“Nearly every American now has PFAS in their blood.” That stark finding, highlighted by journalist Alden Wicker, captures the scale of a problem that has quietly woven itself into the UK’s modern life – and into the clothes we wear every day.
What are PFAS?
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often dubbed “forever chemicals”, are a vast family of synthetic compounds engineered to repel water, oil and stains. Since the mid‑20th century, they have been used in everything from non-stick cookware to firefighting foams.
In fashion, PFAS underpin many of the performance qualities consumers expect: waterproof jackets that withstand hours of rain, stain-resistant school uniforms, and durable outdoor gear designed for extreme conditions.
But this technical brilliance has a darker edge. PFAS do not naturally degrade. Instead, they accumulate in rivers, soil, wildlife and, ultimately, human bodies. A raincoat designed to keep the weather out can, over time, contribute to pollutants that are almost impossible to remove from the environment.
The growing case against PFAS
Scientific concern about PFAS has shifted from tentative to urgent. Certain well-studied compounds (including PFOA and PFOS) have been linked to immune suppression, hormonal disruption and increased risks of cancers such as kidney and testicular cancer. In 2023, US litigation against major chemical manufacturers resulted in multi-billion dollar settlements over water contamination, underscoring the scale of potential harm.
Exposure is not evenly distributed. Textile workers involved in coating and finishing processes are often at the front line, while children, who are more susceptible to chemical exposure during development, face heightened risks through everyday items – notably, treated school uniforms.
The environmental picture is equally concerning. PFAS are typically derived from fossil fuel-based feedstocks, tying their continued use to carbon-intensive supply chains. Once released, they travel vast distances: PFAS contamination has been detected in Arctic ice and remote mountain regions, far from any manufacturing source.
For an industry striving towards circularity, PFAS present a fundamental contradiction. They contaminate recycling streams, reduce the quality of recovered fibres, and can render otherwise reusable textiles unsuitable for onward use. The very chemistry that enhances durability in use actively undermines recyclability at end of life.
The shifting regulatory landscape
Regulators are beginning, albeit belatedly, to catch up.
In the European Union, a sweeping proposal under REACH aims to restrict PFAS as an entire class, rather than tackling substances individually. If adopted, it would be one of the most significant chemical bans in decades, potentially affecting everything from waterproof clothing to footwear and accessories. Countries such as Denmark and France have already moved ahead with targeted restrictions, particularly in consumer textiles and food-contact materials.
The United Kingdom is taking a more gradual approach. Its February 2026 “PFAS Plan” stops short of immediate bans but signals a clear trajectory: improving monitoring, prioritising high-risk uses and supporting industry transition to alternatives. Notably, it also anticipates increasing alignment with EU REACH, suggesting that UK businesses should prepare for stricter controls in the near term.
In the wider textiles based industry, there is increasing high‑level government and advocacy focus on PFAs and flame‑retardant chemistries in furniture, where longstanding UK fire safety rules have driven heavy chemical use; reforms now under consultation reflect years of campaigning by groups and practitioners, including Delyth Fetherston-Dilke, who have documented links between flame retardants, environmental contamination and human health risks.
The route forward
As Tiffanie Darke, fashion journalist and author, puts it: “chemists can create new chain molecules faster than the regulator can regulate them.” That imbalance means legislation alone is unlikely to solve the issue. Consumer awareness, and demand for safer alternatives, is becoming a powerful catalyst.
Industry responses are already diverging in strategy. Some brands are investing in next-generation biomaterials, while others are retrofitting existing processes to eliminate PFAS without compromising performance. Increasingly, however, innovation is narrowing this gap.
One example is Surprice, a material derived from waste rice husks showcased at SXSW London, combining water resistance with a significantly lower environmental footprint. At the same time, smaller brands are setting the pace on transparency: Community Clothing has developed plastic-free sportswear lines, while Nobody’s Child has successfully rolled out digital product passports across its lines to give consumers visibility into a garment’s lifecycle and recyclability.
The direction of travel is unmistakable. Regulation is tightening, consumer expectations are rising and technological solutions are coming on stream – demonstrated brilliantly by Fashion District Council’s recent Manufacturing Futures programme. For fashion brands, reducing reliance on PFAS is no longer a niche sustainability goal but a commercial necessity, one that can mitigate regulatory risk, strengthen supply chain resilience and align with the transition to a more circular industry.
How we can help
We work with fashion and retail clients to navigate emerging sustainability challenges, from embedding climate and environmental obligations into supply chain contracts, to structuring responsible business models and governance frameworks that place long-term value and nature at their core. We also convene industry discussions to help clients stay ahead of regulatory and market developments.
If you would like to explore how your business can respond to PFAS and related risks, please get in touch.