I tried out supermarket loo rolls – my 70p per roll winner was softer and thicker than Andrex
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
WHEN it comes to buying toilet paper, the last thing you want to do is throw money down the toilet - literally.
Cheap rolls may seem like a bargain but if they don't do the job or you need to use lots of sheets, it might not be as good value as it first appears.
10
Lynsey Hope tested loo roll so you don't have to
Credit: Oliver Dixon
To help you choose, we have tested supermarket own brand rolls to see which performed best against the market leader, Andrex.
As well as testing them day to day, we also submerged them in water and checked how easy they were to then tear after applying a bit of pressure.
Here, Lynsey Hope, reveals the results:
M&S Super Soft Toilet Tissue
£2 for 4 rolls
50p per roll of 200 sheets (25p per 100 sheets)
10
M&S offers better value than Andrex, Lynsey found
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "Not the cheapest roll but it's still better value than Andrex and it oozed quality.
"It was soft and nice to the touch and didn't irritate even delicate skin.
"It was probably the strongest I tried and is triple-layered (three-ply) for added strength and works out around 25p per 100 sheets.
"It's also made with at least 15% recycled paper so it's kind to the planet too."
Effectiveness: 5/5
Value: 3/5
Total score: 8/10
Lidl Floryalys Luxury Soft White Toilet Tissue
£1.45 for 4 rolls
36.2p per roll of 220 sheets (16.4p per 100 sheets)
10
Lidl's sheets were on the smaller side, but it's a good option if you want to save money
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: 'A competitive price from Lidl. It definitely wasn't the softest to touch, it felt a little scratchy.
"The sheets also seemed a little on the small side.
"But it was reasonably strong and did an ok job overall so for the price, it was ok.
"A good option if you really need to save money on your grocery bills.'
Effectiveness; 3/5
Value: 4/5
Overall score: 7/10
Andrex Complete Clean
£2.95 for 4 rolls
73.7p per roll of 190 sheets (38.7 per 100 sheets)
10
Andrex is the go-to toilet paper for many
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "Soft, strong and gets the job done. I can see why this is the go-to toilet paper for so many households.
"It's gentle on skin but durable enough to withhold tearing, even when submerged in water.
"It's two-ply and is embossed with a unique 3D wave texture which stopped it from ripping and allowed for more efficient cleaning.
"The only downside is the price - it's more than double the cost of most own brands per 100 sheets."
Effectiveness: 5/5
Value: 3/5
Total score: 8/10
Tesco Luxury Soft
£1.45 for 4 rolls
36.2p per roll of 220 sheets (16.4 per 100 sheets)
10
Tesco's worked well and offers great value too
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "This Tesco paper was quite resistant and didn't split when soaked in water.
"It worked just as well as Andrex, although it wasn't as soft.
"Each two-ply sheet was a decent size and there were a generous 220 sheets on each roll so it lasted well.
"Working out at just over 16p per sheet it was one of the cheapest products we tested and I thought it was great value."
Effectiveness: 4/5
Value: 5/5
Total score: 9/10
Asda Shades Everyday White
£1.44 for 4 rolls
36p per 220 sheet roll (16.3p per 100 sheets)
10
Asda's loo roll didn't tear easily
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "Asda's loo paper is good value but it also felt strong, not tearing easily.
"It was soft to touch, absorbed water well and I didn't have to use much of it, so I thought it was pretty good value, too."
Effectiveness: 4/5
Value: 4/5
Total score: 8/10
Aldi Saxon Softer Luxury Toilet Tissue
£1.45 for 4 rolls
36.2p per 220 sheet roll (16.4p per 100 sheets)
10
Lynsey wasn't impressed by Aldi's loo roll
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: 'Aldi has so many bargain dupes but sadly, this wasn't one of them.
"It felt quite thin and scratchy on the skin, it didn't absorb water well and it ripped too easily.
"The Sainsbury's option is better value and does a better job.'
Effectiveness: 1/5
Value: 3/5
Total score: 4/5
Morrisons Oh So Soft Classic White Toilet Tissue
£1.75 for 4 rolls
43.7p per 190 sheet roll (23p per 100 sheets)
10
Morrisons was among the pricier options and it didn't last long
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "These felt soft to use and they were strong enough, not tearing easily, but each of the two-ply sheets was quite small so you need to use quite a bit each time.
"The roll quickly disappeared, not lasting very long at all.
"One of the more expensive own brands too. I didn't think they were worth the money."
Effectiveness: 3/5
Value: 3/5
Total score: 6/10
Sainsbury's Super Soft Double Rolls
£2.80 for 4 rolls
70p per roll of 440 sheets (15.9p per 100 sheets)
10
Sainsbury's was crowned the winner in our test
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "Not only did the Sainsbury's toilet roll feel softer and thicker than Andrex, it is incredible value.
"The rolls are extra long, with 440 sheets each, so you are paying £2.80 for the equivalent of eight rolls.
"They work out at less than 16p per 100 sheets so these are great value.
"The two-ply tissue didn't tear easily after being soaked in water and withstood a decent amount of pressure.
"As an added bonus, they were the only roll in this test to come in paper packaging so they are a great eco choice too. My winner."
Effectiveness: 5/5
Value: 5/5
Total score: 10/10
Essential Waitrose Ultra Soft Bathroom Tissue
£2 for 4 rolls
50p per 190 sheet roll (26.3p per 100 sheets)
10
Lynsey wasn't a fan of the Waitrose loo roll either
Credit: Oliver Dixon
Lynsey says: "Waitrose came under fire recently for reducing the number of sheets in its roll from 240 to 190 and sadly, I don't think the quality is much cop either.
"They felt soft and were embossed but the two-ply sheets were small and tore easily.
"They were pretty absorbent but I would have expected better from the upmarket chain. Not a fan."
Effectiveness: 3/5
Value: 2/5
Overall score: 5/10
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 days ago
- The Guardian
Food additive titanium dioxide likely has more toxic effects than thought, study finds
The controversial food additive titanium dioxide likely has more toxic effects than previously thought, new peer-reviewed research shows, adding to growing evidence that unregulated nanoparticles used throughout the food system present an underestimated danger to consumers. In nanoparticle form, titanium dioxide may throw off the body's endocrine system by disrupting hormonal response to food and dysregulating blood sugar levels, which can lead to diabetes, obesity and other health problems, the study found. Ultra-processed foods more broadly have this effect on 'food hormones', but there isn't a full understanding of why, and the new research may help point to an answer. 'Our research highlights the detrimental effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles as potential intestinal endocrine disruptors,' the authors wrote in the peer-reviewed study led by China's Jiaxing Nanhu University. Titanium dioxide in nanoparticle form is used in food to brighten whites or enhance colors, and may be in as many as 11,000 US products, especially candy and snack foods. Popular products like M&Ms, Beyond Meat plant-based chicken tenders and Chips Ahoy! cookies contain the substance. They're also heavily used in nonstick ceramic pans. The EU banned titanium dioxide for food use in 2022 because previous research has shown it to likely be a neurotoxin, be an immunotoxin, cause intestinal lesions and potentially damage genes. The particles can accumulate in organs and stay in the body for years. A 2022 lawsuit drew wide attention for alleging that Skittles are 'unfit for human consumption' because they contain titanium dioxide. On the heels of the study, Skittles announced it would stop using the substance, while the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has maintained that it is safe. The new research compared the gut health of three groups: mice that were fed titanium dioxide nanoparticles, mice that were fed larger microparticles and mice that were fed no titanium dioxide. Mice that were fed the nanoparticles showed lower levels of several types of gut hormones that signal to the body that it is full, aid in digestion and regulate glucose. The mice that were fed the nanoparticles showed much higher levels of glucose, or blood sugar, than those that were fed microparticles. The authors also noted that 'gut hormones secreted by enteroendocrine cells play a critical role regulating energy intake and maintaining glucose' levels. The titanium dioxide nanoparticles seemed to disrupt the enteroendocrine cells' differentiation, which is part of the hormone secretion process, and reduce the cells' numbers. These issues can lead to obesity, type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance, the authors wrote. The findings are 'a really big deal because when you start messing with glucose levels – that's diabetes', said Tom Neltner, director of the non-profit Unleaded Kids, who, along with other public health groups, filed a formal petition with the FDA in 2023 that requested the agency ban the use of titanium dioxide in food. The agency is legally compelled to respond within 180 days, but so far has ignored the petition, Neltner said. The petition comes as Robert F Kennedy Jr has made reducing toxic food additives a priority. 'He's getting started so it's too soon to tell, but there's hope that we didn't have before,' Neltner said. But he added that the groups will sue if the petition continues to be ignored.
BBC News
4 days ago
- BBC News
Should you be eating food products with fewer ingredients?
