PFAS25/ 100Poor
Overall0/ 100Bad
Kotex Bamboo Ultra Thin Pads with Wings

Kotex · Period Pads

Kotex Bamboo Ultra Thin Pads with Wings

Poor

Skip until Kotex discloses waterproofing chemistry; pads need water barriers often using PFAS.

Verdict: SkipBamboo viscose pads lack PFAS disclosure; other hazard profile typical for category, but water-resistance coating chemistry unknown.

Bamboo viscose pad doesn't disclose waterproof backing composition. Period care products often use PFAS-based water-resistant coatings.

The safe swap

OB / Maternity Pad Maxi Super Absorbency NON241279

OB

OB / Maternity Pad Maxi Super Absorbency NON241279

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

bamboo viscose, cellulose core, polyethylene/polypropylene layers, unspecified water-resistant coating

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
🏷️

PFAS

Kotex does not publicly disclose the chemistry of the water-resistant layer. Ultra-thin pads rely heavily on synthetic barriers; PFAS and other fluorinated polymers are standard in the industry for this function. Absence of disclosure is itself a risk indicator.

Source: ATSDR
20/ 100
🏷️

Skin irritation from undisclosed additives or residual chemicals

Bamboo viscose and polypropylene layers are generally low-risk, but undisclosed processing aids, dyes, or residual chemicals in the coating could trigger contact dermatitis or vulvovaginal irritation in sensitive individuals. No specific incidents on record for this product, but direct genital contact amplifies exposure risk.

70/ 100
🫧

Microplastic or polymer shedding from backing layers

Polyethylene and polypropylene backing can degrade or shed fibers, particularly if pad is flexed, compressed, or left in warm conditions. Menstrual products are not regulated for microplastic content. Shedding risk is typical for synthetic-backed pads but unquantified for this specific product.

70/ 100
⚠️

Allergic reaction to fragrance or adhesive (if present)

Kotex Bamboo line does not advertise added fragrance, but adhesive components and bamboo processing may include undisclosed fragrance carriers or contact sensitizers. Vulvovaginal area is highly permeable; risk is low but non-zero without full ingredient transparency.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Viscose processing residues (sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, carbon disulfide)

Bamboo viscose requires harsh chemical processing. Kotex does not disclose finishing steps or residue limits. Well-manufactured viscose poses minimal risk if properly rinsed, but verification is unavailable for this product. Industry standard is tight but unaudited.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Kotex Bamboo Ultra Thin uses bamboo viscose (regenerated cellulose) for the top layer, a cellulose core for absorbency, and polyethylene/polypropylene backing layers for structure. The water-resistant coating composition is not disclosed by Kotex. Bamboo viscose itself is chemically processed from pulp and carries minimal inherent toxicity, but the undisclosed waterproofing layer is the critical unknown, as these coatings historically rely on PFAS or other synthetic barriers.

The brand's record and disclosure

Kotex (Kimberly-Clark) does not publicly disclose waterproofing chemistry or PFAS content in period products. The brand has not published transparency reports on per- and polyfluorinated compounds in menstrual pads. No major safety recalls specific to chemical composition have been publicly documented for this product line, but silence on coating chemistry is a red flag in an industry where PFAS use is widespread and largely unregulated.

How it compares in its category

Most conventional period pads contain polyethylene and polypropylene layers; Kotex's bamboo viscose top is a differentiation point but does not reduce reliance on synthetic backing. Competitors like Seventh Generation and some organic brands disclose materials more openly or avoid fluorinated coatings, though verification remains difficult across the category. Ultra-thin formulations across brands typically require water-resistant coatings, making them higher-risk for undisclosed PFAS than thicker pads.

If you buy it

Change pads every 4-8 hours to limit skin contact time with any coating residues. Store in a cool, dry place away from heat or direct sunlight to prevent polymer degradation. Monitor for unusual skin irritation, which may indicate sensitivity to undisclosed additives or coatings. If concerned about PFAS or other chemicals, contact Kotex directly requesting full ingredient and coating disclosure, or consider brands with verified PFAS-free or transparent waterproofing claims.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 52% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Kotex 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.