Hemophobia is not why the industry refuses to talk about menstrual blood

Antonia Jenkinson

On August 8th 2023, the first research study by E DeLoughery et al. on the absorbency of menstrual products tested with menstrual blood rather than water was published to the BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health Journal. The study revealed that the majority of disposable period products, like tampons and sanitary towels, are insufficient at carrying the weight of heavier periods. The first advert for a tampon appeared in a newspaper advert in 1920, and for years until BodyForm’s advert in 2017, TV adverts only showed the use of blue water in placement of menstrual blood. Internationally, there has always been a huge stigma around showing period blood to the public, but it is only until today that the true extent of period stigmatisation has shown itself with the reveal that this is the first study to use actual blood in testing products.

Why have we waited so long?

The reason for not testing blood on sanitary products is a result of historical misogyny in the medical industry.

Years of menstrual myths based in covert misogyny, like the idea that period blood is dirty or toxic, or that people who menstruate are hysterical, has led to a hug gap in research regarding women’s health particularly regarding what is and isn’t normal for periods. Constant stigmatisation of the period has led millions of menstruators to being ignored by healthcare professionals, as the lived experience does not match what supposed research tells us. Of course, this most recent study is a huge step forward in achieving equal care for everyone, however it’s tardiness acts as a microcosm for the wider systems of neglect being kept in place in the twenty-first century. Access to appropriate healthcare is a UN human right, and a lack of research for issues which affect more than 50% of the global population is a huge barrier in achieving this, without mentioning gaps in access to healthcare globally.

What does this mean for menstruators?

The revelation that perhaps sanitary wear is not as effective as previously considered is a huge one.

For years, people with periods have been told that heavy periods which lead to leaks (and the frequent bleaching of sheets) is normal and nothing to worry about. This article is not entirely negative however, as this new information will allow for items better suited for their purpose. If these results can be taken into the right hands, it could lead to a revolution in the sanitary wear industry.

The study published to the BMJ journal also suggests that reusable period alternatives, like menstrual disks, cups, and underwear, are probably more effective at safe collection than disposable products for those with heavier periods. With this knowledge, the SuPer Project hopes that this will result in a bigger push for the wider normalisation of education and use around sustainable period products. If you are interested in more details about this study, we have linked it, along with other research resources, at the bottom of this article.

The SuPer Project has a wonderful list of sustainable period alternatives which can be found in our blog posts, and some excellent reviews from our project director, Mel, about her experiences using each item. The SuPer Project exists with the aim to make period poverty more manageable for all – by purchasing one of our reusable period pads, we will donate one to someone in period poverty.