CPSC NEISS · code 1137

Paper Products

Paper Products: danger rank #105 of 838 is not ER-volume rank #97 of 838 (27,645 estimated ER visits a year; declining by about 13% over the last five years).

Containers & Packaging CPSC NEISS through 2024

Danger score versus ER volume

Danger score versus ER volume

According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Paper Products ranks #105 of 838 by danger score (42/100) at ER-volume #97 of 838 (27,645/yr). They are not the same ranking.

#105
danger rank of 838
#97
ER-volume rank of 838
42/100
danger score
27,645/yr
estimated ER visits (avg)

Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.

Where this category's danger score sits nationally

Danger score (42/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories

42 Higher than most more dangerous than 84% of 838 product categories

scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2024

Composite verdict

Composite Safety Score: 74/100

One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.

D
Dimension Value National percentile Weight applied Source
Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) 9 72nd 35% CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index
Annual ER injury volume 27,645 87th 30% CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries
5-year injury trend -13% 46th 15% CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries
Consumer incident reports 75 78th 20% CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count

Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.

Where 552,908 estimated ER injuries land on the body

Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 1137. Segments sum to 552,908 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.

Two danger lenses

Same-group peer scores and this product's dial

The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Containers & Packaging group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.

Containers & Packaging danger scores

1. Bottles Or Jars, Not Spec…45/1002. Containers, Not Specified43/1003. Paper Products42/1004. Bags, Not Elsewhere Class…41/1005. Nonglass Bottles Or Jars41/1006. Other Containers41/1007. Other Specified Plastic P…40/1008. Plastic Bags40/100
Higher score = higher composite danger in this group. Peer set is other scored products sharing the same CPSC group.
0/100100/10042/100
PlainSafety danger score · Paper Products

Source: CPSC NEISS danger-score model As of 2024

How this 42/100 score is built

The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for paper products - no opinion, no editorializing:

  • Injury volume 27,645 ER visits/yr High volume
  • Severity (hospitalization rate) 8.9% Above median admission rate
  • Fatality rate 0.01% Low fatality rate
  • 5-year trend-13%

Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.

What the CPSC Data Shows

Across the 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for paper products are declining by about 13% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2018 (34,319 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2007 (23,043 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is foreign body to the ear, accounting for approximately 81,747 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by foreign body to the face (64,561 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 114,567 cases over the NEISS window, and females appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 8.9% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.01%) result in fatality.

Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 75 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how paper products fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.

Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)

20K25K30K35K 20052008201120142017202020232024 29K
Estimated annual emergency-room visits for Paper Products, CPSC NEISS

Source: CPSC NEISS national injury estimates As of 2024

Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only

Who Gets Injured?

Age Group Male Female Total
0-4 51,242 63,325 114,567
5-14 53,952 43,563 97,521
15-24 16,132 18,427 34,567
25-34 16,713 23,571 40,284
35-44 16,486 23,440 39,959
45-54 16,041 22,773 38,814
55-64 16,853 23,610 40,463
65-74 14,541 24,534 39,075
75+ 38,256 69,389 107,645

Most Common Injuries

Body Part Diagnosis Est. Injuries
Ear Foreign Body 81,747
Face Foreign Body 64,561
Eyeball Contusions, Abr. 42,105
Head Internal Injury 27,010
Finger Laceration 23,906
Lower Trunk Strain, Sprain 17,830
Internal Ingestion 17,225
Lower Trunk Fracture 15,690
Lower Trunk Other 13,994
Internal Aspiration 12,049
Face Laceration 9,289
Upper Trunk Other 9,054
Face Contusions, Abr. 7,048
Head Laceration 6,461
Lower Trunk Contusions, Abr. 6,250

Severity Breakdown

Treated/examined And Released 89.1% (492,480)
Treated And Admitted/hospitalized 8.0% (43,992)
Left Without Being Seen 1.5% (8,374)
Treated And Transferred 1.0% (5,637)
Held For Observation 0.4% (2,364)
Fatality Incl. Doa, Died In Er 0.0% (61)

ER Visit Narratives

Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.

