Connect with us

News

After a study found toxic metals in tampons, lawmakers are pressing the FDA to act

Published

on

After a study found toxic metals in tampons, lawmakers are pressing the FDA to act

Four female House Democrats sent a letter to the FDA commissioner on Thursday urging the agency to address concerns about the safety and regulation of tampons.

Loic Venance/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Loic Venance/AFP via Getty Images

Lawmakers are calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to do more to address concerns about the ingredients in tampons after a study released earlier this summer found toxic metals in products from over a dozen popular brands.

Members of the Democratic Women’s Caucus called on the FDA to “review and improve the current safety standards for tampons” in a letter sent to Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf on Thursday.

“We urge the FDA to take swift action to ensure that women are safe from harmful and toxic substances in tampons,” they wrote. “We look forward to reviewing your plan to address these concerns and working with you on this issue.”

Advertisement

They did not specify a timeline or next steps.

The letter, a copy of which was shared with NPR, was signed by Reps. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Grace Meng of New York and policy task force co-chairs Kathy Manning of North Carolina and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts. The Democratic Women’s Caucus includes all Democratic women in the U.S. House of Representatives.

An FDA spokesperson told NPR that the agency “has received the letter and will respond directly to the Caucus.”

Safety concerns about tampons, and calls for stronger regulation, are not new. More than a dozen studies in recent years have evaluated the presence of various chemicals in widely used menstrual products, including a 2019 study that found higher concentrations of blood mercury in tampon users (which is cited in Thursday’s letter).

But they intensified in July after a first-of-its-kind study published in Environment International detected amounts of 16 heavy metals — including lead — in various tampons made by 14 common brands, which were not named.

Advertisement

Heavy metals have been linked to all sorts of negative health effects, from damaging the cardiovascular, nervous and endocrine systems to increasing cancer risks to harming maternal health and fetal development.

The study authors caution that more research is needed to determine to what extent the metals might “leach out of tampons” and into peoples’ bodies, and what health impacts they might have if so.

But they say more transparency is needed, too — especially considering millions of Americans spend so many hours with tampons inside their bodies. The study found that people who menstruate may use more than 7,400 tampons over their reproductive years.

“I think it’s important that we ask for clear labeling on our products so that people can make informed decisions for themselves based on their own values and health priorities,” lead author Jenni Shearston, a postdoctoral scholar at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, told NPR in July.

“And I think it’s also important that we try to get better testing, especially of heavy metals like arsenic or lead in tampons so we can make sure everyone’s safe.”

Advertisement

When asked about the metals study in July, the FDA mentioned the “limitations” of the research — since it didn’t evaluate to what extent metals might be absorbed by the body — but said it would look into it.

The spokesperson told NPR on Thursday that the FDA has since commissioned an independent literature review and initiated an internal bench laboratory study to evaluate metals in tampons.

“These initiatives will enable FDA to complete a risk assessment of metals contained in tampons, based on a worst-case scenario of metal exposure,” they wrote, adding that the findings will be released publicly once they have been peer-reviewed. “The FDA will also continue monitoring these devices going forward as part of its total product lifecycle approach to medical devices.”

The FDA doesn’t currently require tampons to be tested for chemicals

Various brands of tampons on store shelves.

The FDA says all tampons legally sold in the U.S. go through a review process before they can hit store shelves, but critics say that doesn’t go far enough.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

The FDA regulates and classifies tampons as medical devices, so manufacturers are not required to disclose their ingredients on the label the way that other consumer products do, as the letter points out.

Advertisement

The FDA’s tampon guidance from 2005 doesn’t mandate that products be tested for chemical contaminants. And it recommends — but doesn’t require — that tampons “be free of” the highly toxic compound dioxin as well as “any pesticide and herbicide residues.”

Chemicals could get into tampons in a number of ways, from raw materials like cotton being contaminated by pollutants in the soil and water to manufacturers intentionally adding them as odor control or antimicrobial agents.

Tampons must meet FDA requirements for safety and effectiveness before they can be legally sold in the U.S.

The spokesperson said that process involves toxicity testing, which consists of identifying potentially harmful substances — “such as some metals” — and assessing the risk of those substances coming out of the product and being absorbed by the body during single as well as repeated use.

“As part of the FDA’s review, manufacturers submit data including the results of testing to evaluate the safety of the materials used to make tampons and applicators (if present); tampon absorbency, strength, and integrity; and whether tampons enhance the growth of certain harmful bacteria or change normal bacteria levels in the vagina,” the agency explained in an online fact sheet.

