There’s less toxic PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” in raincoats and other products sold in Canada, thanks to new rules elsewhere. But where are PFAS still found? What are the rules here anyway? Should you throw out your old Gore-Tex jacket? And what should you do to avoid products with PFAS? Here’s a closer look.
What are PFAS and why should we worry about them?
PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl substances, are often called “forever chemicals” because they’re hard to break down and can accumulate in people’s bodies and the environment.
They’ve been widely used industrially, but also for waterproofing and stain repellency in many products, including makeup, paper-based food packaging, feminine hygiene products and clothing such as school uniforms, rain jackets and children’s winter gloves.
But they’ve been linked to many negative health impacts, including increased risk of cancers, reduced immune response and fertility, altered metabolism and increased risk of obesity.
That’s why many jurisdictions are introducing new rules to limit PFAS.
How do new rules on PFAS in clothing affect Canadians?
Two U.S. states passed laws restricting PFAS in clothing in 2022 that went into effect at the start of this year.
New York’s law bans the sale of apparel containing PFAS as “intentionally added chemicals,” except for professional uniforms that protect from health or environmental hazards and outdoor clothing for “severe wet conditions” that is not marketed for general consumer use.
California’s law bans the manufacture, distribution or sale of textile articles — not just clothing, but also things like upholstery, bags and bedding — containing PFAS that’s either intentionally added or above a certain level. It also has exemptions for clothing for “severe wet weather conditions” until Jan. 1, 2028.
While these rules just went into effect two months ago, companies have had to prepare. Arlene Blum is executive director of Green Science Policy, a group that advocates for regulations to eliminate PFAS. She said already, major clothing companies are “pretty much all out of PFAS.”
Bob Kirke is executive director of the Canadian Apparel Federation, which represents companies from throughout the clothing supply chain, from textile manufacturers and distributors to importers and retailers. He said the rules in California, especially, and consumer expectations have caused the Canadian industry to move away from PFAS. “But I could not tell you exactly how much,” he added.
Bruce Calder is VP of operations at Ottawa-based Claigan Environmental, which does PFAS testing. He said a ban on the main water-soluble PFAS in Europe has also made a difference. That kind of PFAS is considered the most dangerous because it can be easily absorbed by the body.
“A lot of products are sold globally,” Calder said. “[The ban has] had a big impact.”
For the first time ever, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is introducing standards to limit PFAS, or ‘forever chemicals,’ in drinking water. Andrew Chang explores how prevalent these chemicals are in our daily lives, why they’re so dangerous and what Canada is doing to deal with them.
What are the rules in Canada?
Three groups of well-studied PFAS (PFOS, PFOA and LC-PFCAs) are prohibited in Canada because of their risk to the environment, and Environment Canada told CBC News that new restrictions on production, use, sale and import of these will come in this spring.
In 2023, the federal government asked companies to report PFAS in products. Cassie Barker, senior program manager at Environmental Defence, a group that has been lobbying to get PFAS out of products, said that will help the government set rules about phasing them out.
Environment Canada also published a draft report in July 2024 proposing that PFAS as a group, excluding a subgroup called fluoropolymers, be added to and regulated under Canada’s list of toxic substances.
Environment Canada told CBC News in an email late last week that these are expected to be finalized “soon.”
Calder said previous Canadian restrictions were effective in getting PFAS out of makeup starting 2021 (although CBC’s Marketplace found evidence of PFAS in makeup in 2023), but didn’t apply to manufactured items like clothing.
CBC’s Marketplace tests eight products from popular makeup brands for so-called forever chemicals. The federal government is currently weighing whether to classify these chemicals as harmful to human health.
What products sold in Canada still contain PFAS?
Calder said recent testing shows PFAS have largely been removed from raincoats and feminine hygiene products such as period panties.
And they’re starting to be removed from products such as children’s winter gloves. Last year, his company tested children’s gloves bought in Canadian stores in collaboration with Environmental Defence. They found water-soluble PFAS — which can be absorbed into the body — in eight out of 11 pairs. Barker said that’s alarming because many children chew on their gloves: “This is a direct route to exposure.”
But Calder said a re-testing last month (not yet published) found PFAS in just three of 12 pairs of children’s gloves purchased at Canadian stores this season, suggesting change is underway.
In Canada, he said, your greatest exposure these days will likely be from paper takeout food bowls, paper straws or other paper containers that use PFAS for waterproofing. The riskiest ones are those without any corporate branding, he added. That’s because many fast-food brands have committed to going PFAS free, and last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned PFAS coating on most food packaging.
New research has found that some packaging that’s touted as environmentally friendly contains high-levels of PFAS chemicals that can be damaging to the environment and human health. PFAS are hard to break down and have been linked to multiple different types of cancer.
Blum says microwave popcorn is “still a problem” even in the U.S., so consumers should look for bags specifically marked “PFAS free” if they buy this kind of product.
What’s being used instead? And is it toxic?
Products such as jackets that used to be made of PFAS-based fabrics, such as the previous generation of Gore-Tex, have now been replaced with a polyethylene-based fabric, which is non-toxic and reportedly stronger, thinner with a lower carbon footprint.
Water-repellent PFAS coatings on jackets and items such as gloves have been replaced with a variety of options, including waxes, silicones and polyurethane. Some of those can release toxins, but paraffin wax has been deemed the safest by Toxic-Free Future, a U.S.-based group that advocates for safer products.
Some product reviewers report that the new Gore-Tex material performs as well as the previous version, but needs to be washed and dried more frequently to maintain waterproofing.
Kirke said he thinks PFAS-free rain jackets may perform well generally, but for performance products that need to meet the highest technical standards for waterproofness, “you can’t meet those standards without PFAS.” However, he noted that the technology is changing quickly. “We’re really in a period of evolution,” he said.
A group of chemicals used in firefighting uniforms has been linked to increased cancer rates. Vancouver could become one of the first cities in North America to phase out their use.
So should I throw out my old PFAS raincoat and buy new?
Everyone interviewed for this piece said no. “I don’t think it’s a huge risk,” said Blum, who still has her own “PFAS” jacket. She said the raw PFAS materials used to make the jacket are far more harmful than those in the jacket itself, and therefore the biggest risks are to the people who manufactured it.
She added that producing a new jacket uses a lot of energy and materials, so avoiding that is probably the greener choice.
Blum said she thought school uniforms were more of a concern, since they come in direct contact with skin, and children run and sweat in them.
What can consumers do to avoid products with PFAS?
Green Science Policy maintains a page of PFAS-free brands, from rain gear to furniture to baby products.
“I believe it’s up to companies who make products, and the government, to make sure they’re free of toxic chemicals,” sad Blum. “It’s really hard for consumers to keep track.”
She suggests that the most effective thing for consumers to do is to support companies and governments who are trying to reduce the use of PFAS.
