Hubbry Logo
Menstrual hygiene managementMenstrual hygiene managementMain
Open search
Menstrual hygiene management
Community hub
Menstrual hygiene management
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Menstrual hygiene management
Menstrual hygiene management
from Wikipedia
Tanzanian students learning about menstruation and puberty

Menstrual hygiene management (MHM) or menstrual health and hygiene (MHH) is the access to menstrual hygiene products to absorb or collect the flow of blood during menstruation, privacy to change the materials, and access to facilities to dispose of used menstrual management materials.[1] It can also include the "broader systemic factors that link menstruation with health, well-being, gender equality, education, equity, empowerment, and rights".[1] Menstrual hygiene management can be particularly challenging for girls and women in developing countries, where clean water and toilet facilities are often inadequate. Menstrual waste is largely ignored in schools in developing countries, despite it being a significant problem. Menstruation can be a barrier to education for many girls, as a lack of effective sanitary products restricts girls' involvement in educational and social activities.

Terminology

[edit]

An accepted definition of menstrual hygiene management (MHM) is:

  • "Women and adolescent girls use a clean material to absorb or collect menstrual blood, and this material can be changed in privacy as often as necessary for the duration of menstruation.
  • MHM also includes using soap and water for washing the body as required, and having access to facilities to dispose of used menstrual management materials."[2]

The "value chain" related to menstrual hygiene management includes four aspects: awareness, access, use as well as waste management.[3] The CLTS Knowledge Hub gives a definition that accounts for these four aspects as well as social and cultural factors:

Menstrual hygiene management' is the way in which women and adolescent girls deal with their menstruation. (Good) MHM requires a minimum level of knowledge and awareness in women and adolescent girls to manage their menstruation effectively and hygienically by using a clean material to absorb or collect menstrual blood, by practising good hygiene and personal care during their period, and by having access to facilities to wash or dispose of used menstrual management materials with dignity and in an environmentally responsible manner. MHM is not just about the management of the menstrual period but also the need to address societal beliefs and taboos surrounding the issue. Sufficient knowledge, guidance and support for girls and women in preparation for and during menstruation is also part of the definition.[4]

The term "menstrual health" is broader than menstrual hygiene. It encompasses both the menstrual hygiene management practices and the broader systemic factors that link menstruation with health, well-being, gender, education, equity, empowerment, and human rights (in particular the human right to water and sanitation).[5] UNICEF now (since 2019) uses the term MHH for "menstrual health and hygiene".[1]

These systematic factors include accurate and timely knowledge, available, safe, and affordable materials, informed and comfortable professionals, referral and access to health services, sanitation and washing facilities, positive social norms, safe and hygienic disposal, and advocacy and policy.[1][4]

History

[edit]

The oldest known records of menstrual hygiene products date to ancient Egypt, where people utilized softened papyrus as a means of absorbing menstrual blood. In resource-constrained Indigenous communities, organic materials were likely employed for this purpose. There is speculation that Vikings used bog moss.[6]

In the late 19th century, some suggest that menstruation was considered a form of illness. Doctor Edward Clark[who?] believed that attending school during menstruation could potentially delay the development of reproductive organs.[6]

In 1897, Johnson & Johnson added sanitary napkins to its price list following a suggestion from Joseph Brown Cook.[who?][7] Despite limited acceptance of this product,[8] it was the first commercially available sanitary protection product for women in the United States. These sanitary napkins were advertised minimally and in small print to maintain a sense of 'modesty'.[7]

Sfag-Na-Kins, developed by the Sphagnum Moss Products Company, transformed sphagnum moss into sanitary napkins with the ability to absorb over 20 times their dry weight in fluids.[9] In 1920, Johnson & Johnson introduced the discreetly named and plainly packaged Nupak brand, allowing women to make purchases inconspicuously.[7]

The success of Kotex napkins in 1921 can be attributed to extensive advertising in women's magazines and the use of Cellucotton enclosed within a gauze sheath.[9] In 1928, Johnson & Johnson introduced silent purchase coupons in magazine ads for MODESS sanitary napkins, providing women with a discreet means of acquiring products without engaging with salespeople.[7]

E.C. Haas filed a patent in 1931 for the Tampax tampons, featuring a paper-tube applicator. Tampons had initially been used in medical practice to control bleeding in deep wounds.[9]

In 1957, Mary Davidson Kenner presented a patent for an adjustable sanitary belt designed to secure the pad, prevent menstrual blood leakage, and avoid stains. However, Kenner, a black woman, faced systemic barriers.[8][10]

The popularity of belted sanitary napkins waned in the early 1980s with the advent of adhesive strips positioned on the bottom of sanitary pads, facilitating attachment to underwear linings. Since then, menstrual products have undergone substantial transformations, evolving to be more ergonomic, thinner, and incorporating diverse materials to enhance absorption.[9]

Challenges

[edit]
Celebration of Menstrual Hygiene Day in Amra Padatik, India

Menstrual hygiene management can be particularly challenging for girls and women in developing countries, where clean water and toilet facilities are often inadequate. In addition, traditional cultures make it difficult to discuss menstruation openly. This limits women's and adolescent girls' access to relevant and important information about the normal functions of their own body. This directly affects their health, education, and dignity. Access to information can be considered a human right.[11][12]

Currently, there are about 3.73 billion women in the world. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), 52%, or 1.9 billion, of those women are of reproductive age, thus menstruating (WHO, 2018).[13] Women at some point in their life will go through the reproductive age and thus, will experience menstruation. It has been estimated that daily 300 million women are menstruating; on average a woman will spend about 3,500 days during her life menstruating.[14]

Many adolescent girls and women of menstruating age live in poor socio-economic environments. 663 million people lack basic access to safe water, and 2.4 billion people lack adequate access to basic sanitary conditions.[15] For women and girls, the lack of safe, accessible water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is particularly troubling during menstruation and childbirth. It has been estimated that half a billion (or 13%) of women lacked a place to [[defecate, have little to no privacy for menstrual hygiene management, and 3/4 of those lacked access to soap and water.[16]

In a 2014 study conducted in India, the researchers found that as many as 42% of women who participated in the study did not know about sanitary pads or from where in their anatomy menstruation originated, and that "most of them were scared or worried on their first menstruation."[17] More recently, studies have shown that 50% of women in India have experienced a urinary tract infection (UTI) related to the inability to safely manage their period.[18] When left untreated, UTIs can lead to kidney failure. Worldwide, in 2018, one in three women did not have access to a working toilet at all.[19] Menstrual hygiene management issues have been ignored by professionals in the WASH sector, as well as in the health and education sectors.[20][21]

School toilets for girls in Tanzania, if they exist, often have no facilities to dispose of pads.

