Best diapers to wear during the summer 2017 edition

Maux · May 31, 2017

bambinod said:
I wonder what the other swimmers think when they see someone in the pool with them wearing a swim diaper? I must admit it would bother me a little bit. Granted, the pool is loaded with chlorine, but it would still hang in my mind. I know what I'd be in for if I went over to the "baby pool" off to the side, but that's not something I expect to deal with in the adult pool. I take it for granted there will be pee in the pool, and if the diaper's doing it's job there won't be any logs floating in the water, fair enough. But I don't know that I want to be exposing my eyes to toilet water that's been mixing with poop.

I don't think I've ever had anybody notice. It's difficult for me to get traditional exercise due to disability, so I've got a yearly membership at the local Natatorium, every once and a while a lifeguard will be a stickler for procedure and demand to see that my swim trunks have a liner, in which case they're obviously going to see the swim diaper, but they've never commented on it to me. I figure they've probably seen a lot of people in swim diapers. The other swimmers have never noticed I don't think, if they have they've never shown signs of it to me.

I honestly wouldn't give a damn about them if they did have a problem with it though. It's a public pool, I have as much right to be there as they do, and if they didn't like it they can leave.

ClickyKeys · May 31, 2017

Ultimate said:
Is anybody in California? If you are, can you tell me if anybody will notice me in a swim diaper or any diaper? Thanks!

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

That isn't really a regional specific question...

Swim diapers are a good deal thinner than regular diapers as they aren't designed to absorb water, just hold it in for a short period of time so that any fecal accidents won't make their way in to the pool.

But as said above they can balloon out a bit when you're getting out of the pool, so an attentive person may be able to notice.

okmis · May 31, 2017

ClickyKeys said:
To be fair you REALLY shouldn't be exposing your eyes to heavily chlorinated water in the first place.

It is a myth that the Chlorine causes red eyes or irritation, it is actually the high urine content that people mistake for high chlorine content according to the CDC.
Incidentally, the CDC has recommend against allowing any incontinent people in any public pools including those with just urinary incontinence and including adults. They advise persons with babies, or others with incontinence to limit themselves to swimming in their own private pools in the future so as to avoid spreading illnesses unnecessarily. They further state that swim diapers are completely inadequate for preventing contamination as urine freely passes and as well as billions of microbes in fecal matter.

To help protect swimmers’ health, chlorine is commonly added to the water to kill germs and stop them from spreading But chlorine can also combine with urine and to a lesser extent fecal matter. This causes two problems: Free chlorine, the form of chlorine that kills germs, gets used up and is no longer available to kill germs. Hazardous chemical irritants called chloramines are formed mainly from the urine. If you smell “chlorine” at the place you swim, you are probably smelling chloramines. Chloramines in the water can turn into gas in the surrounding air.
The CDC has also determined that Norovirus and other similar illnesses are actually transmitted through urine as well.

“When we go swimming and we complain that our eyes are red, it’s because swimmers have peed in the water,” Michele Hlavsa, chief of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s healthy swimming program told TODAY. “The nitrogen in the urine combines with the chlorine and it forms what’s known as chloramine and it’s actually chloramine that causes the red eyes." In fact, Hlavsa said, the stronger the chlorine smell at a pool, the more filled with pee it is. It's not chlorine’s job to clean pee from a swimming pool. Its plate is full and once people start adding pee to the equation, it starts to try to tackle urine instead, leaving it with little energy for anything else, said Hlavsa. The recent CDC healthy swimming report found that nine in ten public pools are unsafe because of high chloramine levels from high urine content. Cryptosporidium, a germ that causes diarrhea, can be transmitted through urine as well and lives in chemical-treated water for two to three weeks, says Hlavsa.

okmis · May 31, 2017

ClickyKeys said:
Problem with saying to prohibit incontinent people from using public pools is that doing so is a blatant violation of the ADA.

It is only a violation if they only elect to ban children or something like that. If they have a blanket ban on all incontinent persons then it would be permissible, the problem is determining who is or isn't incontinent. How would you prove or disprove someone is incontinent in a practical manner? That is the reason why there is likely nothing that can be done, not because of being in violation of the ADA.
It would be illegal if they just banned young kids or babies from the pool as an example.
As an aside, cruise ships can already legally can all incontinent persons from the pool without running afoul of the ADA.

I personally do not swim in pools anymore because of the widespread contamination.

okmis · Jun 1, 2017

ClickyKeys said:
It is illegal because age discrimination to ban children. Banning all incontinent people is banning someone because of their disability which is prohibited by the ADA. Doubly under the FHA if an apartment or HOA doing it.
Perhaps nobody has taken the cruise lines to court over it, but the ADA is pretty clear that if you deny access to someone based on a disability that they would otherwise have access to without a disability it is a violation.

The cruise lines have been taken to court many times over the ban and the cruise lines have won every time.
The one thing you are forgetting is that you cannot sue a person, organization or company for explicitly following a recommendation for the general health and safety of the public. In other words the Centers for Disease Control supersedes the Americans with Disabilities Act. As long as the recommendation is applied equally and not excluding one specific group of incontinent people but not another then there is nothing you could do about it.
Most cases where there is a possible discrimination suit is for a ban on children or babies but not adults who are incontinent. Those would also be in violation of the fair housing act (FHA).

Until fairly recently they were unaware the Nitrogenous compounds in urine bonded with the Chlorine in the water to form very hazardous chemicals. And they were also mostly unaware of how ineffective swim diapers were at preventing contamination. So incontinent people were previously protected by the FHA and the ADA, but that is no longer the case since the courts recently ruled the general health and safety of the general public supersedes the comparatively few people who would no longer have access to public pools.

bambinod · Jun 1, 2017

ClickyKeys said:
It is illegal because age discrimination to ban children. Banning all incontinent people is banning someone because of their disability which is prohibited by the ADA. Doubly under the FHA if an apartment or HOA doing it.

The only times I've seen Age Discrimination applied are for old-age. I don't even know if the law can be applied for too-young? Look at all the laws barring under-age. I remember a vacation to yellowstone years ago, on the way there we stopped in a small town where the only food was from a local bar. I had to eat outside because minors weren't allowed in a bar at all in that state. Roller coasters have height requirements, based directly on ride safety. Try getting into a strip club if you're under-age. Lots of jobs won't accept you below a certain age.

This isn't going to come down to age, it's going to come down to disability. The problem here is "disability" is almost always referring to a mechanical or mental disability. There's countless other ways to have a biological malfunction, they can't all be disabilities. How about eczema? Asthma? Arthritis? Colorblind? (or just plain BLIND... try getting a driver's license and claiming they can't deny you due to your disability!) I think common sense is needed here.

In this case though I was referring to more of a health risk. I would expect someone that spent awhile in a pool in their loaded swim diaper causing a lot of people to develop pinkeye as a result. I don't think I'm being too paranoid? Am I? Or is it too uncertain to just come down to opinion? Or am I being reasonable or at least justified in being concerned?

Maux · Jun 1, 2017

bambinod said:
The only times I've seen Age Discrimination applied are for old-age. I don't even know if the law can be applied for too-young? Look at all the laws barring under-age. I remember a vacation to yellowstone years ago, on the way there we stopped in a small town where the only food was from a local bar. I had to eat outside because minors weren't allowed in a bar at all in that state. Roller coasters have height requirements, based directly on ride safety. Try getting into a strip club if you're under-age. Lots of jobs won't accept you below a certain age.

This isn't going to come down to age, it's going to come down to disability. The problem here is "disability" is almost always referring to a mechanical or mental disability. There's countless other ways to have a biological malfunction, they can't all be disabilities. How about eczema? Asthma? Arthritis? Colorblind? (or just plain BLIND... try getting a driver's license and claiming they can't deny you due to your disability!) I think common sense is needed here.

