|
|
Toxic Protection / Confidence Shock / Why Am I Sick? / Scenarios |
Despite considerable
attention being given to such matters, mistakes continue to be made...
|
|
Susan May Wilson, in
her 2003 paper entitled “The Toxic Shock Crisis of 1980,” suggests a scenario
in which the crisis might have been averted: “A study conducted in
1979 [...] revealed that carboxymethyl cellulose, or CMC, worked as a filter
for bacterial toxins. A simple
analysis of the ingredients in Rely’s new tampons would have revealed the
presence of this fiber to the FDA.
Though...CMC was not the ingredient that caused TSS, had the FDA then
required that more research be conducted on the Rely tampon before it entered
the market, they might have identified a problem with Rely’s polyester foam,
which may have spared many lives.” |
|
Carboxymethyl cellulose
– harmless enough, it turns out |
|
Another scenario
that “may have spared many lives” centers on the tampon design process
itself. It was in 1973, a
full seven years before the US toxic shock outbreak, that P&G filed a patent
application for the Rely tampon, listing Jean Edward Schaefer of Cincinnati,
Ohio, as the sole inventor. The P&G patent
states that Schaefer’s invention: “...maintains a
large void volume within the vagina and, therefore, has a greater capacity;
it is large enough to fill out substantially the entire cross-section of the
vagina and, therefore, provides containment; it has a large available surface
area which has resulted in unexpectedly high absorption rates;...” |
|
|
Rely tampon, Drawings, US
Patent 3,815,601, granted to P&G June 11, 1974 |
|
[arrows inserted by
MOLT] |
The P&G patent
further explains that: “A high absorption
rate is an important attribute of a tampon in order to prevent partitioning failure,
which occurs when the rate of fluid flow to the tampon exceeds the absorption
rate of the tampon...” Perhaps if the
reverse had been explored during the design process (that is, what
happens when a tampon’s rate of absorption exceeds the rate of fluid flow),
“many lives may have been spared.” From the FDA
website, 2006: “Because the TSS risk increases with tampon absorbency, if you
use tampons, you should use products with the lowest absorbency that meets
your needs. There’s usually less need
for higher absorbency at the end of a menstrual period.” From Rely 1980
product leaflet: “Rely is so
comfortable you could forget you’re wearing it [...] Change at least once a day
even if you’re flowing lightly.” |
|
|
From P&G’s US
Patent 3,815,601: Table showing
jump in absorbency rates from “solid block” foam to Rely’s “aggregate” foam (that
is, cut into pieces: “...the pieces
need not necessarily be uniformly shaped, in fact, they preferably are very
irregularly shaped as such would result by chopping in a Waring kitchen
blender. Pieces were chopped for the
tampon of this invention in a Waring kitchen blender by putting blocks of
Hydro-Foam™ in the blender”). |
||
|
Perhaps it’s unfair
to point out in 2007 what was not obvious in 1973. However, in 1977*, four years
after the filing of the P&G
patent, Kimberly-Clark, maker of Kotex tampons, addressed the issue of high
absorbency/low fluid flow in one of their own patent applications: “..., one noticeable
shortcoming of the higher capacity tampon not experienced with the
conventional tampon products was the fact that withdrawal of the used tampon
appeared to be more difficult and have greater frictional drag than
conventional tampons. This was
particularly noticeable when the superabsorbant tampon was removed early
and/or when it contained relatively small amounts of absorbed fluid whereby
only a portion of the tampon cavity was utilized.” Is this the first
description of the “toxic shock scenario” on public record? * Interestingly, 1977 is the same year the Society for Menstrual Cycle
Research was founded. |
|
|
“Table 1. Coefficients of Static and Sliding Friction” from Mark’s
Mechanical Engineers’ Handbook, 1951.
“Copper on glass” is listed, “cast
iron on oak” is listed, but “tampon on vaginal wall” is not. |
RETURN TO
TOXIC PROTECTION / CONFIDENCE SHOCK DIRECTORY
X
|
Art,
Poetry and Music
|
From Protection to Expression: The Future of Menstrual
Advertising |
|||||
Menovulography:
the years from puberty to menopause, told as a story with pictures
|
|||||||
Contact
MOLT
|
|||||||