daylight
Est. Contributor
- Messages
- 693
- Role
- Incontinent
I posted this in a reply on another sub-discussion and thought it was worth it to post here as well. - sorry about cross posting :sad:
While trying to qualify this (Are-the-ABDL-diapers-worth-it/page3) discussion, I looked up some prices and absorbencies and in doing so stumbled upon a ISO standard for it ...amazing... See ISO 11948-1 and references:
https://www.ics.org/Abstracts/Publish/41/000170.pdf
https://www.incontinencechoice.co.uk/information-absorbency-levels
There's a lot of information in this study:
https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/hta12290/#/abstract
So, I was curious. How do the diapers bantered about in conversations compare? And as any geek would do...
The following table quickly compares a few products (not exhaustively), it is based on prices per package verses by the case. What is interesting is when taking into account ISO 11948-1 (Rothwell method) with a working capacity of 50%, the price per ml changes in favor of lower capacity diapers. Whereas, based solely on maximum capacity, these diapers are equivalent in price per ml. Also, note the Practical column is ml per unit price (higher value is better).
As a data point, I added the Always Discreet Max. Underwear. You should note the capacity is an empirical estimate for Always.
View attachment 31793
- - - Updated - - -
Interpreting the limited data, it is cheaper to buy cheaper and change more often. However, if changing often is impractical or surge capacity is an issue, more absorbency (higher price) is needed. We knew this, the numbers help to see it.
- - - Updated - - -
Darn it. I incorrectly referenced the ISO in the thread subject, and cannot seem to edit it.
While trying to qualify this (Are-the-ABDL-diapers-worth-it/page3) discussion, I looked up some prices and absorbencies and in doing so stumbled upon a ISO standard for it ...amazing... See ISO 11948-1 and references:
https://www.ics.org/Abstracts/Publish/41/000170.pdf
https://www.incontinencechoice.co.uk/information-absorbency-levels
There's a lot of information in this study:
https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/hta12290/#/abstract
So, I was curious. How do the diapers bantered about in conversations compare? And as any geek would do...
The following table quickly compares a few products (not exhaustively), it is based on prices per package verses by the case. What is interesting is when taking into account ISO 11948-1 (Rothwell method) with a working capacity of 50%, the price per ml changes in favor of lower capacity diapers. Whereas, based solely on maximum capacity, these diapers are equivalent in price per ml. Also, note the Practical column is ml per unit price (higher value is better).
As a data point, I added the Always Discreet Max. Underwear. You should note the capacity is an empirical estimate for Always.
View attachment 31793
- - - Updated - - -
Interpreting the limited data, it is cheaper to buy cheaper and change more often. However, if changing often is impractical or surge capacity is an issue, more absorbency (higher price) is needed. We knew this, the numbers help to see it.
- - - Updated - - -
Darn it. I incorrectly referenced the ISO in the thread subject, and cannot seem to edit it.
Last edited: