would be interesting to hear a woman's opinion here. My understanding was that panties are usually bought on the merits of fit and, especially, quality of material. Is the built-in pad an improvement or gimmick?
Having not tried it, I do not know the answer to your question. But, as a woman, I know one issue that is common for women is that pads often fail to cover, get accidentally repositioned, etc and then you end up bleeding onto your panties. This can lead to an unfortunate mess (leakage) even if you are not bleeding very heavily. Plus, some women have very heavy periods and find it a challenge to keep everything clean no matter how many precautions they take. Speculating: I can imagine it being something some women would prefer simply for potentially superior coverage.
But I suspect I will not ever buy them. I have a compromised immune system. If I bleed on my clothes, I throw them out. Washing blood out is not sufficient for my needs. So I am kind of grossed out by the idea of buying underwear with the intention of bleeding into them and then washing the blood out and then doing that again.
>So I am kind of grossed out by the idea of buying underwear with the intention of bleeding into them and then washing the blood out and then doing that again.
that probably it. Back in USSR times the single use pads were a luxury, and women frequently were getting by with kind of self-made and somewhat reusable pads. The moment [western] single-use pads/tampons became available they stopped using anything else.
In particular, i think, there is an issue with washing out as it is not only blood there, and all the stuff wouldn't be washed out completely, especially from inside built-in padding material. Things change of course, yet 30 years ago regular detergent in regular cloth washer wasn't enough.
The moment [western] single-use pads/tampons became available they stopped using anything else
Which is a shame, as it is not exactly ok for the environment. Same goes for diapers. Tons and tons of throw-away material every single day. Which is the reason my wife uses reusable pads and our (future) children will use reusable diapers. My wife has no problems with the pads whatsoever (not claiming no women will ever have, but it definitely indicates it can be a proper substitute - although in might be in contradiction with what marketing tries to make one believe) and none of the parents we now who are using cotton diapers have problems either (again, same remark).
I have seen conflicting reports regarding the environmental impact of cloth vs disposable diapers. Cloth diapers have to be washed. They use water, detergent, etc. It isn't a clear "win" for the environment to forego disposable diapers.
For me, I have a genetic disorder. Treating it conventionally is extremely expensive (~$100k or more annually, which grows the older -- and sicker -- that you get). I have found that throwing out contaminated clothing is a drop in the bucket compared to what the medical expenses are supposed to be and far more effective in terms of giving me high quality of life (a la "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" -- it is just so much better to protect myself than to let myself get sick and then try to treat it).
Also, I am somewhat skeptical of self-reported anecdata concerning "we do x and it causes no problems" when someone has a stated up front agenda because of the tendency humans have to attribute "bad" outcomes to something they have decided is "bad" and "good" outcomes to something they have decided is "good" and do not confuse them with the facts. I have seen way too much of that in life. People are seldom objective or logical.
I have seen conflicting reports regarding the environmental impact of cloth vs disposable diapers
Me too. At least a couple of studies mainly took into account the amount of energy used for production vs washing. That is basically nonsense as it discards the waste. So even if both came out equally regarding energy consumption (hereby properly considering the washing machines these days use way less energy and water, latter might even have been collected from rain) there is still waste left with one and not so much with the other. And plastic isn't exactly that easy to get rid of.
Also, I am somewhat skeptical of self-reported anecdata concerning "we do x and it causes no problems"
Which is exactly why I also pointed out that I do not take it for granted that it works for everyone. And obviously for you it doesn't work, at all. And I'm fine with that.
Reusable cotton diapers are great, if you have access to a washing machine. Doing it by hand is not an option and you don't want to let them sit unwashed for long.
Another thing that's great, if they work for you anatomically, is the little plastic mentruation cups. They are to the tampon what the cotton pad is to the single-use one.
Not a woman, but its well known they buy several pairs of "period panties" as to not ruin their nicer ones. This seems to be tapping into that market by making an explicit "period panty" that'll last longer, come in dark colors, has a pad, etc. So instead of buying a cheap set of disposable panties and using those, you'd buy a few pairs of these that are specialized for the task.
No idea how pricing works out. In the end, it might be smarter to just buy a box of 10 granny panties at Walmart for 12 bucks than pay $20 a pair for these high-tech ones. (The 5 day set is $180.) Especially if they can only hold 2-6 teaspoons of liquid. Seems the 'help a girl in the third world' narrative is pretty disingenuous here at those prices. Pads cost a fraction of that. This seems like something a western woman would use on top of a pad or tampon.
Does every startup need to be about "changing the world" and "helping the third world?" Its practically self-satire at this point and was expertly mocked in HBO's Silicon Valley series. This is a luxury good, not a charity.
I don't think that the period panty product is actually what they're sending to Africa. They mentioned that "the purchase of a pair of THINX also buys seven washable pads for girls in Uganda."
I don't think the majority of startups are out to 'help the world,' though many are out to change/'disrupt' (even this one claims to be disrupting). I don't know that I find that such a bad thing, though. Many products try and fail to change what they see as a problem, but there's really no harm in that. They're just trying to help.
The changing the world line and the bit about a 'week of shame' sounded like complete BS.
But leaks don't just affect panties, I've ruined many sets of sheets, expensive pairs of jeans and even a very nice dress. As a very frugal woman I would buy a pair.
Never are they claiming it is not a luxury good. Why are you being so dismissive of them? It's like saying Tesla can't save the world because they're making $80k cars, it's short sighted.
Menstruation varies much between individuals, not to mention with age. So I'm sure there are people for whom this will be an improvement, which is the question you really wanted to ask.
I analyzed this pretty critically with my girlfriend who is sitting right next to me and had heard of them before. She agreed that there was definitely a demand for this product, but that 1) the cost was too high 2) she would rather just buy regular panties + some tampons or pads to put in her purse 3) it may be more applicable for women who have had children and have more issues with incontinence/etc (we're both 23). We also both pointed out that regular panties are something like 6/$24 at Victoria's Secret... a sixth of the cost of these things.
There are a couple of companies on the market making leak resistant underwear now. Dear Kate is one of them and then Knix Wear is another. Seems to be a trend given there are a couple startups in the space. I agree though fit, quality of material and comfort have to come first.
