How we score

Chemicals that can interfere with the body's hormone system — the signals that regulate growth, metabolism and reproduction. Exposure matters most during pregnancy and early childhood, which is why this component carries extra weight in baby products. Common examples under study: certain parabens, phthalates and bisphenols.

Ingredients that authoritative bodies (IARC, US NTP) have classified as known or suspected causes of cancer, weighted by the strength of that evidence — 'possibly carcinogenic' is treated very differently from 'known'.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — 'forever chemicals' that persist in the body and environment for years. Used for water- and stain-resistance; linked in studies to immune and developmental effects.

US law lets 'fragrance' stand in for dozens of undisclosed chemicals as a trade secret. This measures how much of the scent formula is hidden — not that fragrance is inherently harmful, but that you can't evaluate what isn't disclosed.

What the product is physically made of — the pulp, films, fibres and adhesives that touch skin. Rated on the safety record of each material, the way cookware is rated on its coating and metals.

Residues left on produce and grains from how the crop was farmed. Organic certification prohibits synthetic pesticides, which is why the same fruit can rate very differently by farming method.

Preservatives, colorants, emulsifiers and flavorings added in processing — each rated on its own evidence record, from benign (vitamin E as a preservative) to contested (certain synthetic dyes).

The NOVA scale classifies how industrially transformed a food is, from whole ingredients (1) to ultra-processed formulations (4). Population studies associate heavy ultra-processed diets with worse health outcomes independent of nutrients.

Refined oils and added sugars — rated by what they are: cold-pressed fruit oils and whole sweeteners like honey rate well; hydrogenated oils and high-fructose syrups rate poorly.

Independent third-party verifications (USDA Organic, FSC, EPA Safer Choice…). Informational only — having none never lowers a score; verified claims can raise it.

The medicine's active drug itself — its safety margin, side-effect profile and interaction record at the labelled dose.

Recalls and manufacturing contamination events on record for this product class or maker.

The inactive ingredients — dyes, fillers, sweeteners — rated the same way food additives are.

The maker's FDA inspection and quality-control history.

Whether an independent lab (e.g. USP) has verified content and purity.

Volatile compounds that end up in the air you breathe while cleaning — the main exposure route for cleaning products.

What happens after it goes down the drain — toxicity to aquatic life and how quickly it breaks down.

US law doesn't require cleaning products to list full ingredients. This measures how much the maker chooses to disclose.

Whether the cooking surface uses PFAS-based nonstick chemistry, which can degrade at high heat.

Whether lead, cadmium or other metals can migrate from the material into food — the concern behind some glazes and older cookware.

Plastic building blocks (like BPA) that can migrate into food, especially when heated.

Independent food-contact safety verifications (NSF, FDA food-contact).

The quality and specificity of the named protein sources — 'chicken' vs 'meat by-products'.

Whole grains vs fractions and fillers, and the residue record of each.

The forms used for fortification — some are better absorbed and better characterised than others.

The fibres and films against the skin — fluff pulp, cotton, polypropylene, the absorbent polymer. Reassuringly, this is the part of a diaper with the strongest safety record: these polymers aren't absorbed through skin. A good score here is expected; the real questions live in the other components.

Substances that can move from the product onto skin: hot-melt adhesives and their tackifier resins, printed pigments, and the lotion applied to the liner. Rated per substance — most are low-concern, but this is where quality differences between makers actually show up.

What manufacturing leaves behind rather than what goes in: the pulp-bleaching route (totally-chlorine-free vs chlorine-dioxide), residual monomer in the absorbent polymer, trace PAHs. French agency testing found these — not the plastics — were where diaper risk thresholds were exceeded. Rarely disclosed on any panel, so this mostly scores through process certifications.

Fragrance in a product worn against covered, often irritated skin for hours at a time — close to worst-case conditions for a contact allergen. The French safety agency ANSES recommended eliminating fragrance from diapers entirely, and two once-common diaper fragrance allergens are now banned in EU cosmetics. Fragrance-free isn't a preference here; it's the evidence-backed choice.