For gluten-free, citrus-free and tomato-free Kerry Clayton, shopping and cooking is a well as her own food requirements, her 10-year-old son is dairy and family shops at multiple stores each week to get the best free-from options, cooks adaptable meals like jacket potatoes and pasta, and makes cakes and cookies from spends about an hour a week baking, on top of running two online jewellery businesses and parenting another M&S launched its Only range in March, with products featuring six or fewer ingredients, Ms Clayton described it as "a dream".That was despite higher prices - its one-ingredient corn flakes cost £2.50 for a 325g box, compared with 90p for 500g of the standard kind."For standard shoppers, it seems a lot, but for us with allergies, it's about normal," says Kent-based Ms Clayton."It's hard to find enjoyable things we can all eat. If you're used to the luxury of standard cereal, you might not enjoy alternatives, or understand the extra cost - but for those of us that need low ingredient food, it's perfect." Life might just be about to get a lot easier for Ms Clayton. More retailers and food brands are taking M&S's lead to offer more items containing fewer ingredients, prompted by the concern around ultra-processed food (UPF) that has been growing since Dr Chris Van Tulleken released his book, "Ultra-Processed People", in is ultra-processed food?Less processed is growing in Hopkins, founder of IND!E, a platform which helps small food and drink brands get into big retailers, says he's seen a 40% increase in retailer enquiries over the past year about products with fewer ingredients. He is taking bigger orders specifically from Ocado, Selfridges and John Lewis."Retailers are responding to growing consumer demand for simpler, more recognisable ingredient lists," says Harrogate-based Mr Hopkins. Feeling the need to offer a less-processed product, plant-based brand THIS, which makes meat-free sausages, burgers, chicken and bacon, has recently launched a new Super Superfoods designed to be the protein component of a meal, and features natural ingredients, like beans, seeds and is also responding to surveys indicating that shoppers are avoiding meat replacement products, due to their processed nature and the presence of artificial Byrne, innovation and sustainability director at THIS is concerned about "consumer confusion and hesitation"."We understand we are classified as a UPF, however, that has little bearing on whether our products are healthy, because their nutritional properties are extremely good. Our products are high in protein, high in fibre, low in saturated fat and low in sugar," says London-based Mr Byrne."It has been frustrating in many ways as it has shifted the focus away from the most important thing about food, which is the nutrition aspect." So has the public been misled that all ultra-processed food is bad, and all unprocessed food is good?Nutritionist Dr Laura Wyness thinks so, expressing disappointment that the M&S Only range puts "hype over health"."It may be that consumers are looking for products with shorter ingredient lists, but to leave out fortified nutrients is a backwards step for public health nutrition. We should be encouraging more nutrient dense foods in the diet, and fortifying products such as plant milk and dairy alternatives and breakfast cereals," says Edinburgh-based Dr Wyness."This seems like one occasion that the customer is not always right - mainly due to the misinformation that is informing their food choices."Dr Jibin He says UPF as a term is not a helpful indicator of whether something is healthy or unhealthy, as the concept, and how it is explained to the public, is food, Dr He notes, will remain an essential part of feeding a large and growing human population, as processing ensures food safety, extends shelf life, and reduces waste."Take tofu as an example. It is a great source of protein, low in fat and considered as a healthy alternative to meats, particularly red meat. It is also more environmentally tofu would be considered as a UPF whereas red meat would be an unprocessed food," says Dr He, who is head of science and a chartered food scientist at Teesside University. He has also collaborated with food manufacturers and food technology companies to improve processing technologies. For food brands wanting to create less processed products, Dr He advises that it can be done by simplifying the formulas of existing products, and looking at new processing and packaging technologies that mean fewer ingredients can be used."Many food products have extremely complex formulas, and a manufacturer may not fully understand the functions of each listed ingredient in their formula."I would advise food manufacturers to closely examine their formulas and identify which ingredients are absolutely necessary and which they can do without," Dr He recommends."Novel food processing technologies can also help produce products with higher nutritional retention and longer shelf life without significantly altering the physical structure and chemical composition of the food." Dr He is also expecting a rise in marketing to push the virtues of less processed food products, as well as to justify their higher price porridge brand 3Bears, for example, recently launched its own range of low ingredient breakfast cereals, in partnership with footballer Harry Kane. Mr Kane appears in product promotion, and is also a company shareholder.3Bears' oat cinnamon loops, containing seven ingredients, are priced at £3.99 for compared with Only multigrain hoops from M&S, containing five ingredients, at £2.50 for 300 grams, while Waitrose Essential multigrain hoops are £1.25 for 375 grams, and contain 22 ingredients."With our oat flakes it was really hard to get the texture and crunchiness right – as we only wanted to use three ingredients, and oats are very different to process than other grains. With the costs of creating products with fewer ingredients higher and the process harder, the price points are reflective of this," explains 3Bears co-founder Caroline Nichols. For some foods, the debate over UPF, seems less of a problem. The UK confectionery market continues to grow steadily, and is worth about £14.8bn, despite it having a high proportion of UPF cream ball brand Little Moons might list over 30 ingredients on some of its flavours, but it now exports from the UK to 35 countries, and supermarkets have copied it with own-brand Farquhar, the company's marketing, innovation and sustainability director, is confident that treat food brands can ride out the UPF storm, so he isn't in a hurry to slash Little Moon's ingredient list."The reality of a category like ice cream is that certain ingredients are needed to keep the product stable through the food supply chain, like emulsifiers and stabilisers. So unless we're all going to start making ice cream at home regularly then off-the-shelf ice cream still has a role to play," says London-based Mr Farquhar."I'm sure the M&S 'Only' chocolate bars are delicious, but they're speaking to a very specific audience, and I doubt the big confectionery brands are going to be willing to compromise the core product attributes consumers love."
