To the price-conscious, it seems you don't always get what you pay for when it comes to facial tissues.
A Consumer Council test on 20 models - 13 in boxes and 7 in soft packs - has shown a vast range of prices but, despite the significant price variations, could find no direct correlation between price and performance in strength, absorbency and softness.
As nearly half of the box models (6) were not labeled with the number of sheets and most without size information (length and width of paper), meaningful price comparison is not possible and consumers are pretty much left to themselves to find out which ones offer the most bargain with comparable quality.
For the remainders (7), while all stated the number of sheets, only one could meet up to the stated number; the rest were slightly less by 0.5% to 4% according to the test on the samples measured.
In the case of the 7 soft pack models, all were labeled with the information and, again, only one was found exactly the stated number of sheets but not all remaining samples were less in quantity; half of the remainders had actually more sheets by 3.3% to 9.7% while another half were less by 2.2% to 4.3%.
In the test, on the basis of the actual number of sheets measured, the samples were computed for their unit cost per 100 sheets. The results were no small a revelation to the price-conscious.
The unit cost of the 3-ply boxed models ranged from $5.9 to $8.3, a difference of 41%; the cost of the 2-ply models varied even more vastly from $2.8 to $6.0, a difference of 114%.
Significant price variations were found also among the soft pack models, ranging from $2.6 to $5.0, a difference of 92%.
As facial issues are in daily use and even more during cold, flu and allergy season, the savings one could gain by careful price comparison could accumulate to a considerable sum over the years.
It appeared that those (the 6 box tissues) without the number of sheets labeled tended to be at the higher, if not the highest, end of the unit price range - at $8.2 and $8.3 for the two 3-ply and from $3.8 to $6.0 for the four 2-ply samples.
As with other products, packaging could be misleading. For instance, in the case of 2 unlabelled tissues measured with 100 and 110 sheets respectively, both their boxes were taller than one labeled with a considerably more number of sheets of 200.
Besides vast price variations and quantity discrepancies, the facial issues were evaluated for their performance in dry and wet tensile strength, water absorption rate and capacity as well as softness.
Ideally, a good tissue needs to be sufficiently strong to withstand sneezes, absorbent to cope with a streaming cold, and still be soft enough to keep your nose or skin from becoming irritated.
For obvious reasons, the 3-ply tissues were generally better in tensile strength (both dry and wet) than the 2-ply, and less likely to tears.
But, on the other hand, the absorbency of four 2-ply samples fared, surprisingly, better than that of the boxed 3-ply. All 2-ply samples also compared favourably in softness with the 3-ply models.
Furthermore, the facial tissues were put through a series of microbiological analyses to detect, among others, the Total Bacterial Count (TBC). The majority were found to have a TBC of under 20 with the exception of two detected with TBC of 28 and 48 respectively, which are however still in compliance with the Mainland Standard (GB15979-2002) of under 200/g.
In one box sample, it is labeled with the claim "kills 99% of bacteria", but in the absence of information on its ingredients, the validity of the claim could not be ascertained.
Summing up, in a nutshell, are the more pricey facial tissues necessarily of better quality? No clear correlation could be established between price and performance. In fact, the top performers in the box tissue groups were not the most costly models.
Manufacturers of facial tissues are urged to provide better information disclosure on the number of plies and sheets, size, and net weight.
Consumers are advised to consult the findings of the test, and choose with care for facial tissues that offer good value in both price and quality.
The Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Onlin CHOICE (https://echoice.consumer.org.hk/).