In this case though I was referring to more of a health risk. I would expect someone that spent awhile in a pool in their loaded swim diaper causing a lot of people to develop pinkeye as a result. I don't think I'm being too paranoid? Am I? Or is it too uncertain to just come down to opinion? Or am I being reasonable or at least justified in being concerned?

I've never heard of that happening and I've been swimming a long time. Though I would always get out immediately if I had BM. The concern being raised here is urine in the pool anyway, and quite frankly it's a ridiculous one. The number of incontinent people in pools is going to always be ludicrously low, and the amount of urine required for the CDC's concern is going to be from continent people who don't give a damn. Banning incontinent people for a problem caused by the continent is just completely stupid, and a useless suggestion.

You can ban all the incontinent people, and you will still be guaranteed this problem. Because the problem isn't caused by the 1 guy whose day you screwed, he'll never reach the concentrations necessary on his own, but by the 99 other people who were never singled out who don't give a damn about that problem who will collectively have concentrations that high.

okmis · Jun 1, 2017

ThePaddedDM said:
You can ban all the incontinent people, and you will still be guaranteed this problem. Because the problem isn't caused by the 1 guy whose day you screwed, he'll never reach the concentrations necessary on his own, but by the 99 other people who were never singled out who don't give a damn about that problem who will collectively have concentrations that high.

You actually are mistaken, you are going by what was formerly believed to be the case. The CDC actually explicitly stated that, while the sweat of hundreds of people in a pool will have a negligible effect, the amount of urine output by just one person (continent or not) creates a significant risk. The amount of ammonia added from just one person is enough to result in pneumonitis and edema. Just because no one is aware of the risks or the actual reactions that are taking place, doesn't mean they aren't there just because you are uniformed. It has only been within the past year or so that the CDC has changed their recommendation for swimming in public pools. Apparently there are three different types of chloramines: monochloramine (NH2Cl), dichloramine (NHCl2), nitrogen trichloride/trichloramine (NCl3). Monochloramine is not as hazardous, but unfortunately trichloramine the most hazardous one is what is formed from urine.

When chlorine disinfectants are added to water, two chemicals are unleashed that destroy waterborne germs: hypochlorous acid, HOCl, and hypochlorite ion, OCl-. A measure of the chlorine in these two chemicals is known as "free available chlorine" or FAC. An adequate FAC level in the pool water is necessary for the safety of swimmers. Their challenge comes from the fact that FAC is reduced when it reacts with urine to form chloramines. An inadequate FAC level also will lead to algae in the water causing more problems.

According to the New England Journal of Medicine: Severe Lung Injury Results after Repeated Exposure to Chloramine Gas from Swimming Pools. Apparently when inhaled, chloramines react with the moisture of the respiratory tract to release ammonia (NH3), hydrochloric acid (HCl), and oxygen free radicals. Typically, exposures to even low concentrations of chloramines produce the combination of hydrochloric acid, ammonia, and oxygen free radicals which may cause corrosive effects and cellular injury, resulting in pneumonitis and edema.4

As an aside, people formerly thought that if they were swimming in a large body of water such as a lake or ocean that everything would be so diluted as to be a non-issue, but they have recently discovered this not to be the case as due to the nature of the tides, people swimming at the beach in the vicinity of someone who vomited, had a BM, or otherwise contaminated the water would then be exposed and be likely to develop that illness as well. Apparently there was an outbreak of a stomach virus in a large lake recently where one person had vomited in the lake and hundred of others became ill as well.

Maux · Jun 1, 2017

I'm not disputing your information, necessarily, so much as questioning the response based upon it. How are you going to account for everyone else peeing in the pool, which is never going to not happen, just by banning incontinent people? Why single this group out, when it isn't going to fix that problem? That Large Lake probably had zero incontinent people in it.

EchoForest · Jun 1, 2017

Preschool cloth or plastic, or Barebums

okmis · Jun 1, 2017

ThePaddedDM said:
I'm not disputing your information, necessarily, so much as questioning the response based upon it. How are you going to account for everyone else peeing in the pool, which is never going to not happen, just by banning incontinent people? Why single this group out, when it isn't going to fix that problem? That Large Lake probably had zero incontinent people in it.

