  |
Summary
The NONISEC Extra Protection is a cloth-backed Argentinian diaper at the top of the Lenterdit absorbance range. These diapers are made and sold in supermarkets throughout Argentina but don’t appear to sell abroad. The sizing for their NONISEC adult line is interesting because it uses both weight and waist-size for recommended sizing. The smallest size is recommended for a weight of 20-45 kg (44-100 lbs) and a waist of 40-80 cm (16-31”) and it goes up 2 sizes from that. For this review I tested the medium (though labelled large) size, which is recommended for a weight of 45-75 kg (100-165 lbs) and I found the sizing to be perhaps slightly on the large side for a medium fit or smaller for a large fit. Another interesting aspect of this diaper is that it’s one of very few adult diapers on the market that is scented, with a very light cherry-like fragrance, though far from the level of fragrance you get in the Attento diaper. On the package it’s indicated to be an Aloe-Vera scent.In terms of actual performance I found it lacked absorbency, allowing for maybe one wetting, but even then it could be risky. The biggest downside was the ease at which it gave up surface dampness on pressout. Otherwise, it’s a decent quality construction with surprisingly large tapes. Padding deterioration was a bit of an issue, but I didn’t find it had a major impact on performance. During testing, I found it to be highly breathable and comfortable. Price-wise, it runs pretty expensive for what you get, but I think that’s a common issue in Argentina where inflation has run high for quite some time. It’s certainly worth a try if you’re in that part of the world, but I’d recommend using it with a booster for added protection.
Key Features:
- Cloth-like backsheet
- Standing inner leak guards
- Aloe-Vera scenting
- Repositionable fasteners
Pros:
- Highly breathable
- Soft and comfortable
- Large tapes
Cons:
- Highly susceptible to pressout/surface dampness
- Limited availability
- Padding deterioration
Product Details
For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized NONISEC Extra Protection Adult Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:
Packaging
Brand: NONISEC
Manufacturer: Lenterdit S.A.
Origin: Argentina
Units Per Bag: 8
Cost Per Unit: $$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 19 cm (7.5") x 15 cm (5.9") x 24.5 cm (9.7")
Weight: 1.5 kg (3.3 lbs)
Available Sizes: J,G,EG
Advertised Absorbency: Extreme
      |
| 1.1 NONISEC Extra Protection Packaging |
Diaper
Backsheet: Cloth-like (non-woven)
Wetness Indicator: No
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: Yes
Outer Color: White (2 strips of horizontal lines of blue dots + rectangles down middle)
Inner Color: White (light blue rectangle in the middle)
Front Waistband: No
Rear Waistband: No
Folded Thickness: 2.66 cm (1.05")
Folded Length: 23 cm (9.1")
Dry Weight: 100 g (3.53 oz)
Fragrance: No
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 83 cm (32.7") x 62 cm (24.4") x 28 cm (11") x 59 cm (23.2")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 67 cm (26.4") x 23 cm (9.1") x 16 cm (6.3") x 28 cm (11")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 3.5 cm (1.4") x 10 cm (3.9") x 6 cm (2.4") x 16 cm (6.3")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Total Padding Area: 1334 cm2 (207 in2)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 4.5 cm (1.8") x 12 cm (4.7")
Tape (W x L): 5 cm (2") x 4 cm (1.6")
   
 
|
| 1.2 NONISEC Extra Protection Diaper |
Laboratory Absorbency Tests
Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 725 ml (34.4 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 975 ml (34.4 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (73 s, 65 s, 79 s, 90 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 73%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.64 ml / cm2 (0.15 oz / in2)
Press Out Volume: 350 ml (12.4 oz)
Surface Dampness Rating: 2
The NONISEC diaper is like a sponge when it comes to surface dampness (not in a good way). It appears to absorb a lot of moisture, but it’s only weakly held by the padding and can easily be squeezed out. During the lab test significant surface dampness was apparent from the first wetting (albeit I mistakenly missed it in the video). It appeared to absorb a lot before the end of the test but there was a massive amount of pressout when it came to testing that aspect. This was also backed up with real world testing where moisture easily pressed out upon sitting and the diaper was damp to the touch after a single wetting.
 
|
| 2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test |
 |
| 2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test |
"Real World" Absorbency Tests
Posture Tests
Standing-Sitting
Total Absorbed Volume: 550 ml (19.4 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing)
Leaked After Sitting: Yes
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 81%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.41 ml / cm2 (0.09 oz / in2)
Standing-Sitting Rating: 2
The NONISEC diaper struggled when tested while standing and sitting, with pressout leakage on the first wetting. When wet while standing the moisture all sank toward the lower crotch/mid-padding with a significant amount of pooling. The diaper padding certainly felt damp at this point though the extremely breathable design kept it from feeling clammy. I didn’t notice any sign of leakage through the leak guards at this point, albeit they weren’t subject to any pressure and the padding felt quite saturated in the mid-section, even if dry at the front/rear. Upon sitting shortly afterward there was noticeable pressout with moisture coming back up through the padding and a moderate leak through the lower leak guards. I stopped the test at that, because the padding was clearly at its limit. Even though the front and rear padding still had areas of dryness, it’s unlikely moisture could have wicked that far. I’d advise against the NONISEC for daily wear or any case where it may be subject to pressout as it’s unlikely to handle more than a single wetting. It may be fine for moderate incontinence or perhaps do better with a booster pad.
Lying Down
Total Absorbed Volume: 750 ml (26.5 oz)
Total Wettings: 2
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 93%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.56 ml / cm2 (0.13 oz / in2)
Lying Down Rating: 3
The first wetting while lying down was fully absorbed without leakage. There was initially quite a bit of pooling and it felt very close to leaking but it managed to hold it long enough to distribute it through the padding. Afterward the diaper felt only slightly damp but otherwise it wasn’t too different from its dry state at this point and there was still a considerable amount of dry padding at the front and rear. The second wetting was clearly going to leak and quickly resulted in a major leak. Moisture skipped the front padding and pooled then leaked from the rear leg gathers. The diaper felt soaked at this point with significant pressout. Given the relatively low overall absorbency I’d say the best you’ll get from this diaper is a single wetting without leakage when lying down, but even that could be a risk and I wouldn’t push it past that.
  |
| 2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left) |
Daily Wear and Bedwetting
The NONISEC Extra Protection diaper is the first South American diaper I’ve tried so I was interested to see how it would perform. As it turns out, it was hardly a top performer but did offer some unique characteristics. For one, it’s one of only a small handful of scented diapers I’ve seen on the market. I wouldn’t say this is a big selling point and the scenting is very mild, but interesting nonetheless. It also features some very large tapes, matching the coverage area of the Trest Elite or Tykables Little Rawrs. However, this diaper doesn’t feature a landing zone, and oddly enough doesn’t even feature a wetness indicator. There are a bunch of blue branding rectangles that run down the middle but they are unaffected by dampness. Another interesting feature is the odd rectangles of a different fabric material on the front wings. I couldn’t figure out what those were meant for, but my best guess would be that it’s the easy refastening system referred to on the package. The description mentions it as a way to refasten without damaging the diaper, as you might expect with a landing zone. Unfortunately, unless you’re near the top of the range for the diaper there’s no easy way to apply the tapes over that material. Incidentally, during testing I never noticed any backsheet deterioration when applying/removing the tapes directly to the backsheet, so I’m not sure how much benefit this actually provides anyway. I do feel the sizing for this diaper is probably more generous than it looks. It had among the most stretchy leg gather elastics of any I’ve tested so far and I was able to stretch it out much further than I might otherwise expect. In terms of practical use you can’t expect to get more than a single wetting out of this diaper without leaks. I found it was able to manage a single wetting for bedwetting, but it felt noticeably damp and I think the only reason it didn’t leak was because the leak guards were able to hold and there’s no significant pressure on the padding while lying down. In spite of the obvious dampness, I didn’t notice much in the way of skin irritation and this diaper is very soft and breathable. During warm weather I didn’t notice much sweat, so it could be a good choice in those cases where absorbency isn’t an issue. In daily wear it will easily leak when wet and under pressure (e.g. when seated). I think in that case it would be best used with a booster pad.Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 5
The NONISEC diaper isn’t a particularly strong choice when it comes to dealing with bowel incontinence. For one it’s cloth-backed and lacks waistbands to retain odors. Also, the padding isn’t particularly durable and subject to dampness. However, it does have a large amount of rear padding coverage, is lightly scented, and the tapes are fairly large. With all that said, I rank it at the lower end of the rankings in this category and feel there are better choices for dealing with this condition.
Wear & Tear Tests
Fitting
The NONISEC diaper features a cloth-like backsheet with large tabs that are a mix of hook & loop and adhesive tape material. I found the fit to be a bit on the loose side with the tapes having a wide coverage but not firmly adhering to the backsheet like you sometimes find; though this is typical with fasteners on a cloth-like backsheet lacking a landing zone. An interesting aspect of this diaper is that the front wings have an area of rectangular material that resembles a landing zone, but it was set so far back it would be hard to make use of unless you were near the top of the fitting range with the tapes hitting the front wings. In either case the tapes can be refastened and repositioned multiple times after the first application.
 |
| 3.1 NONISEC Extra Protection Fastener |
Ease-of-Use Rating: 7
The NONISEC is relatively easy to use but has a few notable deficiencies. For one, it lacks a wetness indicator so it could be harder to tell when it’s wet in a care environment. I also found the tapes can slide around a bit. The front wings have what looks like a tape landing zone, but if you have a larger fit then the tapes will extend past it and it ends up folding back under the rear wings. I may be confused about the purpose of this feature. It doesn’t detract from its fit/comfort, but it could mess you up if you try using it for tape placement. Otherwise, I found it to be decent for getting a snug fit and easy to reattach/position the tapes multiple times. I think a large part of this comes from the incredibly stretchable elastics. The tapes don’t have a super strong grip, but generally are sufficient. The tapes are also exceptionally large, which would assist those with dexterity challenges. Other than that, I felt this diaper has a pretty spacious feel to it in the lower padding, which could be beneficial for managing bowel incontinence. I’d also say the fit is a bit on the larger size than you might expect given the weight/waist ranges given for this diaper.
