Product Profile: Textiles

Some ingredients of concern that commonly show up in textiles include:

FIBERS AND MATERIALS

Natural Fibers— A primary concern for natural fibers is the exposure to pesticides. The term “pesticides” encompasses any herbicide, insecticide, or fungicide used in the growing or processing of a crop. Exposure to pesticides is associated with a slew of health concerns including endocrine disruption, neurological disorders, and cancer.¹ Pesticide usage is also linked to detrimental outcomes for land and water habitats, which exacerbates the world’s already declining biodiversity. This is troubling because biodiversity is a major indicator of ecosystem health and strength. One landmark 2025 study analyzed over 1,700 existing lab and field studies on the impacts of 471 different pesticides in agricultural and household use. The study found negative effects on nearly every aspect of behavior and lifecycle for more than 800 plant, animal, and microorganism species.²

Cotton remains one of the most pesticide-intensive crops per acre in the US, and ranks fifth among the most heavily sprayed crops grown globally.³ Research on farmers and workers exposed to pesticides used in the production of cotton in international contexts point to a gamut of both acute and chronic concerns such as neurological problems, respiratory illnesses, cancer, and more.^4,5,6

Survey data from 2021 collected by the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) found that for conventional cotton crops grown in the US, herbicides were applied to 96% of planted acres, insecticides were applied to 39% of planted acres, and other chemicals (referring to chemicals targeting all other pests) were applied to 68% of planted acres. The top herbicides applied were glyphosate isopropylamine salt, glyphosate potassium salt, and paraquat.⁷

Despite continued pushback, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains that there are no risks to human health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label and that it is unlikely to be a human carcinogen.⁸ This decision was echoed by the European Commission when, in 2023, they reviewed data from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and subsequently renewed the approval for the use of glyphosate on crops in the EU until 2033 due to insufficient evidence to meet the criteria for a ban.⁹ This herbicide continues to be a topic of contention, with a stark divide between independent academic research and regulatory agency findings (which often uses both academic research and unpublished industry-generated data to inform its decisions). Academic research has raised concerns over the repercussions of glyphosate exposure including harm to the nervous system¹⁰ and the microbiome,^11,12 as well as detrimental epigenetic effects.¹³ Researchers have also advocated against glyphosate due to its negative impacts on bees.^14,15 This only touches on the many concerns raised by researchers and consumers regarding the safety of glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides. In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A) after reviewing the available literature.¹⁶ In January 2026, a 2000 cornerstone study establishing glyphosate’s safety was retracted from the Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology journal after ethical concerns emerged revealing undisclosed industry influence in the designing and writing of the study.¹⁷ This development comes at an interesting time, as the EPA is expected to issue a new, comprehensive final registration review decision for glyphosate sometime in 2026.

Paraquat likewise raises a number of environmental and human health concerns. Research has linked paraquat exposure with Parkinson’s Disease,^18,19 other neurotoxic effects,²⁰ and cancer.²¹ In April 2026, the US House of Representatives voted to remove preemption language from the Farm Bill to preserve each state’s right to issue their own health warnings and restrictions, garnering support and praise from the Parkinson’s advocacy community.²² As of 2026, multiple US states have proposed bills to ban the use of paraquat.

Pesticide residues lingering from the growing process is a known phenomenon, prompting researchers to search for a reliable method to test for these residues.^23,24,25,26 One 2025 study aimed at developing a precise, robust testing method for 115 pesticide residues simultaneously, found that many of the materials tested had low concentrations of a wide variety of pesticide residues, which raises concerns regarding the cumulative risk to human health.²⁷ As global trade increases, it becomes harder to track what chemicals are used in different countries throughout the growing and manufacturing processes. For example, raw materials may be grown in one country using a number of herbicides and insecticides, and then transported to or stored in another country where fungicides are applied to keep mold and mildew at bay. The result is a cocktail of chemical exposure that compounds and often survives through to the finished product.