Age 88 · Female · Wrist · Laceration · 2024

88YOF HAD A MECHANICAL TRIP AND FALL WHILE TRYING TO GET HER MAIL FALLING FORWARD AND ATTEMPTED TO CATCH HERSELF WITH RIGHT HAND DX: LACERATION OF RIGHT WRIST; SKIN TEAR TO RIGHT HAND; SKIN TEAR TO RIGHT KNEE

Age 206 · Male · Internal · Ingestion · 2024

6MOM CHILD ATE A BUNCH OF TOILET PAPER, VOMITING DX: VOMITNG IN PEDIATRIC PATIENT

Age 12 · Male · Ear · Foreign Body · 2024

12 YOM WITH A PIECE OF PAPER IN EAR. DX FB EAR

Age 50 · Female · Lower Trunk · Other · 2024

50YOF C/O RIGHT LUMBAR MUSCLE PAIN FOR 2 DAYS. 2 DAYS AGO WAS BENDING DOWN TO PICK UP A NAPKIN AND ABOUT AN HOUR LATER NOTICED LEFT LUMBAR PAIN. DX: LUMBAR BACK PAIN

Age 3 · Female · Ear · Foreign Body · 2024

3YOF STUCK A PIECE OF TISSUE PAPER IN LEFT EAR DX: FOREIGN BODY EAR

Age 210 · Female · Mouth · Foreign Body · 2024

10 MOF COMES TO ED WITH A STICKER STUCK TO ROOF OF HER MOUTH, DX: FOREIGN BODY MOUTH

Age 4 · Male · Ear · Foreign Body · 2024

4YOM STUCK A PIECE OF PAPER IN HIS RIGHT EAR DX: FOREIGN BODY EAR

Age 8 · Female · Ear · Foreign Body · 2024

8 YOF ROLLED UP SOME PAPER AND PUT IT INTO HER RIGHT EAR THIS MORNING. DX: FOREIGN BODY RIGHT EXTERNAL EAR CANAL

Age 84 · Female · Foot · Other · 2024

84YOF PT STATES SOME PAPERS FELL TO FLOOR & SHE WENT TO PICK THEM UP, SLIPPED & FELL; STRUCK FACE & LEFT TORSO; C/O LEFT FOOT & LEFT LEG PAIN NO DX

Age 2 · Female · Head · Internal Injury · 2024

2YOF PRESENTS WITH A HEAD INJURY S/P PT'S MOTHER STATES THE PT SLIPPED AND FELL BACKWARDS TODAY AROUD NOON HITTING HER HEAD AT HOME WHILE RUNNING IN THE KITCHEN. PT SLIPPED AND FELL ON A PIECE OF PAPER. DX: HEAD INJURY

Age 3 · Female · Face · Foreign Body · 2024

3YOF STUCK A PIECE OF WRAPPING PAPER IN NOSTRIL DX: FOREIGN BODY NOSE

Age 101 · Female · Lower Trunk · Fracture · 2024

101 YOF FROM HOME WENT TO GET THE MAIL. SHE WAS WALKING UP THE STAIRS WHEN SHE SLIPPED ON A PIECE OF MAIL AND LOST HER BALANCE AND TRIPPED BACKWARDS. SHE STRUCK HER HEAD ON A THIN WOODEN CABINET AND LANDED ON HER BACK AND BUTTOCKS. C/O SEVERE PAIN IN LEFT HIP DX RIGHT 5-7 AND LEFT 5-6 RIB FX, LEFT SACRAL ALA FX, LEFT INFERIOR PUBIC RAMUS FX, LEFT ANTERIOR ACETABULUM FX

Consumer Incident Reports

Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.

9/3/2013 · Incident, No Injury · AJM PACKAGING CORPORATION · Arizona

I was in the process of warming food (chicken) in the microwave on a Walmart Brand Great Value microwavable paper plate. - 110 plate package. The food was on the plate in the microwave no more than 45 seconds and a flame presented, burning the plate and causing me to open the microwave to extinguish the flame. I was able to blow the flame out. Luckily I was standing in the kitchen while the incident took place, as the food was timed for 1.5 minutes. I'm still not certain why the plate would catch fire and have also requested the microwave be inspected. I do have photos of the plate and the microwave was clean. I was very concerned regarding this issue as others might encounter the same problem or I may have walked about from the unit and not have seen the beginning of the fire. This is very disturbing and I never would have used the plate in the microwave if I had known this was a possibility. Thank you.

9/29/2020 · Injury, No First Aid or Medical Attention Received · KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP. · Michigan

Two boxes of tissues emitted a chemical smell that made an 86 year old consumer feel unwell. Her blood pressure increased from 112/40 to 200/90 or 200/100. Her pulse increase from 60 to 90-100.

9/25/2013 · Incident, No Injury · Durable Packaging International · Colorado

I purchased some wax paper at the Dollar Store ( 65 s.f. of Durable Wax Paper, distributed by Greenbriar Intl., Inc., of Chesapeake, VA 23320) and today I used it, as advertised on the box, for microwaving. I wanted to reheat a slab of baked tofu and some broccoli florets, so I placed them on a plate ([REDACTED]) and covered them with a sheet of the waxed paper, setting the MW for one minute on 70% power. Imagine my surprise when I smelled something burning - sure enough, I looked in the MW and the waxed paper was pretty much ashes all over my food. The food, however, was just fine, warm enough to eat but not burned itself or even piping hot. I think this stuff is dangerous. I don't know why it flamed out like that, and I can't remember it ever having done that before, but if it advertises itself as microwavable, it needs to hold to that standard. Report Update 09/25: Consumer states via email update "I now believe the wax paper got caught underneath the turntable of the microwave. The food was rotated but the paper was not and so it burned."

9/20/2018 · Incident, No Injury · The Procter & Gamble Company · California

Caller says that for weeks she has noticed a strange odor in and around certain spots of her home but could not figure it out. About one week ago the caller went to go reach for the toilet paper that’s located in the garage and noticed that the strange smell coming from the product. Caller says that it gave her a violent headache from the odor as soon as she opened the plastic. Caller says that the product is stored inside of the garage and the smell is noticed from inside of the house close to the garage door. Caller wants to warns other consumers about the odors in the product and the headaches that this product has caused. Caller contacted the manufacturer and they offered her a $16 gift card and offered apologies to the consumer.

9/1/2016 · Injury, First Aid Received by Non-Medical Professional · The Procter & Gamble Company · Rhode Island

August 23, 2016 Proctor & Gamble Distributing, LLC PO Box 599 Cincinatti, OH, 45201 On Saturday, August 13, 2016 1 was visiting my brother and sister-in-law at their [REDACTED] rented house when I picked up a roll of Bounty/Dawn paper towels and tore off a couple pieces. The plastic wrapper had been removed and the paper towel roll was on the counter looking like any normal roll of paper towels. It was unseasonably hot and I tore off a few pieces of the paper towel to wipe my brow and carry with me. Within a half hour I began to experience a burning sensation in my eyes which grew more and more severe over the next half hour. It became so painful that I could barely blink without experiencing excruciating pain. My eyes became alarmingly reddened. My wife, brother and sister-in-law became justifiably concerned, as was I. We stopped at a pharmacy and bought eye wash which I used in earnest for the next hour. I also showered and attempted to further flush my eyes. We were ready to find a clinic or emergency room as I was afraid that my eyes might be experiencing lasting damage. After further flushing the severe pain subsided somewhat and by nightfall I could keep my eyes open again without intense pain. I had absolutely no idea what had caused the severe burns to my eyes until the next morning. The next morning my wife picked up another piece of the Bounty/Dawn paper towels to dry her hands after dish washing. She immediately noticed a film on her hands which she was able to rinse off. Only then did we surmise that there was soap embedded in the paper towels and that this had been the cause of my eye injury. You responded to my initial notification of this incident with a letter from a [REDACTED] on the "Bounty Team copy of which is enclosed. She also sent me a coupon worth $11.00 toward Bounty products. I am returning that coupon herewith. The pain and suffering I experienced was severe and frightening for me and my family. An $11 .00 coupon is

8/30/2012 · Injury, No First Aid or Medical Attention Received · The Procter & Gamble Company · New York

When recently using a new box of Puffs Lotion Tissues - 3 pack/21.3cm x 20.8cm (Procter & Gamble) I noticed a very strong chemical smell from the tissues. The odor reminded me of a lemon scented cleaning chemical. When I took the first tissue from the box and used it, I was overwhelmed by the chemical smell, and it gave me a headache. I also experienced a burning sensation on my top lip, where the tissue came in contact with my lip. I continue to feel the burning sensation on my top lip 16 hours after coming in contact with the product. The chemical smell from the box of tissues (all the boxes have the same lemon scented chemical smell) was so overpowering when it was near my bed, approximately 1 foot from my head, that I had to remove the tissues from my immediate sleeping area. My children also complained of the chemical smell on the tissues. I purchased two packages of the Puffs Lotion Tissues - 3 pack yesterday (August 16, 2012) and the other package, on inspection, also has the strong lemony chemical smell. Both packages were securely wrapped in plastic when they were purchased.

8/29/2017 · Incident, No Injury · GEORGIA-PACIFIC LLC · Kansas

This consumer is reporting a 24 roll of toilet tissue that he purchased from retailer in Topeka, Kansas around July 28, 2017. The caller opened the package during the first week in August, 2017 and noticed it had a splotch of something on it that he noticed after his first use. He removed the roll of toilet tissue then showed it to his wife who took out a new roll from the same package but saw that it had a light spray of small dots of the same type of stain. He contacted the manufacturer who advised him to return the first roll of toilet tissue but not the second. [REDACTED] who is the Product Liability was his contact but [REDACTED] was not keeping in touch with him so he went to [REDACTED] Supervisor who verified for him that the substance on the toilet tissue was blood. [REDACTED] supervisor verified that the substance on the toilet tissue was blood. The consumer asked if he could check this same stain for disease and the manufacturer responded that they did not have that type of equipment. [REDACTED] asked the caller what he expected from the manufacturer. He answered that he would ask that he become reimbursed, that his medical bills be paid, compensated for his emotional distress because he already had PTSD and emotional distress. He states that now he is afraid to touch his wife children and is constantly worried about which is causing him more distress. He does plan to have his blood checked for communicable diseases. I thought to refer him to the health department or FDA however he was very distressed and I didn't want to upset him further. After checking to find that we had reports regarding this product I went ahead with tis one.

8/26/2014 · Injury, Hospital Admission · The Village Company, LLC · Mississippi

On 4/9/10 the consumer's daughter swallowed the white circular paper material inside a Mr. Bubble Bath bottle cap. While the consumer's wife was bathing her daughter she saw her daughter swallow it. The consumer took his daughter to King's Daughters Hospital emergency room located 823 Grand Ave Yazoo City, MS 39194. The doctor examined the child and advised the consumer that the white circular paper material inside the bottle cap that his daughter swallowed would pass threw. The consumer's daughter went home the same day. The consumer states during the next 2 years he noticed that his daughter experienced shortness of breathe and would regurgitate her food on several different occasions. In 2012 the consumer took his daughter to Blair E. Batson Children's Hospital in Jackson MS and a doctor conducted a Barium test. The doctor advised the consumer that something obstructed his daughter's esophagus and made a pouch. The consumer's daughter had surgery to remove the white circular paper material that she swallowed. The consumer's daughter stayed a few days in the hospital. The consumer's daughter has gone for a yearly examination since her surgery as directed by the doctor. The consumer states that the white circular paper material found inside a bottle cap poses a safety hazard due to it not being detected in an X-ray. The consumer states this piece of white circular paper material inside a bottle cap is found in many different bottled containers. The consumer has not contacted the manufacturer and does not plan to. He does not have the bottle of Mr. Bubble Bath but has the white circular paper material that was inside the bottle cap which his daughter swallowed.

Showing 8 of 75 reports.

Product Recalls

Search for active and past recalls related to paper products on the CPSC website.

Compare beyond Containers & Packaging

Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization

Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Paper Products: cross-group products nearest on danger score (42/100), estimated annual ER visits (27,645/yr), and hospitalization share (8.9%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.

Read with this product

About this data

CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.

According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Paper Products ranks #105 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #97 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does paper products rank on danger score versus ER volume?

Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, paper products ranks #105 by PlainSafety danger score (42/100) and #97 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (27,645/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.

What are the most common injuries from paper products?

The most common injury is foreign body to the ear, accounting for approximately 81,747 injuries over 20 years.

Are injuries from paper products increasing or decreasing?

Down 13% over 5 years.

Who is most at risk for paper products injuries?

The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 114,567 cases recorded over 20 years. Females are more frequently injured in this age group.

What happens when someone is injured by paper products?

Of all ER visits involving paper products, approximately 8.9% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (91.1%) are treated and released from the emergency department.

How can I report a safety problem with paper products?

You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.

Data on Paper Products is compiled directly from CPSC NEISS and SaferProducts.gov records, current through 2024. See our methodology for details.

Disclaimer: This page is for informational purposes only and is not affiliated with the CPSC.

PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.