The fiber content label on a garment tells you what the fabric is made of. It does not tell you what was applied to the fabric after it was made. That gap is where PFAS enter the picture for most clothing consumers.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances have been used as surface treatments across the clothing industry for decades. They make fabric water-resistant, stain-resistant, and wrinkle-resistant. They are also persistent synthetic chemicals that accumulate in the human body and the environment, and their presence in clothing has become a significant regulatory and public health concern.
How PFAS Get Into Clothing
PFAS are applied to fabric as finishing treatments, not incorporated into the fiber itself. After a fabric is woven or knitted, it may be dipped, sprayed, or padded with a PFAS-containing solution that binds to the fiber surface. The resulting coating creates the water-beading, stain-resisting, or wrinkle-resisting properties that are marketed as performance features.
The categories of clothing most likely to carry PFAS treatments are: outdoor and rain gear marketed as waterproof or water-resistant, activewear with DWR (durable water repellent) coatings, stain-resistant workwear and dress clothing, and wrinkle-resistant shirts and trousers. These categories cover a significant portion of a typical adult wardrobe.
The Lululemon case brought this into focus for the activewear category specifically. The Texas Attorney General's 2026 Civil Investigative Demand to Lululemon examined whether consumers had been misled about PFAS in products marketed as wellness-focused. Lululemon confirmed its DWR products had contained PFAS before a 2024 phase-out. The investigation reflects a broader pattern: PFAS use in performance clothing has been standard practice across the industry, not an aberration at one brand.
What PFAS Do in the Body
PFAS accumulate in the body over time because they are not metabolized or excreted efficiently. The carbon-fluorine bond that makes them useful as repellents also makes them resistant to the enzymatic processes that break down most organic compounds.
The EPA has linked PFAS exposure to thyroid hormone disruption, immune system suppression, elevated cholesterol, reduced fertility, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and increased risk of kidney and testicular cancers based on human epidemiological studies. PFAS are detected in the blood of virtually all Americans according to CDC biomonitoring, reflecting widespread exposure from food packaging, drinking water, cookware, and clothing.
The thyroid disruption mechanism is particularly relevant for women, who develop thyroid disorders at significantly higher rates than men. PFAS compounds compete with thyroid hormones for binding sites on transport proteins, reducing the availability of active hormone in circulation. This is a documented mechanism in human studies, not just animal models.
Skin Contact During Wear
PFAS in clothing is not just an environmental concern. It is a direct skin exposure concern. As PFAS-treated garments are worn, the coating degrades over time and with washing, releasing PFAS compounds that can migrate toward the skin. Elevated skin temperature and moisture during exercise accelerate that migration.
A 2021 analysis in Sustainability examining transdermal chemical absorption from synthetic textiles found that exercise conditions, specifically sweating and elevated skin temperature, create more favorable conditions for dermal uptake of chemical compounds than resting contact. For activewear, which is worn during exactly those conditions, the skin exposure pathway is not theoretical.
California, New York, and the Regulatory Direction
As of January 2025, California and New York implemented bans on PFAS in most apparel sales. The direction of regulation is clear: PFAS in clothing is being treated as a consumer protection issue, not just an environmental one. Thirty state attorneys general had initiated litigation against PFAS manufacturers by the end of 2024.
The regulatory environment means that many brands are reformulating. But reformulation takes time to work through supply chains, existing inventory in circulation is not recalled, and replacement chemistries are not always free of concern. Short-chain PFAS replacements are increasingly being identified as carrying similar persistence profiles to the long-chain compounds they replaced.
How to Identify Lower-PFAS Clothing
Three signals are worth looking for. First, OEKO-TEX Standard 100 certification on the finished garment, which independently tests for specific PFAS compounds among over 100 restricted substances. Second, Bluesign certification, which covers chemical inputs throughout the production process. Third, explicit brand disclosure of their restricted substances list and independent testing protocols, not just a marketing claim of being PFAS-free.
A brand claim of being PFAS-free without a certifying body behind it is not verifiable. The Lululemon case is the clearest recent illustration of why that distinction matters.
Choosing a base fiber that does not require PFAS-based finishing to perform its core function is the most durable solution. TENCEL Lyocell manages moisture structurally through fiber absorption rather than surface repellency, which removes the performance rationale for a DWR coating. The Sempre Leggings are 92% TENCEL Lyocell, certified to OEKO-TEX Standard 100. The certification is independently verified and renewed annually. That is a different standard than a brand promise.
The Label Gap
The fiber content label will not tell you whether your clothing contains PFAS. That information is not required to be disclosed. Until regulatory requirements change or independent certification becomes standard, the gap between what is on the label and what is in the garment remains the consumer's problem to navigate.
Knowing the gap exists is the first step to navigating it.
Sources
Texas Attorney General. (2026, April 13). Attorney General Ken Paxton Launches Investigation into Lululemon Over Potential Presence of Toxic "Forever Chemicals" in Activewear. texasattorneygeneral.gov.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024). Our Current Understanding of the Human Health and Environmental Risks of PFAS. EPA.gov.
Foley and Lardner LLP. (2026). Texas Attorney General Investigates Lululemon Over Alleged Forever Chemicals in Activewear. foley.com.
OEKO-TEX Association. (2024). OEKO-TEX Standard 100 Testing Criteria. oeko-tex.com.
Kaplan, S., et al. (2014). Thermal comfort of lyocell and other fibers in active wear. Fibers and Polymers, 15(6).
