10

Loading video...

Jasmine Laws

By Jasmine Laws

Reporter

0

Share

Newsweek is a Trust Project member

See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.


A lawsuit targeting some of the biggest names in the feminine hygiene industry has renewed scrutiny of the "forever chemicals" potentially present in tampons, pads and other menstrual-related products.

The lawsuit, filed by seven women in California against several companies selling some of the most well-known feminine hygiene products, claims that the women suffered severe reproductive harms like miscarriages, polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS), chronic heavy bleeding, pelvic pain and other side effects as a result of using the products for years.

The women claim that the companies sold products containing "forever chemicals," also known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as well as endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, fragrances, preservatives and other substances which they said have the potential to cause reproductive harm.

Read More on U.S.

This month, one of the companies, Kimberly Clark Corporation, filed a notice of removal—a request to move the legal action from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

This comes after a recent Harvard-led study, published in Environmental Research, found that mothers with higher blood concentrations of certain PFAS compounds during pregnancy are more likely to have daughters who later developed PMOS, previously called polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and daughters with moderate-to-severe acne during adolescence.

File photo of feminine hygiene products on sale at a Costco store in Miami, Florida.

...

Details of the California Tampon Lawsuit

The women who filed the lawsuit are named as Alassandra Franco Lopez, Silva Galarza, Cindy Galarza, Liza Jalal, Stephanie Cordova, Mehrnaz Assaf, and Aufra Galng.

The companies sued included Procter & Gamble, Prestige Consumer Healthcare, Essity North America, Kimberly Clark Corporation, Edgewell Personal Care, and The Honey Pot Company. The lawsuit specifically mentions the brands Tampax, Always, Always Discreet and L. Organic.

Newsweek reached out to the companies named in the lawsuit for comment via email.

In the lawsuit, Franco Lopez claimed she had used feminine hygiene products sold by the companies for 14 years. She alleged that, as a "direct" result of using them, she has "suffered severe and life-altering injuries and medical conditions," which include, but are not limited to, endometriosis, ovarian cysts, PMOS, pelvic inflammatory disease, anemia, and others.

She also said she had a miscarriage, which she "believes was caused or substantially contributed to by the reproductive and gynecological injuries she sustained" from using the products, and has had to undergo surgeries because of the conditions, and been hospitalized due to severe chronic pain.

She added that these conditions have "substantially interfered with [her] daily life, physical well-being, emotional health, ability to work, ability to walk or get up due to the excruciating pain, personal relationships, and overall quality of life."

The other women, who are between the ages of 25 and 81, also cited having medical conditions which they say came as a result of using the products, and that using them notably harmed their physical, mental and emotional well-being and impacted their daily lives.

They claim that the companies "failed to adequately test their products for long-term safety, failed to disclose the presence of potentially harmful chemicals, failed to provide adequate warnings regarding health risks, failed to conduct proper safety monitoring, and failed to take reasonable steps to protect consumers from foreseeable harm."

This is not the first lawsuit of its kind. In recent years, several others have also alleged that feminine hygiene products contain dangerous chemicals, harmful to human health. For example, a 2025 lawsuit alleged that Tampax tampons contained unsafe amounts of lead that enter the bloodstream and cause side effects.

Related Story

The End of Forever

The End of Forever

What Are 'Forever Chemicals'?

PFAS are a large group of synthetic chemicals widely used in consumer and industrial products because of their resistance to water, grease, stains and heat. Because of that resistance, they are commonly found in nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing and stain-resistant furniture, but also in consumer products and even smartwatch wristbands.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified certain PFAS, or "forever chemicals," as a Group 1 carcinogen.

Long-term PFAS exposure "can cause cancer and other serious illnesses that decrease quality of life or result in death," according to an EPA fact sheet on the substances. The agency also said that PFAS exposure "during critical life stages such as pregnancy or early childhood can also result in adverse health impacts."

Now, more and more research has been highlighting the wide-ranging impacts exposure to these chemicals can have on the body. Studies have also linked PFAS exposure to thyroid disease, liver disease, immune system dysfunction and other health problems.

Study Finds Association Between PFAS and PMOS

In April this year, another study suggested the potential impact PFAS exposure could have on reproductive health.

Researchers at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health analyzed data from 322 mother-daughter pairs enrolled in the Project Viva study.

They found that mothers with higher blood concentrations of a certain PFAS chemical, EtFOSAA, during pregnancy were 2.7 times more likely to have daughters who later developed PMOS. They also found that they were 2.3 times more likely to have daughters with moderate-to-severe acne during adolescence.

The authors cautioned that the findings show an association rather than proof that PFAS cause PMOS, noting that the study's relatively small sample size and limited demographic diversity mean further research is needed to confirm the results and better understand the potential reproductive health impacts of prenatal PFAS exposure.

Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Daniel Orton and Sam Wilson.

View 0 Comments

Request Reprint & Licensing

Submit Correction

View Editorial & AI Guidelines