Scottish Sun
4 days ago
- Scottish Sun
Luxury £130 gift set urgently recalled over ‘serious health risk' including banned chemical that can ‘harm unborn child'
Read more to find out about more product recalls HEALTH ALERT Luxury £130 gift set urgently recalled over 'serious health risk' including banned chemical that can 'harm unborn child' A LUXURY perfume and candle gift set is being urgently recalled after posing a serious health risk. The alarm was raised after a chemical that can damage the female reproductive system or harm unborn babies was discovered in the products. 1 The Maison Louis Marie No.04 Bois de Balincourt gift set was found to contain a harmful chemical Credit: La Gent The £130 Maison Louis Marie No 04 Bois de Balinbourt gift set was found to contain Butylphenyl methylpropional (BMHCA), which is prohibited in cosmetic products. The Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) made the decision to withdraw the set from shops after it failed to meet trading standards. The box contains a 50ml eau de parfum, a 15ml perfume oil and a scented candle. No. 04 Bois de Balincourt is a recipe of aromas including sandalwood, cedarwood, nutmeg, cinnamon, vetiver, and amber wood. The gift set was sold via La Gent's website. This comes after Marks and Spencer recalled a popular baby product due to customer safety complaints. Polarn O. Pyret Branded Poppy Print Rompers were recalled due to safety complaints. Parents and carers of little ones have been asked to check their homes to see if they have the affected product. The recall was made for the T94 8409A model in size 1-12 months old, which was sold online at M&S. The company said: "Polarn O. Pyret has issued a Product Recall due to safety complaints with their Poppy Print Romper, T94 8409A in the specified sizes 1-12 Months". 'Contaminated' Costco snack recalled as 'small pieces of wood' are found inside it – eight products are affected The online-only product means that affected items were not available to purchase from physical M&S stores during the original purchase period. Those who bought the romper or received it as a gift have been urged to "return it immediately" at any M&S Clothing store. A full refund will be issued upon return. M&S has said that further support is also being offered and if customers have further questions, they can call the company's customer service line at 0333 014 8555. The OPSS also recently rejected a Chinese product after it threatened "serious" suffocation fears. Parents were strongly advised to avoid Belecoo's baby stroller and car seat, which was recalled due to a lack of safety warnings. The brand's 580-2 model was deemed to pose a serious asphyxiation risk to babies and toddlers by Trading Standards. It does not meet the requirements enforced by the General Product Safety Regulations 2005. The damning report claims that parents might unknowingly endanger their young children by letting them sleep in the seat. Your product recall rights Chief consumer reporter James Flanders reveals all you need to know. Product recalls are an important means of protecting consumers from dangerous goods. As a general rule, if a recall involves a branded product, the manufacturer would usually have lead responsibility for the recall action. But it's often left up to supermarkets to notify customers when products could put them at risk. If you are concerned about the safety of a product you own, always check the manufacturer's website to see if a safety notice has been issued. When it comes to appliances, rather than just food items, the onus is usually on you - the customer - to register the appliance with the manufacturer as if you don't there is no way of contacting you to tell you about a fault. If you become aware that an item you own has been recalled or has any safety noticed issued against it, make sure you follow the instructions given to you by the manufacturer. They should usually provide you with more information and a contact number on its safety notice. In some cases, the manufacturer might ask you to return the item for a full refund or arrange for the faulty product to be collected. You should not be charged for any recall work - such as a repair, replacement or collection of the recalled item
