Законодательство Калифорнии о раскрытии состава подгузников может изменить стандарты по всей Северной Америке

A California bill requiring manufacturers to reveal what they intentionally put in children’s diapers could eventually change diaper packaging across the United States and Canada. Assembly Bill 1901 has passed both chambers of the California Legislature and was presented to Governor Gavin Newsom on September 4, 2026. If signed, it would introduce some of North America’s most detailed diaper ingredient-disclosure requirements. Although the legislation would apply only in California, the diaper industry operates through interconnected North American manufacturing, packaging, and retail networks. Major brands may find it more practical to adopt California-compliant packaging throughout the U.S. and Canada instead of producing separate products for one state. Introduced by Assemblymember Marc Berman, AB 1901 covers disposable diapers, training pants, protective underwear, liners, boosters, inserts, and underpads intended for babies and children. The requirements would apply to the entire product, including absorbent materials, outer shells, adhesive tabs, wetness indicators, dyes and fragrances. By January 1, 2029, manufacturers would have to publish a list of every intentionally added ingredient used in each diaper product. The dedicated webpage would need to identify: The chemical or raw-material name Its Chemical Abstracts Service, or CAS, number Its purpose in the diaper Ingredients would be listed in order of weight. Diapers manufactured or distributed in California would also need the ingredient list and disclosure website printed on the outer package by January 1, 2029. Products sold in the state would need compliant packaging by July 1, 2029. Companies that fail to comply could face penalties of up to $5,000 for a first violation and up to $10,000 for subsequent violations. Disposable diapers are complex products containing absorbent pulp, superabsorbent polymers, plastics, elastic materials, adhesives, inks, and sometimes lotions, dyes, or fragrances. Some manufacturers voluntarily provide general descriptions of these materials, but the amount of information available varies widely. Supporters of AB 1901 say parents should not have to contact manufacturers or search through company websites to learn what is in a product worn against their child’s skin for several hours at a time. Consumer and public-health organizations have also raised questions about substances detected in some diaper testing, including phthalates, volatile organic compounds, PFAS, and heavy metals. The presence of a chemical does not automatically mean a diaper is harmful. Risk depends on the substance, concentration, and level of exposure. Research into the health effects of long-term diaper-related chemical exposure also remains limited. AB 1901 would not declare existing diapers unsafe or ban most individual ingredients. Instead, it would require companies to identify the substances they intentionally add and explain why they are used. The bill may not reveal every trace contaminant or unintended manufacturing byproduct. Ingredient disclosure is therefore not the same as independent safety testing. California represents an enormous consumer market. When it introduces new packaging or product requirements, national brands must decide whether to create California-only inventory or adopt the new standard more broadly. For diaper manufacturers, maintaining different packages for California, the rest of the United States, and Canada could complicate production, inventory, and distribution. A common North American package may be the more efficient option. Canadian parents could therefore benefit even though AB 1901 would not legally apply in Canada. Brands may also make their California ingredient webpages accessible to everyone, giving families across North America the same information. The legislation could have several broader effects on the industry. More scrutiny throughout the supply chain Diaper brands would need detailed information from companies supplying adhesives, absorbent materials, inks, fragrances, and other components. Manufacturers may be required to collect information they do not currently possess, particularly when a supplier considers its formula proprietary. The bill would not directly prohibit most ingredients, but public disclosure could still influence product design. Companies may remove or replace ingredients they believe parents will avoid. Fragrances, dyes and materials associated with PFAS or phthalates could receive particular attention. Brands already promoting fragrance-free or minimalist products may gain a competitive advantage, while larger manufacturers could introduce reformulated product lines. Terms such as “natural,” “clean,” “plant-based” and “eco-friendly” do not necessarily explain everything used in a diaper. Detailed ingredient lists could help parents look beyond broad marketing claims and compare products more directly. Manufacturers may also need to explain technical ingredients in plain language so parents understand their purpose. Supplier documentation, legal reviews, packaging redesigns and ingredient databases will cost money. Large manufacturers may be able to spread those costs across their North American operations, while smaller brands could face a greater compliance burden. Some expenses could eventually be reflected in diaper prices, although the bill does not require or predict a price increase. Parents would gain access to information that is currently inconsistent or difficult to find. This could be especially helpful for families trying to identify the cause of recurring irritation or avoid fragrances, dyes, and other specific ingredients. However, a short ingredient list does not automatically make one diaper safer than another. Chemical names can also sound alarming even when an ingredient serves a common and useful purpose. Parents will need clear, evidence-based explanations—not simply a long list of unfamiliar terms and numbers. A possible North American turning point.  AB 1901 is awaiting action from Governor Newsom and is not yet law. If enacted, however, it could become a turning point for diaper transparency throughout North America. The legal requirements would stop at California’s borders, but the practical effects may not. Because the U.S. and Canadian diaper markets are closely connected, changes made for California could influence the products, packages and ingredient information available to millions of families across both countries.