Pantalones de pañal RashShield®

Parasol holds OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 at Product Class I under certificate BJ026 283472, issued by TESTEX AG and valid to 30 April 2027, scoped to the finished baby diaper and baby pant rather than to their materials. That number resolves in OEKO-TEX Label Check, and the Class I screening — VOC emissions, the 44-compound speciation panel, organotins and the PFAS method — is run on the assembled product.

The fluff pulp in these pants is totally chlorine-free (TCF), stated explicitly rather than as the ambiguous "chlorine-free" that usually signals chlorine-dioxide (ECF) processing, and independent diaper roundups consistently place this product in the small TCF group. TCF here is a self-declared process with no certification scheme behind it, and the pulp mill and its country are not published.

These pants are fragrance-free rather than merely unscented, with no lotions and no dyes, and the retailer's own structured product attributes for this item carry the same free-from set: fragrance-free, dye-free, lotion-free, alcohol-free, latex-free, paraben-free and phthalate-free. The printed designs sit on the outer layers in water-based, RoHS-compliant inks, and the topsheet's chamomile-derived alpha-bisabolol infusion is itself fragrance-free.

More than 60 individual PFAS compounds are screened on the finished diaper across EN 17681-1:2025 and OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 Method 9, with every category at or below detectable limits. The panel sits behind TESTEX AG report BJ026 283472.1, issued 30 April 2026 — an accredited laboratory named and a dated report reference.

We queried the complete CPSC recall corpus — 9,944 records spanning June 1973 to August 2026 — and Parasol Co appears nowhere in it, in any role, at any date. The same corpus contains 32 diaper records, 86 pacifier records and 1,470 toy records, so this product class is covered and the clean result reflects the brand's genuine absence rather than a failed search.

The core is a published dual-core specification: sodium polyacrylate paired with totally chlorine-free fluff pulp, rated to roughly four cups of absorbency and built around a 5mm suspended absorption layer. The polymer is called only "high-grade" — the SAP supplier, its country of origin, and residual acrylic acid or acrylamide testing are not published.

The marks on this diaper now carry numbers: OEKO-TEX STANDARD 100 Class I under certificate BJ026 283472 from TESTEX AG, and FSC chain of custody under SGSHK-COC-331121 from SGS Hong Kong — both current, both scoped to the finished product, and both resolvable in their issuers' registries. The Dermatest “Excellent” rating is carried by study number rather than by a published certificate.

Every layer is named: a polyethylene and polybutylene terephthalate topsheet, totally chlorine-free wood pulp with sodium polyacrylate in a dual core, a polyethylene backsheet, polypropylene and polyethylene terephthalate fastening panels, styrene-butadiene copolymer adhesives, spandex leg cuffs and a wetness indicator. That component-level breakdown was also supplied on request to an outside reviewer and matched what is published; the pigments and the wetness-indicator chemistry are the only components withheld.

Dermatest GmbH study 1906035906 V2 ran this product on 20 children aged four months to four years, several times daily in the nappy area over four weeks, and recorded zero pathological findings — no irritation and no contact dermatitis in any subject, under ISO 9001 quality assurance monitored by TÜV Rheinland.

A layer-by-layer materials list is published for these pants, and when the brand was asked directly it handed over the same list, withholding only the pigments and the wetness-indicator materials; manufacture takes place in China with materials sourced worldwide, a fact the brand does not publish itself.

The fluff pulp runs under FSC chain of custody SGSHK-COC-331121 (CN20/31823), issued by SGS Hong Kong and valid to 28 November 2030, covering FSC 100% and FSC Mix pulp purchasing through diaper manufacture and sale. The code resolves in the FSC public register; the forest region and the pulp supplier are still not named.