PFAS25/ 100Poor
Overall3/ 100Bad
Always Ultra Thin Regular Pads

Always · Period Pads

Always Ultra Thin Regular Pads

Poor

Skip if PFAS concerns you; limited brand transparency on water-resistant coatings.

Verdict: SkipTypical period pad with poor PFAS transparency and unspecified waterproof coating; acceptable for occasional use if PFAS exposure is not a priority concern.

Waterproof backing coating is standard but unspecified, and PFAS-based water-resistant treatments are common in menstrual products. Always discloses nothing.

The safe swap

Nana Maxi Thick

Nana

Nana Maxi Thick

70/100 safety

70Good

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Good.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

nonwoven cellulose/polyester blend with waterproof backing coating (unspecified)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

75/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
🫧

Microplastic shedding from waterproof backing

Unspecified plastic coating may degrade under friction, moisture, and body temperature over the product's shelf life and use period, potentially releasing microparticles. No published testing of Always Ultra Thin for microplastic shedding is available, but this is a recognized concern for all plastic-backed pads.

70/ 100
♾️

Teflon-type coating (Teflon) fume risk from waterproof coating

If the backing contains Teflon-type coating-based polymers, thermal degradation is unlikely at body temperature (37°C) but microscopic inhalation of shed Teflon-type coating particles is theoretically possible with high-friction use. The brand does not disclose whether Teflon-type coating is used; this remains speculative.

70/ 100
🏷️

Skin sensitization from undisclosed adhesives or coatings

User reports of genital itching, irritation, and allergic reactions attributed to Always pads exist on consumer forums and health sites, though no formal causal link has been established. The nonwoven materials themselves are generally safe, but unidentified adhesives or waterproof polymers may trigger reactions in sensitive individuals.

45/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Nonwoven textiles are often bonded using formaldehyde-based resins; Always does not confirm or deny this practice. Direct skin exposure to formaldehyde vapors from pads is low under normal use, but prolonged contact in warm, moist conditions could increase exposure in sensitive users.

Source: ATSDR
70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Dioxins from bleaching of cellulose

Elemental chlorine bleaching of pad cellulose can produce trace dioxin contamination, but most modern manufacturers (including P&G) have adopted elemental chlorine-free (ECF) or totally chlorine-free (TCF) processes. No published contamination is reported for Always Ultra Thin pads.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Always Ultra Thin Regular Pads use a nonwoven cellulose and polyester blend core with an unspecified waterproof backing coating. The cellulose absorbs menstrual fluid while the polyester adds structural integrity; the backing coating (likely a plastic polymer) prevents leakage but its chemical composition is not disclosed by the brand. Waterproof coatings on period products are frequently made with Teflon-type coating-based polymers or polyethylene, both of which can shed microparticles under friction and degradation. The lack of transparency on this backing material is the primary safety concern for this product.

The brand's record and disclosure

Procter & Gamble (Always' parent company) has not publicly committed to PFAS-free formulations or disclosed the chemical identity of waterproof coatings in Always pads. The brand does not provide ingredient lists or third-party certifications (such as Cradle to Cradle or Gots standards) that would verify absence of harmful chemicals. P&G has faced consumer advocacy pressure on period product transparency but has not substantially increased disclosure for Always products specifically. No recalls related to chemical hazards in Always Ultra Thin pads are on record as of public knowledge cutoff.

How it compares in its category

Most conventional period pads (Tampax, Kotex, Stayfree) share the same generic construction (cellulose/polyester with unspecified plastic backing) and similarly poor chemical transparency. A subset of brands (Cora, Rael, LOLA, Aunt Flow) explicitly market PFAS-free and/or plastic-free alternatives with disclosed materials, though these carry premium pricing. Always Ultra Thin is not distinguished by superior safety disclosures or reduced chemical risk compared to competitors; it is a market standard product with market-standard opaqueness.

If you buy it

Store pads in a cool, dry location away from direct sunlight and heat to minimize polymer degradation and potential microparticle release. Replace pads every 4-8 hours during use; extended wear increases friction and wear on the waterproof backing. If you experience skin irritation, redness, or allergic reaction (itching, rash), discontinue use and consider brands with disclosed, simpler materials. Do not use for non-menstrual purposes (wound absorption, etc.) where skin contact time and friction would be prolonged.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 45% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Always has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Safer alternatives in Period Pads

O.b Pro Comfort Super Plus 16 pad

OB

O.b Pro Comfort Super Plus 16 pad

rayon/viscose, cotton, and gelling polymers

PFAS Grade70Good
Overall Grade52Good
🫧

Microplastic shedding or degradation

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Irritation or allergic sensitization from adhesive or synthetic fibers

Moderate concern

45
⚠️

Bacterial growth or contamination from prolonged moisture

Limited concern

70

Lower concern. Typical period pad materials lack PFAS triggers.

Risky category by default

OB / Maternity Pad Maxi Super Absorbency NON241279

OB

/ Maternity Pad Maxi Super Absorbency NON241279

cellulose, polyethylene, absorbent core (typical period pad materials)

PFAS Grade70Good
Overall Grade44Poor
⚠️

Absorbent polymer (sodium polyacrylate) allergic sensitization

Limited concern

70
🫧

Polyethylene microplastic shedding

Limited concern

70

Bacterial colonization from prolonged wear

High concern

20

Lower concern, typical pad materials rarely require PFAS treatments.

Risky category by default

OC BON Ultra Thin Wings Sanitary Pads Medium 4P

OB

OC BON Ultra Thin Wings Sanitary Pads Medium 4P

Cellulose, nonwoven synthetics, adhesives

PFAS Grade70Good
Overall Grade62Good
⚠️

Adhesive contact sensitivity

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Bleaching residues in cellulose

Limited concern

70

Lower concern. No PFAS-prone materials publicly identified.

Risky category by default

More period pads grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.