Well like I said before even if they do ban all incontinent people there is no good way to enforce it. How do you easily prove someone is incontinent? I don't know any good way to do so, or any good way to enforce such a ban. So until they figure out a way, there is effectively nothing that will be done.
Also the problem with that specific lake was caused indirectly by the urine in the lake, the naturally occurring compounds in a lake that would normally be beneficial to handling the vomit were already bonded to urine, thereby exacerbating the problem. Granted when someone vomits in the water there is only so much the naturally occurring compounds can do, so I would avoid swimming in that lake regardless. Would you count babies as incontinent people for your purposes?

The CDC has recommended that the best way to approach the situation would be for pools to ban anyone regardless of if they are incontinent or not from the pool who has an incident in the pool, so if a child or adult elects to just pee in the pool, they would be permanently banned even if wearing a swim diaper. So babies and children not toilet trained would inherently not be able to swim, plus older adults who are incontinent.

It is an unfortunate situation that to protect the general safety of the public that some would have to be limited to swimming in their own private pools.

Maux · Jun 1, 2017

I don't think the guidlines presented here are unreasonable at all, but I do think banning incontinent people outright is unreasonable, and will ultimately be ineffective.

https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/swimming/swimmers/swim-diapers-swim-pants.html

"Pool operators should ensure that:

All patrons understand the importance of NOT swimming when ill with diarrhea.
Caregivers/users frequently (approximately every 30 to 60 minutes) check swim diapers and swim pants and change them away from the poolside (for example, in the bathroom). This will allow for washing hands after diaper/pants changing and reduce the chance of fecal and germ contamination of areas around the pool. It can also reduce the amount of urine in the pool that binds with disinfectant and creates irritants in the air (see Chemical Irritation of the Eyes and Lungs )."

I honestly think that should be standard operating procedure.

bambinod · Jun 1, 2017

ThePaddedDM said:
I don't think the guidlines presented here are unreasonable at all, but I do think banning incontinent people outright is unreasonable, and will ultimately be ineffective.

https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/swimming/swimmers/swim-diapers-swim-pants.html

"Pool operators should ensure that:

All patrons understand the importance of NOT swimming when ill with diarrhea.
Caregivers/users frequently (approximately every 30 to 60 minutes) check swim diapers and swim pants and change them away from the poolside (for example, in the bathroom). This will allow for washing hands after diaper/pants changing and reduce the chance of fecal and germ contamination of areas around the pool. It can also reduce the amount of urine in the pool that binds with disinfectant and creates irritants in the air (see Chemical Irritation of the Eyes and Lungs )."

I honestly think that should be standard operating procedure.

I'd completely agree with all of that. I'd also add that I consider urine in the pool to be very low-risk, considering the mostly-sterile nature of urine.

DiaperedBedwetter1998 · Jun 1, 2017

OK I think this whole debate about this swim diaper and the topic about banning incontinent people is really getting out of hand. Could we please just get back on topic about the best diapers to wear during the summer?
I just want this thread to be on topic. If you wanna have this discussion about that swim diaper and the topic about banning incontinent people, talk about it on a new thread but not on this because this is irrelevant.

okmis · Jun 1, 2017

bambinod said:
I'd completely agree with all of that. I'd also add that I consider urine in the pool to be very low-risk, considering the mostly-sterile nature of urine.

It has absolutely nothing to do with urine being sterile or not. All urine has Nitrogen and when Nitrogen mixes with the Chlorine in the pool it creates a nasty chemical. Also they found that gastroenteritis can be transmitted through urine, and urine is no longer sterile once it exits your system and mixes with the environment.
That is all I am going to say further as we are being disrespectful of AnimeDude892.

AnimeDude892 said:
OK I think this whole debate about this swim diaper and the topic about banning incontinent people is really getting out of hand. Could we please just get back on topic about the best diapers to wear during the summer?
I just want this thread to be on topic. If you wanna have this discussion about that swim diaper and the topic about banning incontinent people, talk about it on a new thread but not on this because this is irrelevant.