Health and psycho-social aspects

[edit]

Poor MHM may affect the reproductive tract, but the specific infections, the strength of effect, and the route of transmission remain unclear.[21] In India, a majority of girls are at risk for reproductive tract infections (RTI) because of poor MHM. RTI can lead to various disabilities if not treated early on[22] and are the cause of 30–50% of prenatal infection.[23] Due to prejudices surrounding the issue, some women in India do not eat or take showers during their menstruation.[24]

Girls' self-image may be negatively impacted by adverse attitudes towards menstruation.[25][26]

Sanitation facilities at schools

[edit]

The onset of menstruation is challenging for school-aged girls in low-income settings. Impacts can include school absenteeism, missed class time, reduced participation, teasing, fear and shame, and risky adaptive behaviors.[27] Further challenges that menstruating school girls face are a lack of knowledge, communication, and practical guidance prior to menarche and during menstruation; inadequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities; and ineffective or unavailable menstrual management materials.[27]

In many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, girls can miss up to 5 days of school a month or drop out entirely due to insufficient access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities and menstrual hygiene products.[28][29] Improving access to WASH facilities can actually increase girls' attendance at school. A program for school sanitation in Bangladesh increased girls' enrollment at school by 11%.[30]

Menstrual waste is largely ignored in schools in developing countries, despite it being a significant problem. Girls' access to water and sanitation at school is only available at 47% and 46% of all schools globally.[11] Often, school toilets for girls (if they even exist) are missing bins for menstrual waste collection with the result that pads may be spread all around the school compound area.[31] This pollutes the environment and also causes embarrassment for the school girls.

In the United States, among other countries, girls who are unable to afford feminine hygiene products may miss school in order "to avoid the embarrassment of staining their clothes".[32] According to a study done by INTIMINA surveying students across Ohio State University, University of Wisconsin at Madison, Harvard University, New York University, and University of Central Florida, 19% of female college students said they have felt forced to decide whether to buy period products or other necessities like food.[33]

Period poverty

[edit]
A period product dispenser in a bathroom in a public school in Victoria

Period poverty is a term used to describe the lack of access to adequate menstrual hygiene management supplies and education, including sanitary products (e.g., tampons, pads, liners, menstrual cups), washing facilities, and disposal management.[34] It also includes other constraints such as taboos and myths, movement and food restrictions, shame and stigma around impurity and dirt which all contribute to the menstruator having an experience which is not dignified.[35] Period poverty is a global health issue that affects many individuals living in low- and middle-income countries, with many young adolescents using materials such as mud, leaves, old paper, cotton, or animal skin to manage their periods.[36] The use of alternative products, or using products longer than intended, can lead to health complications, infections, and long-term health issues.[37] "In a 2018 study commissioned by U by Kotex, one in four women surveyed struggled to purchase period products. In the same study, one in five low-wage women reported missing work, school or similar events due to lack of access to period supplies. These instances were linked to reported feelings of embarrassment, disappointment and depression."[38][39][40]

Despite known health consequences, period poverty is often overlooked and not discussed due to social and cultural stigmas and taboos.[36] In recent years, many governments have actively increased access to affordable sanitary products and changed social norms towards menstruation. Scotland offers its residents free period products, while Kenya and New Zealand offer free period products for students in public schools.[41] In Australia, the state of Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory are rolling out access to free period products in public places,[42] and period products have been freely available in Victorian government-run schools since 2020.[43] Many organisations are spreading awareness to policymakers about the problem of girls missing school due to period poverty.[39][40]

However, period poverty remains a prevalent issue in the United States. In the United States, federal aid programs, including food stamps, SNAP benefits, and WIC benefits, do not cover purchases of feminine hygiene products.[40][34] With the lack of government support and high taxes on menstrual products, many women choose to forgo the purchase of sanitary products for other needs. For instance, two-thirds of 16.9 million low-income women cannot afford sanitary products and have to choose between sanitary products and food.[44] Currently, there are 14 states that ensure students have access to menstrual products in school bathrooms.[34] But school closures during the early onset of the COVID-19 pandemic challenge low-income students' access to pads and tampons.[34]

The homeless population also has difficulty accessing menstrual products.[37] In a mixed-method study conducted from May to August 2019 in New York City with homeless individuals, many participants reported that they had uncertain access to safe, clean, and private spaces for changing period products.[45] Many reported that the bathrooms in their homeless shelters were dirty or flooded.[45] They also reported feeling shamed and embarrassed in public with the possibility of menstrual leakage.[45] While most of the research on period poverty in the United States has largely focused on the homeless population and low-income school students, college students also report high rates, affecting school attendance and mental health, respectively.[46][47] In 2021, approximately 14.2% of menstruating college students reported experiencing period poverty.[44]

Access to materials

[edit]

In low-income countries, girls' choices of menstrual hygiene materials are often limited by the costs, availability and social norms.[48][49]

Absorption materials that may be used by women who cannot afford commercially produced materials include: sand, ash,[35] small hole in earth,[50] cloth, whole leaf, leaf fiber (such as water hyacinth, banana, papyrus, cotton fibre), paper (toilet paper, re-used newspaper, brown paper bags, pulped and dried paper),[51] animal pelt (such as goat skin),[50] double layer of underwear, socks, skirt, or sari.[52][53]

A lack of affordable hygiene products means inadequate, unhygienic alternatives are used, which can present a serious health risk.[54][55] Menstrual cups offer a long-term solution compared to some other feminine hygiene products because they do not need to be replaced monthly. The quality of the material also makes them a reliable and healthy menstrual hygiene solution, as long as there is access to clean water for washing them. A Menstrual disc is a reusable, medical-grade silicone product designed to collect menstrual fluid for up to 12 hours. Unlike traditional pads and tampons, it sits comfortably higher in the vaginal canal, offering a discreet, leak-free period experience. Safe for IUD users, cost-effective, and sustainable for over five years, they deliver a modern, eco-conscious solution for period care.[56]

Girls and women in the workplace often miss work because they don't have access to sanitary materials and places of employment in some countries do not provide resources for women or even have "proper toilets".[26] Women in Bangladesh who work in factories have reported that due to the cost of sanitary products for menstruation which they could not afford, they have resorted to using "factory-floor rags in place of pads and tampons, leading to dangerous infections and missed work."[57] The Christian sweeper community in Lahore who clean the roads do not have access to public washrooms because none or very few are available for women and because of this have to miss work when they have their period.[35]

Menstruation can be a barrier to education for many girls, as a lack of effective sanitary products restricts girls' involvement in educational and social activities.[58][59] Often they do not attend school due to fear of leaking, shame or embarrassment, period pain or inadequate sanitation facilities that do not allow them to wash or change in privacy.[60] This applies mainly to schoolgirls from low-income families, since disposable hygiene products are a monthly expense that many people simply cannot afford.[61]

Adequate sanitation facilities and access to menstrual hygiene products are just one part of the solution to menstrual taboos that impede women's progress in many developing countries. Knowledge is critical for girls to feel comfortable with menstruation and to gain a positive awareness of their bodies.[62]

Access to menstrual hygiene products may be limited in prisons and correctional facilities where the services have been historically designed for the male population. In 2021 there were around 740,000 women in prisons around the world[63] A woman incarcerated for five years in Pakistan spoke of how the prison authorities did not provide any menstrual products or pain relief medication to menstruating women.[35]

US and UK

[edit]