Advertisement

The Center for Baby and Adult Hygiene Products (BAHP), a North American trade association, defended the safety of its members’ menstrual products in a 2022 statement in which it said all absorbent hygiene products “undergo a thorough safety assessment beyond what is required by the applicable regulatory framework.”

It said any chemicals in menstrual products are “not intentionally added by the manufacturers,” saying such “impurities” may be present in the environment or “even made by the human body.”

“Our members routinely test their products with external labs for the presence of background substances and these reports affirm our products are safe and that women can use them with confidence,” it said.

Thursday’s letter isn’t the first from members of Congress who want answers and action.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wa., the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, sent a letter to Califf of the FDA in late July, several weeks after the publication of the metals study.

Advertisement

“In light of this alarming reporting, I urge the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to carefully examine these new findings and evaluate any necessary actions to ensure the safety of tampons and menstrual products,” Murray wrote.

Murray asked the FDA to respond in writing to six specific questions about what it currently does and plans to do to ensure the safety of period products, and to brief her staff on the “regulation and safety processes for tampons and menstrual products,” by specific dates in August.

NPR has reached out to Murray’s office about the status of those requests. The FDA says it “will respond directly to Senator Murray regarding questions in the letter.”

Some states are passing their own laws in the absence of federal requirements

The New York State Capitol building in Albany.

New York was the first state to require manufacturers to disclose ingredients on the packing of period products, with a law that took effect in 2021. California and Nevada have since followed suit.

Bennett Raglin/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Bennett Raglin/Getty Images

Congress has tried unsuccessfully in the past to strengthen regulations on tampons and other menstrual products.

Advertisement

In 2022, Reps. Debbie Lesko, R.-Ariz., and Meng — one of the letter’s signatories — introduced the “Menstrual Products Right to Know Act,” which would have required the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to “treat menstrual products as misbranded if their labeling does not list each component of the product.”

The legislation was referred to a subcommittee and did not progress further.

In a report that same year, the House Appropriations Committee expressed concern about the “potential danger of fragrance ingredients used in menstrual products that are medical devices.

“These products are used frequently by consumers without knowledge of the presence of these ingredients, or understanding of their potential harms,” lawmakers wrote, noting that the FDA does not currently maintain a list of such ingredients.

The committee’s report directed the agency to evaluate the fragrance ingredients in its existing records and “if necessary” compile a list. It also directs the FDA to determine at what concentrations it would recommend that manufacturers disclose the presence of such ingredients in their product labels.

Advertisement

The FDA spokesperson said the agency will continue working to update its existing guidance to include recommendations outlined in the report, and “looks forward to engaging with patients, health care providers, and others during a public comment period when those guidance updates are proposed.”

In the meantime, some states are taking matters into their own hands.

In 2019, New York became the first to pass a law requiring manufacturers to contain a “plain and conspicuous” list of ingredients on the packaging for menstrual products. It took effect in 2021.

The nonprofit group Women’s Voices for the Earth (WVE) conducted a field study on ingredient disclosures from late 2021 to early 2022 and found that the ingredients newly announced on period product labels included chemicals that can irritate skin, trigger allergic reactions, cause cancer and release microplastic particles into the environment.

“Numerous additives to period products are now being disclosed for the first time, indicating that chemical exposure from period products is much more complicated than previously assumed,” they wrote in a May 2022 report.

Advertisement

The group also noted that while compliance with New York law was imperfect — for example, some products described ingredients as “fragrance” or “adhesive” without including the actual chemical names — ingredient information appeared to be becoming more standard on menstrual product labels nationwide.

“We commonly found products in other states with ingredient disclosures on the package similar or identical to what is required in New York, affording period product users across the country the right to know what is in their products,” WVE added.

California followed suit in 2020, passing a law that requires period product manufacturers to disclose “intentionally added ingredients” both on labels and online starting in 2023. And last year, Nevada became the third state to require ingredient disclosure, with a law slated to take effect at the start of 2025.

In June, Vermont became the first state to ban so-called PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” from menstrual products; that law is poised to take effect in 2026.

Half a dozen other states have also enacted phaseouts of PFAS in menstrual products so far, according to the national environmental health alliance Safer States. They include Maine, Colorado, Connecticut and Minnesota.

Advertisement

News

Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation

Published

on

Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump returned from the spectacle of a Chinese state visit to a less than welcoming U.S. economy — with the military band and garden tour in Beijing giving way to pressure over how to fix America’s escalating inflation rate.

Consumer inflation in the United States increased to 3.8% annually in April, higher than what he inherited as the Iran war and the Republican president’s own tariffs have pushed up prices. Inflation is now outpacing wage gains and effectively making workers poorer. The Cleveland Federal Reserve estimates that annual inflation could reach 4.2% in May as the war has kept oil and gasoline prices high.