Sorry for sidetracking your thread. My apologies
Now back to the topic of which is best for the summer......

DiaperedBedwetter1998 · Jun 1, 2017

okmis said:
It has absolutely nothing to do with urine being sterile or not. All urine has Nitrogen and when Nitrogen mixes with the Chlorine in the pool it creates a nasty chemical. Also they found that gastroenteritis can be transmitted through urine, and urine is no longer sterile once it exits your system and mixes with the environment.
That is all I am going to say further as we are being disrespectful of AnimeDude892.

Sorry for sidetracking your thread. My apologies
Now back to the topic of which is best for the summer......

It's ok. Also I don't think that you guys are being disrespectful to me, I'm just giving out some constructive criticism. That's all.

Maux · Jun 1, 2017

I agree, so I'll make my final say on it too. I asked around and this is the response I got on it:

"The issue at the root of this argument is cyanogen chloride. This is a compound created by the interaction of chlorine and nitrogen.
Presumably, people are worried about nitrogen in the urine...

Human urine consists primarily of water (91% to 96%), with organic solutes including urea, creatinine, uric acid, and trace amounts of enzymes, carbohydrates, hormones, fatty acids, pigments, and mucins, and inorganic ions such as sodium (Na+), potassium (K+), chloride (Cl-), magnesium (Mg2+), calcium (Ca2+), ammonium (NH4+), sulfates (SO42-), and phosphates (e.g., PO43-).

So if you have a high nitrogen intake, like eating several bananas, your kidneys will filter out some of the excess, so you have varied trace amounts in your urine.

There's most likely more nitrogen in one bird dropping that lands in the pool, than your urine after eating a banana.

Now consider how many gallons of water is in that pool. 10,000? 100,000?
We are already measuring the nitrogen in your urine that is already about 93% water in Parts Per Million... now add the 10k-100k+ water? Get the picture? It's so incredibly dilute, that making a stink about its health risk is akin to banning people from eating peaches or almonds, due the the trace amounts of arsenic.

It's silly. This is a problem when non scientific legislators stick their nose in science. Yes there is a chemical reaction, and in a small pool environment with a gusher of people peeing in it uncontrollably, it may tear your eyes or cause various other irritation. Government agencies tend to make statements with a broad paintbrush to cover all possibilities. A problem arises when people take these suggestions and go overboard, due to a lack of scientific understanding and lack of common sense.

The Swim diaper contains enough. More than a non incontinent deliberately lets loose, or a child that doesn't know any better."

But that's my final say on it, I'll leave it alone after that. Suffice it to say, a lot of this is simply using data incorrectly.

TyphaHare · Jun 5, 2017

The new hybrid Tena diapers are perfect!! They have breathable cloth sides, but nice, smooth plastic on the front

I was so sad when they stopped making the old Tena.. but this one actually works for me the best. It also holds a lot of pee!

Andrewgdfw · Jun 12, 2017

Clicky Keys said:

"Swim diapers aren't meant to keep water out, they are meant to hold on to fecal matter for a pretty short amount of time, basically about as long as it would take to get out of the pool. They are designed to NOT be absorbent. At the same time they are designed to keep as much water in as possible to prevent pool water contamination. The fabric inside the diaper is just there to help cling to fecal matter for a short time."[/QUOTE]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quite so. I'm puzzled that so many seem to think otherwise. This topic has come up a number of times on ADISC with the common (false) thought that a 'swim diaper' can keep pool water out.

TheRainbowPrincess · Jun 12, 2017

My favorite is anything cloth backed. Usually store brand or cheap brand and with a boooster if needed. We don't have air conditioning, so thick plastic backs are best for cool nights! I'm currently using a mix of cvs brand or attends breathable briefs, though the tapes from the attends stick to my bedding and I need to wear something over them (like a pair of regular underwear or bike shorts) to keep the diaper from undoing itself when I sleep. I don't recommend attends for being active and awake.