PFAS statement on record, and that plant-based absorbents may not deliver the capacity some people need.

NorthShore Premium 36 is the clearest illustration of why naming matters. Its backing is described as polyethylene, a specific named plastic, and it grades 70. Products whose backing is described only as waterproof grade 25. Pros include a high-capacity product with a described construction. Cons include that NorthShore publishes no PFAS statement, so this rests on the materials description.

The three Tranquility listings in the table and both LILLE Suprem Form listings are cellulose-based cores with no waterproof treatment described. Pros include conventional, widely stocked products. Cons include the same absence of any brand PFAS statement across all of them.

The NorthShore Champion XD Washable is worth separating out because it is reusable rather than disposable, with a cotton blend outer fabric. Pros include removing the disposable backing question entirely. Cons include that washable products are sometimes given stain or water-repellent finishes, and the listing does not rule that out explicitly.

The Poor tier, 25 out of 100

In all, 196 products grade 25, all described with a waterproof or water-resistant backing or coating whose chemistry is not stated. The seven in the table are all Seni. Seni Lady Maximum, Seni Man Active Guards and Seni Man Fit Guards all carry the same recorded description. The Seni Booster Pad is described with a plastic backsheet and a moisture barrier, where the barrier rather than the backsheet is the unresolved part.

There are no pros to highlight from a PFAS grading standpoint on these listings. The con is consistent, a barrier layer exists, it is the functional heart of the product, and it is not described.

What to avoid

• Products whose backing or barrier is described only as waterproof, leak-proof or water-resistant with no material named. That is what separates the 25s from the 70s in this category.
• Assuming a higher absorbency product is a higher-concern product. Capacity is not what drives these grades, the backing description is.
• Assuming reusable automatically means untreated. Washable products can carry stain or water-repellent finishes, and the listings here do not rule that out.
• Reading a low grade as a finding that a specific product contains PFAS. It is a finding about disclosure, and no product in this category has published test data either way.

If you are comparing related products, our period care, pads and period underwear categories cover adjacent items with their own grading, and the PFAS hazard page explains why water-repellent layers attract scrutiny.

Our pick

Based on available materials and data, the Eco by Naty Incontinence Pads grade 70, the top grade in this category, and so do 20 other products. None of them carries a certification or a brand PFAS statement. For higher capacity, the NorthShore Premium 36 is our pick of the 70 tier, since its polyethylene backing is named rather than left as a generic waterproof layer. If you need a reusable option, the NorthShore Champion XD Washable carries the same grade. These are estimates built from disclosed materials, not laboratory proof, and no product here is being called PFAS-free or safe by us.

FAQ

Why does the waterproof backing drive the grade rather than the absorbent core?

Because the absorbent cores in this category are consistently described as cellulose, fluff pulp, cotton and superabsorbent polymer, which are named materials, while the barrier layer is the component most often left undescribed. Water-repellent and barrier layers are where fluorinated chemistry has historically been used in textiles and paper, so an unnamed barrier is treated as unresolved in our model.

Does a low grade mean the product contains PFAS?

No. It means a barrier layer is present and its chemistry is not disclosed. No product in this category has published independent test data, so neither a high nor a low grade here is a laboratory finding about what any specific product contains.

Is a washable product better than a disposable one?

Not on this measure. The NorthShore Champion XD Washable sits at 70 out of 100, the same as the better disposables, while reusable pads from Renfrew and Lillian grade 25 because their records describe a waterproof backing, so our data does not show reusable as categorically better. A washable product removes the disposable backing question but introduces a different one, whether a stain or water-repellent finish was applied to the fabric.

Should I be worried about health effects from a lower-graded product?

Any discussion of PFAS and health in our guides describes association, not proven causation, and grades measure estimated chemical concern based on materials and disclosure, not a medical risk assessment for any individual. Questions about skin irritation, infection or continence care itself are matters for a clinician rather than a product grade, and nothing here is medical advice.