People who use tampons
NPR takes care to insult women again, via a story about metals found in tampons.
Researchers have found toxic metals — including arsenic and lead — in over a dozen popular brands of tampons, raising questions about a menstrual hygiene product used by millions of Americans.
American whats? Dogs? Cars? Barbecue grills?
Researchers say the study marks an important first step in confirming the presence of toxic metals in tampons, which are used by an estimated 52% to 86% of menstruating people in the U.S.
Ah there we go. They start slowly and build. Americans instead of American women is a jab, and menstruating people is a smash in the head with a hammer.
They say more studies are needed to determine to what extent such metals might “leach out of tampons” and into peoples’ bodies. They’re calling not only for more research, but also for stronger regulations.
…
“We plan to evaluate the study closely, and take any action warranted to safeguard the health of consumers who use these products,” Hils added.
Ah that’s a good one – consumers. What kind of consumers? Shhhhhhhh.
Catherine Roberts, a health and science journalist at Consumer Reports who has written about tampons, says it’s more surprising that the question wasn’t investigated sooner.
“It’s in the most sensitive part of people’s bodies. It’s so close to us,” she says. “We use so many [tampons] over a lifetime. It’s just wild to me that this is so both so little researched and so little regulated.”
Of people’s bodies – so there goes the opportunity to discuss the ways women’s health is neglected or overlooked because women are still viewed as inferior.
People who menstruate may use more than 7,400 tampons over the course of their reproductive years, the study authors calculated, with each tampon staying in the vagina for several hours at a time.
In what vagina? The people’s vagina? Are vaginas like noses and kneecaps – everyone has them?
Dr. Nathaniel DeNicola, an OB-GYN who served as the environmental health expert for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, says the more pressing question is not whether there are chemicals in tampons, but “when does it convert to a dangerous amount?”
Some of the metals found in the tampons — including copper, calcium, iron and zinc — are not only considered safe, but recommended for patients by many doctors, he notes. They would not be damaging in low amounts, but a cumulative amount could have a lasting effect on a person’s endocrine functions.
That’s an awkward piece of writing. The self-conscious swapping of “a person” for “a woman” creates a pointless clunker of a sentence.
It’s not clear from the study whether people are getting harmful amounts of each metal from tampons, DeNicola says.
Well it damn well is clear that half of “people” aren’t – the male half.
To Roberts, one of the main takeaways from the study is that the “organic label was clearly not a guarantee that these products would not have heavy metals.” So what are concerned shoppers supposed to do?
Ideally, she says, regulators would mandate heavy-metal testing for tampons to take some of the pressure off consumers.
Until then, she says, there are some measures that tampon users can take to try to reduce their exposure to chemicals in general.
Shoppers, consumers, tampon users – but never women. Never never never women. It’s a filthy word, and it must not be uttered.
DeNicola recommends relying on a combination of “third-party testing and some personal due diligence.” He says there are apps shoppers can use to scan product barcodes and see what chemicals they contain, which could be useful for personal care and feminine hygiene products.
In some cases, people might want to consider alternatives to tampons, such as pads or menstrual cups. The reusable cups have become increasingly popular in recent years, especially given their lower environmental impact compared to tampons.
Shoppers shoppers shoppers, people people people.
DeNicola notes that plastic from tampons is one of the biggest sources of waste worldwide (and that some brands are more eco-friendly than others). Roberts points out that even if they didn’t contain chemicals, tampons would still pose a risk of toxic shock syndrome, a rare but potentially life-threatening illness (wearers can reduce their risk by changing their tampons frequently).
Wearers?? You don’t wear tampons.
DeNicola stresses that this study doesn’t have him running to tell his patients not to use tampons at all.
And so we come to the end without ever using the word “women.” NPR is despicable.
Careful Ophelia, you’ll just encourage them to start calling women inserters instead.
They’d do it, too.
It looks like the reporter, and the researchers and doctors she quotes are all studiously avoiding the naming of The Sex That Dare not Speak its Name (or at least in the passages quoted; perhaps their were unfortunate slips of their tongues that were edited out of the finished story). By modelling this deliberate refusal to use the word “women”, they are hoping to encourage emulation, normalizing the taboo, and further dissociating the realities of female biology from the concept of “woman,” thereby opening up the category of “woman” to those who are not female, that is, men. After all, who benefits from all of this muddying of the waters and redefinition? Men claiming to be women. I can’t imagine that all of this circumspection, euphemization, and anathemization has anything to do with upsetting the sensibilities and feelings of trans identified females. I believe that in this movement, these women are only considered useful to the extent that they advance the interests of TiMs, confusing the issue enough to clear the way for these men to claim the title of “woman.”
The media are certainly not reticent to call men “women” when it comes to housing them in female prisons, cheating their way onto women’s sports teams, or becoming brand ambassadors for products aimed at women, among other outrages and insults. They flatteringly oblige these male predators, cheats, and imposters by using their “preferred pronouns” and simply reporting them as women (leaving their continuing maleness unmentioned), leaving unsuspecting, uninformed readers, listeners, or watchers none the wiser if they didn’t already know. There’s no law compelling them to do this, so this osequiousness is completly voluntary. That the same media outlets carefully self-censor the word “women” when discussing abortion rights, menstral products, and women’s health care is telling. This too is an unforced move on their part, a deliberate and calculated erasure of the word and concept “woman” from stories and circumstances where it is, in reality, at the heart of the issues under discussion.
Despicable indeed.
Oh come now, I remember hearing that tampons work great to absorb a bleeding bullet wound, still more common in men than women I believe… surely that’s worth considering. /s
Gawds but idiocy is irksome.
Common, we all know the most important use of tampons is as gender affirmation devices. Tomato juice, anyone?
If tampons did not contain chemicals, they would be nothing, literally. The absorbant materials they are made of are chemicals. /pedant chemist
Pads and cups could also contain the metals in question. The exposure risk is likely to be different, but there is likely to be some risk.
A point I’ve always liked to make. If you want to get the chemicals out of the water, you want to get the water out of the water.