{"url":"https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles","path":"/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles","alternates":{"json":"https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/api/articles/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles.json","markdown":"https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles.md"},"topic":{"slug":"clothing-and-textile-chemicals","name":"Clothing and Textile Chemicals","url":"https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/clothing-and-textile-chemicals"},"slug":"chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles","order":1,"title":"Chemicals in Clothing and Textiles","question":"Are chemicals in clothing a health concern, and is organic cotton worth it?","answer":"Clothing chemicals may add only a small exposure, and allergic skin reactions are the best-documented harm; organic cotton is no guarantee.","description":"Clothing can carry PFAS, bisphenols, dyes, formaldehyde resins and flame retardants. What studies show on skin exposure, washing new clothes and organic cotton.","confidence":2,"confidenceNote":"Most studies measure what is in the cloth and model skin exposure; few follow wearers' health, apart from case series of allergic rash.","evidenceSummary":{"rctCount":0,"observationalCount":7,"metaAnalysisCount":0,"totalParticipants":"20+","replicated":false,"newestStudyYear":2025},"category":{"categoryTitle":"What's Harming You","categorySlug":"harming-you","subcategoryName":"Your Home","subcategorySlug":"home","url":"https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/explore/harming-you/home"},"actions":["Wash new clothes, baby items, sheets and underwear before first use: no formaldehyde was detectable in washed samples [3].","Skip wrinkle-free, stain-resistant and water-repellent finishes on everyday clothes, especially children's school wear, where PFAS turned up in every stain-resistant product tested [2] and formaldehyde resins can cause allergy [6].","Treat organic as a statement about the fibre, not the finish. Look for certifications such as OEKO-TEX or GOTS, which researchers want enforced more strictly [7]."],"cautions":["A rash on tight areas, waistbands or collars, or starting after new clothes, can be textile contact allergy to dyes or resins; a dermatologist can confirm with patch testing [5][6].","Babies (formaldehyde) and pregnant people (bisphenols) had the highest modeled exposures in Spanish studies, though below safety limits [3][4]; wash their clothes first and ask a clinician about persistent rash."],"simpleText":"Clothing can carry finishing chemicals such as PFAS water-repellents, formaldehyde resins, azo dyes, bisphenols and flame retardants [1][2]. Estimated skin exposure from baby and maternity clothes was mostly below safety limits [3][4], and the best-documented harm is allergic rash [5]. Washing new clothes removed detectable formaldehyde, and organic cotton is no guarantee: eco-labelled clothes had more formaldehyde in one study [3].","mediumText":"How it works\n\nTextiles pick up chemicals when they are dyed, finished (wrinkle-free, stain-proof, water-repellent, flame-resistant) and cared for. A review found flame retardants, trace elements, aromatic amines, bisphenols, phthalates and formaldehyde in some clothing, and said skin exposure could pose systemic risks under specific circumstances [1]. Most data describe what is in the cloth, not what ends up in the wearer.\n\nWater- and stain-repellent finishes (PFAS). All 57 stain-resistant children's products analyzed contained PFAS. School uniforms ran higher than bibs, hats and swimsuits, and 100% cotton uniforms higher than synthetic blends. The estimated median skin exposure for a child was about 1 nanogram per kilogram of body weight per day [2]. In lab skin models, shorter-chain PFAS were absorbed (up to 59%), while long-chain ones were retained in the skin rather than absorbed [8]. See reducing PFAS exposure.\n\nWrinkle-free finishes (formaldehyde). In Spain, 20% of baby, toddler and maternity garments had detectable formaldehyde, a little more in \"eco-friendly\" than regular items on average (10.4 vs 8.2 mg/kg; significant only for maternity bras and panties). None was detectable after washing [3]. In a small test of 16 fabrics, most had too little free formaldehyde to trigger allergy in sensitive people [6].\n\nDyes. Disperse dyes are among the most important causes of textile contact allergy [5]. The EU bans azo dyes that release 22 known carcinogenic amines; a screen of 470 azo dyes flagged 40 more mutagenic amines, though that is database and lab work, not proven harm [9].\n\nBisphenols and flame retardants. BPA was in all 120 new garments tested, highest in polyester, with less BPS in organic than conventional cotton [4]. A 97% polyester infant fabric reached 13,300 ng/g [10]. In 1978, a flame retardant's metabolite turned up in the urine of children, even those in well-washed sleepwear [11]. See flame retardants.\n\nClothes act as a sponge. In one chamber experiment, cotton clothes worn after nine days in air containing phthalates raised skin uptake of two phthalates 3.3 to 6.5 times versus bare skin [12].\n\nRanked fixes, cheapest first\n\n1. Wash before first wear, especially baby items, bedding and underwear [3]. See laundry products for what detergent leaves behind.\n2. Skip wrinkle-free, stain-resistant and water-repellent finishes for daily wear [2][6].\n3. Do not pay extra for \"organic\" alone; certifications covering finishing matter more [7].\n4. See a dermatologist about rashes in covered areas [5].","deepText":"The evidence in detail\n\nPFAS. Xia and colleagues screened 72 children's textile products marketed as stain-resistant for total fluorine and analyzed 57 for 49 PFAS. PFAS were in every product, led by 6:2 fluorotelomer alcohol, with a median total of 117 ng/g and a range from 0.25 to 153,000 ng/g. School uniforms were significantly higher than bibs, hats, stroller covers and swimsuits, comparable to outdoor wear, and 100% cotton uniforms beat synthetic blends. The median modelled dermal exposure was 1.03 ng/kg/day [2]. Ragnarsdóttir and colleagues exposed 3D human skin equivalents to 17 PFAS at 500 ng/cm² for 24 to 36 hours: the absorbed fraction fell with chain length, from 58.9% for PFPeA and 48.7% for PFBS to none for chains of nine or more carbons, though a large share of those stayed in the skin tissue (for example 66.5% of PFUnDA) [8]. The dose was dissolved in methanol on lab tissue, not worn fabric, and the authors note that human dermal data are lacking.\n\nFormaldehyde and bisphenols. Herrero and colleagues tested Spanish-market clothing for pregnant women, babies and toddlers. Formaldehyde was in 20% of samples (mean 8.96 mg/kg), eco-friendly items ran higher than regular ones, and estimated exposure was generally highest in babies. Cancer and non-cancer risks were below national safety limits, and no formaldehyde was detected in washed samples [3]. The same group measured bisphenols in 120 new garments: BPA was in all, median 7.43 ng/g, highest in polyester. Conventional cotton held more BPS than organic cotton (1.24 vs 0.76 ng/g, p < 0.05). Pregnant women had higher estimated exposure than children, and risk estimates were below unity [4]. Xue and colleagues found BPA in 82% and BPS in 53% of 77 textiles, with a mean BPA of 366 ng/g and socks highest (mean 1,810 ng/g), and calculated infant dermal doses up to 7,280 pg/kg/day [10]. All of these are product surveys with modelled doses, not measurements in people.\n\nDyes and resins. Malinauskiene and colleagues reviewed 54 studies: Disperse Blue 106, Disperse Blue 124 and Disperse Orange 3 each averaged over 1% positive in patch-test screening, and data on several other listed dyes were missing [5]. Scheman and colleagues measured free formaldehyde in 16 fabrics: eight had none detectable, seven under 200 ppm, and one about 2,000 ppm by one method but 24 ppm by the Japanese law method. Ten people with textile allergy all reacted to formaldehyde and the resin DMDHEU, and a few reacted mildly to newer low-formaldehyde resins [6]. Brüschweiler and Merlot screened 397 unregulated aromatic amines from 470 azo dyes. Of 18 high-priority amines, 4 were mutagenic in Ames tests, and overall 40 mutagenic amines could come from about 180 azo dyes (38% of the database) [9]. Those are lab and database results; skin bacteria may cleave azo dyes, but the real-world dose is unknown [9].\n\nFlame retardants and clothing as a reservoir. Blum and colleagues found a mutagenic tris-BP metabolite in the urine of 10 children who had worn treated sleepwear, 8 in well-washed garments, and not in a child and an adult who never had [11]. Morrison and colleagues had one volunteer wear clean or air-exposed cotton clothes in a chamber: clean clothes were protective, while clothes exposed for nine days increased uptake of diethyl and dibutyl phthalate 3.3 and 6.5 times compared with bare skin [12]. That is one person, so it shows a mechanism, not a typical effect.\n\nWhat does not line up. \"Eco-friendly\" did not reliably mean cleaner: formaldehyde was higher [3], PFAS were higher in cotton than synthetic uniforms [2], and only BPS was lower in organic cotton [4]. Modelled risks sit under limits [3][4], yet reviewers warn that mixtures and cumulative exposure are poorly studied [1][7]. And none of these studies followed wearers' health beyond allergic rash.\n\nBottom line (emerging evidence). Chemicals are present in clothing and some reach the skin, but real-world risk looks small and is unproven. Washing first and avoiding unnecessary finishes costs little; these studies give no reason to pay a premium for \"organic\" alone.","deepTruncated":false,"references":[{"id":"1","title":"Human health risks due to exposure to inorganic and organic chemicals from textiles: A review","authors":"Rovira J, Domingo JL","year":2019,"journal":"Environ Res","pmid":"30278363","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30278363/"},{"id":"2","title":"Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in North American School Uniforms","authors":"Xia C, Diamond ML, Peaslee GF, et al.","year":2022,"journal":"Environ Sci Technol","pmid":"36129192","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36129192/"},{"id":"3","title":"Early-Life Exposure to Formaldehyde through Clothing","authors":"Herrero M, González N, Rovira J, et al.","year":2022,"journal":"Toxics","pmid":"35878266","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35878266/"},{"id":"4","title":"Dermal exposure to bisphenols in pregnant women's and baby clothes: Risk characterization","authors":"Herrero M, Souza MCO, González N, et al.","year":2023,"journal":"Sci Total Environ","pmid":"37001656","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37001656/"},{"id":"5","title":"Contact allergy from disperse dyes in textiles: a review","authors":"Malinauskiene L, Bruze M, Ryberg K, et al.","year":2013,"journal":"Contact Dermatitis","pmid":"23289879","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23289879/"},{"id":"6","title":"Formaldehyde-related textile allergy: an update","authors":"Scheman AJ, Carroll PA, Brown KH, et al.","year":1998,"journal":"Contact Dermatitis","pmid":"9687033","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9687033/"},{"id":"7","title":"Human health risks from textile chemicals: a critical review of recent evidence (2019-2025)","authors":"Rovira J, Souza MCO, Nadal M, et al.","year":2025,"journal":"J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng","pmid":"40482050","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40482050/"},{"id":"8","title":"Dermal bioavailability of perfluoroalkyl substances using in vitro 3D human skin equivalent models","authors":"Ragnarsdóttir O, Abou-Elwafa Abdallah M, Harrad S","year":2024,"journal":"Environ Int","pmid":"38810496","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38810496/"},{"id":"9","title":"Azo dyes in clothing textiles can be cleaved into a series of mutagenic aromatic amines which are not regulated yet","authors":"Brüschweiler BJ, Merlot C","year":2017,"journal":"Regul Toxicol Pharmacol","pmid":"28655654","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28655654/"},{"id":"10","title":"Bisphenols, Benzophenones, and Bisphenol A Diglycidyl Ethers in Textiles and Infant Clothing","authors":"Xue J, Liu W, Kannan K","year":2017,"journal":"Environ Sci Technol","pmid":"28368574","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28368574/"},{"id":"11","title":"Children absorb tris-BP flame retardant from sleepwear: urine contains the mutagenic metabolite, 2,3-dibromopropanol","authors":"Blum A, Gold MD, Ames BN, et al.","year":1978,"journal":"Science","pmid":"684422","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/684422/"},{"id":"12","title":"Role of clothing in both accelerating and impeding dermal absorption of airborne SVOCs","authors":"Morrison GC, Weschler CJ, Bekö G, et al.","year":2016,"journal":"J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol","pmid":"26058800","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26058800/"}],"wordCount":1126,"source":{"path":"src/content/topics/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles.md"},"citeAs":"“Are chemicals in clothing a health concern, and is organic cotton worth it?.” What's Healthy and Why. https://whatshealthyandwhy.com/clothing-and-textile-chemicals/chemicals-in-clothing-and-textiles","notice":"General information backed by peer-reviewed research, not medical advice."}