There is a better way to manage chemical toxicity, and forward-thinking brands are already moving in that direction. Clean, traceable supply chains are no longer a “nice-to-have.” They are proving to be strategic assets that build trust with consumers, reduce risk and lay the groundwork for more responsible growth.  

In today’s retail landscape, if you think transparency is optional marketing jargon, you’re wrong.  It’s essential. Consumers want to trust what they use and wear. This puts regulators in the spotlight as they step in as consumer protectors.

While the fashion industry buzzes about the macro issues of sustainability, circularity and conscious consumption, chemical safety is finally making headlines. There’s a lesser-known concern woven into many fabrics: harmful chemicals like hormone-disrupting phthalates, allergy-triggering dyes and the so-called “forever chemicals” known as PFAS. 

Silent Toxins

The reality is unsettling: clothing that symbolizes self-expression, comfort, and even sustainability, is often contaminated with toxic chemicals. This hidden hazard puts garment workers at risk, harms factory communities and exposes consumers, including children, to avoidable health threats. In a chase for climate commitments and ESG metrics, the human and chemical safety side of sustainability has long been sidelined. But that’s beginning to change. Executives and brand leaders are being held accountable not just for what their products claim, but for what’s actually in them and how those ingredients ripple across the value chain. 

The campaign for toxic chemical awareness isn’t just about doing what’s right, it’s about brand survival. And it’s why safer, traceable supply chains, powered by science-backed certifications like nonprofit OEKO-TEX® are rapidly becoming one of the most powerful competitive advantages for brands. 

The Chemical Burden of Fashion 

Fashion is one of the most chemically intensive industries in the world. Up to 3,500 different substances are used in textile processing, with over 750 (21%) known to be hazardous to human health. Some are used to dye fabrics, others to provide wrinkle resistance, waterproofing, flame retardance, or anti-odor properties. Among the most concerning are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, a class of over 12,000 synthetic chemicals linked to cancer, liver damage, immune suppression and reproductive issues. Commonly used in stain-resistant coatings on outerwear, uniforms, activewear and even children’s clothing, PFAS are called “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the environment and accumulate in the human body. 

As global awareness and public health research on PFAS accelerate, so do regulations. In the U.S., nearly a dozen states, including California, have passed or proposed bans on PFAs in textiles, with AB 1817 going into effect in 2025. The EU is also moving toward a wide-reaching PFAS restriction under REACH. These aren’t abstract compliance hurdles; they’re real legal risks. Brands caught unprepared could face lawsuits, product recalls and public backlash. Investors are also paying attention, and falling short on safety can hurt your reputation and bottom line. 

Who’s Most at Risk? Everyone 

Toxic chemicals in textiles don’t just impact the end consumer; they pose significant risks throughout the supply chain. 

• Garment workers. Many operate in countries with weak labor and environmental protections and face daily exposure to chemical-laden dyes, finishes and solvents, often with no protective equipment. These exposures have been linked to respiratory problems, skin disorders, reproductive health issues and long-term chronic illness.
• Local communities. Residents living nearby textile and dyeing factories, particularly in major manufacturing hubs across South Asia, often contend with contaminated water supplies and soil, creating multi-generational health impacts.
• Consumers, particularly children. People are exposed daily to hazardous substances through skin contact, especially in garments like pajamas, underwear and school uniforms. Children’s smaller bodies and developing systems make them more vulnerable to toxic chemicals like formaldehyde and heavy metals.

What’s most concerning is that while many brands know there’s a problem, they don’t know where to begin to solve it. Most don’t have chemists on staff, don’t know how to check their supply chains, and aren’t sure what questions to ask. At the same time, most consumers remain unaware that the clothes they wear and everyday home textiles, like bed sheets, towels and rugs, could be impacting their health and the well-being of their families. 

A Brand Liability Crisis in the Making 

The conversation around brand risk used to focus on sweatshop labor and carbon emissions. Today, safety is emerging as the next major challenge for brand reputation. 

High-profile investigative reports and lawsuits have already put brands on the defensive. In just the past two years: 

• Major retailers have been sued for selling PFAS-treated products under “eco-friendly” labels.
• NGOs have flagged dangerous chemicals in supposedly “organic” or “sustainable” collections.
• Influencers and watchdogs have taken to social media to expose “greenwashed” garments that fail basic toxicity tests.

An inconvenient truth is emerging: Chemical safety isn’t a niche concern; it’s a mainstream mandate. And consumers are paying attention. According to OEKO-TEX® research, over 60 percent of global consumers say they want more transparency about what’s in the clothes they buy, and nearly half say they’d switch brands to avoid harmful substances. 

Why Are So Are Many Brands Still Laggards? 

Despite rising awareness, many brands are struggling to keep up. It’s not because they don’t care, it’s because the problem is so complex and there’s a lack of the right tools and infrastructure to fix it. Fashion supply chains are long, opaque and often built for speed, not safety. Brands frequently rely on Tier 1 suppliers or factories that sew, finish and ship final garments for assurances, with little to no visibility into upstream processes where most chemical inputs occur. Even when sustainability teams want to eliminate harmful substances, they often run into the same core problems: 

• Lack of reliable chemical data from mills and manufacturers
• Inconsistent testing protocols across product categories and geographies
• Vendor pushback on the cost or feasibility of switching to safer alternatives

Without the right systems in place, many brands end up in reaction mode, responding to crises rather than preventing them. But in today’s climate of tightening legislation and growing consumer scrutiny, being reactive isn’t just risky; it’s unsustainable. What’s needed is a shift in mindset. Chemical safety must move from a hidden vulnerability to a core strategic priority. And that transformation starts with visibility into supply chains, expert guidance and the right tools to build a cleaner, safer and more trustworthy production process. 

Good News: Clean Chemistry Is a Competitive Edge 

There is a better way to manage chemical toxicity, and forward-thinking brands are already moving in that direction. Clean, traceable supply chains are no longer a “nice-to-have.” They are proving to be strategic assets that build trust with consumers, reduce risk and lay the groundwork for more responsible growth.  

Achieving this kind of supply chain transparency doesn’t happen by accident. It requires systems that not only identify harmful substances but also help brands make smarter decisions about what goes into their products and how those products are made. 

That’s where independent, science-based certification frameworks come into play. Tools from OEKO-TEX® offer practical pathways to: 

• Detect and eliminate harmful substances before they enter supply chains and before products reach the market
• Audit and improve chemical management and worker protections across production tiers
• Build traceability and transparency that’s visible to consumers
• Align with current and emerging legislation through regularly updated restricted substance lists (RSLs)

These certifications don’t just support sustainability claims; they provide third-party verification at a time when trust is harder to earn and easier to lose. As PFAS bans and other chemical restrictions become the norm, brands that take a proactive approach to safety will be better positioned, legally, reputationally and operationally. Not because they have to be but because the future of fashion depends on it. 

What’s Next? Accountability by Design 

The fashion industry doesn’t need another sustainability buzzword. It needs tools to rebuild consumer trust. That means asking hard questions at the highest levels: 

• What chemicals are in our products?
• Are we testing beyond compliance, based on risk?
• Are we protecting our most vulnerable stakeholders, the people who make, wear, use and live near our products?

For brands serious about sustainability, chemical safety must be elevated to a boardroom-level discussion. Third-party certifications are no longer optional extras; they’re ESG performance levers and signals of brand integrity. A safer, more responsible fashion system is not only possible but already underway. But it takes leadership. It takes brands willing to treat chemical safety not as a compliance burden or additional expense but as a core brand value. Because in the post-greenwashing era, trust isn’t built with marketing. It’s earned through science and proven with certification.