 |
| 3.2 NONISEC Extra Protection Fit |
Comfort
Comfort Rating (dry): 8
For the most part I found the NONISEC diaper to be highly breathable and comfortable. This diaper is made of an incredibly soft material, not far off the Attento diapers from Japan. I never had issues with the material chafing or any sort of irritation. However, the padding is quite susceptible to deterioration, with substantial areas sliding around, which can lead it feeling a bit lumpy/uneven with wear. It also lacks waistbands and the tapes aren’t particularly strong, but surprisingly not bad for managing it with the limited weight in its dry state. The breathability is top notch and would surely make it a good choice for warm weather wear.
Comfort Rating (wet): 7
The NONISEC diaper didn’t feel too different in its wet state from its dry state even if the padding was obviously saturated and not great with pressout moisture. It remains incredibly soft and breathable with the excess moisture only detracting slightly from comfort. Part of this may be due to its limited absorbency, but I feel it pretty closely aligns with the Attento diaper for comfort and in either case the breathability makes up for the extra surface dampness. The padding didn’t deteriorate much further when wet so felt about the same in that regard. The tapes held up alright under the limited additional weight of the wet diaper.
  |
| 3.3 NONISEC Extra Protection Topsheet and Backsheet |
Durability
Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 19.5% (topsheet), 26.1% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 5 shakes to deterioration
Durability Rating (dry): 5
The NONISEC diaper is quite susceptible to padding deterioration, but I wouldn’t say it’s among the worst of the market for dry durability. While the padding did deteriorate during the dry durability test, it was mostly tearing without much clumping and a lot of core padding remained intact. In fact, I found it didn’t impact absorption as much as I thought it would; having a very wide padding coverage also helps however. Aside from padding deterioration, the tapes held reasonably well. Certainly better than some cloth-backed diapers like the Lille SupremFit or CardinalHealth Wings Plus, but far from the top performers in this regard. Moreover, it was possible to refasten the tapes multiple times without any damage to the backsheet. I also noticed the strip of fabric on the front wings, which I assumed was a landing zone but couldn’t actually be used as such due to the loose fit, was very susceptible to detaching. Another interesting feature of this diaper is that the elastic leg gathers and mid-section are incredibly stretchy; I found I could stretch it far more than I expected. If the padding were a bit more durable it could be good for active wear, but in its current form it’s certainly a diaper that would be best used for non-active situations.
Durability Rating (wet): 5
I found little difference between the NONISEC diaper durability in its wet and dry state. If anything the padding became a little more durable in its wet state as it firmed up and areas where I thought had some tears were no longer obviously in that state. Again, the tapes aren’t super strong, but for the amount of absorbency you’d ever get out of this diaper they’re good enough. This diaper doesn’t have some of the premium durability features like waistbands, but I doubt they’d make much of a difference.
 
|
| 3.4 NONISEC Extra Protection Dry Test Deterioration |
Discretion Tests
Profile
Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 7 cm (2.8"), 8 cm (3.2")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 6 cm (2.4"), 6 cm (2.4")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 9.5 cm (3.7"), 6 cm (2.4")
Profile Discretion Rating: 6
The NONISEC Extra Protection isn’t particularly bulky, but I still found it had a notable diaper bulge at its rear. The front padding was otherwise snug and easy to conceal. Aside from that, it had a moderate rise above the waistline. You’d certainly need to take some care to wear this diaper when out and about, but it’s hardly the level of bulkiness you’d find in something like the Abena M4.
  
|
| 4.1 NONISEC Extra Protection Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right) |
   | ||||
| 4.2 ANAN Premium Adult Diapers Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right) |
Noise
Noise Rating: 6
The NONISEC diaper was unusually loud for a cloth-backed diaper. I found its sound to be particularly apparent when standing or sitting as air pushed in or out of the padding. It sounded like a muffled crinkling, but certainly enough to be noticed. It was less apparent when walking and I believe if worn with underwear or meshpants it may be possible to conceal but would still take some work.
 |
| 4.3 NONISEC Extra Protection Noise Profile |
Odor Reduction
Odor Reduction Rating: 7
First off, the NONISEC diaper does have a very slight fragrance of its own. I wasn’t able to narrow down the scent. It’s described as aloe vera, I feel it has a cherry-like smell, or maybe similar to the fragrance commonly found in pampers diapers. It does seem to be an intentional design to suppress other odors. Other than that, I didn’t notice odors from this diaper as much as I otherwise would have expected given its surface dampness issues. It reminds me a bit of the Attento tape diaper in that regard. Even so, it’s still cloth-backed and doesn’t have waistbands that might otherwise prevent odors. Absorbency is relatively limited too. For these reasons it doesn’t come near the top performers in this regard.
