Read Dr. Lillian Gilbreth's - two of her
kids wrote about her in "Cheaper by the Dozen"
- critique of pads
in 1927 for Johnson & Johnson, maker of
Modess. And read the influential pad put-down
"Tampons as Menstrual
Guards" from 1945. Criticism of the Rely tampon, later
associated with toxic
shock syndrome, from a tiny
Rochester, New York, newspaper (1975-76). Safety page.
Tampax's defense: "Are
Vaginal Tampons Prejudicial to Health?"
(Proof for a British Tampax ad, 1952)
|
Facts
and Frauds in Woman's Hygiene:
A Fearless Exposé of
Misleading Claims and Dangers of
Widely Advertised Products Used by
Women, 1936,
by Rachel Lynn Palmer and Sarah K.
Greenberg, M.D., The Sun Dial Press,
New York.
Excerpts about pads and tampons,
their cost, advertising and quality
A site visitor writes,
I am currently reading the above
book, copyrighted 1936, subtitled "A
Medical Guide Against Misleading
Claims And Dangerous Products" from
The Sun Dial Press, New York, and it
is filled with interesting
information, including the
following, taken directly from its
first chapter entitled "The Feminine
Hygiene Field."
Thought you might find the above
interesting and your readers might
also! This is a very
interesting book. I would love to
find more on the subject of
available brands of hygiene
items from the past.
Read
excerpts from this book criticizing
douching with Lysol - yes - and
Zonite.
Read Dr. Lillian
Gilbreth's - two of her kids wrote
about her in "Cheaper by the
Dozen" - critique
of pads in 1927 for Johnson
& Johnson, maker of Modess.
And read the influential pad
put-down "Tampons
as Menstrual Guards" from
1945. Criticism of the Rely tampon,
later associated with toxic shock
syndrome, from a tiny Rochester,
New York, newspaper (1975-76). Safety
page. Tampax's defense: "Are Vaginal
Tampons Prejudicial to Health?"
(Proof for a British Tampax ad,
1952)
From the book:
[Advertising
for sanitary napkins]
The sanitary napkin people are far
from laggards. During the first
two months of 1936, Kotex spent
$50,000 in an attempt to convince
women that theirs was the best
sanitary napkin on the market. [See a
Kotex ad
from 1933.]
The feminine hygiene advertising
utilizes to the full the fear motive
that is such a favorite with all
advertising copy
writers. "Panicky?" reads a
Modess ad. "Like a shadow, fear
haunts you. Every minute you
wonder----'Am I safe?'" This
Modess ad probably would be without
effect on a mature woman. It
might do a great deal of harm to a
young girl to whom the new function of
menstruation constitutes enough of a
problem without the idea of
"accident-panic" thrust into her mind.
Today, with the women's magazines
full of ads depicting women fearful to
go on the dance floor because they
aren't wearing the right kind of
sanitary napkin, with news papers and
subways sprinkled with ads for
nostrums which are supposed to relieve
"periodic pain," the subject is no
longer shrouded with its old-time
secrecy.
There are any number of sanitary
napkins on the market as well as other
devices for taking care of the
menstrual flow. Most women want a
sanitary napkin that is absorbent,
comfortable, and which has a
moisture-proof backing, so that the
menstrual fluid does not penetrate
immediately. Consumers Union, a
non-profit membership organization,
(located at 22 East 17th St., New York
City), which tests consumers' goods
and reports on quality for its
subscribers, has tested more than
twenty brands of sanitary napkins for
the above three
qualifications. The three which
rated best and most economical were
Veldown, Modess [here] and
Belfair.
Of the three, Veldown had the most
effective moisture-proofing, due to
the fact that the moisture-proof
material extended over the sides as
well as the back. The napkin
became thoroughly saturated before the
fluid penetrated either the sides or
back. Modess napkins tested
almost as well, except that the sides
were not moisture-proofed, therefore
the edges might become wet and
irritating. Modess napkins are
better than many others in this
respect, however, since the crepe
paper pad is wrapped in cotton which
would help to keep the sides from
becoming soggy. Other napkins
which rated fairly well were Lotus,
Venida Nap and Dove, but Lotus is the
only one of these which had a
moisture-proof backing.