Many low-income and/or homeless girls and women in the inner cities of the United States cannot afford sanitary supplies.[32][64] Food banks in New York report that feminine hygiene products are in high demand.[32] Homeless women in the United States may face the challenge of not being able to shower or use the communal toilet in homeless shelters as often as they need to in cases where there are restrictions on toilet usage.[64] In New York, proposals to help lower-income women access menstrual sanitary supplies include proposals to remove the sales tax on feminine hygiene products and "distributing free tampons in public schools."[32] Sales tax are levied on menstrual supplies in 36 states.[65] On May 1, 2018, the National Diaper Bank Network, which provides millions of diapers to poor and low income parents and advocates for policy change around basic needs, launched the Alliance for Period Supplies and began distributing free period products through allied organizations across the U.S.[66] Homeless women in other industrialized countries, such as the United Kingdom, face problems affording tampons and sanitary napkins.[67] Scotland became the first country in the world to provide universal access to free period products in 2020.[68] Research has shown that for allotment holders who menstruate, lack of access to sanitation at their plots can lead to challenges in hygiene.[69]

South Asia

[edit]

Homeless women in Pakistan use dried ash wrapped in cloth to help them during their period. They have no access to clean running water, public washrooms are few and mainly for men, there is no privacy, no place to rest, and the women suffer from many infections.[citation needed]

Disposal of used materials

[edit]
Recyclable sanitary care box in Montevideo

A review in 2018 found that disposal of menstrual waste is often neglected in sanitation systems. This leads to improper disposal and negative impacts on users, the sanitation systems and the environment.[70]

Solid waste disposal systems in developing countries are often lacking, which means women have no proper place to dispose of used products, such as pads.[71] Inappropriate disposal of used materials also creates pressures on sanitation systems as menstrual hygiene products can create blockages of toilets, pipes and sewers.[72]

It is estimated that tampons, pads, and applicators generate 200,000 tonnes of plastic waste in the UK each year.[73]

In developing countries, women experience a lack of access to affordable menstrual hygiene products in addition to a lack of access to other services, such as sanitation and waste disposal systems needed to manage their menstrual cycles. Lack of access to waste disposal leads women to throw used products in toilet systems, pit latrines, or discard them into open areas such as bodies of water. These practices pose dangers to workers who handle these wastes, as they increase possible exposure to bloodborne infections in soaked menstrual products and exposure to chemicals found in menstrual hygiene products. Inappropriate disposal also creates pressures on sanitation systems as menstrual hygiene products create sewage blockages.[72] The effects of these inadequate facilities have been shown to have social effects on girls in developing countries, leading to school absenteeism.[74]

Taboos

[edit]

Even though menstruation is a healthy biological process, it is approached with hesitance and misinformation because of deeply-rooted cultural taboos surrounding menstruation.

Cultural,[35] religious and traditional beliefs, particularly in developing countries — can lead to restrictions that women or girls face during their period. In some societies, women do not wash their bodies, shower, or bathe during menstruation. They may not be allowed to use water sources during menstruation. Even if they have access to toilets, they might not use them because of the fear of staining the toilet bowls (in the case of dry toilets or flush toilets where the flush is not powerful).[61] This impairs the use of menstrual cups compared to pads, as the cups are normally emptied into toilets.

Expanding the discussion to include consideration of waste management is part of the attempt to "normalise" conversations about menstruation.[3][4]

Approaches for improvements

[edit]

MHM in schools should not be a stand-alone programme but should be integrated with existing programmes on WASH in schools, school health and nutrition programmes, puberty education programmes, and emergencies.[75][76]

In rural Bolivia, a menstrual hygiene management game was developed for school girls that stimulated detailed responses and diversified participatory activities in focus group discussions. The board game helped to ease girls' discomfort discussing menstruation.[27]

In India, comic books Menstrupedia Comic have been used to educate children, street theatre performances to educate men and women, wall paintings and murals to engage community youth and art workshops and exhibitions to break the stigma and shame.[35]

In Bhutan, the Buddhist nuns, through the Bhutan Nuns Foundation, have revolutionised the menstrual health of the nuns living in nunneries.[35]

In Pakistan, many new start-ups in this area have contributed to improving access and making the subject easier to talk about. In Balochistan, a tribal area of Pakistan, the first-ever menstrual health participatory workshop held in 2021 used poetry and art to raise awareness and change the discussion around the subject and make it more open.[35]

Improving MHM requires community-wide attitudinal changes. Involving men in MHM.[35] is a key to get them to support their wives and daughters.[77] Other organisations have also worked with games and stories to teach MHM, dispel common myths and start conversations. Games help to create a positive atmosphere around a topic generally associated with shame and embarrassment.[4]

An under-researched area is how people living with disabilities cope with the challenges of menstruation, and how their caregivers have to manage their menstrual hygiene and health for them.[35]

Further research investigation, and practical assistance is also needed for those living in temporary shelters due to migration, climate change, flooding, earthquakes, communal riots or other such reasons of displacement.[35]

In 2014, Wash United initiated Menstrual Hygiene Day on May 28. Menstrual Hygiene Day creates an occasion for publicising information about menstrual hygiene management issues in the media as a way to raise awareness, celebrate and normalise menstruation and menstrual hygiene. The day offers an opportunity to actively advocate for the integration of menstrual hygiene management into global, national, and local policies and programmes.[78]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Menstrual hygiene management (MHM) consists of the use of clean materials to absorb or collect menstrual blood by women and adolescent girls, combined with access to private facilities for changing these materials as needed, proper disposal or cleaning options, handwashing with and , and sufficient knowledge to avoid health risks such as infections from poor . In practice, this requires absorbent products like or cloths, sanitary infrastructure such as toilets with and waste disposal, and on menstrual to counteract cultural misconceptions that perpetuate stigma or unsafe practices. Globally, inadequate MHM affects menstrual health outcomes, with empirical data showing elevated risks of reproductive tract infections and urogenital issues in settings lacking clean water or products, though causal links are mediated by baseline sanitation levels rather than menstruation alone. Schoolgirls in low-income regions often face absenteeism—estimated at 1-3 days per cycle in some studies—due to insufficient facilities or fear of odor and leaks, disrupting education and exacerbating gender disparities, yet randomized interventions providing pads yield mixed results on attendance, suggesting psychosocial barriers like shame play a larger role than material access. In humanitarian crises, such as refugee camps, MHM challenges intensify from overcrowding and supply shortages, leading to improvised and unhygienic methods that heighten vulnerability to disease. Notable efforts include scalable programs distributing reusable pads and building girl-friendly latrines, which improve usage rates but require ongoing evaluation for cost-effectiveness amid debates over disposable versus sustainable options' environmental trade-offs.

Definition and Biological Basis

Terminology and Physiological Fundamentals

Menstruation is the periodic discharge of blood and mucosal tissue from the uterine lining (endometrium) in females of reproductive age, occurring when pregnancy does not follow ovulation.30619-0/fulltext) This process is part of the menstrual cycle, a hormone-regulated sequence averaging 28 days in length but normally ranging from 24 to 38 days, divided into the follicular phase (beginning with menstruation and culminating in ovulation) and the luteal phase (post-ovulation, preparing the endometrium for implantation). Key hormones include follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) from the pituitary gland, which stimulate ovarian follicle development, and estrogen and progesterone, which thicken and maintain the endometrium; a drop in these latter hormones triggers endometrial breakdown if no implantation occurs. The cycle typically begins at menarche (first menstruation, average age 12-13 years in developed regions) and ceases at menopause (permanent end, average age 51). Menses denotes the effluent of menstruation, comprising approximately 80% blood (from endometrial arterioles), 10-20% endometrial debris, and mucus, with total volume usually 5-80 ml per episode (median 30 ml) and duration of 2-7 days. Physiologically, this shedding prevents unchecked endometrial proliferation, which could otherwise lead to hyperplasia or malignancy over time, while conserving reproductive energy in non-pregnant states. Dysmenorrhea refers to painful menstruation due to prostaglandin-mediated uterine contractions, affecting up to 90% of women to some degree, while menorrhagia describes excessive bleeding exceeding 80 ml or lasting over 7 days. Menstrual hygiene management (MHM) encompasses the practices and materials used to handle menstrual blood and maintain cleanliness during this process, defined by the (WHO) and as "women and adolescent girls using a clean menstrual management material to absorb or collect blood, and who change this material as often as necessary, use and for washing the body as required, have access to suitable disposal facilities, and understand the basic facts relating to the and personal ." Related terms include amenorrhea (absence of , primary if before or secondary if ceasing after establishment) and oligomenorrhea (infrequent cycles over 38 days), which signal potential endocrine disruptions rather than normal variation. These fundamentals underscore MHM's role in mitigating risks like from unabsorbed blood stagnation or anemia from unmanaged heavy flow, grounded in the cycle's inherent variability and biological imperatives.

Scope and Universal Aspects

Menstrual hygiene management (MHM) refers to the access to and use of clean materials to absorb or collect menstrual blood that can be changed in privacy as frequently as necessary, along with facilities for washing the body with soap and water, safe disposal of used materials, and awareness of menstrual hygiene practices to support health and dignity during menstruation. This scope extends beyond mere product provision to include sanitation infrastructure, such as private latrines or changing spaces equipped with water and soap, and education on menstrual physiology and hygiene to mitigate risks like infections from prolonged contact with blood or unclean materials. Effective MHM requires these elements to be integrated into daily routines, particularly in resource-constrained environments where lack of access can disrupt education, work, and social participation for affected individuals. Biologically, menstruation is a universal process among human females from (typically ages 10-15) through (around age 50), involving the monthly shedding of the uterine due to hormonal fluctuations, with cycles averaging 21-35 days and bleeding durations of 3-7 days. Blood volume per cycle normally ranges from 5 to 80 milliliters, necessitating absorbent or collection methods to manage flow and prevent leakage, odor, or skin irritation from exposure to menstrual fluid, which contains blood, endometrial tissue, and cervical . These physiological constants underpin the universal requirement for practices, as unabsorbed blood provides a medium for bacterial proliferation, potentially leading to localized infections if not addressed through regular changing and cleaning—fundamentals independent of cultural or socioeconomic variations. Globally, more than 300 million females menstruate on any given day, affecting roughly half the world's at some life stage and highlighting MHM as a baseline need akin to other excretory . Yet, an estimated 500 million lack sufficient access to appropriate products or facilities, with prevalence of unmet needs higher in low-income regions due to infrastructural deficits rather than biological differences. Universal implementation of MHM principles—regardless of disposable versus reusable options—correlates with reduced and improved physical comfort, as evidenced by data from diverse settings where basic access yields measurable benefits. This underscores that while product preferences may vary, the core imperatives of absorption, , and remain non-negotiable for maintaining vulvovaginal across all menstruating .

Historical Context

Pre-20th Century Practices

In , women utilized softened , a grass-like plant, to create absorbent tampon-like devices inserted to manage menstrual flow, as evidenced by archaeological and textual records from the period around 3000–1000 BCE. Similarly, in circa 500 BCE, women fashioned rudimentary tampons by wrapping lint or soft wool around small wooden sticks for internal absorption. These methods relied on readily available natural materials, reflecting practical adaptations to biological needs without industrialized production. Across prehistoric and early historical societies, including hunter-gatherer groups in Europe and Africa, women employed absorbent substances such as moss, grass bundles, animal skins, or wool scraps folded into pads or loincloths to contain blood, with evidence from ethnographic studies of surviving indigenous practices and paleontological inferences. In ancient Rome, both sexes wore the subligaculum, a basic loincloth of linen or wool that served as underwear and incidental menstrual containment for women during the Republic and Empire eras (509 BCE–476 CE). In regions like ancient Japan, paper sheets were occasionally used as external pads by the Heian period (794–1185 CE), leveraging the material's availability in literate societies. During the European (c. 500–1500 CE), reusable cloth rags or strips were commonly folded and pinned into undergarments, washed after use, supplemented in some northern areas by moss for its natural absorbency. traditions under laws, dating to at least 1000 BCE, emphasized ritual seclusion for menstruating women, reducing public management needs but still involving private use of rags or absorbent cloths, as referenced in Leviticus texts. These practices prioritized reusability due to material scarcity, with hygiene limited by available water and . By the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe, homemade pads from woven fabric or flannel became standardized for middle-class women, often secured with rudimentary belts or tied to undergarments, laundered frequently to mitigate odor and infection risks in pre-antiseptic eras. In equatorial African cultures, grass mats rolled into tampons or external pads were documented in ethnographic accounts from the 19th century, adapting local flora for containment. Odor management relied on frequent changing of reusable cloths, rags, moss, wool, or other natural absorbents, followed by thorough washing. Fresh menstrual blood is largely odorless until exposed to air and bacteria, with smells arising mainly from delayed changing or poor hygiene. Techniques included ventilation by avoiding tight undergarments, prompt replacement of materials, and masking with strong perfumes among wealthier women. In 18th-century France, menstrual odor was sometimes viewed positively as seductive. Rubber barriers were occasionally used but could trap moisture and exacerbate smells. Overall, pre-20th century methods universally depended on biodegradable, locally sourced materials, lacking disposability and often entailing social taboos that influenced seclusion over innovation.

20th Century Developments and Commercialization

The development of disposable menstrual pads accelerated during , when nurses in and other battlefields adapted highly absorbent wood pulp bandages—originally designed for wound care—into makeshift sanitary napkins that could be discarded after use, addressing the limitations of reusable cloths in hygienic but resource-scarce environments. This wartime improvisation directly influenced post-war commercialization, as surplus cellulose materials from military production became available for civilian applications. In 1921, launched , the first disposable pad successfully mass-produced and marketed at scale, leveraging the absorbent properties of Cellucotton—a rayon-wood pulp composite developed for surgical dressings—to offer a convenient alternative to homemade rags or early commercial towels like Johnson & Johnson's Lister's Towels, which had seen limited adoption due to distribution challenges and social taboos. Kotex's introduction marked a pivotal milestone, with aggressive campaigns in the 1920s—often veiled in euphemisms to navigate menstrual stigma—targeting women through magazines and discreet packaging, resulting in rapid sales growth as urban middle-class consumers embraced disposability for its convenience and reduced laundry burden. By the 1930s, competitors like Modess (introduced by in 1926) expanded the market with refined designs, including deodorized and scented variants, while belts or pins remained standard for attachment until innovations emerged later in the century. Parallel advancements occurred with s, as internal absorption addressed external ' bulkiness and chafing issues. In 1931, physician patented a compact, applicator-based made from , enabling easier insertion and ; this design was licensed to Gertrude Tenderich, who founded Tampax Inc. and began commercial sales in 1936 after initial resistance from retailers wary of the product's novelty and perceived indecency. 's emphasized athletic freedom for active women, gaining traction amid post-Depression consumer shifts toward convenience, though adoption was slower than due to insertion learning curves and early medical concerns over potential infections, which manufacturers countered with expanded testing protocols by the mid-1940s. Mid-century innovations further drove commercialization, including the 1937 patent for a latex menstrual cup by actress Leona Chalmers, an early reusable alternative that anticipated later sustainability trends but achieved limited owing to fitting variability and cleaning requirements. Post-World War II economic booms facilitated product diversification, with beltless featuring self-adhesive strips appearing in 1972—pioneered by brands like —eliminating cumbersome sanitary belts and boosting accessibility for diverse body types and activities. By the , multinational firms such as (with Always ) and Tambrands (acquiring ) dominated global markets through economies of , R&D in super-absorbent polymers, and that normalized in media, though persistent cultural silences in some regions constrained broader uptake. These developments shifted menstrual from predominantly homemade practices to industrialized, consumer-driven solutions, prioritizing disposability and discretion.

Management Methods and Products

Disposable Options

Disposable menstrual products primarily consist of sanitary pads and tampons, designed for single-use absorption of menstrual blood externally or internally, respectively. Sanitary pads, also known as napkins, are adhesive-backed absorbent sheets worn in , featuring multiple layers including a permeable top sheet for acquisition, an absorbent core often incorporating superabsorbent polymers () derived from petroleum-based materials to lock in liquids, and an impermeable backsheet to prevent leakage. These pads can comprise up to 90% plastics and synthetic polymers, contributing to their non-biodegradable nature. Tampons, by contrast, are cylindrical plugs inserted into the , composed mainly of compressed fibers such as , , or blends thereof, which expand upon absorbing blood; they may include applicators made of or for ease of insertion. Globally, sanitary pads represent the most prevalent disposable option, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where cultural preferences favor external products and internal insertion faces barriers related to and infrastructure. In , for instance, approximately 121 million women generate over 1 billion pads of waste annually from average monthly usage of eight pads per person. usage is higher in high-income regions like and , where applicator-equipped varieties facilitate adoption, though overall disposable product consumption yields 5,000 to 15,000 units per menstruator over a lifetime. These products offer convenience and reliability in absorption, with in pads capable of retaining 30 times their weight in fluid, reducing leakage s during daily activities; proper hygiene practices include changing pads every 4-6 hours regardless of flow to prevent bacterial growth and infections, as well as washing the external genital area with warm water. However, peer-reviewed analyses indicate potential low-level exposure to environmental chemicals like and volatile organic compounds from manufacturing residues, though systemic health s remain minimal based on exposure modeling. Tampons carry a rare but documented of (TSS) due to bacterial overgrowth in the stagnant vaginal environment, with incidence rates historically below 1-2 cases per 100,000 users annually following formulation changes to reduce absorbency. Production of disposables relies on industrial processes involving for plastics and , with global market volumes driving annual waste outputs equivalent to 28,000 tonnes in some regional estimates, predominantly from . Organic variants substitute conventional or with certified pesticide-free fibers, but life-cycle assessments show they often incur higher resource demands in cultivation without proportionally reducing overall environmental burdens compared to non-organic counterparts.

Reusable and Traditional Alternatives

Reusable menstrual products include menstrual cups, cloth , and , which offer alternatives to disposable options by allowing repeated use after cleaning. Menstrual cups, typically made of medical-grade or rubber, are inserted into the to collect rather than absorb menstrual fluid, with capacities holding 20-60 milliliters and recommended emptying every 4-12 hours depending on flow.30111-2/fulltext) A 2019 of 331 women across three studies found menstrual cups safe for menstruation management, with no increased risk of adverse effects on compared to or tampons, and rare severe adverse events like IUD expulsion in five cases among thousands of users. Further in 2023 indicated that menstrual cup use reduced incidence by 26% and improved vaginal microbiota health in adolescent girls after six months, attributing benefits to reduced exposure to external irritants. Cloth or reusable pads consist of layered absorbent fabrics like or , fastened to and washed after use, typically lasting 6-12 months with proper care. A 2021 meta-analysis of 21 studies involving over 3,000 participants confirmed reusable menstrual pads as effective for fluid absorption and leakage prevention, with acceptability rates of 70-90% in low-resource settings due to cost savings of up to 80% over disposables. These pads require handwashing with and drying in sunlight for , mitigating risks when maintained correctly, though improper cleaning can harbor . integrates absorbent gussets into regular undergarments, often with layers, providing capacities equivalent to light-to-medium flow pads and reusability for 2-5 years. Comparative studies note period underwear's superior comfort and leak resistance over separate reusable pads, as the built-in design prevents shifting, though initial costs are higher at $20-50 per pair versus $5-10 for cloth pads. Traditional alternatives, predating commercial products, involved absorbent natural or household materials such as rags, , or leaves, often folded and secured with belts or ties. Historical evidence from pre-20th century practices in various cultures documents rag use in and cloth wrapping in parts of and , with rudimentary washing to reuse, though hygiene standards varied widely and contributed to odor and risks without modern detergents. In contemporary low-income or rural settings, some communities still employ homemade cloths or natural fibers, influenced by cultural norms viewing menstruation as impure, which can limit access to on safe reuse. Peer-reviewed analyses highlight that while these methods reduce , they pose higher health risks from inadequate absorbency and contamination compared to engineered reusables, with studies in and linking traditional rag use to elevated urinary tract infections absent in standardized cloth pad programs. Overall, reusable options demonstrate empirical advantages in safety and efficacy when protocols are followed, outperforming many traditional improvisations through material advancements.

Emerging Innovations

Recent developments in menstrual hygiene management emphasize sustainable materials and integrated technologies to address environmental concerns and improve user monitoring. Innovations include biodegradable pads derived from agricultural waste, such as and plantain fibers processed into absorbent materials, which reduce reliance on synthetic disposables and support local economies in regions like . Similarly, plant-based pads using fibers have been engineered through open-source processes to enhance absorbency while minimizing plastic content, potentially alleviating period poverty in low-resource settings. Biomaterial advancements feature eco-friendly, blood-absorbent substances that outperform traditional superabsorbent polymers in menstrual products, as demonstrated by research at , where fungal-derived composites achieve higher liquid retention without chemical additives. These materials prioritize rapid wicking and properties to lower risks, though long-term field efficacy remains under evaluation. Technological integrations are emerging in "smart" products, such as menstrual cups and tampons embedded with sensors for Bluetooth-enabled flow tracking, enabling real-time data on volume and cycle irregularities to inform health decisions. Wearable biosensors combined with biodegradable biofibers further extend this by monitoring biomarkers like hormones alongside menstrual flow, paving the way for predictive health analytics, though privacy and accuracy concerns persist in early prototypes. Experimental hormone-tracking pads aim to detect fertility indicators directly from absorbed fluids, but clinical validation is limited as of 2025. These innovations collectively reduce waste—menstrual cups, for instance, generate up to 99% less contribution over a lifetime compared to disposables—while enhancing , yet barriers include regulatory hurdles and consumer education needs. Peer-reviewed analyses highlight that while reusable and tech-enhanced options lower environmental footprints, their health benefits, such as reduced risks from non-bleached materials, require broader longitudinal studies beyond initial trials.

Health Effects

Positive Outcomes from Effective Practices

Effective menstrual hygiene management (MHM) practices, including the use of clean absorbent materials and regular washing, reduce the risk of reproductive tract infections (RTIs) by minimizing bacterial growth and contamination. A study in China found that frequent genital self-washing during menstruation was associated with lower odds of RTIs such as candidiasis (adjusted odds ratio 0.51) and bacterial vaginosis (adjusted odds ratio 0.42). Similarly, proper hygiene prevents odors and discomfort, contributing to overall physical well-being during menstruation. Interventions promoting effective MHM, such as providing sanitary products, , and facilities, have demonstrated improvements in school attendance among adolescent girls. In a randomized trial in conducted between 2012 and 2013, girls in intervention schools showed 68% class attendance during compared to 30% in control schools, alongside reduced dropout rates. Systematic reviews of multiple trials indicate positive effects on schoolgirls' attendance and academic performance, with education components enhancing and in managing . Beyond health and education, effective MHM fosters benefits by alleviating embarrassment and stigma associated with menstruation. Programs combining product provision with hygiene education have led to improved attitudes and , enabling greater participation in daily activities. In low-resource settings, such practices correlate with higher overall , as girls report less disruption to social and economic engagements. Effective MHM also enhances agency in sexual and reproductive health decisions, supporting better outcomes in family planning and contraception. These outcomes underscore the causal link between hygienic practices and enhanced female empowerment through reduced menstrual-related barriers.

Risks Associated with Poor Management

Poor menstrual hygiene management (MHM), characterized by practices such as reusing unwashed cloths, infrequent changing of absorbents, or limited access to clean for washing, has been associated with elevated risks of urogenital infections. A of 718 menstruating women in , , found that unhygienic MHM practices, including not changing absorbent materials at least twice daily or using unclean reusable pads, were strongly linked to (BV) with an adjusted (AOR) of 6.1 (95% CI: 3.6–10.2) and vulvovaginal with an AOR of 5.6 (95% CI: 2.7–11.7). These infections arise from prolonged exposure to blood and moisture, fostering bacterial overgrowth in the vaginal . Urinary tract infections (UTIs) represent another documented risk, particularly where washing frequency is reduced during due to or cultural taboos. In a study of 650 adolescent girls in rural western , UTI prevalence was weakly associated with less frequent genital washing (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.53, 95% CI: 1.00–2.34), compounded by household factors like lack of private latrines. Such conditions exacerbate bacterial ascension into the urinary tract, with symptoms including and potential progression to if untreated. Dermatological complications, such as , rashes, and ulceration, frequently occur from extended contact with soiled or irritant materials like rags or low-quality pads. Surveys in low-resource settings report irritation rates up to 20–30% among girls using reusable cloths without proper drying or soap, attributable to moisture retention and chemical irritants in blood degradation products. Chronic exposure may lead to secondary infections or scarring. Longer-term reproductive health consequences include heightened risk from recurrent infections; BV, for instance, disrupts cervical mucus and increases susceptibility to . Poor MHM further reduces agency in decisions on sex, relationships, family planning, and contraception, contributing to adverse outcomes such as early marriage and higher fertility. However, systematic reviews emphasize that while associations exist, causal evidence remains limited by confounding factors like overall and study designs reliant on self-reported practices, with few longitudinal data confirming direct links to outcomes like preterm birth or . In resource-poor environments, these risks compound with or co-infections, amplifying morbidity.

Barriers to Effective Management

Access and Infrastructure Gaps

![School toilet facilities for girls in Tanzania](./assets/School_toilet_for_girls_in_Tanzania_(6880181036) Globally, an estimated 500 million women and girls lack access to menstrual products and adequate facilities for menstrual , exacerbating and educational disruptions. In low- and middle-income countries, over 500 million reproductive-age women lack proper facilities tailored for , leading to reliance on inadequate or unhygienic methods. Infrastructure deficiencies are pronounced in educational settings, where only 39% of schools worldwide provide , dropping to 17% in and 11% in . Less than one-third (31%) of schools globally have disposal bins for used products, and one in five children lacks basic services at , compelling girls to manage without or . These gaps contribute to , with a pooled of 15% for menstrual-related school absence among women and girls aged 15-49 in 44 low-income and lower-middle-income countries. In , one in ten girls misses during her due to such deficiencies, while in , 95% of menstruating girls report missing one to three days per cycle. Rural areas and regions with face compounded challenges, as inadequate water supply hinders cleaning of reusable products and personal , increasing infection risks. In many developing contexts, schools lack separate, lockable toilets for girls, forcing improvised solutions or avoidance of facilities altogether, which perpetuates cycles of educational disadvantage. These infrastructural shortcomings, often documented in and WHO assessments, stem from underinvestment in gender-specific (water, sanitation, and hygiene) systems rather than broader sanitation coverage alone.

Economic Factors

The high cost of disposable menstrual products constitutes a primary economic barrier to effective menstrual hygiene management, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where such items can consume 10-15% of average monthly income in nations like , , and . In , women may allocate up to 13% of their income to these products, exacerbating financial strain amid competing household needs. This affordability gap drives "period poverty," defined as the inadequate access to hygienic products due to financial constraints, compelling many to ration supplies, improvise with suboptimal materials like cloths or rags, or forgo management altogether, which heightens health risks. Economic barriers disproportionately affect low-income households, where wealth inequality directly correlates with unequal access to menstrual products and facilities, independent of other socio-economic variables. In low-income settings, the upfront of reusable alternatives, such as menstrual cups or cloth , can deter adoption despite long-term savings, as initial costs represent a significant outlay for impoverished families. Consequently, girls in affected regions experience heightened absenteeism—up to one in five cases linked to —leading to reduced and perpetuating cycles of through diminished future earning potential. On a macroeconomic scale, poor menstrual hygiene management results in losses, with estimates indicating that unaddressed barriers widen inequalities in and , constraining overall in developing economies. Interventions like product subsidies or reductions on menstrual items have shown potential to improve affordability, but their efficacy remains limited without addressing underlying disparities, as evidenced by persistent unmet needs in subsidized programs across multiple low-income countries. In higher-income contexts, such as the , approximately 20% of adolescents report difficulties affording products, underscoring that economic hurdles persist even where absolute costs are lower relative to wages.

Cultural Influences

Cultural norms and taboos surrounding frequently act as barriers to effective management by promoting secrecy, restricting access to sanitary resources, and discouraging hygienic behaviors. In many traditional societies, menstrual blood is perceived as impure or polluting, leading women and girls to hide their and resort to makeshift absorbents such as old cloths, rags, or leaves, which increase risks of reproductive tract infections due to inadequate absorption and cleaning. These practices persist because open discussion is often prohibited, limiting on proper management techniques. In , the tradition exemplifies severe cultural restrictions, where menstruating women and girls are isolated in rudimentary sheds or livestock areas for up to seven days, lacking basic and exposing them to unhygienic conditions that heighten vulnerability to infections, animal attacks, and . Although outlawed by Nepal's in 2005, the practice continues in rural far-western regions due to entrenched Hindu-influenced beliefs in menstrual impurity, with surveys indicating that up to 20% of women in affected areas still adhere to it as of 2018. Similarly, in rural , taboos rooted in cultural myths—such as avoiding to prevent illness—compromise personal hygiene, contributing to higher incidences of urinary tract infections and vulvovaginal issues among adolescent girls. A 2022 study found that 62% of young Indian women used reusable cloths during , often washed infrequently due to stigma around public drying. Religious doctrines amplify these barriers in various contexts; for instance, purity rituals in and some Islamic interpretations impose or activity restrictions during , which can delay changing absorbents or accessing clean for washing. In rural , cultural taboos intertwined with misinformation lead to improper washing of menstrual cloths—such as avoiding or sunlight drying—persisting even after educational interventions, thereby sustaining and health risks. In Pacific Island countries like and , beliefs that menstrual blood weakens men or pollutes food result in prohibitions on cooking or social participation, coupled with school due to teasing and shame, further entrenching poor outcomes. These influences, while varying by region, collectively undermine MHM by prioritizing ritual avoidance over empirical hygiene needs, as evidenced by persistent low adoption rates of disposable products in taboo-heavy areas.

Environmental and Economic Analyses

Lifecycle Environmental Impacts

Disposable sanitary pads and tampons generate substantial environmental burdens across their lifecycle, including raw material extraction (e.g., pulp from trees or , plastics, and superabsorbent polymers), energy-intensive manufacturing, transportation, and end-of-life disposal primarily via landfills or . These products contribute to , with pad production alone responsible for 65% of fossil resource impacts and 39% of use in assessed categories. Globally, billions of such items are discarded annually, exacerbating waste accumulation; in and the , over 80% enter landfills, where pads can persist for 500–800 years due to non-biodegradable components, releasing and leachates into soil and . Reusable alternatives, particularly menstrual cups, exhibit markedly lower lifecycle impacts when amortized over typical 5–10 year lifespans, outperforming disposables in metrics such as , , acidification, and waste generation. Life cycle assessments across multiple countries indicate cups score 99% lower than non-organic disposables and up to 74% lower than organic variants in overall environmental harm. A single menstrual cup used for one year generates less than 1.5% of the impacts of equivalent disposable pad or usage, primarily due to minimal material inputs (typically medical-grade ) and reduced waste, producing only 0.4% of the volume associated with pads. Washing reusables adds and use (e.g., and heating), but these are offset by longevity, with total burdens remaining under 10% of disposables even accounting for laundering. Cloth pads and follow cups in sustainability rankings, with impacts 50–80% below disposables depending on material and care practices, though they require more frequent replacement and washing than cups. Plant-based disposable innovations, such as hemp-derived pads, reduce certain impacts (e.g., via lower chemical inputs and faster ) compared to conventional synthetics but still lag reusables by factors of 2–5 times in comprehensive assessments. These findings hold across varied geographies, underscoring that shifts to reusables could mitigate broader pressures like from pulp sourcing and from production and waste decay.
Product TypeRelative Impact vs. Non-Organic DisposablesKey Categories Affected
1–1.5% (over 1 year use)Waste, energy, water, GHG emissions
Reusable Pads/20–50%Resource ,
Organic Disposables20–30%Landfill persistence,
Plant-Based Pads (e.g., )40–60%Chemical ,

Cost-Benefit Evaluations

Cost-benefit analyses of menstrual hygiene management (MHM) interventions reveal varying economic returns depending on the context, product type, and outcome measured, with reusable options like menstrual cups often demonstrating superior cost-effectiveness for improvements compared to disposable . In a cluster-randomized pilot study in rural involving schoolgirls, providing menstrual cups cost $3,270 annually for 1,000 girls and averted 1.4 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), yielding a cost-effectiveness of $2,300 per DALY averted; in contrast, sanitary cost $24,000 for the same group, averting 0.48 DALYs at $50,000 per DALY, though reduced school at $300 per student-school year. Net benefits favored (+$68,000) over cups (+$3,630) when incorporating future earnings from reduced , but cups offered higher gains despite lower acceptability. These findings, derived from a one-year with limited statistical power, relied on European models adapted to local data, potentially underestimating unmeasured benefits like stigma reduction. Workplace MHM programs in and factories have shown benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) exceeding 1 in most scenarios, driven by productivity gains and health cost savings. A 10-month intervention across four sites, including upgrades and product provision, incurred costs of $2,827 to $12,629 per site and achieved a base-case BCR of 1.4 (range 0.54–2.22), rising to 2.3 over projected 24 months; optimistic estimates reached 3.39, factoring in 90% reductions in some Nepal sites and willingness-to-pay valuations of $8 per woman. Benefits encompassed lower healthcare expenditures ($7.15–$7.63 monthly per woman in Nepal) and enhanced economic participation, though conservative projections yielded a BCR of 1.33, highlighting sensitivity to data limitations like short durations and self-reported outcomes. Such evaluations, funded by USAID, prioritize private-sector applicability but may overlook long-term . Broader economic assessments indicate that augmenting education with menstrual materials amplifies returns, particularly in schools, by boosting attendance and . In , interventions linking MHM to schooling yielded monetized benefits via extended education years, with conservative estimates as lower bounds and optimistic projections adding 15–30% for effects. Adding materials to hygiene education in Kenya contexts similarly generated additional socio-economic returns, though isolated quantification remains challenging without controls. These peer-reviewed and project-based studies underscore positive net present values but emphasize context-specificity, with generalizability limited by small samples and assumptions in valuing intangible gains like .
Intervention TypeKey MetricValueContext/Source
Menstrual Cups (School)Cost per DALY Averted$2,300Rural , 1-year pilot
Sanitary Pads (School)Cost per Student-Year Absenteeism Reduction$300Rural , 1-year pilot
Workplace MHMBenefit-Cost Ratio (Base, 10 months)1.4/ factories
Workplace MHMBCR (Optimistic, 24 months)3.39/ factories
Overall, while MHM yields empirical and benefits outweighing costs in evaluated settings, rigorous longitudinal gaps persist, and interventions must account for cultural uptake barriers to maximize returns.

Recent Developments and Debates

Technological and Market Advances

The global menstrual hygiene management market was valued at approximately USD 24 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a (CAGR) of 4.2% from 2025 to 2034, driven by increasing demand for sustainable and innovative products. This expansion reflects broader trends in the sector, valued at USD 43.25 billion in 2024 and expected to reach USD 45.56 billion in 2025, with reusable and biodegradable options gaining traction amid environmental concerns. Technological innovations have focused on reusable menstrual products, including menstrual cups, cloth pads, and , which systematic reviews confirm are effective, safe, and more cost-efficient over time compared to disposables. For instance, reusable menstrual pads demonstrate comparable absorbency and leakage prevention to single-use pads in field trials across multiple countries, while reducing long-term costs by up to 40% for users in low-income settings. Recent developments include advanced biomaterials, such as blood-absorbent polymers derived from natural sources, enhancing reusability and in products like improved menstrual cups. Biodegradable sanitary pads represent another advance, utilizing materials like banana fiber, bamboo pulp, and to decompose faster than traditional -based disposables, addressing plastic waste accumulation from the estimated 45 billion pads discarded annually worldwide. Innovations such as fully flushable pads made from plant-based polymers offer 15% higher absorbency than leading disposables while eliminating microplastic release into waterways. These products, developed through processes like open-source fiber extraction, aim to lower environmental footprints without compromising hygiene, though adoption remains limited by manufacturing scalability in developing regions. Smart menstrual technologies, including Bluetooth-enabled cups and tampons with sensors, enable real-time tracking of flow volume and patterns, providing data for personalized health monitoring and early detection of irregularities. Devices like the Bfree Cup integrate dissolvable tablets for expanded wearable health metrics, promoting reusability while fostering acceptance through added functionality. Product launches, such as Ontex's SatinSense tampons with silky coatings for easier insertion in December 2023, illustrate incremental improvements in user comfort and discretion. Despite these advances, barriers like initial costs and cleaning perceptions persist, as noted in user perception studies, underscoring the need for education alongside innovation.

Policy Initiatives and Their Efficacy

Policies addressing menstrual hygiene management (MHM) primarily involve government-mandated provision of disposable or reusable sanitary products in public schools, infrastructure enhancements such as gender-segregated facilities, and educational curricula on menstrual . In developing countries, national programs often subsidize sanitary napkins for adolescent girls; for example, India's Menstrual Hygiene Scheme under the , initiated in 2011 and expanded via 2015 guidelines, distributed over 360 million packs to approximately 20 million girls by 2020, targeting rural and low-income areas. In January 2026, the Karnataka state government announced plans to distribute over 1 million menstrual cups to students in government schools and colleges statewide from the next academic year, expanding a successful pilot to replace sanitary pads with this sustainable, cost-saving alternative expected to reduce annual expenditure by approximately Rs 10 crore. Similarly, Kenya's free sanitary towels program, rolled out in primary schools since 2013, provided pads to over 3 million girls annually by 2022, coupled with basic hygiene education. In high-income contexts, Scotland's Period Products (Free Provision) Act of 2021 mandates free access to tampons and pads in all educational and public buildings, while several U.S. states, including and New York by 2023, enacted laws requiring free products in public school restrooms, with 32 states addressing MHM in policy by 2025, mostly via product distribution. Evaluations of these initiatives reveal mixed , with stronger for short-term behavioral changes than sustained educational or outcomes. A cluster quasi-randomized controlled trial in rural involving 45 schools found that providing reusable sanitary pads and education increased girls' school attendance by 2.1 percentage points (from 79% to 81%) over 20 months, though the effect was modest and not sustained post-intervention. In , a 2021 cluster RCT with 3,000 grade 7 girls showed pad distribution alone raised attendance by 1.5-2% during , while combining it with reproductive yielded no additional attendance gains but improved knowledge scores by 10-15%. Broader reviews, such as a 2023 systematic analysis of 16 trials, reported positive but heterogeneous impacts on school performance and reduced distress, attributing benefits to reduced stigma and better practices; however, effects on attendance were often small (under 5%) and context-dependent, failing to materialize in urban or higher-income settings. Infrastructure-focused policies, like Tanzania's school toilet upgrades under UNICEF-supported WASH programs since 2010, have improved disposal facilities but shown limited direct links to attendance, as cultural absenteeism drivers—such as familial duties—persist. A 2016 systematic review of MHM interventions concluded insufficient evidence for broad effectiveness on girls' education, noting many studies suffer from small samples, short follow-ups, and confounding factors like overall poverty, with only promising preliminary signals for pad provision reducing reproductive tract infections by up to 20% in some cohorts. Critically, program efficacy is hampered by supply chain issues, as seen in India's scheme where distribution reached only 60% of targets by 2018 due to procurement delays, and by overreliance on disposable products, which exacerbate environmental waste without addressing root economic barriers. Recent data from a 2025 World Bank analysis indicate pad provision correlates with lower STI rates but minimal long-term school retention gains, suggesting policies must integrate economic support for fuller impact. Overall, while initiatives enhance access and awareness, causal evidence for transformative educational outcomes remains weak, underscoring the need for rigorous, long-term evaluations beyond NGO-reported metrics often influenced by funding incentives.

Key Controversies

A prominent controversy in menstrual hygiene management centers on mandates for free disposable products in schools, particularly in developed nations. , a March 2025 lawsuit against the Department of Education claimed that withholding free pads and tampons constitutes sex-based discrimination under , arguing it exacerbates period poverty and school absenteeism among low-income students. Proponents cite surveys linking product inaccessibility to missed school days, with one review estimating that inadequate access contributes to health risks and educational disruptions for millions globally. However, implementation challenges persist, as free product distribution often occurs without corresponding upgrades to facilities like private changing spaces or reliable supplies, rendering supplies ineffective and leading to —only 39% of schools worldwide provide adequate menstrual health support per a 2024 WHO-UNICEF report. Critics question the causal link to absenteeism, noting that self-reported data may conflate menstruation with broader socioeconomic factors, and that products cost under $0.20 per unit in bulk, suggesting targeted welfare rather than universal mandates. Environmental claims surrounding disposable versus reusable products have also sparked debate. Life-cycle assessments consistently show reusables like cups and cloth generating 99% lower carbon footprints and reduced waste compared to disposables, which contribute over 20 billion annually to global , with decomposition times exceeding 500 years. Yet, a July 2025 screening by U.S. scientists revealed widespread per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in reusables—33% of and reusable contained these persistent "forever chemicals," intended for resistance but linked to risks like immune disruption. This undermines eco-friendly , as washing practices further amplify impacts: infrequent or energy-intensive laundering can elevate reusables' and use beyond disposables in some models. Advocates for disposables counter that concerns, including risks from improper reusable maintenance, outweigh marginal environmental gains in low-resource settings. Framing menstrual management as a issue rather than a hygiene priority has fueled contention. The WHO's 2022 statement urged shifting discourse from "hygiene" to and to combat stigma, influencing policies like school mandates. Detractors argue this elevates routine biological needs to ideological battles, diverting resources from empirical fixes like infrastructure—evident in East African studies where product access alone fails without clean water, affecting over 500 million users. Such reframing risks overpoliticization, as peer-reviewed analyses emphasize causal factors like and facilities over rights-based narratives.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.