25/ 100
F
OverallF17/100
Kotex Ultra Thin Pads

Kotex · Incontinence Pads & Protection

Kotex Ultra Thin Pads

F · High PFAS

Waterproof backing raises PFAS concern; manufacturer silent on composition.

Verdict: SkipWaterproof backing raises PFAS concern; no toxicological red flags in core materials, but manufacturer transparency deficit warrants cautious use.

Kotex does not disclose PFAS content or use. The waterproof layer in ultra-thin pads typically requires hydrophobic treatment, often PFAS-based. No third-party certification available.

The safe swap

Tranquility Personal Care Pads 13.5" x 6.5", 96/Case

Tranquility

Tranquility Personal Care Pads 13.5" x 6.5", 96/Case

70/100 safety

C

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

Material

cellulose/absorbent polymer core with waterproof backing

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

Why this grade

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

Hurts the grade

Category baseline

period care is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

Hurts the grade

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

Hurts the grade

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Kotex Ultra Thin pads use a cellulose/wood pulp absorbent core with a superabsorbent polymer (likely sodium polyacrylate or cross-linked polyacrylic acid) to lock moisture. The waterproof backing is typically polyethylene or polypropylene film, which raises PFAS concern because water-repellent coatings on period products have been documented to contain PFOA/PFOS or next-generation PFAS alternatives. Cellulose itself is low-risk; the hazard concentration point is the backing layer.

The brand's record and disclosure

Kotex (Kimberly-Clark) has not publicly disclosed whether their waterproof backing contains PFAS, fluorochemicals, or alternatives. The brand does not advertise third-party certifications (e.g., Cradle to Cradle, GOTS, or PFAS-free credentials) specific to this product line. Kimberly-Clark has faced prior criticism for opacity on chemical use in feminine care products, though no major recalls or regulatory action on Kotex pads themselves are on record.

How it compares in its category

Most conventional period pads (Tampax, Always, U by Kotex, etc.) use similar polyethylene/polypropylene waterproof backings and have not disclosed PFAS testing. Organic/eco brands (Cora, Rael, Seventh Generation) often advertise PFAS-free or plastic-free claims but command higher cost. Kotex Ultra Thin is standard-market positioning: affordable, widely available, but with lower transparency than premium alternatives.

If you buy it

Store pads in a cool, dry place away from direct heat or sunlight to minimize any polymer degradation. No special handling is required; use and disposal follow normal practice. If you experience skin irritation, rash, or odor changes, consider switching brands or testing for latex or fragrance sensitivity (some Kotex variants include fragrance). Monitor for any product recalls via the FDA MedWatch database, though current risk is unquantified rather than documented.

Beyond PFAS: other things we checked

Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”

Possible

PFAS in waterproof backing

Waterproof coatings on period products are a known PFAS vector, but Kotex has not disclosed composition. Risk is plausible but unconfirmed for this specific product.

None known

Synthetic polymer skin irritation (superabsorbent polymer contact)

Sodium polyacrylate is widely regarded as safe in absorbent products and approved for direct skin contact by FDA; no Kotex-specific adverse event pattern is documented.

Possible

Fragrance allergens (if scented variant)

Some Kotex products include fragrance; while Kotex does not use known banned allergens, fragrance mixtures can trigger contact dermatitis in sensitive users. Check product variant label.

None known

Microplastic/polymer shedding during use

No evidence of surface breakdown or fiber shedding under normal use conditions specific to Kotex Ultra Thin. Polyethylene/polypropylene backings are inert under body temperature.

None known

Dioxin/chlorine residue from bleaching

Kotex uses elemental chlorine-free (ECF) or total chlorine-free (TCF) bleaching practices per industry standard, and no dioxin detections in finished pads are on record.

What we don’t know

This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 45% confidence. It is not a lab result.

No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.

The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.

Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.

Safer alternatives in Incontinence Pads & Protection

Tranquility Personal Care Pads 13.5" x 6.5", 96/Case

Tranquility

Personal Care Pads 13.5" x 6.5", 96/Case

Cellulose, wood pulp, absorbent core, adhesives

C
F
PFASAll
C · Moderate2 flags

Lower PFAS concern. Typical absorbent pad with no known treatment.

Risky category by default

Tranquility Essential Booster Pads Heavy Absorbency, Long - 4-1/4 x 15 Inch (Case of 200)

Tranquility

Essential Booster Pads Heavy Absorbency, Long - 4-1/4 x 15 Inch (Case of 200)

cellulose/fluff pulp absorbent core with nonwoven layers

C
F
PFASAll
C · Moderate2 flags

Lower concern. Core materials inherently PFAS-free, no evidence of water-repellent coating treatment.

Risky category by default

Kotex Absorbent Wrapped Liners

Kotex

Absorbent Wrapped Liners

Cellulose-based absorbent core, wrapped nonwoven

C
F
PFASAll
C · Moderate3 flags

Lower concern. No known PFAS use in standard absorbent liners.

Risky category by default

More incontinence pads & protection 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.