Despite the extensive advertising of
the Kotex Company [see a dispenser pad
here], their sanitary napkin received
a poor rating in the Consumers union
tests. It was found that moisture
penetrated the napkins almost
immediately. Although the
absorptive power of Kotex is good, a
Kotex napkin absorbs no more moisture
than Sanovals, distributed by the
Kress stores, which are much
cheaper. The "equalizer" of which
the Kotex Company makes so much, is
nothing but a piece of corrugated
crepe paper inserted in the middle of
the pad. Sanovals, representative
of a group of unadvertised sanitary
napkins made of crepe paper wrapped in
gauze, showed as good, if not better,
distribution of liquid than did Kotex,
with its much-touted equalizer, in a
test designed to estimate penetration
qualities.
The International Cellucotton
Products Company, makers of Kotex,
recently entered into an agreement
with its wholesalers whereby the
company is enabled to fix the price of
Kotex and eliminate "price
cutting." Quite probably other
sanitary napkin manufacturers will
follow suit, thus keeping the selling
price of the articles entirely
disproportionate to their cost of
manufacture.
There are some napkins on the market
for women with an excessive menstrual
flow. Among these are the Venus [here] brand
and Super-Kotex. The Super-Kotex
proved, in the Consumers Union test,
to be highly absorptive, but, as with
the regular Kotex, was easily
penetrated. The Venus napkins
were much more absorptive than
Super-Kotex and the liquid did not
penetrate nearly so quickly. Although
very bulky, the Venus napkins were
especially soft and
comfortable. They may meet very
well the needs of women with an
exceptionally heavy flow, though it
should be pointed out that women with
limited funds who have need of extra
protection can make up their own
napkins of a good grade cotton and
gauze for less than a third of the
price charged for the Venus brand.
[Tampons]
There are now on the market various
cotton tampons, cone or plug-shaped,
to be placed in the vagina to care for
the menstrual flow, as a substitute
for the usual pad. Among the brands
now being sold are Tampads, Wix [here], Tampax [here] and
Fibs [here]. In
answer to an inquiry regarding
tampons, the Journal of the American
Medical Association stated that though
the possibility of any harm from their
use was very slight, if not placed
properly, irritation might
result. The Journal pointed out
that although their use might be a
convenience during the latter days of
menstruation or for women who have a
scant flow, they would not be
satisfactory for women with a moderate
or profuse flow. [Read a later - 1945
- report
vigorously defending tampons and, um,
poo-pooing pads.]
There is also the possibility that a
woman who inserts a tampon in the last
stage of flow may forget its presence
in the vagina. That such a
thing may occur will not be
readily believed by many women
[!]. Yet doctors rather
frequently report removing from the
vagina foreign objects whose presence
was quite unsuspected by the patient.
NEXT:
Read excerpts from this book criticizing
douching with Lysol - yes - and
Zonite.
|
NEXT:
See the cover and read excerpts from
this book criticizing douching with
Lysol - yes - and Zonite.
Read Dr. Lillian Gilbreth's - two
of her kids wrote about her in
"Cheaper by the Dozen" - critique of
pads in 1927 for Johnson &
Johnson, maker of Modess. And read
the influential pad put-down "Tampons as
Menstrual Guards" from 1945.
Criticism of the Rely tampon,
later associated with toxic shock
syndrome, from a tiny Rochester, New
York, newspaper (1975-76). Safety
page. Tampax's defense: "Are Vaginal
Tampons Prejudicial to Health?"
(Proof for a British Tampax ad,
1952)
© 2001 Harry Finley. It is illegal
to reproduce or distribute any of the
work on this Web site in any manner or
medium without written permission of
the author. Please report suspected
violations to hfinley@mum.org
|
|