Trump’s time with Chinese leader Xi Jinping appears unlikely to help the U.S. economy much, despite Trump’s claims of coming trade deals. The trip occurred as many people are voting in primaries leading into the November general election while having to absorb the rising costs of gasoline, groceries, utility bills, jewelry, women’s clothing, airplane tickets and delivery services. Democrats see the moment as a political opportunity.

“He’s returning to a dumpster fire,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal think tank focused on economic issues. “The president will not have the faith and confidence of the American people — the economy is their top issue and the president is saying, ‘You’re on your own.’”

The president’s trip to Beijing and his recent comments that indicated a tone-deafness to voters’ concerns about rising prices have suggested his focus is not on the American public and have undermined Republicans who had intended to campaign on last year’s tax cuts as helping families.

Advertisement

Trump described the trip as a victory, saying on social media that Xi “congratulated me on so many tremendous successes,” as the U.S. president has praised their relationship.

Trump told reporters that Boeing would be selling 200 aircraft — and maybe even 750 “if they do a good job” — to the Chinese. He said American farmers would be “very happy” because China would be “buying billions of dollars of soybeans.”

“We had an amazing time,” Trump said as he flew home on Air Force One, and told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview that gasoline prices were just some “short-term pain” and would “drop like a rock” once the war ends.

Inflationary pain is not a factor in how Trump handles Iran

Trump departed from the White House for China by saying the negotiations over the Iran war depended on stopping Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said.

That remark prompted blowback because it suggested to some that Trump cared more about challenging Iran than fighting inflation at home. Trump defended his words, telling Fox News: “That’s a perfect statement. I’d make it again.”

Advertisement

The White House has since stressed that Trump is focused on inflation.

Asked later about the president’s words, Vice President JD Vance said there had been a “misrepresentation” of the remarks. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the “administration remains laser-focused on delivering growth and affordability on the homefront” while indicating actions would be taken on grocery prices.

But as Trump appeared alongside Xi, new reports back home showed inflation rising for businesses and interest rates climbing on U.S. government debt.

His comments that Boeing would sell 200 jets to China caused the company’s stock price to fall because investors had expected a larger number. There was little concrete information offered about any trade agreements reached during the summit, including Chinese purchases of U.S. exports such as liquefied natural gas and beef.

“Foreign policy wins can matter politically, but only if voters feel stability and affordability in their daily lives,” said Brittany Martinez, a former Republican congressional aide who is the executive director of Principles First, a center-right advocacy group focused on democracy issues.

Advertisement

“Midterms are almost always a referendum on cost of living and public frustration, and Republicans are not immune from the same inflation and affordability pressures that hurt Democrats in recent cycles,” she added.

Democrats see Trump as vulnerable

Democratic lawmakers are seizing on Trump’s comments before his trip as proof of his indifference to lowering costs. There is potential staying power of his remarks as Americans head into Memorial Day weekend facing rising prices for the hamburgers and hot dogs to be grilled.

“What Americans do not see is any sympathy, any support, or any plan from Trump and congressional Republicans to lower costs – in fact, they see the opposite,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday.

Vance faulted the Biden administration for the inflation problem even though the inflation rate is now higher than it was when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 with a specific mandate to fix it.

“The inflation number last month was not great,” Vance said Wednesday, but he then stressed, “We’re not seeing anything like what we saw under the Biden administration.”

Advertisement

Inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 under Biden, a Democrat. By the time Trump took the oath of office, it was a far more modest 3%.

Trump’s inflation challenge could get harder

The data tells a different story as higher inflation is spreading into the cost of servicing the national debt.

Over the past week, the interest rate charged on 10-year U.S. government debt jumped from 4.36% to 4.6%, an increase that implies higher costs for auto loans and mortgages.

“My fear is that the layers of supply shocks that are affecting the U.S. economy will only further feed into inflationary pressures,” said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon.

Daco noted that last year’s tariff increases were now translating into higher clothing prices. With the Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s ability to impose tariffs by declaring an economic emergency, his administration is preparing a new set of import taxes for this summer.

Advertisement

Daco stressed that there have been a series of supply shocks. First, tariffs cut into the supply of imports. In addition, Trump’s immigration crackdown cut into the supply of foreign-born workers. Now, the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has cut off the vital waterway used to ship 20% of global oil supplies.

“We’re seeing an erosion of growth,” Daco said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Published

on

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.

She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.

Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.

But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”

Advertisement

“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”

As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.

She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.

The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending