Leave no trace: it’s a maxim familiar to anyone who enjoys exploring the countryside. But the kit we wear and carry in the great outdoors often does leave a trace – of ‘forever chemicals’. Or, to give them their correct name, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances PFAS; the term PFC, referring to a related type of compounds, is also commonly used).
The first PFAS were developed in the 1930s – PTFE, trademarked as Teflon, was discovered in 1938 – and have since been used in countless consumer goods, from non-stick pans to lipstick, upholstered furniture, food packaging, clothing and cleaning products.
- PFAS guide: what these 'forever chemicals' are and how they make their way into our waterways
- How to look after PFAS-free kit
“The reason they feature so heavily in outdoor apparel and kit is because of their remarkable capacity to repel water, oil, sweat, dirt and heat – and their durability,” says Charles Ross, lecturer in performance sportswear design at the Royal College of Art and a textiles consultant. You’ll find them in everything from waterproof jackets to hiking boots, tents, rucksacks and sleeping bags. They’re used in surf wax and bike lube – even products that you apply directly to your skin, such as some sunscreens.
With such widespread use, you might assume that this family of chemicals – which now numbers many thousands – has been rigorously tested and deemed safe. Not so. Their harmful effects on the environment, wildlife and human health are increasingly being recognised.
- Toxic 'forever chemicals' discovered in 95 per cent of US beers – this is why
- Toxic chemicals threaten Europe’s orcas
Last year, 59 of the world’s leading scientists wrote to the UK government urging action on regulating PFAS. Studies have linked PFAS contamination with an increased risk of some cancers, reproductive issues (including decreased fertility, pregnancy complications and low birth weight), and disruption to hormonal and immune systems.
“One of the leading concerns about PFAS is their extreme persistence,” says Hannah Evans, project lead on PFAS at Fidra, a Scotland-based environmental charity supporting sustainability and preventing pollution.
In the decades since they were first developed, PFAS have spread to every corner of the globe, “from the top of Everest to the bottom of the ocean”, says Ross. They are present in the soil and air, food and water, wildlife and, inevitably, us. A 2015 study cited by the
US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences found PFAS in the blood of 97% of Americans, while research published in 2023 by Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health detected these chemicals in newborn babies for the first time.
MAKING TROUBLE
Walking around in a waterproof jacket is not the main way that PFAS enter the environment – or your bloodstream. Though some environmental contamination results from product use, the bigger issue is the release of PFAS during the manufacture and disposal of outdoor gear. These chemicals are mostly used in the production of such kit in two areas.
The first is the application of a durable water repellent (DWR) coating – which, Ross explains, is what makes rain bead and roll off a fabric instead of soaking into it, also repelling dirt and oils. The second is in the manufacture of the microporous membrane that sits between an inner and outer protective layer, providing both breathability and waterproofing in fabrics (Gore-Tex being the most widely known example).
“For a long time, the conversation regarding PFAS was only about the DWR coating,” says Ross. “Brands weren’t talking about the fact that to create a microporous membrane, you sprinkle PFAS chemicals onto the fabric to make millions of tiny holes.”
What’s more, a report published last year by the independent, not-for-profit environmental research group Ethical Consumer found that PFAS were also used in other elements of outdoor kit, such as zips and laces.
US footwear brand Keen discovered this fact on its four-year journey towards becoming PFAS-free – a goal they achieved in 2018. “We found PFAS chemicals were being used across footwear supply chains and on components that didn’t need to be waterproof,” says senior sustainability manager Lauren Hood. “Removing these instances set us up well to focus on the areas that did need some sort of waterproof performance. For those solutions, we committed to finding safe, effective and affordable alternatives.”
WAKE-UP CALL
It was a Greenpeace campaign launched in 2012 that first shone a light on the pervasive use of PFAS in the outdoor industry. In 2016, it published the results of its investigation revealing that PFAS levels in the air of outdoor retail stores was up to 1,000 times higher than in urban outdoor air.
For Nick Smith, co-founder and managing director of UK outdoor brand Alpkit, the Greenpeace campaign served as a wake-up call.
“We are in an industry that purports to be very eco and sustainable,” he says. “When we became more aware of these chemicals, we knew we needed to take it seriously. Within our clothing range, we were able to work with our fabric suppliers to make the switch to PFAS-free alternatives quite quickly. It took a little longer to achieve this with our tent range, but we’re there now.”
Among other companies that have transitioned fully to PFAS-free products are Finisterre in the UK, Fjällräven from Switzerland, Vaude from Germany, and US-based brands Patagonia and Keen.
Being relatively small meant Alpkit could react quickly. “As soon as the fabric technologies were available, we could get them into our products,” explains Smith. “It’s more challenging for a company working with agents, distributors and retailers, dealing with very long lead times. Having a direct relationship with our customers has also been really important. We can explain to them why we’ve done what we’ve done, and educate them on how to get the best performance from their PFAS-free gear.
Páramo is in the enviable position of having always used PFAS-free fabrics. “Our waterproofs have never added any type of PFAS to provide or improve water repellency,” says Richard Pyne, the company’s CEO. “Páramo’s sister company, Nikwax, provides the chemistry that gives our technical fabrics their performance.”
Páramo’s technology relies on a concept called ‘directionality’ to move sweat, condensation and rain away from the body. “I always describe it like a funnel,” says Ross. “Wide open at one end, narrow at the other, taking in sweat vapour and pushing it through the fabric to the outside where it dissipates, with the outer being so tightly woven that rain cannot force its way in.”
Despite this long-standing advantage, realising that PFAS are omnipresent in the textile industry, Páramo made the decision in 2012 to ensure that its entire supply chain – not just fabrics and components, but also the factories and production processes they used – was uncontaminated by such chemicals.
“By 2014, we were in a position to guarantee that anything new produced by Páramo was PFAS-free,” says Pyne.
These success stories are heartening, but unfortunately not all brands have been as proactive. An Ethical Consumer report published in April 2024 found that 82% of the outdoor
brands they assessed were still using PFAS, and nearly half had not specified a date by which they planned to phase out use of these chemicals.
“There was also a lack of transparency regarding some brands’ use of PFAS,” adds Jane Turner, the researcher who led on the report. “For example, companies boasted of a ‘PFAS-free DWR’ while the waterproof membrane still used PFAS, or made one specific garment or line of products PFAS-free while the rest were not.”
Pressure from scientists, environmental groups and consumers – as well as motivation within the industry itself – is undoubtedly having a positive impact. But Fidra believes that legislation is still needed.
“Voluntary action must be supported by regulation to ensure effective protection for both public health and the environment,” says Evans.
Legislation is, though, tightening in countries around the globe. In January 2025, a ban on the sale of clothing with intentionally added PFAS came into force in New York, while at the same time California banned the manufacture, distribution or sale of new textile articles containing ‘regulated PFAS’. France has passed into law a ban on all PFAS in consumer clothing, cosmetics and ski waxes from 2026, and for use in almost all textiles by 2030.
Denmark is banning the sale and import of consumer clothing, footwear and waterproofing products containing PFAS from July 2026. (Limited exemptions and derogations apply in some cases.)
The EU is progressing towards a proposed universal ban on the intentional use or manufacture of PFAS ‘not deemed essential to society’,which is regarded as a big step forward. “Traditionally, chemical regulation has taken a substance-by- substance approach,” explains Evans.
“This has often led to the substitution of one harmful chemical for another from the same group, referred to as ‘regrettable substitution’.”
Patagonia has been admirably open about its experience of this. Between 2013 and 2016, it replaced long-chain fluorocarbon-based treatments (PFAS chemicals known as C8s) in its DWR finishes with a shorter-chain fluorocarbon, C6. “After our switch, new research emerged showing that C6 is just as detrimental to us and the environment,” says Leonard Basse, sports communications lead, Europe.
“That’s when we decided to start working toward water-repellent finishes and membranes made without any intentionally added PFAS.” From spring this year, Patagonia’s entire product range is PFAS-free.
The Labour government has said that it’s currently assessing PFAS risks and is working with regulators, whileindicating a desire to align with or exceed EU standards. Yet successive UK governments have been accused of dragging their feet. A recent analysis by the UK charity CHEM Trust shows that the regulatory gap between EU and UK protections on PFAS (and other ‘chemicals of concern’) is significant and growing. “We’re calling on the UK government to align with EU chemical regulation to ensure high standards of protection for UK citizens and our environment, as well as offering clarity to UK businesses,” says Evans.
DO IT YOURSELF
Regardless of when – or whether – that happens, what can you as a consumer and an outdoor lover do? It is not as easy as it should be to find out whether your favourite brands have switched to PFAS-free fabrics and processes.
“Very few companies were completely clear about their use of PFAS,” says Turner of her research for Ethical Consumer. Yorkshire brand Rab is one that bucks the trend.
Admitting on its website that it missed its autumn-2024 goal of becoming PFAS-free (though 91% of its products in the autumn/winter 2024 range made the grade), its ‘material facts’ tables identify any PFAS used in each product. The brands that have successfully transitioned to being fully PFAS-free are usually happy to shout about it.
Reward them with your business to show your appreciation and commitment to halting the flow of these toxic chemicals into our environment. Read the 2024 EthicalConsumer report to see how a range of outdoor brands rate (bearing in mind that it’s a fast-changing landscape).
Can you expect PFAS-free kit to match up in terms of performance?
“We’ve yet to see any DWR coating with this new science that matches the old days of months of wear without having to look after it,” says Alpkit’s Smith.
Ross agrees. But he stresses that the problem isn’t that the new fabrics are less waterproof than those of old, it’s that they lack the oil, sweat and dirt repellency that PFAS-treated fabrics offered, so they are more easily compromised and made ineffectual.
“When the DWR is compromised, sweat builds up and can’t escape, so you feel cold and clammy even though the garment isn’t letting in water,” he explains.
The way to address this is to wash and, if need be, reproof PFAS-free apparel more frequently. Even if your PFAS-free product is functioning well, you might find that it starts looking grubby more quickly.
Don’t be too hasty to get rid of the kit that you already have, though – even if it does contain PFAS. “If you discard garments when they’re still functional, the amount of energy and water used in their production is wasted – and there are also problems associated with disposal,” says Ross. “I have garments with PFAS finishes that are still completely waterproof after eight or nine years of use.”
It’s a timely reminder that the most ecologically sustainable products are the ones we already own.
Top image: Páramo