Other natural fiber options include linen, hemp, jute, silk, and wool. Due to the superior hardiness of linen, hemp, and jute crops, they tend to be less heavily sprayed than cotton, but even smaller amounts of pesticides are still cause for concern. Pesticides are also a concern in silk production, posing significant risks to silk quality and silkworm health.²⁸ Lastly, when it comes to wool, the primary pesticide concern is the use of insecticides to prevent lice, ticks, and other pests. These chemicals are highly toxic to the workers applying them, and some residues may linger in the finished product.²⁹

Synthetic Fibers — Synthetic fibers are man-made textile fibers produced entirely from chemical substances, such as petrochemicals. Common synthetic fibers found in textiles include polyester, nylon, acrylic, and spandex. When it comes to synthetic fibers, the key concerns are exposure to harmful chemicals and environmental impact.

The manufacturing process for synthetic fibers often utilizes harmful chemicals that can remain in the fibers and eventually become a source of exposure for the consumer. For example, antimony—a heavy metal associated with negative effects on the respiratory and cardiovascular systems, as well as skin irritation and possibly cancer^30,31—may potentially leach from polyester fibers when in contact with sweat. A 2021 study tested this phenomenon using artificial sweat, confirming that antimony leaches from polyester in measurable amounts, particularly during the initial stages of wear and in acidic, sweat-inducing conditions.³² An added measure of concern is layered on top of this finding when we consider that a vast majority of workout clothing is composed primarily of polyester.

Similarly, acrylic fiber is made using a volatile liquid called acrylonitrile, some of which can remain trapped in the fabric during the manufacturing process. The EPA classifies acrylonitrile as a probable human carcinogen (Group B1),³³ and IARC categorizes it as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).³⁴ An additional concern for synthetic fabrics is that they are frequently paired with performance finishes.

From an environmental standpoint, synthetic fibers raise issues due to their contributions to pollution throughout their entire lifecycle. Nitrous oxide, which is a byproduct of the production of adipic acid (a critical component for making nylon), accounted for 6% of all US greenhouse gas emissions in 2022.³⁵ While the manufacturing of nylon is only one of several industrial sources of this gas, nitrous oxide is nearly 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide, making even the relatively small percentages linked to synthetic fiber production a meaningful contributor to pollution. At the end of the lifecycle, synthetic fibers incite further environmental concerns due to their lack of biodegradability,³⁶ with one 2023 study finding virtually no signs of degradation after more than 400 days in seawater (for wholly synthetic and cellulose/synthetic blends, alike).³⁷ Synthetic fibers are also known for their microplastic release during the laundering process.^38,39

Regenerated Cellulose – Regenerated cellulose fibers are a category of semi-synthetic materials that are made by taking natural cellulose (from wood, bamboo, or eucalyptus) and using a chemical process to dissolve and regenerate it into a spinnable fiber. Popular types of regenerated cellulose materials are rayon/viscose, bamboo viscose, modal, and lyocell (also known by the brand name Tencel™). The primary difference between these fibers is the solvent used in the fiber’s production and the method of production itself. The traditional viscose process—used for rayon, modal, and bamboo viscose—typically operates as an open-loop system and often utilizes carbon disulfide as a processing chemical. Lyocell, by contrast, usually uses a closed-loop system that relies on N-Methylmorpholine N-oxide (NMMO), an organic solvent. Exposure to carbon disulfide is associated with neurological, cardiovascular, and developmental effects.⁴⁰ Furthermore, research has indicated a connection between carbon disulfide exposure in female factory workers and negative effects on their reproductive health.^41,42 The benefits of a closed-loop system like that used in the production of lyocell is that there is a high recovery rate for the solvents used, meaning that there is less waste leaked into the environment.⁴³ Simply by having a closed-loop solvent recovery system, it can diminish the toxicity-related concerns, with one study finding a 35% reduction in freshwater ecotoxicity and a 62% reduction in non-carcinogenic human toxicity.⁴⁴

On the other end of the lifecycle lies the question of biodegradability for regenerated cellulose. Recent findings from a 2025 study indicate that although lyocell can degrade by 20% in just one month (vastly outperforming polyester), certain dyes and finishes significantly delay this process.⁴⁵ Preliminary findings from a 2025 study found that native cellulose (cotton, linen) and regenerated cellulose (viscose, modal, lyocell) biodegrade at comparative rates.⁴⁶

Ultimately, this is a nuanced conversation because the methods and inputs used to create regenerated cellulose fibers can influence the degree of concern for human and environmental health. For this reason, industry transparency is essential.

TREATMENTS, DYES, AND PERFORMANCE FINISHES

PFAS – PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals,” can be used in textiles for their water repellent and stain resistant properties. They are used as treatments in textiles such as outdoor gear, performance apparel, furniture, carpets, mattress protectors, bedding, and more. Though their use is not always readily disclosed by the company, you can look for red flags in products in the form of performance claims. For example, “water-repellent,” “stain-resistant,” and “easy-care” are telltale signs of a PFAS treatment. PFAS have been linked to harmful effects including endocrine disruption,^{47,48,49,50,51} bioaccumulation,^52,53,54 and cancer.^55,56,57 In 2023, the International Agency for research on Cancer (IARC) upgraded the classification of PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) to Group 1 (“Carcinogenic to humans”) and of PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid) to Group 2B (“Possibly carcinogenic to humans”).^58,59 Increasing awareness of the harmful effects of these chemicals is a big win for consumers, but concerns remain due to the fact that manufacturers tend to replace PFOA and PFOS with other PFAS (oftentimes short-chain varieties) possessing similar properties, meaning they likely have comparable negative effects.⁶⁰

PFAS raise multiple environmental concerns as well, as PFAS are both water soluble and highly persistent in the environment. The result is that their presence in the world is widespread and nearly irreversible.⁶⁰ Due to their lack of biodegradability, both terrestrially and aquatically, they persist in the environment and can create long-term ecosystem concerns.^61,62,63,64

Growing awareness of the harms associated with PFAS has led to a string of legislative actions at the state level in the past few years. States like California, New York, Maine, and Minnesota are leading the way in prohibiting the use of PFAS in textiles in some shape or form. Between new legislative protections and consumer demand for safer products, many companies are phasing out the use of PFAS. In the meantime, it is important to continue reading labels and be mindful of regrettable substitutions (e.g., merely swapping one PFAS chemical for another). One pioneering 2024 study on dermal absorption found that short-chain PFAS, which have become a popular replacement for notorious long-chain PFAS (such as PFOA), are more easily absorbed into the skin,⁶⁵ which raises questions about whether they might be considered a type of regrettable substitution.

Flame Retardants – Flame retardants are added to textiles to slow the ignition and spread of fire. They can be found in children’s sleepwear, upholstered furniture, mattresses and bedding, carpets, protective workwear (e.g., firefighter uniforms), and seats in automobiles or public transportation. The two main classes of flame retardants are halogenated flame retardants and organophosphorus flame retardants. Halogenated flame retardants chemicals contain chlorine, bromine, iodine, or fluorine, and include flame retardants sometimes referred to as brominated or chlorinated flame retardants.^66,67,68 Organophosphorus flame retardants, on the other hand, contain phosphorous bonded to carbon.⁶⁶ Flame retardants have been associated with many negative effects, though the exact health concerns may depend based upon the variety used. Studies have linked flame retardants to negative effects such as endocrine disruption,⁶⁹ lower IQ,^70,71 hyperactivity,⁷² fertility issues,^73,74 and cancer.⁷⁵ Many flame retardant chemicals are also persistent in the environment^66,76,77,78 and some are known to be toxic to aquatic life.⁷⁹

Many US states have taken action, with states like California, New York, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada restricting the usage and application of flame retardants in various consumer goods such as apparel, upholstered furniture, and carpeting.

Formaldehyde – Formaldehyde is used as a finishing agent to give fibers a crisp look and to support properties such as wrinkle resistance, color fastness, and shrink resistance . Signs that a textile may have been treated with a formaldehyde-containing substance are claims like “wrinkle-free,” “easy care,” or “permanent press.” Common textiles that have been treated with formaldehyde include business attire, school and military uniforms, bedding, pre-distressed jeans, and imported cotton or linen (to function as an antimicrobial agent in shipping).

IARC has classified formaldehyde as a Group 1 carcinogen with sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans (and animals) to justify this categorization.⁸⁰ The US EPA⁸¹ and the European Chemicals Agency ⁸² also echo this concern for formaldehyde’s carcinogenic effects. Formaldehyde exposure is furthermore suspected of mutagenicity (causing genetic defects).^82,83

Heavy Metals – Heavy metals like lead, cadmium, and chromium can be used in the dyeing process to create vivid, long-lasting colors or to help dyes stick to the fibers. While the disclosure of their usage will rarely be found on the tag, certain kinds of goods have a higher likelihood of being treated than others. Brightly colored fast-fashion (especially oranges, reds, and yellows) and plasticized screen prints on apparel are high-risk when it comes to heavy metals. The growth in ultra-fast fashion has given rise to an increased chemical risk to consumers—with many products containing heavy metals and other harmful substances. In the US there are significant regulatory gaps specifically when it comes to apparel. While the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) requires that children’s clothing must not contain more than 100 ppm lead,⁸⁴ it has very few rules pertaining to adult clothing. The Federal Trade Commission has regulations, but they focus more on labeling the actual fiber content of the fabrics rather than the chemicals used in the fabric.⁸⁵ Despite the CPSC regulations on lead in children’s clothing, emerging research suggests a lack of compliance in children’s clothing. Preliminary results from researchers at Marian University in 2026 found the presence of lead exceeding the 100 ppm limit in 11 different children’s shirts, spanning the full spectrum of the rainbow in color.⁸⁶

Lead isn’t the only heavy metal lingering in clothing. One 2025 study assessing heavy metals and dermal exposure found that 80% of the 33 textile samples tested exceeded the safety limits set by OEKO-TEX Class I. Amongst the heavy metals present were cadmium, chromium, and arsenic. The presence of heavy metals raises significant concerns regarding dermal absorption (a process accelerated by sweat)—a concern that is compounded when considering clothing for infants, who have thinner, more absorbent skin and smaller body mass compared to adults.⁸⁷

Some US States such as California, Washington, and New York have state-specific regulations regarding heavy metals in clothing.

Synthetic Dyes – Synthetic dyes dominate the global textile industry due to their cost-effectiveness, vibrant color range, and their high color fastness (i.e. colors remain stable during washing and exposure to light). Azo dyes are the most widely used, accounting for approximately 60-70% of all dyes used in industry.⁸⁸

A major concern with azo dyes is the formation of aromatic amines, which are highly toxic degradation by-products released through the breakdown of azo bonds. Aromatic amines have been linked to multiple types of cancers.⁸⁹ IARC Monograph No. 100F, Chemical Agents and Related Occupations, categorized a number of aromatic amines as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).⁹⁰ IARC Monograph No. 127, Some Aromatic Amines and Related Compounds, identified aromatic amines believed to be possibly and probably carcinogenic to humans.⁹¹ In light of the evidence of carcinogenicity, some governmental bodies have sought to regulate azo dyes via the aromatic amines they release. One such example is the EU, which lists 22 regulated aromatic amines and prohibits the use of azo dyes that can release them in concentrations above 30 mg/kg for textiles and leather.⁹²

There are also a number of environmental health concerns associated with azo dyes as well, with a major one being that they are toxic to aquatic systems.^93,94 One 2025 literature review found that the presence of azo dyes resulted in a 70% reduction in photosynthesis in aquatic plants and caused DNA damage and liver necrosis in fish, and contributed massively to terrestrial contamination (irrigation with dye-contaminated wastewater leads to the accumulation of aromatic amines in crops).⁹⁵ Azo dyes are resistant to natural degradation and are known to bioaccumulate, which are both major environmental and human health concerns.⁹⁶ This is significant because, as one 2023 study demonstrated, even though a fabric may be made from biodegradable materials, any synthetic dyes or finishes applied to the fabric may remain in the water column.³⁷ Due to the environmental persistence of azo dyes, wastewater management strategies and the minimization of wastewater contamination are of critical importance.

Azo dyes are also linked to a number of human health concerns as well. Acute exposure to aromatic amines is linked to blindness, skin irritation, vertigo, vomiting, and more.⁹⁵ Chronic exposure to azo dyes and their derivatives has been associated with cancer and mutagenicity.^95,97,98

• Shop MADE SAFE and MADE WISE Certified products.
• Reference other credible third-party certifications that identify safer fibers and fabrics such as GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard) and OEKO-TEX Standard 100. Prioritize organic certifications for items that have the most prolonged, intimate contact with your skin and sweat (underwear, base layers, bedding etc.).
• To minimize chemical burden, opt for organic, natural textile materials where possible. Look for cotton, linen, wool, hemp, silk, and jute.
• Favor regenerated cellulose fibers from closed-looped systems, such as lyocell.
• Wash clothes and bedding before using them to rinse off surface finishes. Washing new fabrics multiple times before wearing or buying secondhand can reduce the chemical load.
• To avoid chemical flame retardants in children’s clothing that lacks any kind of organic certification, look for tight-fitting pajamas, as this style can meet the CPSC flammability standards without the need for flame retardants. Some children’s pajamas will occasionally disclose on the tag if the product has been chemically treated, but not always.
• For outdoor gear or other performance apparel where water-resistance is necessary, search for fluorine-free DWR water repellent treatments as alternatives to PFAS.

• Avoid unnecessary performance claims such as “wrinkle-free,” “stain-resistant,” “easy-care,” “permanent press,” and “odor-resistant”. These indicate that treatments containing PFAS and formaldehyde may have been used.
• Avoid brightly colored fast-fashion items and plasticized prints to minimize risk of heavy metal exposure and other azo dye-associated concerns.
• Bypass mattresses, rugs/rug pads, and furniture made with polyurethane foam or memory foam when possible (polyurethane foam is often treated with flame retardants due to its high flammability). Look for options that specifically use alternatives such as pure, natural latex or natural fibers as the filling. Safer synthetic materials like polyester filling are also an option if alternatives are not available. If polyurethane foam is unavoidable, you can contact the manufacturer to inquire about the use of flame retardants. Secondhand furniture containing polyurethane foam can be ideal because the amount of chemicals off-gassing tapers off over time. However, it’s important to be aware that some older furniture might be treated with phased-out, more toxic flame retardant chemicals (such as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, more commonly known as PBDEs).
• Consider buying secondhand and also donating clothing items that still have life in them rather than throwing them away.
• Remember: Consumers often hear "it’s a low dose, so it’s safe" when it comes to chemical exposures in products. However, it’s important to be mindful of the fact that these seemingly small amounts compound to create a cumulative chemical burden. Even at low doses, a chemical cocktail of 20 different substances adds up. Chemical safety testing is classically done in isolation, but when multiple chemicals present at once, they can produce different synergistic effects. Since so much of chemical testing focuses on acute exposure, as it is easier to study and is important for understanding toxicity thresholds, it can be difficult to quantify the cumulative effects resulting from chronic exposure to these chemicals. For these reasons, eliminating unnecessary chemical exposures wherever possible has a meaningful impact on reducing your overall environmental body burden.